Part 3 Something Of Value I
October 24, 2007
SOMETHING OF VALUE I, PART III
by
R.E. Prindle
Part 3 of Vol. I.
Freud was severely emasculated in both personal ego and in his group ego. He was in fact a practicing homosexual. His relationship with Fliess was homosexual in nature which Freud confessed vowing never to do it again. His group, the Jews, were and are a severely emasculated people. They have been since they walked away from Ur. But on with Freud.
Freud was fond of telling the story of his father and his hat, it seems that Mr. Freud related a story to Sigmund, or Sigismund as he was known then, (His Hebrew name significantly was Solomon) of how when he was a young man walking down the street proudly wearing his new hat, a gentile knocked the hat from his head into the gutter, snarling: ‘Go get your hat, Jew.’
When Sigmund asked breathlessly what his father did, expecting an heroic response, the old gentleman replied: ‘I stepped into the gutter and picked up my hat.’ severely disappointing the young boy.
Since Freud told and retold this story we may be forgiven for believing it had a profound effect on his young conscious and subconscious minds and possibly his ‘unconscious’ too. On the one hand he may have been so ashamed of his father’s very reasonable reaction that he shared his emasculation encapsulating it in his subconscious as a fixation. It is possible that this story either made or contributed to his homosexuality. On the other hand we know for a fact that it inflamed his group ego with an ardent desire for revenge against the gentiles.
As a result of the story he made the Carthaginian Semite, Hannibal, his alter ego. When Hannibal’s father was defeated by the Romans he had his son swear that the would never cease waging war on the Romans until he died. Obviously Freud made his vow against the Europeans although his father didn’t demand it.
It is no coincidence that both Freud and Hannibal were Semites and that the Romans and Europeans were gentiles. Nor is it a coincidence that both Hannibal and Freud were defeated after seemingly winning the war and that rather than fighting the enemy to the end both fled. Now, it therefore follows that Freud never ceased waging war against the Europeans.
You say: How? Come along. I can’t take you into the Inner Sanctum, which way you will have to find on your own, but I can show you some of the records I have been allowed to abstract from the files.
This will involve the secret history of the human race but don’t be alarmed. If you don’t want to believe it you don’t have to. It still is a rousing good story. Besides, if you should ever come around the archives you’ll find it is true.
Freud himself made an attempt to explain a little of the origins of the Jewish psyche in Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety and Moses And Monotheism. The earlier millennia don’t concern us here. The Jews throughout history in their egotism have felt much put upon. This sense of grievance grew until with the expulsion from Spain after the Reconquest their sense of injustice burst into open flames. The group swore revenge on Europe. It must be remembered that at the end of the thirteenth century they were expelled from England, at the beginning of the fourteenth from France and for the duration, well, they were really welcome nowhere.
They swore to stultify Europe. Judaism is the history of messianism.
Sabbatai Zevi.
Zevi- The Last Of The Messiahs
This man was the last great messianic imposter. In 1666, the number of the beast plus a thousand, the Jews of Europe awaited the word from Sabbatai, then at the Ottoman Court to begin the slaughter. But Zevi apostatized to Moslemism instead. The uprising never came off. Hung fire. Fizzled.
Hope beats eternal. The learned Rabbis vowed never to place their hopes on a single individual again. They now concocted a plan for the group to rise as one man in rebellion. The date selected for the revolution was the period 1913-28. You want to give yourself a little leeway there. Born in 1856, in 1913 Sigmund Freud was fifty-seven years old. Although none of his biographers say much about his his Jewish background it is quite clear that he was read in Jewish lore. You may say that he wasn’t a religious Jew but he nevertheless was devoutly Jewish.
Freud quite consciously hated the gentiles for personal reasons that meshed quite well into those of his group identity.
During 1913-17 Freud’s reputation was immense both within and without the Jewish community. It was true his heir apparent, C.J. Jung had broken with him perhaps for this very reason but he and Psychoanalytic Movement had suffered no damage.
In psychoanalyis Freud had the means to instruct his group and control the gentiles. It is said that he gave up hypnotism when he turned to psychoanalysis but as a perusal of ‘Group Psychology’ will show he was preparing for a breathtaking attempt at hypnotizing the entire Western world not unlike that of Burroughs’ Lotharians against their invaders.
Freud lived in Vienna where for years, even decades before 1913, emigrating Jews had flowed through from the entry port into Austria from the East of Brody on their way to America via the North German ports. The prosperity of the whole German shipping lines was built on steerage passengers. Nor were the decisions to emigrate necessarily individual; it may have begun that way but to emigrate was soon organized and directed by the international Jewish community. Check the career of Baron Maurice Hirsch.
The Jewish establishments of both Europe and America provided funding. At about this time provisions were made to transport the entire Jewish population of the Pale, from Lithuania to Romania, to the United States Of America. At the time the international Jewish goverment led by Jacob Schiff and Louis Marshall was located in the United States, New York City. The decks were being cleared so as to remove resistance in America. So as not to call too much attention to the fact by having hordes disembark entirely in New York and Boston, for there would be resistance however feeble, the ports of New Orleans and Galveston were organized to deal with millions of immigrants.
This plan was aborted by the Great War. The Jews had already been at war with Russia, or the Czar as they personalized it, for a hundred years. The international Jewish community had engineered the Russo-Japanese war almost pulling off a revolution in its wake in 1905.
Activities were now intensified. At the time and for about the next sixty years the Jews threw a veil of obfuscation over their activities always denying involvement in Communist or Revolutionary matters. In recent years Jewish scholars, for whatever reason, have now found it expedient to admit that which they were accused of but always denied. They now admit that every national subversive Communist part was over fifty percent Jewish. Those of Russia and Germany were considerably higher. Freud had been involved in Jewish subversive organizations like the B’nai B’rith for many years. As the master psychologist, an expert in the unconscious, he prepared the Jewish mind for the great task of the millennial years in Central and Eastern Europe, which would require much bloodshed, while formulating his psychological plan of conquest not dissimilar from the military plans of his hero, Hannibal.
