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

 

Edgar Rice Burroughs On Mars

A Review

The Chessman Of Mars

by

R.E. Prindle

Introduction

 

     Porges speaks quite highly of this story and I think him right.  The story is a quite complex one with many highlights and as many or more undertones.  Burroughs manages to unite his past with his present while mildly projecting a future.

     The story was his only effort of 1921 while falling between Tarzan The Terrible and The Girl From Hollywood the first of two books for 1922. the other being Tarzan And The Golden Lion.  Thus this book falls between the recovery of Jane and their return to the Estate and Tarzan’s subsequent return to Opar.  These two Tarzan novels undoubtedly reflect discord in the marriage of ERB and Emma.

     It would seem that the move to California disrupted ERB’s concentration as the effort to udjust to Tarzana must have consumed his time somewhat in contradiction of his opinion in Tarzan The Invincible that man has been given all the time he can use, no more, no less.  Well, there’s limits to everything, probably even infinity.

     Whether Burroughs’ tremendous building efforts of the first couple years were pinching his finances at this time there does seem to be an element of panic in the story.  The pictures of his new three car garage shows two Packards and a Hudson so that the unbridled spending of Marcus Sackett in Marcia Of The Doorstep of 1924 seems to be directly based on ERB’s own wastrel habits.

     The Hudson is interesting as ERB may have bought his first Hudson in 1914 in emulation of his hero L. Frank Baum who he visited in Hollywood in 1913 and was friendly with again in 1916.  In  that connection the opening of Chessmen is a variation on The Wizard Of Oz in which Dorothy, her house and dog are transported from Kansas to Oz by a tornado.  In Chessmen Tara of Helium is caught in her flier by a furious windstorm that deposits her in the all but forgotten outpost of  the Kaldanes.  So far out that it might in fact have been the Martian Oz.

     Thus in a sense, ERB returns to the scenes of his childhood or, at least, his young manhood.  This is very likely the result of stress, whether from looming financial difficulties or the responsibilities of managing his estate of Tarzana.

     That he was under extreme stress is made evident by the appearance of John Carter who only appears to a stressed out Burroughs.   At such times Burroughs psychologically returns to the comfort and security of Mars where he is beyond the travails of earthly existence.  This in turn connects this story to the trials and tribs ERB was facing when he wrote Tarzan And The Lion Man.  As I hope to show there is more than one similarity to that story.

     This apprearance of Carter is interesting.  Carter appears after sunset while leaving just before sunrise.  ERB cannot be sure whether he was dreaming or the visit was real.  ERB has said that his stories came from his dreams and this story bears all the marks of being a dream story.

     ERB had the remarkable faculty of turning his problems into metaphors and symbols of his daily problems.  While I don’t believe the stories were concocted in REM type dreaming I’m sure tha as he lay dozing weighing his daily problems he was able to weave them into a creditable story that he was able to elaborate when awake.

     Plus, while we can’t be sure how much psychology he knew or how he understood it he had been aware of psychological concepts while still a boy.  He learned much of this at the knee of Lew Sweetser on the Idaho ranch.  One presumes he remembered, considered and developed his psychological ideas over the years.  Sweetser, even as ERB was writing the story was giving public lectures on psychology.  Chessmen is replete with psychological images not least the appearance of Carter himself.

     Whether Carter was quasi real to Burroughs or not he wants us to believe that Carter was real.  It is quite possible that Carter is not actually there but is merely a phantom of himself much as Helen of Troy was said to be a phantom in Rider Haggard’s The World’s Desire.  Just as Carter explains his appearance to the dreaming ERB,  Burroughs admits he was in a dreaming or trance state as he blew smoke at the head of his defeated king when Carter appears.  That’s quite an image.  His king or himself had been defeated on the chess board as perhaps in real life calling up the need for a visit from the omnipotent Carter.

     And now as to your natural question as to what brought me to Earth again and this, to earthly eyes, strange habiliment.  We may thank Kar Kormak, the bowman of Lothar.  It was he who gave me the idea upon which I have been experimenting until at last I have achieved success.  As you know I have long possessed the power to cross the void in spirit, but never before have I been able to impart to inanimate things a similar power.  Now, however, you see me for the first time precisely as my Martian fellows see me- you see the very short sword that has tasted the blood of many a savage foeman; the harness with the devices of Helium and the insignia of my rank; the pistol that was presented to me by Tars Tarkdus, Jeddak of Thark.

     Indeed.  And I do see what Burroughs suggests, one presumes that the reader sees in his own mind’s eye, the habiliment and weapons on which John Carter, the bronze giant, speaks.  We’ve been hypnotized into projecting into our own reality what isn’t there.

     Yes, Carter speaks of Kar Kormak as though he really existed when we, having read the novel Thuvia, Maid Of Mars, know that the fantastic Bowmen Of Lothar were mental projections without substance who hypnotized others into seeing them and making them believe that they were real.

     So what has Burroughs done here?  We know that he is very familiar with the principles of hypnosis.  At this very time many forms of mass hypnosis were being practised or about to be practiced.  Freud was publishing his mass hypnosis lessons; Fritz Lang had or was making the first of his incredible Dr. Mabuse movies- Mabuse, The Gambler, in which mass hypnotism figures so prominently while Hitler, himself a master hypnotist, was making his bid for power.

     Was Burroughs laughing up his sleeve at us as he knew we were actually visualizing in our own way what he suggested to us.  I don’t know whether he was laughing but I’m sure he was confident that he had succeeded.   So, having hypnotized us into believing the strange appearance of Carter who appears only in the same manner as the phantom bowmen of Lothar to Burroughs although as Carter says he has been successful in projecting the appearance of inanimate matter ERB then begins to weave his incredible story arranging the details so that all can be seen as reality to our minds having once accepted the appearance of Carter as reality who then narrates the story in his own voice.

     Another interesting detail is that Carter now addresses ERB as his son.  When ERB created Carter he was the man’s nephew his father being still alive.  Then as he finished The Warlord Of  Mars  his father died thus Carter’s son dominates Thuvia, the next Martian novel.   Now, while under stress, ERB’s father reappears to him to dictate this story to his son.

     Carter, then, must always have been ERB’s projection of his idea of the perfect father.

     Finally in this introduction I would like to note that both the city of Helium and the ruins of Opar were colored red and gold.  ERB’s Hudson automobile then, a bit of memorabilia of Baum, links the Emerand Cityof Oz and the red and gold cities of Helium and Opar.  Both cities are retreats under stress.  As we will see a key strain of Chessmen is ERB’s fond memories of Baum and the Oz series.  Indeed, Tarzana itself was a grander version of Baum’s own Ozcot while being at the same time an attempt to realize a terrestrial Opar and Helium. 

 

 

Lipstick Traces

A Review

Greil Marcus:

A Few Back Pages

by R.E. Prindle

 

The Man Who Shook The World

For even if they should say something true, one who loves the Truth should not, even so, agree with them.  For not all true things are the Truth nor should that truth which seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true Truth- that according to faith.

 –Clement Of Alexandria

 

     Clement was a man defending orthodox Christianity against not only the Pagans but competing Christian sects.  Here he enunciates the credo  of the true believer- it is True because we believe it, any other opinion even if true, or truer, must be considered false according to the faith.

     In the twentieth century the Jewish comedian  Woody Allen has a scene in one of his movies where some Jewish men are discussing things at a seder.  Allen has one say that he would take God over the Truth.  Or, like Clement he would sacrifice reason to the Faith or, in other words, Superstition.

     There we have the crux of the matter.  To criticize Jews is to criticize God in the Jewish mind.  The inevitable result for those who do not accept the true Truth is to be labelled as anti-Semites.  Thereon hangs the whole of Jewish history, past, present and future.  It is to be devoutly hoped that the following discussion will not be defamed as Semites vs. anti-Semites but approved as Reason vs. Superstition.  After all in the age of Science one would hope that Superstition is a thing of the past.

     The argument will center on the ideas and career of Sigmund Freud- the man who shook the world.  But first the world will have to be placed in the context of competing viewpoints within a Jewish context.

     For many millennia the role of Science was given a subsidiary position below that of Religion.  The truths of Science were denied because they conflicted with the true Truth of Religion.

     In this environment the Jews were advantageously placed to dispute with Roman Catholics.  After all Catholicism used the Jewish texts as its holy scripture.  Thus in debating contests with Catholicism the Jews almost always came out the victors.  This gave them great pride as being superior to the Gentiles.  Their very high opinion of themselves seemed justified.