Freud himself was centered in Vienna. A lieutenant, Abraham, was his man in Berlin while Frerenczi was posted to Budapest in Hungary. The three crucial central European points were covered. Jung in Zurich had split off shortly before this. It is interesting that the Jewish psychoanalytic extablishment spitefully denounced him as a Nazi.
The Jewish millennial years began in 1913. The Great War began in 1914. The Bolshevik Revolution occurred in 1917. Freud’s Introductory Lectures On Psychoanalysis appeared in 1917 also, even though there must have been an extreme paper shortage; it is not a short book. Freud encoded last minute instructions to the Revolutionists in the book.
At this point in 1917 Freud released the inhibitions of millions of Mr. Hydes in Russia, Hungary and Germany. The Bolsheviks took Russia out of the war signing a seemingly humiliating peace treat at Brest-Litovsk. As Lenin said the peace treaty was meaningless because it was his intent to stab Germany in the back.
Germany had a huge Communist Party which it is now admitted was around sixty percent Jewish. Now with the United States in the war, Germany debilitated internally and crippled psychologically, thousands of Jewish revolutionaries intent on the realization of the millennium flowed back into Germany from Russia in hopes of achieving the Revolution there, giddy with the hopes of thereby annexing Central and Eastern Europe. That they didn’t was because of the efforts of the German Volkish groups such as Hitler and his Nazi Party.
The unconscious psychoses of the Jewish people who it will be remembered as a group were suffering from severe emasculation were erupting. Emasculation of the Ego is always expressed in a sexual manner frequently sadistic. Freud had been preaching the practice of unrestrained sexual activity for years. Murder is a sexual act. He was against ‘repression’ you remember.
When Russia began its program of expansion under the Romanovs it annexed an enormous number of nationalities. The Russians then tried to impose their language and manners on the conquered peoples in an attempt to form an homogeneous State. In so doing they emasculated the subject peoples. Those same subject peoples were now the masters of the Russians with permission to indulge their ‘unconscious.’
Jews, Letts, Poles and others let loose. Stalin himself was a Georgian.
Jacob Schiff- PM of the International Jewish Government at this time.
As Jean Genet correctly saw of the Nazi State, in Russia a criminal intellect was now joined to the political and legal apparatus of the State. The criminal code was changed from an objective one to a subjective one; one of vengeance. For a period of years law was suspended in Russia. Amidst the chaos International Jewish organizations including those of the United States operated openly to coordinate their hopes for the millennium.
Bela Kun- Communist Psychopath
What I’m about to say has been denied and suppressed but the example was before both Hitler and Stalin. In Hungary Freud had his man Ferenczi to coordinate the Hungarian Jews. The Jewish Bela Kun (Cohn) seized the government beginning a reign of terror against the gentiles during which thousands of non-Jews were murdered in a horrible sadistic manner commensurate with a severely emasculated Ego.
For some time the Jews had been clamoring for a State of their own. Taking advantage of the chaos in Russia the Jewish American Joint Distribution Committee under the leadership of Schiff and Marshall decided to appropriate the Crimea. Bela Kun who had escaped Hungary during the inevitable reaction, going to Moscow, was sent down to the Crimea to exterminate the population to make lebensraum for the Jews. He was in the process when Lenin died. Stalin then recalled him to Moscow where he was subsequently shot.
All these activities were obscured and suppressed. It is forbidden in American universities to study the subject to this day.
Still, Europe was so horrified that they declined to discuss it or even acknowledge it. But Hitler and Stalin remembered.
The Communists in Moscow being composed solely of emasculated peoples functioning from Freud’s vision of the unconscious like so many Hydes conducted a criminal homosexual style State that would have delighted Genet had he been there. The author the The Thief’s Journal would have gasped at the warehouses full of stolen furs, diamonds and other jewels, art objects and whatever of value that the poor emasculated wretches had stolen from their murdered victims. It was the triumph of the Common Man.
As soon as Stalin gained power he began to discredit and remove Jews from influential positions. Trotsky was sent to a malarial swamp in Siberia to die but from which he escaped to be killed by Stalin’s assasins later. As Stalin consolidated his power he acted more directly until he held the famous show trials of 1936. He then began the systematic elimination of Jews which resulted by the end of 1945 in the death of millions.
Adolf Hitler
Joseph Stalin
Thus Hitler, an emasculated man leading an emasculated people had the Judaeo-Communist example before him. As an avid anti-Communist and open anti-Semite he was virtually isolated by the world that by 1936 was under the control of Judaeo-Communists. He was the antagonist not the protagonist.
While Stalin who had religious training was clever enough to seemingly work through the system openly followed legal controlled methods although the law had been subordinated to his ends. Hitler acted as a homosexual with an ax in his hand. Stalin’s officers dispatched prisoners hidden in the depths of the Lubyanka with a bullet in the back of the head, which method, by the way, was favored by Jewish and Italian members of Organized Crdime in America of the time, while the Nazis brutally beat prisoners, finally shooting them in the back while escaping.
Stalin, Hitler, Freud, which was worse? Freud enabled, Stalin and Hitler executed. They were all the same.
In Russia during the first year or so of Lenin some Russian workers were being read to as they worked. Were they being read the works of Marx or Lenin? No. They were being read the Tarzan novels of Edgar Rice Burrougs. This infuriated the Politburo. The State was trying to impose a collectivist unconscious psychology on the Russians while Burroughs and his great psychological projection were individualist and responsible. In fact, Burroughs offered a concept of the unconscious which was directly opposed to that of Freud. One might say that Burroughs was Dr. Jekyll to Freud’s Mr. Hyde.
Burroughs himself had been severely emasculated at the age of nine. The situation seems to be this: Burroughs came from a prosperous Chicago family. His parents were very proud of their English ancestry. If you’re unwilling to understand national and racial prejudices that were very pronounced at the time then you probably won’t be able to understand. There were strong feelings between the Anglo-Saxon and Celt or English and Irish. The Anglos considered the Celts if not inferior at least eccentric. The Burroughses employed two Irish girls as servants. In all probability Young Burroughs assumed an attitude of superiority which the girls resented. They then concocted a plan to cut young Burroughs down to size.
They had a friend or relative by the name of John who was aged twelve to Burroughs’ nine. Being much larger and tougher than Burroughs he stopped the younger boy on the way to school one day where he thoroughly intimidated and terrified him. It is quite possible that Burroughs messed his pants. In any event, he suffered severe emasculation that was to haunt him all his life. He does not seem to have ever practiced homosexuality although he was haunted by a feeling of sexual ambiguity.
The incident with John the Bully not only played havoc with Burroughs personal psychlogy in the narrow sense of creating a psychosis but there was also an effect in what Freud’s erstwhile associate, C. J. Jung called the collective unconscious. The individual is limited by his very humanity to a small number of general responses.
Thus Burroughs was given a cast of mind which the Hindus denoted as Shivaistic. This is a general outlook or philosophy of life, if you wish, which one adopts unconsciously as the consequence of one’s experience. I share it although it took me nearly a lifetime to recognize and accept it.
Edgar Allan Poe- The Father Of Modern Literature
Burroughs himself was aware of the fact by at least 1931 when he wrote Tarzan And The Leopard Men. In one key or on one level the story is one of Shiva and Kali his consort. Burroughs names his heroine Kali while she is selected to be the White Goddess of the Leopard Men as part of their death cult.
As can be seen by their complete disregard for life Freud, Hitler and Stalin were also Shivaites.
Shiva and Kali are the Hindu representation of Life and Death. Shiva plays unconcernedly on the pipes while the carnage of life and death goes on around him. The song goes on. Kali, his consort, the goddess of death and regeneration dances on the bodies of the dead to Shiva’s music while wearing a necklace of skulls. Death means nothing because she as the eternal mother has the means to multiply unendingly. Do multitudes die? Why then, multitudes die. Not to worry. Life goes on.
Burroughs also developed an interest in psychology in his attempt to free his mind of the fixation given him by John the Bully. As his psychological notions were well formed by 1911 when he began to write in his attempt to expiate his guilt it follows that he acquired his knowledge during his early married years from 1900 to 1911. He married at 24. He had little opportunity to do his reading before then as the major works were only appearing in the late ’90s.
His main concern was the subconscious mind. While his evolutionary ideas are easier to trace he has left no mention of his psychological reading. It seems certain that he was familiar with FWH Myers who, as noticed, first defined the notion of the unconscious in 1886. He must have read James while Freud’s notions would have been discussed, if not yet translated; thus DH Lawrence had highly developed ideas on the Freudian unconscious in his 1911 Psychoanalysis And The Unconscious while I doubt Burroughs had read Freud in the German.
Also it seems probable that Burroughs had read Le Bon.
Burroughs’ idea of the unconscious differed greatly from Freud’s while being more soundly based in the actual functioning of the mind. While Burroughs’ hero Tarzan seems to function with an integrated personality from his creation in 1911-12 Burroughs himself came very close to integrating his own from 1913 to ’17 or may have although he always had trouble with his Animus and Anima.
Even though Freud advertised the fact that he had taken a year off (golly, a whole year) for self-analysis, whatever the results may have been he never succeeded in integrating his personality or, apparently, realized he should have. He was severely conflicted all his life. Just take a look at his photo where you can see that huge welt running from his lover right cheek across his nose into his forehead. That was caused either by excessive cocaine use or mental conflict in the brain stem, probably both.
As did all mythographers, Burroughs had read his Poe, like them he was concerned with the conscious and subconscious minds. While Stevenson’s Jekyll lost his conscious mind in his subconscious mind, Burroughs cencentrated on the concept of the beast within the man, the relationship between the conscious and the subconscious. In Chapter 3 of The Return Of Tarzan, in what appears to be a plagiarization of the murder scene of Poe’s Murders In The Rue Morgue, Burroughs has Tarzan act out the parts of both the Sailor and the Orang.
Lured up to the apartment on the pretext of helping a young woman, Tarzan is set upon by her accomplices. Discarding the trappings of his recently acquired civilization Tarzan reverts to his anthropoid education of the Jungle becoming Poe’s Orang, yet always retaining the restraints of his humanity or the Sailor.
When the police come he leaps out the window to a telephone pole which one imagines were more common in Chicago than Paris. (Burroughs had never been to Paris so he replicated the urban scene he knew.) While still in his ape guise he has the sense to look down where he sees a policeman below so he climbs up leaping to a rooftop.
Racing across the rooftops of Paris he climbs down another pole. Then in a Hyde-like transformation back to Jekyll he shakes himself from his ape self back into his human self, without the aid of drugs, enters a restaurant to clean up in the rest room then saunter jauntily down the street as though nothing had happened.
Thus the plagiarization of not only Poe but Stevenson was merely an attempt to give a better solution by using the mythological symbols.
Return was written at the end of 1912 and the beginning of 1913.
Burroughs’ own self-analysis would continue through his astonishing output of 1911-17 when he finally integrated his personality with the final volume of his Mucker Trilogy published as the Oakdale Affair but alternately titled Bridge And The Oskaloosa Kid which is the better title. At that time he had exorcised his major fixations which should have integrated his personality.
In understanding that the disintegration of the personality was caused by an affront or affronts to the Ego or Animus that resulted in the creation of fixations that festered in the subconscious that in turn manufactured affects that evidenced themselves in various physical and psychological ways he realized that the same could be exorcised returning the Ego to a whole state.
Unfortunately he strung his theory on through a couple dozen works of fiction disguised as incident. A very few would read all the novels while the only possible interpreters could be those who had read them all not only with a psychological background but an open, inquisitive mind. We’re a very small minority.