      Had things remained a matter of faith the Jewish opinion of themselves would probably still be unchallengeable.  However Science which had been treated by the Church more roughly than the Jews refused to be suppressed.  Actually a higher percentage of Scientists were persecuted to death by the Church than Jews but this fact has to my knowledge never been considered.

     The rise of Science in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries not only shook the faith of the religious to its roots but actually cast the Semitic faiths into the dust bin of history.  With the rise of Science Judaism became irrelevant.  It could not win any debates with Science.

     In the many crises of the Jewish soul this was a very significant one.  It caused the breakup of medieval Judaism.  For the first time the Jews left their ghettos and attempted to enter the mainstream of European life.

     The Talmud which the Jews had always considered the repository of all true wisdom and knowledge now appeared to enlightened Jews to be the collection of nonsense the goys had always claimed it was.

     As the Jews, then, began to enter the mainstream of European society they did so consciously as inferiors trying to impose themselves with their old dignity on superiors.  The raison d’ etre of Judaism had to be replaced or the faith would just fade away.

     The Talmud was useless to them in argument; they could only embrace the alien ideology of Science and try to excel the European originators of it.

     Bearing in mind their desire to avenge themselves on the Europeans by befuddling them because of their expulsion from Spain they campaigned both politically and intellectually.

     The first major attempt at establishing a science was that of Karl Marx who espoused ‘scientific’ socialism which was superior to ‘utopian’ socialism.  Thus a Jewish social system supposedly scientifically constructed was placed in opposition to a European social system.

     In the realm of Physics Einstein managed what seemed to be a more accurate description of reality.  So in politics and physics the Jews had established a seeming scientific superiority.

     At the same time as Einstein Sigmund Freud coalesced a theory of psychology that was superior to the fragmented state of psychology.

     All three men then tried to turn their achievements to the benefit of the Jewish culture.  As much as anything this was the cause of the two European wars as Hitler so accurately recognized.

     As a little aside it is interesting to note the career of Immanuel Velikovsky.  Like Einstein Velikovsky was a very competent Scientist, that is to say, working within an European intellectual milieu.  But whereas Einstein stopped short at attempting to prove the veracity of Genesis and Exodus Velikovsky plowed straight ahead.  Using his scientific skills to attempt to validate the literal accuracy of every fable he broke on the rock of superstition.  Still, he wrote some very entertaining books, somewhat along Marcusian lines.

2.

     The influence of Sigmund Freud on psychology has been immense while that influence has been almost entirely of a negative character.  The increase in crime can be attributed to the implementation of his theories.  Certainly the self-centered attitude of the homosexuals aboard the Teufelsdreck is about to lead to crimes and thwarted crimes which can be laid to Freud’s teachings.  Let us review Freud’s ideas in the light of his milieu.

3.

     One of Freud’s discoveries was the neurotic need to repeat.  In other words, the subject repeatedly acts out the encysted subconscious fixation in an attempt to exorcise or realize the fixation.  This phenomenon applies to cultures as well as individuals as Freud taught.  In cultures it is called the ‘national character.’  In other words, a people must always act out its characteristic view of reality, the true Truth of the faith vs. the actual scientific state of things.

     The Jews by and large have been a Stateless people since their origins.  If one takes Genesis as fact, and it is psychological fact for sure, the Jews enter history ‘On The Road’ having been expelled from Ur of the Chaldees seventy-five years after having come into existence as a people.  The theme of expulsion is a repeated figure in Jewish history.  They are never tolerated for long.  This is a fact, a truth, but in variance with the true Truth of the faith.

     If we take the Jewish historian, Josephus, at face value they were expelled from Ur because of the jealousy of the Chaldean astronomers who were angry at Abram’s superior skills.  The Chaldeans were known as the foremost astronomers of the ancient world so the Jewish ego must excel them at their own game.

     The Jews then went to Egypt which was the home of the greatest magicians.  After having outperformed Pharaoh’s magicians at feats of magic they take to the road again, fleeing Egypt.

     Thus the main tenets of the Jewish character are fixed.  They see themselves as an invasive people who are naturally superior to any people whose territory they invade and then they leave.  These two themes repeat and repeat.

     Thus in the nineteenth century when the Jews move West out of the Pale of Settlement into Vienna the migration must be seen as an invasion of a hostile culture intent on taking over the State as in Ur or Egypt.

     A historical characteristic  of Jewish invasions is that they are not usually militaristic but infiltratory.  Like the military invasion of Hungary by the Magyars the Jewish invasion of Vienna was no less belligerent and exhibited the same needs to impose its culture.

     In the biblical account of the invasion of Palestine the Jews put entire peoples to the sword to make living space for themselves.  Thus they committed genocide several times over.  There is no reason to believe they wouldn’t have done the same in Vienna given time and opportunity.

     The bulk of the Jewish people after 1700 had been collected in Eastern Europe in what became known as the Pale of Settlement.  This was mainly in Eastern Poland and Western Russia.  When Poland was partitioned between Russia, Austria and Germany in the eighteenth century Austria acquired a large Jewish population in Galicia and its other Eastern provinces.

     The Western Jews had already realized that the great challenge to their sense of superiority came from Science.  What is called the Emancipation of the Jews was done by the French Revolution c. 1789-93.  The Emancipation allowed the Jews to begin participation in European society.  The work of the Church was undone.  Thus the Jewish intellect came into conflict with the European intellect. In Germany this created a reaction known as the Kulturkampf.  What the Germans had done was to give their intellect a name.  They opposed German Kultur to Jewish Semitism.  Semitism is the Jewish name for their intellect.  Hence both anti-Semitism and anti-Kulturism came into existence. 

      Once within the Austrian Empire the Jews began to migrate toward its capitol, Vienna.

     The Austro-Hungarian Empire was already an unwieldy amalgam of disputing nationalities and races.  Its German governors had their hands full.  Austria was sort of an early version of the United States.

     Unable to destroy the Germans by the sword the Jews made a cultural assault on the institutions of the Empire.  They pitted the Jewish intellect, Semitism, against the German intellect, Kultur.  Freud who fully understood the meaning of Kultur wrote a book denouncing it- Civilization And Its Discontents.

     Now, Jews are not smarter than anyone else although the mythology of the West so asserts.  In fact, Jews are not under the same constraints as the indigenous peoples.  Thus, the Jews are always a free, if circumscribed, people.  The indigenous peoples were seldom as free.  Medieval Europe had been a caste society in which only certain castes had freedom of movement.  The Russian Serfs were both unfree and circumscribed until 1861 when they were at least nominally freed although not allowed to freely participate in society.  They and other European peasants had a role akin to the American Negro of 1900 in the South who were supposed to know their place and keep it.

      Thus a university education was beyond the aspirations of the indigenous lower classes but open to Jews of any class.  It doesn’t take a genius to realize that social advancement is much facilitated by a solid education.  The Jews accordingly flooded European universities in greatly disproportionate numbers to the population.  Any Jew could thus place himself above the majority of the indigenous population.

     It was inevitable that they be disproportionately represented in law, the judiciary, medicine, education, the arts and all prestigious occupations.  As Semitism was unassimilable to Kultur it was inevitable that if the invasion was not resisted that Semitism would  replace Kultur.  This left the Germans in a difficult situation.  They must either discriminate against the invaders, kill them, or go under.

     Given more freedom of movement than the indigenous population and possessing a universal language, Yiddish, the Jews could form the international business corps of any community unrestrained by the business mores of the indigenous people.  They could make their own rules, upsetting established traditions and customs as in Egypt and Chaldea.

     This too is an established Jewish custom.  Things don’t absolutely have to be done in the manner in which they are being done.  When the Jews invaded Egypt they began to slaughter the sacred animals which the Egyptians had protected for millennia.  The Jews saw no reason for the custom so they rudely pushed Egyptian mores aside.  This habit is repeated in every country they invade.  The peoples can learn to do it the Jewish way like it or not.  They feel they speak with the authority of the true Truth of God.

     By 1899 they were over 10% of the population of Vienna which is where critical mass begins.  Muscling into the cultural life of the city they acquired a disproportionate number of seats in the symphony orchestras.  As in Chaldea and Egypt they assumed that the Semitist style of playing was superior to that of Kultur.  As music in Germania occupied an analogous position to astronomy in Chaldea and magic in Egypt the Jews naturally assumed they were better musicians than the Germans although music had never played a large part in their culture before.