If I hadn’t been through the same process on my own I probably never would have recognized it. However as his theories were embodied in his hero Tarzan as mythology they passed into the unconscious of his readers of which, as a teenager, I was one, so shall we say, my mind was prepared.
Pt. V Lipstick Traces: Greil Marcus
August 21, 2007
A Review
Greil Marcus: Lipstick Traces
Part V
The Crash Of Yesterday’s Art
by R.E. Prindle
At this stage of the review it will turn into a secret history of the secret history. Since last writing I have read Mr. Marcus’ opus on Dylan’s Like A Rolling Stone, The Dustbin Of History and Mystery Train plus a few articles available on line. The qualities not as apparent from a volume or two become more apparent when enough material is read. No writer can write several hundred pages without revealing himself and his intentions.
Thus it becomes clear that Mr. Marcus was reared as both a Communist and a Jew. Of course he uses the palliative, socialist. He seems to have come from a privileged background while having received a Jewish conditioning. He was born in the summer of 1945. His father, Greil Gerstner, died during WWII so he must have been adopted by his stepfather, obtaining the name of Marcus.
As part of the Critical Theory of The Frankfurt School he has been trained to view life as one tragedy after another. Whereas in the Western tradition we are trained to see life as a series of adventures in which if we triumph, good; if not, then efforts must be taken to rectify the situation. There is no mystery in situationism; it is just the way it is. Thus the Westerner even more that the Jewish Guy Debord is trained as a situationist.
In his criticism Mr. Marcus unremittingly condemns the United States as fatally flawed and ripe for destruction. As this is his vision he is compelled to work toward its realization. This might be considered strange because when his grandparents or great-grandparents landed on these shores c. 1900 they thought they had found the Promised Land. So what happened in the years between then and now to turn the Promised Land into the shitheap Mr. Marcus sees? Nothing. The conditioned Jewish character merely asserted itself and Paradise turned into fecal matter. One might look to Freud for a solution but I think the answer can be found even earlier in that ridiculous Holy Book of the Jews that Westerners call the Bible.
Now, they are always looking for a paradisical ‘situation.’ According to their Holy Book 5700 and some odd years ago which is when they believe that the world was created they lived in the literal Paradise. All they had to do was keep their nose clean and mind their manners. So as to leave room for no mistakes their mentor God, or as Jews spell it G-d, told them all of Paradise was theirs to enjoy but they must never eat of the fruit of a forbidden tree. Pretty clear wasn’t it?
So then the Jews defied their mentor by eating the forbidden fruit. This act enraged their mentor so greatly he picked them up and bodily threw them from Paradise thus beginning a very long list of expulsions. Also their God did not fool around. He was unforgiving telling them to never come back at the same time setting up a guard who couldn’t be fooled to make sure they never did come back. Thus the first act of the conditioning of the Jewish people took place.
So, the scenario is that the Jews are welcomed, then the Jews repel mentor or hosts, the host eventually becomes sufficiently angry with the Jews to expel them from their midst. This scenario has been repeated for, by Jewish calculations, 5700+ years.
C. 1900 Mr. Marcus’ ancestors arrived in what they jubilantly described as the Promised Land, in another word, Paradise. They prospered mightily. Mr. Marcus himself is the product of that prosperity but, like the Jews in the Garden of Paradise, Mr. Marcus is busily trashing the Land of Promise. As he sees it the United States is fecal matter that has to be flushed down the toilet. Further he wants you to view the United States the way he does and trash the only home you have ever known or will ever know. Mr. Marcus is a dual citizen; when the country is trashed he and his successosrs will just move on as they have always done.
That’s the short form.
Now, Mr. Marcus and his fellow culturalists have declared war on the Aryan species as well as on the United States and, actually Europe. They will settle for nothing less, according to their spokesperson Mr. Noel Ignatiev, than the abolition or genocide of the entire species, one billion strong.
While this goal can be achieved by psychological means, indeed is well advanced, the fun comes from openly fuddling people. To do that one needs a power base. A power base was first achieved in Russia in 1917 but that one slipped through their hands.
But then this summer Sarkozy got himself elected President of France thus placing the power of that State in Jewish hands. One of the first things Sarkozy did was to begin to distribute French atomic weapons to France’s enemies. Unless the Jews and Moslems are secretly allied this act seems suicidal for the Jews. Who knows maybe it has reached that point in Jewish minds. It should be clear to all that as there is no God the story of Paradise is merely a reflection of the Jewish ego. In the search for anti-Semitism it is quite clear that it is a product of the Jewish outlook. In the conflict within the Jewish mind God became the first anti-Semite. The whole Jewish scenario develops from this inner psychological conflict.
A second thing that began happening after the Sarkozy election was that key Jews were beckoned to France for instructions in somewhat the same manner as Judaeo-Communist revolutionaries returned to Russia just after the October Revolution when as Mr. Marcus quotes Trotsky as saying, the Mensheviks were tossed into the dustbin of history.
Mr. Marcus was called to France in July of this year under the auspices of The Cartier Foundation For The Contemporary Arts [ http//www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1649503,00.html ]
ostensibly to give his views on Buddy Holly. Whether Mr. Marcus actually met with Jewish conspirators in private to receive instructions I can’t say but it would have to be proved to me he didn’t, especially as this ‘cultural’ forum turned into a podium for America bashing in which Mr. Marcus gleefully participated.
Speaking of Elvis Presley and Jackson Pollack the director Alain Perrin described them as “Two young people living in a society that they want to provoke to rebel against, and to mock sometimes.” I think perhaps Mr. Perrin is projecting his and France des Juifs’ opinion on Elvis, I don’t know about Pollack. I never had the notion that Presley was mocking America and I wouldn’t have liked him if he did. The early Rock n’ Rollers were not mocking anything they were just trying to break in a different musical form against great opposition and make it big. That opposition merely had to do with people who were shocked at the musical departure.
I graduated HS in ’56 and was one of a minority who accepted the music in my class. The new era began really with the class of ’57 when the form had penetrated to the youth consciousness.
The skewed Mr. Perrin goes on to say “This was the America that had liberated the world of Nazism…’ Surely Mr. Perrin meant France although in his skewed imagination it may have seemed like the world. “…but this was also a racist America, a puritan America, (no capital. It might be possible to say America was still Puritan but it was not puritan.) a hyper conservative, McCartyite America.” Well, one out of five ain’t bad especially for France as America did what the French couldn’t do themselves. I hope Mr. Perrin wasn’t offended that America wasted its own men, some of whom were my relatives, money and resources to save an ungrateful France from itself. As I understand it there was no scarcity of French collaborators in that glorious lovely Liberal Communistic ‘pure’ France of Mr. Perrin’s imagination. One would expect a Communist of Mr. Perrin’s stripe to be opposed to weird old ‘conservative’ America. But, then I’m sure he doesn’t want to talk about that in an open forum. No one expects gratitude from the French but a little realistic appraisal of the past wouldn’t hurt. Liberals are Liberals, but, geez.
Mr. Marcus slips and slides in with his two cents worth:
Quote:
In the 1950s (ten long years note) the official story was that America was back to normal (the Depression?) women were out of the factories, (happened in the forties) everything was working like clockwork, (not so, but Mr. Marcus was a nine year old and it may have seemed so) but underneath this was an entirely different story (secret history again) of confusion, conflict, desperation, (how did I survive?) desire for grandeur. Life could have been an epic story, life was dangerous ( aw, come on, Mr. Marcus, don’t put me on with all these cliches) you could step outside the role that had been preordained for you. (by whom?)
Unquote.
Now, let’s see. How many cliches are in that novelistic approach to history. Mr. Marcus says he was born in the summer of ’45. McCarthy was shot down in ’54 so Mr. Marcus would have been eight or nine. His memories of the fifties then are pretty thin so he must be reading the Time-Life Decade series for the 50s. Even then they wouldn’t have made such puerile remarks. Well, I’ve read the series and they do, so… My memory of the time was that there was no normal. The discord was right on the surface and that was no fooling around. Our town was virtually in the hands of the Chicago Outfit. Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamster bomb wielders were serious, the Korean War, the Commie Threat (that Mr. Marcus and the French refer to as ‘McCarthyite America’) produced great tensions. The Atom Bomb, my god Mr. Marcus don’t you ‘remember’ the Rosenbergs in 1953?
If you’re going to try to write history give up your sophomoric Jewish presentation. Hunker down. Get objective.
Mr. Marcus has his own secret history and mocking America is central to it.
In concentrating on the nonentities clowning it up in Zurich Mr. Marcus fails to relate Da Da to the course of the evolutionary development of Western society thus exaggerating the importance of these clowns grossly. Their effect on the development of society was minimal. The Da Da art movement did have some effect. Bear in mind that Da Da is merely a state of mind shared by a percentage of any age cadre from say 17 to 25 or so when they are struggling to find their way. Finding one’s way isn’t easy and does have its stresses. The situation of this particular group occurred as the Scientific Revolution, the real revolution, begun in 1859 with the publication of Darwin’s Origin Of Species was disrupting Western society to the maximum extent. Science challenged religious concepts including those of the Jews.
The ethos of art had run its course having achieved all that representational art could achieve. The search for novelty or an avant garde, if you will, produced Cubism, Da Da and Surrealism. Thus these clowns in Zurich who produced nothing but had a narcissitic crush on themselves were presumably able to make a noise. In reading Mr. Marcus one isn’t sure exactly what that noise was. In any event the Cabaret Voltaire changed nothing that had not already been changed or was changing.
Other than rescuing this crew from the dustbin of history and amusing us aside it is difficult to understand what significance Mr. Marcus finds in this clown act performing hackneyed stunts.
He somehow segues this act into his following act, even more insignificant than the opening act. The Crash Of Yesterday’s Art concerns the career of another complete and insane non-entity, one Isador Isou.
In order to give some significance to Isou he manages to compare him with both Elvis Presley and Tony Curtis. Not bad footwork for a fancy dancer.
As is usual with Mr. Marcus all the people he considers important are Jewish and those he denigrates are goys. Thus in the comparison between the earth shaker Presley and the non-entity Isou the latter comes out as the more signficant of the two. How Tony Curtis comes in isn’t clear unless it is his famous pompadour that is said to have influenced Presley’s hair style. At any rate the two Jews to one goi with Presley basing his hair style on one Jew while the other’s portrait often mistook him for a ‘pop star’ which it would appear raises him to a level slightly above Presley seems relevant in Mr. Marcus eyes. I don’t know, hard to dicipher.
As Mr. Marcus describes the megamaniacal Isou it would appear that he could have been at the famous dinner at the Maison de Sante described by Edgar Allan Poe in his famous The System Of Dr. Tarr And Professor Fether. In fact much of Mr. Marcus writing reminds me of nothing so much as Poe’s lady who tried to get outside her clothes rather than in them. I have great difficulty taking Mr. Marcus discussion of Isou as seriously as he seems to, although I find the story a fascinating bit of trivia.
Leaving Isou’s manias aside it seems that his contribution to the deconstruction of Western Civilization was to insist that paragraphs, sentences and words were meaningless while the only thing of importance was the bare letter itself. A building block. You see what I mean by trying to get outside one’s clothes than inside. Mr. Isou grandiloquently called his ‘organization’ The Lettrist International with he and his other member. He wished to establish the Lettrist Dictatorship.
Actually as a Jew Isou was merely following the letter mysticism of the Jewish alphabet in which not only does each letter have incredible symbolic meaning but each curve and segment of a letter is also endowed with incredible symbolism. A whole several hundred page volume could easily be written concerning the letter aleph and each additional letter thus adding up to a magnificent Harvard five foot shelf of the Jewish alphabet.