     As the scientific demands of music are greater than ancient astronomy and magic the Jews were never able to muster a composer of the first rank although their instrumentalists dominated the stage.  But then all the empresarios were Jewish so they would necessarily hear with the Jewish intellect.  Even today the Jews believe that without the Semitic intellect the orchestras of Europe sound nowhere as good as before the Holocaust.

     They established their own newspapers and publishing houses.  They used them to defame anyone who dissented from their program.

     Without physical resources they had to resort to psychological means to disarm their opponents.  They had to ‘psyche’ them out.  Anyone who opposed or criticized them was branded as an anti-Semite and his own people were instructed by the Jews to ostracize him.  Thus German nationalists became, if not criminals, at least, pariahs in their own land.  The Austrian reaction to Jewish nationalism was extremely violent giving expression to itself only after the Anschluss.

     These German defense forces were active and powerful during the period from approx. 1890-1914.  After 1918 resistance to the Jewish invasion crumpled everywhere.  The Millennial Revolution had gone swimmingly.  Jews assumed the top positions or became dominantly influential in nearly all governments including the United States.  The Jewish Invasion was for all practical purposes a success.

     Two men were born into this Viennese environment that would have a profound impact on world history, Sigmund Freud and Adolf Hitler.

4.

         Freud’s main desire was to become a great man.  This idea was planted in his intellect by his Christian nurse as a child.  He succeeded in realizing this in the field of psychology.  Freud was himself an immoral man nor does he advocate morality for others.  He advocates an unbridled self-indulgence.  Like he says:  Life is short.  To succeed in one’s aims it is permissable to take immoral shortcuts even to use criminal means.  The Mafia believes the same thing.

     As a young man he was schooled in the tradition of Anton Mesmer from whom modern psychology descends.  He was heavily indebted to the teaching of the French psychologist Jean Martin Charcot as well as to the school of Nancy.  His own approach was an adaptation of their methods.  He at first used Mesmerism or hypnotism as did the schools of Paris and Nancy but later abandoned it in favor of a form of self-hypnotism that he called free association.  Hypnotism as a result went into a period of disfavor although applications are being found for it once again.

     He got his real start by insinuating himself into the good graces of Josef Breuer whose work he very nearly appropriated.  Having plundered Breuer he broke off with him never speaking to him for the rest of Breuer’s life.  Thus does conscience make villains of us all.

     Unable to admit his indebtedness to his teachers he repudiated their influence acting as though he had evolved his theories out of whole cloth.  As an aspect of his character he was unable to suffer any criticism or advancement on his own ideas by others.  He eventually acrimoniously broke with any of his associates with intellegence and independence.

     Freud was a Jew which is to say devoutly so.  He did not consider himself Austrian or German but an ethnic Jew.  He believed in the supremacy of the Jewish people.

     The most revealing anecdote concerning him was that as a child he was walking with his father who told him how when a young man he was wearing a new hat when a Gentile knocked it off his head into the street.

     ‘What did you do?’  Freud asked breathlessly expecting the answer to be that his father knocked the Gentile down.

     ‘I went out into the street and picked it up.’  His father replied.

     Freud then lost all respect for his father which troubled him greatly for he wrote:  ‘I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father protector.’  His dad wasn’t it.

     So Freud’s own psychic needs distorted his approach from one of science as Jung claimed to one based on his personal needs.  He falsely maintained that the father figure is the most important in a man’s life.  When his disciple Otto Rank had the courage to correctly insist that the mother was the most important, Freud drummed him out of the ranks.

     Disappointed by his own father he took as a surrogate father figure Hamilcar Barca, the father of Hannibal.  Hamilcar Barca having suffered an injury at the hands of the Romans made his son swear on his sword, which is only a substitute for the ‘thigh’ or penis, that he would avenge him on the Romans.  Clearly Freud would have promised his dad to avenge him on the Europeans if he had asked.  Maybe he did.

     Curiously Freud doesn’t carry Hannibal’s story through to its conclusion.   The Romans exterminated the Carthaginians and razed their city.

     Freud’s lapses in the application of his psychology are very peculiar.  Having discovered the psychological compulsion to repeat he applied it neither to an analysis of himself or of his culture and people.  He might have saved the Jews much suffering if he had.  In his desire to avenge his father he became a central figure in the millennial period of 1913-28 which ended in yet another attempt to exterminate the Jews.

     Post exilic history for the Jews began rather favorably.  They returned to Palestine just as the Middle Eastern Empires were entering a time of troubles.  The succeeding Hellenistic period left them more or less independent until in 186 BC the Seleucids interfered in their internal affairs.  Under the Maccabbees the Jews were able to defeat the relatively weak Seleucid Emperors who were besieged on all sides.  The victory gave them a feeling in invincibility.

      The feeling was shattered by the Romans.

     The Jews tried again and failed in seventeenth century Europe.

     Their third repeated attempt was in 1913-28 which can be extended to the present.

     Freud made the incredible and mind boggling statement on the eve of the Bolshevik, or Jewish Revolution in Russia:  We tell ourselves that anyone who has succeeded in educating himself to truth about himself is permanently defended against the danger of immorality even though the standard of morality may differ in some respects from that which is customary in society.  He then goes on to say especially since the existing standards of morality are beneath contempt.

     Thus he advocates that a private, personal, obviously self-serving morality is superior to an ideal morality that has evolved over millennia extending those millennia anterior to the Old Testament.

     What could Freud, knowing the imperfect nature of man, have found so objectionable about the existing morality?  I don’t experience it as he did.  It can only have been that it was based on European traditions and not Freud’s Jewish heritage.

     The birth of modern Judaism was caused by the rise of the European Scientific attitude.  Science was the sole creation of Europeans with which the Jews had nothing to do.  Prior to the Enlightenment in their argument with Roman Catholicism the Jews had not only been equals but superiors.  As the creator of the corpus followed by the Church the Jews were in a better position to understand and interpret it through the repository of the Talmud.

     When as a result of the Enlightenment, scientific Europeans left the puerile biblical debates behind the Jews were hopelessly medieval.  The Talmud, so effective against the bible, was worthless against science.  The more intelligent or, perhaps, less traditional Jews began to reorganize Judaism to meet the Scientific times.  This left them second rate beneath the Europeans, a serious affront to their amour propre.

     The real challenge then was to regain their superiority.  This could only be done by excelling in Science as they could invent nothing superior to it.  The true Truth of religion broke on the rock of reality.  If they merely excelled in Science they merely excelled in an European milieu. They were clearly then no longer the Chosen People; they became lost in the ruck.  Freud at one time says that he saw no reason why the ‘wisdom’ of the Talmud couldn’t be raised to a level with Science thus bringing the Jews level with the Europeans in their dreams.

     Strangely he didn’t understand that the entry into full consciousness caused by the understanding of the workings of the psyche obviated all forms of consciousness that went before including the so-called wisdom of the Talmud.

     So, to whom was Freud speaking about educating himself against the danger of immorality?  By Freud’s own admission his fellow Jews.

     Freud’s vision of psychoanalysis is personal, dealing exclusively with the subjective workings of the subject’s mind.  He doesn’t even seem to grasp that the fixations are caused by external forces.  He seems to think the mind functions independently of the outside world.  Input does not seem important to him.

     To Jung and others Man’s relationship to his world is based more on a Challenge and Response system.  In other words, the intellect, which Freud denies, plays a very important part.

     Freud’s own intellect cast against his ideas places them in a different light.  The man was born in 1856 in a Central European Jewish milieu.  It will be remembered that the Hasidic religious movement grew out of psychological trauma that occurred in 1648.  Founded c. 1700 the Hasidic movement was only about a hundred fifty years old at his birth thus retaining much of its original vitality.

     Also arising out of the Jewish disappointments caused by the failed Messiah, Sabbatai Zevi, in 1666 a movement was led by a follower of Zevi by the name of Jacob Frank.  This movement also took shape in the first half of the eighteenth century and was still flourishing during Freud’s young manhood.

     As a consequence of Zevi’s failure Frank believed that man was inherently evil thus God would never redeem him until the evil was spent.  The only way to expel evil was to commit enough crimes to get it out of one’s system.  Novel pyschology to say the least.  Thus he taught to a large and attentive Jewish audience that one must commit evil for evil’s sake and that good will come of it.  So, in a manner of speaking, one is doing good by doing evil.

     Now, one can trace the spread of this idea in various forms and guises through space and time.  One very interesting advocate who deserves more study is an eighteenth century English Jew by the name of Samuel Falk.  Another is a twentieth century American Jew  by the name of Arnold Rothstein.  And of course, Marx and Freud.

     Freud does not go into the external influences that formed his outlook or life or personal Weltanschauung but this emphasis on a personal morality that is superior to prevailing morality seems a sublimation of Jacob Frank and his evil for evil’s sake.

     Now, to whom was Freud speaking and why?  Certainly Freud considered himself a prophet of the Jewish people amidst the dawning millennium.  He had an intense desire to avenge his people on the goyim.  Did this Hannibal in that role have anything to do with organizing or directing the Jewish Revolution of the dawning millennium?

     There is no question that his statement that anyone who has educated himself to truth about himself is permanently defended against the danger of immorality (and hence a guilty conscience) could be construed as advance absolution for any acts of the Bolsheviks that would be considered crime by ‘conventional morality.’

     Freud’s statement and role resembles those a great deal of Simeon Bar Yochai, a second century rabbi of the Roman Wars.  The Roman-Jewish war of 66-135 AD was perhaps the first of the Holy Wars.  Its rationale and leadership was provided by the religious leaders of Judaism.

     Simeon Bar Yochai was a leading architect of that war, probably its guiding light.  After Bar Kochba’s defeat in 135 AD Yochai was compelled to go into hiding in a cave from which he daren’t move for many years until the Romans gave up the search.  As a tribute to his influence in the war his obituary at his death said that he was the man who shook the world to its foundations.

     Just before the bloodbath of 116 when the Jews rose up to slaughter hundreds of thousands of Gentiles a moral quandary arose in the Jewish community.  They wondered whether it was permissable to kill ‘good’ Gentiles as well as the ‘bad.’  The rabbis without a moments hesitation replied that it was permissable to kill any and all Gentiles.

     In 1666 with the expected advent of the millennium heralded by the messiah, Sabbatai Zevi, the Jews had been prepared on the strength of ‘God’s promise’ to rise up and murder Europeans much as they had done in the Roman War.

     The third repeat of the Jewish Revolution of which the millennial date was 1913-28 had come to a slow boil with the Communist Manifesto of 1847.

     It will be remembered that following Marx’ manifesto all the national Communist parties were over half Jewish.  The non-Jew, Kropotkin, as leader of the anarchists had been discredited and the anarchists disenfranchised from the Communist Movement.  The Jews than held all the leading positions.

     Thus four Jews led the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia- Lenin, Kamenev, Zinoviev and Trotsky.  All the abortive revolutions of Central Europe were led by Jews.  They actually repeated the massacres of the Roman Wars in Russia and Hungary and were prepared to do so throughout the world as the Revolution rolled on to success.

     In Russia slaughterhouses were established in which Jewish murderers ‘worked’ all day long slaughtering Gentiles until they stood ankle deep in blood and gore.  Were they able to do this because Freud and made known to them truths about themselves that prevented them from committing immoral acts?  Were they absolved of their crimes in advance as were the Jews of the Roman Wars?  They must have been or they couldn’t have performed their ‘work.’  As it was numbers of them had nervous breakdowns as a result.

     The atrocities in Hungary and the projected total annihilation in the Crimea have already been mentioned.  The similarities between the Roman and European slaughters are quite pronounced in their ferocity.  Of course all the details of the former had been recorded in that epistle of ‘science’, the Talmud.

     Did the Jews go to Freud to justify their atrocities as they had to Simeon Bar Yochai two thousand years earlier?  There is the compulsion to repeat.  The Jews were very well organized before, during and after the Great War.  Agents of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee swarmed over Central and Eastern Europe after the War in an attempt to rehabilitate their brethren first so they could assume control.  The AJC and B’nai B’rith were the leading components of the ‘Joint.’  Freud had been a member of B’nai B’rith since 1895.  He lectured to them in Austria on a consistent basis for years, even decades.  As a psychoanalyst what was he telling them?  His intellect deserves closer examination for what else can ‘anyone who has succeeded in educating himself to a few truths about himself is permanently defended against immorality’ mean except a license to kill.  If a Jewish supremacy arose out of that evil wouldn’t good have come out of it in Jewish eyes?  Yochai, Frank, Freud, there is a succession.

     Placed in that context one must reevaluate the whole period as well as the careers of Hitler and Stalin, for as Freud wrote openly in a universal idiom his rationale can be appropriated by any individual for his personal morality.

     The invasion of Vienna was preceded by and coincident with the rise of Jews in France.  At the time of the Russian Revolution a document became prominent called the Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of Zion.  The document outlines a method for creating discord in society so that a junta can easily assume control.  It was said that this document was a Jewish blueprint for world dominion.  The provenance of the Protocols has never been established for certain.  The Jews say it is a ‘forgery’ while their opponents say it is authentic.

     Over the years the Jews have managed to discredit the document and have its study suppressed.  This is a great disservice because whoever wrote it its precepts are currently being followed by several groups.  Have you ever looked at Homeland Security carefully?  It behooves every person interested in current affairs to be conversant with the Protocols of Zion.

     In point of fact the Protocols are of Jewish provenance.

     One thing all disputants agree on is that the Protocols were based on an earlier document of Franco-Jewish provenance called in English:  Dialogues Between Montesquiou And Machiavelli In Hell.  The Dialogues are of Jewish provenance so whether the Protocols are or not is a moot point.

     The Dialogues were attributed to a French Jew by the name of Maurice Joly but internal evidence indicates several hands including that of the ‘Gibbon’ or Jewish historians, Heinrich Graetz.

     The creation of the Dialogues was coordinated by a French Jew by the name of Adolph Cremieux.  Little known outside Jewish circles but extremely important to a number of situations Cremieux also deserves further study.  He was a lawyer and politico deeply involved in the revolutions of 1830 and 1848.  If one takes the Jewish ‘Gibbon’ Graetz at his word both revolutions were the result of Jewish machinations.  On this point Graetz and Hitler are in accord.

     Cremieux was responsible during the annexation of Algeria in 1830 under cover of that year’s revolution for obtaining French citizenship for the Algerian Jews.  Thus with the annexation the barbarous medieval Jews of Algeria became full French citizens gaining precedence over the native Algerians in one fell swoop.  Clever move for the Jews bad move for France.

     As Jewish affairs were consolidating nicely in France twelve years after the 1848 revolution a Jewish central governing body called the Alliance Israelite Universelle was founded by Cremieux in 1860.  The Dialogues were supposed to have appeared in 1862.  The name means The International Alliance of Jewry or in a slightly different translation:  The International Jewish Conspiracy.  Actually the Alliance was the seat of the Jewish government until c. 1900 when the seat was transferred to the United States under the guidance of the financier, Jacob Schiff.

     Thus the Protocols arose out of the Dialogues in direct succession sometime during the 1880s.  It should be noted that the Dialogues was never seen in bookstores.  The whole printing was confiscated by Napoleon III according to report against whom they were supposedly directed.  It follows that the only people who could have known of the book and provided a copy as a model for the Protocols were its producers the Jews of France.

     Nevertheless, as masters of misinformation, disinformation and misdirection the Jewish government was able to shame the liberal parties into rejecting Jewish provenance of the Protocols.  The Liberals then condemned any Gentiles who persisted in saying so as anti-Semitic cranks.  That is actually the nature of the ‘proof’ that the Protocols aren’t of Jewish provenance.

     Jacob Schiff himself was a very effective Prime Minister.  He was able to engineer the First Russian Revolution of 1903-05 by funding the Japanese war machine from America while he and European financiers prevented funding to the Russians.

     Schiff was able to disrupt American and Russian diplomacy for the benefit of the Jews from 1900 to 1913 when he succeeded in persuading the US to break off diplomatic relations completely.  Immediately with the Bolshevik succession he rushed huge loans of American dollars to their coffers even during the Great War to shore up the regime.

     Thus absolved by Freud of guilt and supported by  world resources from 1917 to 1924 it looked as though the Jews were on the eve of success in their millennial pursuit.  With the possible exceptions of Mussolini and Ford it looked at though there were no fences facing.

     However Hitler and Stalin sensed the danger.  Hitler himself was always hostile to Freudian beliefs; it may be assumed that Hitler read at least some Freud.  He was hostile to Freud for much the same reasons that Freud was hostile to Kultur.  Living in the Vienna under the governance of the ‘anti-Semitic’ Mayor Lueger Hitler was self-educated.  He spent years in the libraries organizing his view of the world.