Somehow Charlie Starkweather and Caril figure in here but I’ll have to go back and study to get it which would scarcely be worth it. I’ll see if I can find the time.
Mr. Marcus also recasts a version of his musings on what appear so be his favorite song: It’s Too Soon To Know of the mid-forties. Favorite songs are often inscrutable to anyone who doesn’t ‘get it.’ I know the song and while I like it, I don’t get it like Mr. Marcus does. On the other hand I don’t expect Mr. Marcus to get a couple of secret favorites of mine, one by a singer whose name I forget, Clint something or other, although I should still have the 45. I got the disc in a close out mystery package of 10 for 99 cents. The song goes something like ‘Bertha Lou, Bertha Lou, I wanna conjugate with you.’ I like it however I have never met another person who has ever heard the song.
Another favorite of mine is by the Crows (Orioles-Crows- the bird, the bird, the bird’s the word) of Gee fame that reads something like this:
I’ve got a girl named Rosie Lee,
I wanna tell ya what she did for me.
She took me in when I had nowhere to go
And that is the reason I love her so.
—-
Face like a tadpole, shape like a bear,
But when it comes to lovin’ Rosie is there.
The lyricist is certainly no Allen Ginsberg but as you can see both these songs and Ginsberg’s Howl are concerned with a certain word begining with the letter F. And the usage is indeed international. God bless Isidore Isou and the Lettrist International.
Well, enough of this funnin’, let’s get on with the serious stuff. So Isou and his Lettrist Interntional is going to segue into Guy Debord and his Situationist International but first we have to go to church. It seems to me that I have a vague memory of Part VI so the invasion of Notre Dame must have been a true international scandal.
Part VI Follows.
Lipstick Traces: Greil Marcus
A Review
Part IV
The Art Of Yesterday’s Crash
by R.E. Prindle
As I mentioned in Part II Mr. Marcus seems to consider himself first an Old Testament prophet prophesying fire and destruction for the United States. Secondly he sees himself as a continuator of the Frankfurt School or New School Of Social Research and thirdly the spiritual successor to Guy Debord and perhaps the new leader of the Situationist International.
In the situations under consideration he turns his New School For Social Research and SI sides up.
Now as it happens that when I attended Cal State At Hayward one of the professors was a fellow named Theodore Roszak. Mr Roszak wrote a volume called The Making Of A Counter Culture while teaching at Cal State; probably something called American Studies or some such, I can’t remember, which these Frankfurters always aim for and we’ll see why.
We are now talking ’64-’65. Sixty-five is probably best known for the Black rebellion in LA’s Watts district. That kicked off the violent revolt of the Blacks which smolders on today flaring up here and there. Thus in Mr. Marcus’ The Shape Of Things To Come he prophesys blood in the streets.
It was also the beginning of the San Francisco Scene. The San Francisco Mime Troop- a Communist outfit- had been active in street theatre for some little time. Then Kesey organized the Merry Pranksters, Owsley entered the picture and the Acid Tests began. I was invited to the Acid Test but declined to go. Couldn’t see the social utility; it would have been interesting but I’m not sorry I missed it.
Roszak. So everybody assumed that this book he advertised he was writing called The Making Of A Counter Culture was about what Jack Kerouac called ‘The Rucksack Revolution.’ These were the post-British Invasion days so long hair was slowly making inroads into the East Bay. I didn’t have long hair but I had a strange long ducktail from the fifties. Cal State was on a windy plateau so everytime I went outside I looked like a hurricane walking around. This was enough for the profs and administration who were terrified that the Free Speech Movement would edge up from Berkeley to classify me as a ‘radical.’
I was sent to Roszak as he was presumably writing a book on the ‘counter culture’ which is what the hip movement was known as. I found Roszak one guilty customer. Dark mind too, repellent. He thought I was sent as a spy. That increased his guilty reaction.
When his book came out it didn’t have anything to do with a Hippie counter culture. It was all about the Frankfurt School, Marcuse et al. The book was about the Jewish Revolution. Roszak must have thought the ‘anti-Semites’ sent me. So, now I understand Mr. Marcus; use of the term ‘Secret History.’ He doesn’t just mean obscure. Roszak was part of history being made but it was unintelligible to the uninformed mind. Even though the Frankfurt School was operating openly I don’t know if anyone knew that subterranean history was being lived in the open but there it was as plain as day. Roszak was a continuator. I don’t know if Mr. Marcus knows Mr. Roszak but it wouldn’t surprise me if he did, they are both Jews etc, but as a continuator of the Frankfurt School Mr. Marcus may be described as having the baton passed to him through Mr. Roszak. Mr. Marcus is more prolific and effective while being more obscure and secretive than Mr. Roszak. The reader, even the informed reader, probably doesn’t know he is being spoon fed Semitism.
Mr. Marcus even allows himself to be called by the presumptuous title of The Holy Greil even further insulting his subordinate Euroamerican culture. I don’t mind Mr. Marcus and others insulting the half-Jewish Jesus but I do want him to keep his hands off the essence of Euroamerican Culture. I can accord Mr. Marcus neither Holiness nor any association with the Grail stories even though his style incomprehensible as it is is pretty entertaining. Must have learned that from Old Bob.
Mr. Marcus establishes himself as a continuator of the Frankfurt School and then says he is going to criticize the living crap out of everything. Well, alright, OK! I would like to point out however that criticism is not analysis. Any fool can criticize but analysis requires a little science. There’s a serious rub in Mr. Marcus’ style, not science, all, well, not all, blather.
I will give him credit for not beginning this Situation with the Armory Show. My god and Jesus H. Christ we know how that changed America but, well, as an Israeli citizen and man of the world Mr. Marcus isn’t talking about America or anything as earth shaking as the Armory show. No. He’s talking about six inconsquential nerds pulling sophomoric stunts in Zurich in 1916 while there was a war going on. All a bunch of draft dodgers too, except for the woman doing the splits with the madonna face whatever one of those is. I been looking but not finding.