     In Freudian terms both he and Stalin certainly knew truths about themselves which prevented them from committing ‘immoral’ acts.  Freud’s dictum could be construed as also authorizing their crimes.

     Coming to maturity in the Red Terror of 1917-24 Hitler had a good understanding of the course of events in Central and Eastern Europe.  It is silly to think that he acted solely from his own impulses.  There was a civil war going on between Reds and Whites from 1918-33 in Germany.  Judeo-Communist atrocities were daily before his eyes.  As he said, he knew his head would roll in the sand if he lost.   That was not mere rhetoric.

     Hitler’s experience in Vienna convinced him of the nature of the war between Jews and Gentiles.  The evidence is clear that the Viennese shared his views.  Once given the upper hand over their invaders the Austrians were much more obdurate than the Germans.  Never forget that an Austrian, Hitler, directed the fate of the German nation.

     Hitler’s book burning in 1933 might be construed as nothing more than a vindictive censorship of ideas he didn’t like.  But the books burned were those of Jewish writers, expecially Freud, it should probably be seen as an attempt to eject Semitism from Kultur.  In other words the triumph of Kultur over Semitism.  In the end the Germans chose to kill the Jews rather than discriminate against them or go under.  You may be sure the Jews would have done the same.

     As Stalin usurped power from the Jews in Russia a strange thing happened.  Psychoanalytic methods assumed great importance.  Spectacular show trials ensued.

     When Freud’s disciple Otto Rank defected from the ranks of Freudian pyschoanalysts he was excommunicated.  The validity of his views was not examined; even if true they were not the true Truth of the faith.  Hence Rank was compelled to submit to criticism, confess his faults and beg for acceptance back into the faith.

     The Show Trials of 1936 were conducted in the exact same manner except that the sinners were given the death sentence.  The method surfaced again in Red China in 1966 when the Red Guards and Cultural Revolutionaries of Mao Ze Dong overturned that society.  The accused were criticized in mass meetings, compelled to confess their ‘faults’ and beg to be allowed to rehabilitate themselves through hard labor.

     Thus Marxist and Freudian ideas converged in an orgy of evil to destroy the oldest continuous civilization in the world.

     The notion prevails in Politically Correct circles in the US today.  Thus Freudianism has had a profound if unsuspected impact on the world.

     Freud remained confident through 1928, began to waver in 1930 and by 1938 the horror of the impending destruction of the Jews as a repeat of the Roman War was before his eyes as fled Austria for England.  In Moses and Monotheism he pitifully whines that the Jews had given up those notions of world dominion long ago.  Or, in other words, I’m sorry.

     Like Hannibal, his attempt to avenge his father resulted in the destruction of his people.  As in the Roman War the Nazis conducted a manhunt to find every single Jew and kill him.  Not only had Bar Kochba and Sabbatai Zevi failed the Jews as messiahs; so had the Revolution.  The Jews failed in this third attempt to take over the world but the legacy of Sigmund Freud lives on in the ambiguous words of his corpus.  His immediate political aims failed but his undermining of European society was much more successful.

     Apart from his political intent Freud had uncovered a great scientific area of study.

5.

The Shirt Of Nessus

     While Freud’s short term political goals ended in disaster for his people, as did those of his role model, Hannibal, Freud’s long term goal of destroying the social foundations of the Gentiles has succeeded quite well.

     As an innovator Freud cannot be expected to have had a complete and final idea.  Much of the information that became available after 1950 was undeveloped in Freud’s time, such as the Matriarchal and Hetairic periods, so he cannot be held accountable for not knowing them.  Physiology has made tremendous strides since his day.

     Freud’s errors do not so much lay in areas of knowledge but in the areas of intent or motive.  He was unable to separate his own psychology of hatred from that of his scientific discipline.  Hence his mistaken emphasis on the importance of the father figure and his misbegotten notions of the Oedipus Complex.  Then too, he projected his hatred of the Gentiles into his views of religion and sexuality.

     The only thing of value Freud had to offer, that of the formation of neuroses, has been rejected by the lay and medical communities alike.

     Strangely his nonsense is revered as great revelations of truth, largely because they fit in with prevailing prejudices.  In his attack on the Christian religion Freud was curiously unaware that the Scientific Consciousness displaced the anterior consciousnesses of Hetaira, Matriarchy and Patriarchy.  Thus the people who were dependent on Religion as the basis of the mentality were people whose beliefs could not be dislodged.  On the one hand were the various esoteric religions whose beliefs do not depend on the divinity of Jesus and the Fundamentalists whose belief is so secure that nothing can shake it.  For those who need a supernatural agency in their lives New Age people using science as a tool have created alien intelligence from beyond the solar system to serve as their ‘God.’

     If Freud thought dispelling Christianity as a religious belief would bring the Gentiles down he was mistaken.  The ‘illusion’ had already been replaced by a ‘reality.’  The futility of trying to dispel religious beliefs should have been clear to Freud.  The exposure of the illusion or, even delusion, of the compact between the Jewish people and their god had no effect on them; they continue to believe the compact exists and that Palestine was given to them by their tribal god inalienably.

     The most potent dissolvent in Freud’s arsenal was his sexual theory.  He was quite severely criticised for his sexual beliefs then and they should be rejected now.

     Everything Freud believed on the subject was wrong.  Basic to his misunderstanding was the physical structure of the human organism. 

     He quite correctly picked up the ovate and spermatic halves of the psyche but since he didn’t associate them with physical origins he mistakenly thought that men were part woman and vice versa.  This was a critical misconception as it opened the door to much erroneous speculation on homosexuality.

     There may be rare cases of sexual ambiguity caused by birth defects in the physical apparatus or defective hormonal systems but any other expression of ambiguity is a perversion that is not part of the most perfect specimens but comes about only when the ovate is fixated and spermatic repressed or, in other words when the organism is mentally disturbed.  Psychological perversion has nothing to do with the physical organization.

     Since Freud misunderstood the physical organism he equated sexuality not with the Power Train itself but only with sexual intercourse.  Freud actually equated fucking with mental health.  Because psychic discomfort is reflected in sexual urges he actually believed that the more fucking one did the better person one would be.  Such nonsense has not only passed unchallenged for eighty years but is actually embraced today as the Gospel of Fuck.

     Freud did not believe in the intellect or the effectiveness of intelligence.  While he made the grandiose pronouncement:  Where Id is, Ego shall be, he failed to explain how this would come about.  For whatever reason he considered the intellect nonexistent and intelligence ineffective and unimportant.  In keeping with his times he believed in the hereditary transmission of mental traits.

     More importantly he invented a whole category of affects he identified as self-sufficient ‘instincts.’  Like the Unconscious instincts do not exist.  There are no instincts, not a single one, all is a matter of learning and education.

     Even eating is not an instinct but taught at the mother’s breast.  Hunger may be a physical reality but it is not an instinct.  Assuaging hunger must be learnt and that literally at the mother’s breast.  The first lesson an infant is taught is when the mother inserts the nipple in his mouth.  His mouth is blocked he has no choice but to resist by sucking.  Imagine his surprise when the liquid emitted seems delicious and when he swallows it because he can’t spit it out the physical reaction is terrific.  It feels good.  Having learnt to eat he wants more.  Being a quick learner, from that point on the infant will demand to be fed.  But without that first infusion he would die hungry not knowing what the desire to eat meant.

     Because Freud wanted to project his own psychic vision he gave instincts precedence over all other psychic functions.  He professed that the individual was incapable of resisting or controlling what the Ancients characterized as the Raging Bull and what he called the Ego.

     Both the Church and Esoteric religions have devised rigors to control or domesticate this Bull or Ego/instincts by using intelligence.  Freud thought that to use your intelligence to control your ‘instincts’ was to incur damaging inhibitions and repressions.  Hence he was opposed to European morality.  Freud imagined this did irreparable damage to the psyche especially sexual inhibitions and repressions hence the Gospel of Fuck.

     If fucking actually made a person better, then the logical conclusion is that libertines and homosexuals would be the best people in the world.  Fucking dominates the libertine and homosexual mind.  It is not unusual for them to commit thirty or forty sex acts a day for as many days as they can sustain it.

     As the only thing that counts in this view of sexual activity is the climax it follows that if machines were placed in prominent places to masturbate the individual on an hourly basis or less that society would be darn near perfect.  I don’t know why people are leery of buying the Brooklyn Bridge when they have bought the myth of sexual intercourse.