These six Mr. Marcus informs us created Da Da. They gave their shenanigans a name that stuck. While Mr. Marcus seems to revere their stuff I have to confess that it doesn’t seem much different than the shenanigans of any other generation. Da Da is just a state of mind that certain people experience at a certain stage and condition of life.
If Mr. Marcus had looked around Berkeley and the Bay Area he would have seen plenty of evidence of the state of mind in the Mime Troupe, the whole San Francisco Sound was Da Da. Kesey was Da Da, and everyone was pulling the same kind of stunts with the same results. That trick with the splits and madonna face is so commonplace it doesn’t bear mentioning. A guy playing an imaginary violin? Whew! Wow, who in the world could ever have thought that one up?
The hell with this Da Da crap. Real men dying in the trenches and these guys are scraping an imaginary violin? Not too impressed, Mr. Marcus. Let’s get on to the real stuff. This gets passed over by The Holy Greil. The foundation of the Frankfurt School c. 1923. Here’s the real crux of Mr. Marcus; psychology, the culture wars between the Semitic intellect and the European intellect. A lttle clash of loyalties here in that dual citizenship Mr. Marcus holds.
While the clowns in Zurich, for that is what they were , were trying to live down their antics at the Cabaret Voltaire the real revolution was forming in Frankfurt. This the revolution of which Mr. Marcus is the continuator. This is the real substance of Mr. Marcus’ work. Nice work too, don’t get me wrong.
I’ve done some work on this subject but I’m going to refer any possible readers to this web page for a quick history of the Frankfurt School: http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2007/07/great-historical-outline-of-cultural.html The article was posted by Mr. Rob Fedders. Bear in mind this analysis represents the foundation of Mr. Marcus thought, intellect and purpose. His writing makes much more sense in this context.
Quote:
Before World War I, Marxist theory said that if Europe ever erupted in war, the working classes in every European country would rise in revolt overthrow their govenments and create a new Communist Europe, but when war broke out in the summer of 1914, that didn’t happen. Instead the workers of every European country lined up by the millions to fight their country’s enemies….After World War I ended in 1918, Marxist theorists had to ask themselves a question: What went wrong?…two leading Marxist intellectuals, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and George Lukacs in Hungary…independently came up with the same answer. They said that Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interests, that a Communist revolution was impossible in the West, until both could be destroyed. That objective, established as cultural Marxism’s goal right at the beginning, has never changed.
Unquote.
There’s a little secret history for you. The Frankfurt School employed the political theory of Marx, the psychological theory of Freud and the relativistic nonsense of Einstein to undermine Western culture backed up by the ever potent charge of ‘anti-Semitism.’ Their BS could easily have been resisted and rejected but for their alliance with Liberals. To merely state that a critic was anti-Semitic was enough to set the conditioned Liberals on the accused and make him or her a non-person in society. Thus without their Liberal slaves the Frankfurt School would not have been that effective. Liberals are the true enemy.
Now, skipping the interim machinations, by the time of the Free Speech Movement the Jewish Revolution had been nearly completed.
In addition to the music the introduction of hallucinigens made the capture of the whole generation child’s play.
As with the so-called Free Speech Movement the problem was not one shared by society as a whole which was functioning quite nicely, thank-you, but a cultural problem within the Semitic species. As always the inability of the Semites to compete effectively with the Indo-Europeans, or to be brief, Aryan species was the crux of the problem. The Terachites challenged the Ur of the Chaldees. In the ancient conflict between the Semites and the Aryan Sumerians the latter were centered about Ur while the Semites were centered further North. So Abram as a Semite was challenging the Aryan Sumerians who had understood and developed Astronomy. The Egyptians were an amalgam of the HSII Libyans and the Egyptians of the Upper Nile valley. In my opinion the intellectual content of Egypt was injected by the Libyan refugees from the post-ice age flooding of the Mediterranean.
The Semites then came into collision with the superior intellecual and scientific civilization of the Hellenes more especially in Greek Alexandria where Philo attempted to subvert Hellenic science in favor of ‘Talmudic’ mythology. The Romans who created the most amazing empire the Mediterranean world had ever seen once again, as it were, illuminated the inferiority of the Semitic intellect. The Jews set about to subvert and destroy the Roman Empire which, in my opinion they did both in the exhausting Roman-Jewish Wars and the succeeding Pauline Judeo-Christian subversion. Matters were then stalemated for centuries until Aryan science finally pushed through the Judeo-Christian meshes in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
Once again the inferiority of the Semitic intellect was displayed. Marx, Freud and Einstein created the basic non-scientific means posing as science to subvert the Aryan scientific intellect. The groundwork laid by the big three, the epigone went to work. The nitwits of Da Da may be considered shock troops while the Frankfurt School- The Institute For Social Research- formed c. 1923 began the serious work of undermining Western Civilization. Once again, Mr. Marcus seems to consider himself first a continuator of the Frankfurt School, a reincarnation of Guy Debord and then in The Shape Of Things To Come to graduate to the role of a Hebrew prophet.
Now, in every instance in which the Jewish Semites have confronted the Aryans they have failed to excel them although taking advantage of the reluctance to face the problem directly on the part of the Aryans the Jewish Semites have been able without exception to destroy the Aryan achievement.
The Jews also insist that they are the Chosen People of mankind just as the Arabs insist that they are The Central People. Chosen, Central are the same things. We are talking a characteristic of the Semitic species. Yet evolutionarily they are constitutionally or genetically inferior to Aryans. No matter what happens they will never be able to match or sustain Aryan achievements.
What to do? I know most readers have never delved deeply into this area of study so that the reader may be astonished by what is going on and find it unbelievable. It isn’t. Realizing that they can never excel the Aryans the Jewish Semites have resolved to exterminate- that is commit genocide- on the whole species. They propose to and are fairly well advanced in their program to eliminate a species of over a billion people.