     The fact is that libertines and homosexuals are the worst people in the world so the basis of Freud’s argument is very limp.

     The West has generally embraced Freud’s misguided sexual theory.  The United States is actually fucked.  Freud’s sexual theory was picked up by the lame third rate novelist Henry Miller who actually formulated the Gospel of Fuck during the twenties and thirties in the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn.

     Henry Miller was gaining respectability during the fifties with psychotic fringe groups in the San Francisco Bay Area and elsewhere.  By the sixties he would have a profound impact on society with the reverence given his two volumes of the Tropics.

     As Freud was interpreted in the common mind repression and inhibition were the causes of psychic discomfort.  The common mind had no idea how inhibitions and repressions were caused except by not being allowed to do whatever you wanted to do.  Through the forties and fifties children of innumerable families were encouraged to indulge their whims and fancies regardless of who they might hurt.  They were given no instruction or correction lest they become inhibited and repressed.  It was thought that when they grew up they would naturally gravitate to the intelligent choice.

     The so-called ‘Me’ generation of the sixties and seventies lacked proper instruction in managing their ‘instincts.’  The pervading influence of past mores prevented them from expressing themselves with true lack of ‘inhibition’ or repression.  The wave of high school shootouts of the later century when the succeeding generation had moved out from the shadow of earlier mores were committed by the offspring of the ‘Me’ generation.  They are the logical progression of Freudian sexual theory.

     Employing metal detectors and other ‘inhibitory’ or ‘repressive’ systems will not solve the problem.  Freud has to be amended.

     Freud’s thesis was advanced by the Jewish monologist Lenny Bruce as well as furthered by Jewish interests in Hollywood who produced innumerable ‘action’ films in which the uninhibited and unrepressed protagonist attempts to solve his problems from the barrel of a gun rather than reason them out.

     So, this brings us up to Greil Marcus and the present.  Greil Marcus is himself a Jew so the question is how does Greil Marcus and his writing fit into this Jewish cultural scheme of things.  On my first reading of the book I had no idea what Mr. Marcus was talking about.  I had heard of the Situationist International but knew nothing about it.  Reading the blurbs I was under the impression that Mr. Marcus was going to explain the SI.  Not very clearly anyway.  As I turned the last page I had no idea what the book was all about.

     Second reading same as the first.  Then I read his 2006 effort The Shape Of Things To Come.  I gathered from that that Mr. Marcus considered himself in direct descent from the Old Testament Hebrew prophets and that he had conflated Israel and the United States.  Armed with that understanding I had the thin edge of the wedge.  I went back to a third reading of Lipstick Traces.  Pay dirt!  I think.

     I gather from the third reading that Mr. Marcus considers himself also a direct lineal descendent of Theodore Adorno and Herbert Marcuse, in other words The Frankfurt School or alternatively The Institute For Social Research or alternatively still The New School For Social Research.  Now we’re getting somewhere.  In addition his intellectual romance with fellow Jew Guy Debord who was the Situationist International seemed that in much the same way Dr. Baum assumed the soul of Dr. Mabuse in Fritz Lang’s The Testament of Dr. Mabuse I gather that Mr. Marcus may feel that like some Buddhist Lama the soul of the dead Debord has passed into himself and he is the new leader of the Situationist International.  So as I perceive it  Mr. Marcus views himself as an ancient Hebrew prophet, a critic in the mold of the Frankfurt School and the leader of the Situationist International.

     For some in depth background on the Frankfurt School the interested reader might try Kevin MacDonald’s  ‘The Culture Of Critique.’

     Following the above notion of who Greil Marcus might think he is and what he thinks he’s doing I will attempt an interpretation of Lipstick Traces.  Mr. Marcus as the leader of the Situationist International seems to have compiled his book which is as much a stream of consciousness impressionistic novel as anything else as a number of situations.

     I will deal with each situation as a separate entity which indeed a situation is.  Rather than begin with the first situation which as I see it should be last I will begin with the second situation, part of Version Two- A Secret History Of A Time That Passed- Legends Of Freedom.

     The theme of the book as a whole seems to be the saying of Karl Marx that Mr. Marcus refers to repeatedly:

I am nothing and I should be everything.

End of Part II.

A Review

The Strange Case Of Dr. Mabuse

by

David Kalat

by R.E. Prindle

Fritz

 

     The message and the medium are the same.  For those who like obscure but important issues a book appeared in 2001, of all years, by David Kalat entitled ‘The Strange Case Of Dr. Mabuse published by McFarland, the publishers of obscure studies par excellence.

     For those unfamiliar with Dr. Mabuse, for this study may indeed be obscure, Dr. Mabuse was a film character created by the movie auteur, Fritz Lang, in 1922 when he filmed Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler.  Kalat chronicles the whole series of twelve films and some related titles extending from 1922 to the present.  However my concern will be primarily Lang’s The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse of 1933.

     There are great similarities in Lang’s film to The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari because Lang was also involved in that film.  Mabuse may be the logical extension of it.

     The premise of the series is the undemining and destruction of society to be replaced by the anarchy and chaos of a Mabusian Empire Of Crime.  As you can see, if you look around you, Mabuse’s goal has been all but realized.

     Dr. Mabuse himself went insane at the end of The Gambler having been confined to an insane asylum administered by one Dr. Baum.  Catatonic for quite some time, Mabuse began moving his hand and fingers in a gesture of writing.  Baum provided Mabuse with pen and paper which Mabuse used to begin writing non-stop until he died.  He wrote his criminal manifesto for destroying society as we know it. He was a master hypnotist apparently hypnotizing Baum through his writings.  His soul or spirit thus entered Baum so that he, posing as the incapacitated Dr. Mabuse set in motion a whole series of crimes meant to destabilize society.

     In the end Baum too went insane after becoming in actuality Dr. Mabuse himself, recently deceased.

     Mabuse, in the Rosicrucian tradition, was an ‘unknown superior’ who directs the society of criminals anonymously.  Baum too was one.  Was Fritz Lang another?  Was the film his method of transmitting instructions to all the malcontents of the world who mesmerized from the screen rather than the printed page became agents in the establishment of the Empire Of Crime?  I rather suspect so.

     Mabuse is very sillily supposed to represent Hitler and the Nazis but nothing could be further from the intent and nature of the Empire Of Crime.  The excellent DVD of ‘Testament’ includes an interview with Fritz Lang.  Lang gives an account of his interview with Joseph Goebbels just before he fled Nazi Germany.

     Even though an evil Nazi Goebbels was no fool.  He easily saw through the equally evil Lang’s intent and purpose.  As he told Lang there was no State that could not be undermined by such methods which, once again, look around and you will find it is true.  Blair, Chirac, and Bush act like brain washed zombies aiding the Mabuse program.  Their acts are so contrary to reason, elementary reason, that one wonders if, indeed, they have not been hypnotized, coerced in some strange way to act against society’s and their own best interest.  Manchurian Candidates every one.

     So Goebbels banned the film confiscating the prints.  However the canny and evil Lang had been one step ahead of him.  He had concurrently reshot the whole movie in French which he had smuggled out of Germany.  The French in turn smuggled the movie out of Nazi occupied France to the United States where the film was shown beginning in 1943 thus perpetuating the legacy of Dr. Mabuse which might otherwise have been lost.

      As Mabuse, although based on a novel by Norbert Jacques, essentially sprang from the mind of Fritz Lang being commited to celluloid, the inescapable conclusion is that he himself was one of the many faces of Dr. Mabuse as Joseph Goebbels had no trouble realizing.

     The above goes well beyond Kalat’s text.  His book is a good description of the Mabuse phenomenon while providing good biographies of Lang and the German, French and Spanish movie people who perpetuated the program willingly or not.  For those not familiar with the European movie scene, or part of it, of which I am one, the book is also an excellent introduction.

     If you are Mabusian, whether you know it or not, you will find Kalat’s book indispensable.  If, like myself, you opposed to Mabusianism the book will provide essential background.  Kalat’s All Day Entertainment site has a good bargain on a combo book and movie offer.  If nothing else you will be able to entertain yourself all day in the grand manner.

End Of Dr. Mabuse Review

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.

 

The Deconstruction Of

Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America

by

R.E. Prindle

Part I

Snapshots Of The Twentieth Century

     Hey mama, mama, hey papa, papa

Ridin’ on the Mobile Line.

Hey mama, mama, hey papa, papa

I’m talkin’ ’bout the Mobile Line.

 Theys a road to ride baby,

Ease your troubled mind.

Trad.

     The time is 1912, the place is Harry Hope’s Bar in New York City.  A number of hapless alcoholic anarchists and socialists lay about waiting for the Revolution, Lefty, Godot or the one bright spot in their year, the appearance of a traveling salesman named Hickey who will regale them all with free drinks until his money runs out.

     Larry Slade, a despondent tired anarchist sits numbly staring into thin air when Don Parritt a young Movement member blows in from the Coast.  The Utopian revolution has crashed on the rock of psychological realities.   Don Parritt could not tolerate his mother’s one night stands turning her and the West Coast Movement in to the police.

Eugene O' Neill

—–

     The scene now shifts to the inside of a rundown movie theatre in Manhattan in 1943.  On the end row in the middle back slumps a tall gangly man of twenty-eight intently almost breathlessly watching the flickering movement on the screen listening with great concentration to the words booming from the loudspeakers.

     Well he might for the movie is one of the most amazing ever filmed.  Originally shot in Germany in 1932 the movie had been confiscated by Dr. Goebbels shortly thereafter as subversive.  Dr. Goebbels was right on the mark.

page 1.

     Thus the film had disappeared to be discovered and reconstructed only in the post-war years.  Wait! How then could the man be watching The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse in 1943?  Well, this is an amazing story.  The director, Fritz Lang, well knew his film would be suppressed by the German authorities so he had a parallel copy filmed in French at the same time.  This version was smuggled from Germany to France and from Occupied France to the United States even as the war raged.   What was so important about this film that it had been rescued twice and shown in the middle of the war? 

Fritz Lang

     The film was and is subversive and not only to Nazi Germany.  It is quite frankly a blueprint for the subversion of society, indeed, of all civilization.  Anarchism perfected.  The faithful were being given their post-war marching orders.  The Communists, of which faith the tall gangly man was, cleverly described the movie as an anti-Nazi polemic which it definitely was not.  They fooled a great many people but at the same time the faithful were directed to see the movie.  The message struck home.   The Capitalist State could be undermined.  As the man left the theatre he would always recall the moment as one of the great moments of his life.  A life changing moment.  He would subsequently review the movie many times, finally watching the German version when it was released.  The movie so overwhelmed his senses he never could get the story right.

     Three years later in 1946 the now thirty-one year old sat in a theatre watching a play with the same rapt intensity.  This too electrified him as much as the Testament Of Dr. Mabuse had in 1943.  The play depicting an earlier time had been writen in 1939 but for various reasons had never been produced until this evening.  The scene is set in Harry Hope’s Bar in New York City in 1912.  A group of alcoholic socialists and anarchists sat around waiting for the Revolution, Lefty, Godot or the appearance of a traveling salesman named Hickey whichever came first.  Hickey was first on the spot with money for drinks.

     Yes, the play was Eugene O’ Neill’s The Iceman Cometh.  The opening scene of the play occurred only in Eugene O’ Neill’s imagination.  True enough the story was nevertheless.  The tall gangly man watched this greatest of all American plays with feelings mixed with admiration and loathing.  Stunned by its brilliance, he resented the depiction of his fellow anarchists and socialists as bums.  The play was the antithesis of his favorite movie, The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse.

     As he left the theatre he was one of the few who realized he had watched a masterpiece.  He had to strike back in the name of subversion.  The character of Hickey, the traveling salesman, haunted his mind mixed with images of the terrifying sociopathic and insane Dr. Mabuse.  As he brooded the faint outline of a play of his own formed in his mind.  His play would be about a traveling salesman but would combine both efforts to attack and undermine the fabric of the American State as his favorite movie had taught him.

     He and his had been attacked and ridiculed by what he considered  the reactionary Eugene O’ Neill.  In only one or two years Arthur Miller’s Death Of A Salesman would assault and insult the American people.  Miller was clever, the Boobocracy didn’t even know it had been insulted.  The Judaeo-Communist propaganda machine went to work.  Today O’ Neill is all but ignored while Arthur Miller’s insignificant piece of fluff is mentioned in the same breath with Shakespeare.

—–

        Back once more to 1912 where a thirty-six year old man toils over what will be his second published novel.  The first novel was strange enough but the novel he is now writing will become perhaps the most unusual novel to ever become a best seller.

     O’ Neill wrote conventional prose, long winded sucker too; Lang’s Dr. Mabuse was comprehensible to the simplest mind although understood by few, the novel being written in 1912 would leave  men and women scratching their heads incredulously.  The novel defied conventional literary logic speaking instead to unspoken hopes and desires.  The author himself was terrified that the story was too strange.  But as he put a period to the last sentence of Tarzan Of The Apes and mailed it off, Edgar Rice Burroughs heaved a sigh and sat to wait for the verdict of the publisher.  It seems almost too incredible that such a bizarre story was immediately accepted with such enthusiasm.

DISASTER BY ANY OTHER NAME IS DISASTER

     The Heir to the first disaster, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected President of the United States in 1932.

TWENTY YEARS OF TREASON BEGINS

     Samuel Dickstein, a congressman from New York, sitting in the House of Representatives was on the payroll of the Premier of the Union Of Soviet Socialist Republics, Josef Stalin.

     In this capacity he pushed for a House Un-American Activities Committee to root out and punish opponents of the Soviet Union and Communism.  These people were labeled Fascists whatever their actual politics and defamed by the Judaeo-Communist Propaganda Machine.   They were usually anti-Communists opposed to the Soviet Union and perhaps to Uncle Joe himself.  Needless to say they were also characterized as anti-Semites.   This was done with the full blessing of Frank Roosevelt himself.

     In 1938 HUAC was created but the chairmanship went to a Congressman from Texas by the name of Martin Dies.  Although his name has been blackened by the Judaeo-Communist Propaganda Machine Dies was a good man.  A very good man.

     He promptly went after Communists as well as ‘Fascists’, which was not in Uncle Joe’s, Frank’s or Sam Dickstein’s script.  Dies was given a very hard time.  Captured by Parnell Thomas and the Roman Catholic religious faction after the war HUAC became dedicated to anti-Communism.  This was definitely not in the Red script so the Propaganda Machine was turned against HUAC after initially agitating for it.  The Communists now did everything they could to destroy the committee they had created.

WITH A SONG IN MY HEART

Irving Berlin

     Israel Baline, giddy with the success of the Russian Revolution sat down in Tin Pan Alley to write a sweet little song to the tune of an earlier hit, When Moses Led The Band With His Nose, entitled God Bless America.  He exhorted his fellow Culturalists to ‘stand beside her, and guide her’ as presumably he thought Americans were incapable of navigating a course without Semitic assistance.

     Presumably as part of the assistance and guidance the media of his ‘home sweet home’ was taken over and administered by his fellow Culturalists.  Tin Pan Alley, A Jewish cultural economic niche, was already accounting for a large part of culture forming popular songs.  Now in the twenties a flood of books was written by Jews, or Semites, debunking ‘Bad Old America’ as Greil Marcus has characterized it, and the poor ignorant boobs who formed the country the songwriter claimed to love, appeared.  Israel Baline’s Home Sweet Home was never to be the same as another of his Culture, Philip Roth, wrote a book eighty years or so on, The Plot Against America, in which, backdating a little to that critical year of 1943, Roth gives the Jewish Culture credit for creating ‘the land that he loved’ while the Bad Old American true creators are accused of corrupting it.

     God Bless America wasn’t orignally all that successful.  In the critical year of 1938, when HUAC was formed, Irving Berlin, for that’s who Israel Baline became, dusted the song off and rewrote it.  For now the game was afoot indeed.  In 1918 spreading a new song by sheet music and phonograph, without the use of radio, was along, laborious effort.  Things had changed by 1938.  In one night a new song broadcast over radio would be heard instantly by millions of people across this great land of ours.

     The contest between the Communists and Nazis was raging.  Uncle Joe Stalin, Sam Dickstein and Frank Roosevelt had established the House Un-American Activities Committee for the purpose of rooting out not only Nazis but, you guessed it, ‘anti-Semites’ and , if fact, enemies of the New Deal.  Irving Berlin’s song reintroduced in 1938 was a very strategic emplacement.  The same words have different meaning for different Cultures.  Thus the message sent to the Jewish Culture by the song was different from what was heard by the general culture, or most of it.  I always had difficulty with the song as a child, refusing to sing along.  I couldn’t reconcile the words:

God Bless America land that I love.

Stand beside her,

And guide her

Thru the night with a light from above.

        ‘Land that I love’ implies a choice of lands and I knew no other lands nor any other choice.  As I was ‘America’ to ‘stand beside her, and guide her’ meant that I would have to be beside myself which was clearly impossible.  I considered the last line pure nonsense.

     I couldn’t articulate my understanding at the time but I was not alone in my perception.  Apparently feeling the insult, Woody Guthrie wrote an answer in 1940 originally entitled God Bless America For Me.  It seems clear he understood the cultural implications.  He later changed the title to the very aggressive This Land Is My Land- this land is your land, from California to the New York Island.’  I didn’t know it but I wasn’t alone.

     One of the most popular radio shows of 1938 starring the most stellar of Anglo-Saxon singers was chosen for the debut to make sure the song had strong ‘American’ credentials.  Berlin and his culture knew what the song meant.  Georgie Jessel wasn’t right for this one.  Kate Smith could really belt it out too.

     The Kate Smith Society historian Richard K. Hayes tells the story like this:

http://katesmith.org/gba.html

     Quote:

     Now Kate Smith was the No. 1 popular songstress in America in 1938, and her weekly Kate Smith Hour was heard by many millions of radio listeners that Thursday, November 10.  The shy composer was invited to attend the show but he declined, opting to listen with a few friends in his office at his music publishing company in New York.  Kate sang it as her closing number after which Berlin’s phone began to ring, as people began to ask, ‘Where can we get that song Kate Smith just sang?”

     The new anthem electrified the nation and Kate sang it on nearly every broadcast through December, 1940.

     Unquote.Kate Smith

     The song was revived in the equally crucial year of 1943 when Kate Smith rendered it in the Warner Brothers movie This Is The Army.  This was the year it became clear in Jewish circles that the Nazis were bent on exterminating European Jewry.  It would be more urgent than ever to reinforce the notion of a Jewish and American ‘partnership’ which is what the song implies.  The protection by America of the Jews was paramount in Jewish minds.  Now more than ever it was necessary for the Culture ‘to stand beside her, and guide her.’

SO LONG, IT’S BEEN GOOD TO KNOW YA

     FDR did the United States a favor by passing away in 1944.  Could have done it earlier and made it a big favor.  Succeeded by his VP Harry Truman  the FDR-Truman years would be characterized by the stout Roman Catholic anti-Communist, Joe McCarthy, as Twenty Years Of Treason.  Joe got it right but heavily infiltrated by Judaeo-Communists he was made to look ridiculous and a fool.  Needless to say the Propaganda Machine has ground an honest American to dust.

BETRAYAL

     The man who created Tarzan had been working away developing his creation, who was well on his way to becoming the reigious archetype for the Aquarian Age.  Himself a stout anti-Communist, capable of creating a new scientifically based religion, it became necesary for the Machine to co-opt his creation while neutralizing Burroughs himself.  Accordingly, the Judaeo-Communists at MGM lured Burroughs into a contract in 1931 then stripped him of his creation while ultimately exiling Burroughs himself from Hollywood in 1940.

SOUR GRAPES

     Anxious to join the war against Germany, John Dos Passos joined the ambulance corps in France.  the experience of the war was the making of Dos Passos (1896-1970) as a writer.  In 1924 he published his novel, Manhattan Transfer, since become a minor classic of the period.  During the thirties he began to write and publish his magnum opus the USA Trilogy.  Composed of The 42nd Parallel, 1919 and The Big Money the trilogy would cover the years from approximately the time of his birth to the 1920s.

     In 1906 he would have been called a muckraker; in 1935 he was one of the Jewish debunkers.  He didn’t just debunk one person he debunked a whole people.  There is not one single admirable person is his story and few if any immigrants.  One asks as one reads, why would anyone want to know these people or live in the US?  He’s attacking the ‘Anlgo-Saxons’.  These are all Bad Old Americans in Bad Old America.   While others were writing utopias Dos Passos ground out these dystopias- people you didn’t want to know in a place you didn’t want to be.

     Some caricatures are easily recognizable.  Bernarr Macfadden is laughable present.  There are some incidents reminiscent of Edgar Rice Burroughs who in the 1930s was a world renowned figure.  Dos Passos was born in and spent some of his youth in Chicago but would have been too young to actually have observed what he was writing about.  He was only sixteen when he left for France and his ambulance.  Thus his writing was based on hearsay and rumor.

     John Dos Passos may be considered a key figure in the deconstruction of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America.  His constant derogation of people, places and things either set or reinforced the negative critical attitude which has since become the norm.  My most recent reading left me with a slight feeling of nausea for have visited Dos Passos dystopian Bad Old America.

A SOLDIER OF FORTUNE MOVES ON

  Invictus

W.E. Henley

Out of the night that cover me,

Black as the pit from pole to pole,

I thank whatever gods may be

For my unconquerable Soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance

I have not winced nor cried aloud,

Under the bludgeoning of Chance,

My head is bloody but unbowed.

Beyond this Place of wrath and tears,

Looms but the Horror of the Shade,

And yet the Menace of the years

Finds and shall find me Unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the Master of my Fate,

I am the Captain of my Soul.

     In March of 1950, if not one of the greatest men of the 1850-1950 period, certainly one of the most influential shuffled of this mortal coil and did his cake walk over to the other side.  Edgar Rice Burroughs had seen enough.  This stuff wasn’t funny anymore.

     It was a tough fight.  Burroughs was a tough fighter but life is a fight one must inevitably lose.  Like his generation and three or four following it Burroughs embraced Henley’s Invictus of 1896 as his own creed.  There are no golden ages except in retrospect; his was as tough and violent as they come.  Born at the end of that great criminal holocaust known as Reconstruction, Burroughs was always sympathetic to the South.  He owned volume three of Thomas Dixon’s trilogy on Reconstruction while certainly having read the first two.

     When it comes to holocaust denials liberals have no interest in acknowledging the great crimes they have perpetrated.  The Reconstruction period is barely mentioned in US histories and then with no references to the egregious crimes committed in the name of ‘social justice.’  This is not the place to go into them.

     Suffice it to say the bigoted Old Testament Hebrew immitating Puritan wannabes  of New England- read New Anglia- meant to reverse the situation in the South making the Whites virtual slaves of the Negroes.  That they failed is one of the great epic histories of mankind.  Reconstruction is a story that remains untold.  In control of the media, text books and all, Liberals have attempted to bury the truth with a slight condemnation of a ‘small minority’ of Yankee thieves known as carpetbaggers.

     The crimes of the Reconstruction period rival and surpass even those of Adolf Hitler against the Jews.  Many more people were affected by Reconstruction while millions lost their lives during Reconstruction and in the war that preceded it that had nothing to do with Negro slavery.

     Filled with stories of the evils of Reconstruction perhaps heard from the lips of victims and victimizers, young Burroughs followed the Indian Wars of the eighties in the pages of his native Chicago papers.  He in fact participated in the final suppression of the Apaches.

     As a young man he witnessed the terrific technological expansion of America.  All the inventions we take for granted today were invented in his lifetime with the exception of photography.  He saw the first airplanes  fly and watched them metamorphose into supersonic jet planes.  He saw the first Model T and watched it metamorphose into what is now considered the classic 1949 models.  Movies, radio and even the first glimmerings of television.

     Amonst all these positive developments he also watched the deconstruction of the America he grew up in.  The advances in technological developments themselves brought about incredible changes.  The propaganda capabilites of movies, radio and TV by a process of gradualism in the hands of a selfish culture graually eroded the values of his childhood and youth beginning their replacement by the antithesis of everything he believed in.  They turned the Bad Old America of their fancy into the cesspool America has become under their guidance while they stood beside us.

     He had been a central figure in the deconstruction of America himself whether he knew it or not.  He embodied his character of Tarzan with all those venerable  American values placing himself under attack by those who wished to replace them.  He survived the brutal battering he took in the thirties his ‘head bloody but unbowed.’

     In the menace of those years he continued to patiently endow Tarzan with those qualities we his successors would need to be the  ‘Masters of our Fates; the Captains of our Souls.”  He was able to organize a hope and belief for the coming Aquarian Age.

     So, here’s to Edgar Rice Burroughs and his great projection, Tarzan.

     Rest not in peace Old Warrior but alert to the dangers we face on this side of the divide.  Live on in our hopes and needs.  You continue to inspire and guide us.  May we be worthy of your trust.

End of Part I  of The Deconstruction Of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America.   Part II Follows.