Astounding and unbelievable isn’t it. Well, while you were sleeping astounding developments were in progress. It is time for the sleeper to awake. Be patient with me and I’ll explain how it is being done and why Mr. Marcus may possibly see himself advance from Hebrew prophet to Judge-Penitent of the Aryan peoples. (See my review of Albert Camus’ The Fall here on I, Dynamo.)
The plan is available on line at a site run by a former Harvard professor, Noel Ignatiev called Race Traitor. Mr. Ignatiev believes in races even though he is a Jew and the current Jewish line is that races do not exist. The first stage of this program is part of psychological warfare based on the Freudian model.
Mr. Ignatiev as spokesman for the Jewish culture asserts that all the evil in the world proceeds from the Aryan ‘races.’ It is true that the Jews argue in other situations that ‘race’ exists only as a social construct however as ‘race’ is useful in this instance the idea is reconstituted. The approach is a key tenet of ‘critical theory’ in which the critical base point is one’s relative need at the moment.
As all evil proceeds from the Aryan ‘race’ it follows that if the Aryan race is eliminated from the face of the earth by ‘any means necessary’ that evil will disappear from the world. This notion is apparently a variation on the eighteenth century Jewish notion of Jacob Frank that Jews will only become good when they expend all the evil in their system. Apparently at that time Jews were the evil ‘race’ but at some point between then and now they have expended all the evil in their system and have become ‘good’ along with the rest of the world. All this stuff sounds good according to Jewish ‘critical theory’ but falls apart under ‘Aryan’ scientific analysis.
The problem is the obvious Aryan superior intelligence so that Mr. Ignatiev invents the concept of ‘White Skin Privilege.’ Using critical theory the only reason Aryans or Whites, to which term I will revert, have obtained the prominent position among the ‘races’ is because Aryans have White Skin. Real Tarzans if you know what I mean. Thus the superiority is based on cosmetics. Change the cosmetics and the superiority will go away. Not bad reasoning really. It therefor follows that if Whites can be persuaded to give up their ‘White Skin Privilege’ why, the Utopia will become a reality and evil will disappear from the world. I’m not making this up.
Therefore from sheer shame Whites should voluntarily abandon ‘Whiteness.’ Remember this line of reasoning comes from a Harvard graduate and a Harvard professor. I would have been laughed out of a ‘third rate’ college like Cal State for proposing such nonsense. To my knowledge neither the Jewish culture or Harvard University have ever publicly repudiated Mr. Ignatiev so one must assume he speaks with the full approval of both.
Mr. Ignatiev also calls his program the New Abolitionism calling for the abolition of the White ‘race.’
The easiest course, or least painful, for Whites to abolish themselves, actually, is to marry Black people. Any resulting offspring will be non-White so that if all Whites could be persuaded to do this ‘Whiteness’ would disappear within, well, a generation.
Realistically this isn’t going to happen although historically conquerors have killed the men and kept the women. Without White men White women will have to produce colored children. This was actually done during the Haitian revolution from France. The men were killed and the White women were told that they could live only if they served as wives to Black men. Most of them did. Thus we have the result of Haitians being the most beautiful people in the world while having constructed the most successful and glorious society not to mention culture.
Now, if you follow what’s happening in education, kindergartners are being taught to be homosexuals. Is it necessary to say that homosexuals cannot reproduce themselves? It therefor follows that if White boys are raised as homosexuals White women will have to turn to Black men while if such a program is successful White men will diminish say by a half life a generation. Thus another method to eliminate Whites. And White people are dumb enough to go for it. Can’t ask for more than that, can one?
And then for the remainder of hard cases there are always industrial means to eliminate them. Gas chambers or whatever means necessary, who cares?
So as you can see Mr. Ignatiev is not theorizing but helping to implement a program that is well advanced.
Now then, the strength of the US economy and well being of Whites as a result is a standing rebuke to the other ‘races’ of the world and a cause of the most destructive envy. We don’t want to look at Zimbabwe and South Africa do we? Naw. How’s that going to prove anything? Thus jobs were exported out of the country to everywhere. The US economy as a whole was picked up and moved to China which for all practical purposes is run with the lowest cost slave labor possible.
The unions have been broken and the well being of the working man has been destroyed by unrestricted Mexican immigration which is lower cost. Technical jobs have been given to lower cost immigrant labor via the worker visa program.
Back in the eighties the savings and Loan industry was savagely looted. One of the beneficiaries of that theft was the family of the current President of the United States. The housing debacle which will be a blow from which the US economy will not recover was engineered from the start to impending finish with the full knowledge of that President.
It only remains to gut the savings of the older generation. At the appropriate time this will be done by inflation. At that point the United States and the West will be defenseless. One can’t imagine what the Liberals have to gain from this.
So, within the matter of a few decades ‘White Skin Privilege’ will be just a memory. Of course other ‘situations’ may enter in to redirect the course of history. No one can accurately prophesy including Mr. Marcus.
Thus if Mr. Marcus lives long enough he may finish his life as a ‘Judge Penitent’ choosing who may live and who not.
I will end this Part here and meld the end of The Art Of Yesterday’s Crash with the next situation The Crash Of Yesterday’s Art.
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.
Part 2 Springtime For Edgar Rice Burroughs
June 5, 2007
Springtime For Edgar Rice Burroughs
Part II
by
R.E. Prindle
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Civilization And Its Discontents.
The period of Burroughs’ life was one of those great pivotal times of civilization. Civilization was in the midst of one of its great metamorphoses, scientific, political and intellectual. Changes which had been building up the last few centuries could no longer be absorbed by the existing religious structure. That structure was no longer viable. Its bursting mode was not only for the new Scientific Consciousness but the increasing scientific examination of the past opened the way for the revival of forgotten forms such as the Matriarchy. Thus along with the inevitable Patriarchal religious reaction the Matriarchy as well as suppressed occult religions forced their way through.
The reaction from contacts between civilizations sent various alien religions and ideologies into the Western leaven.
Confused with these intellectual challenges the agricultural basis of civilization evolved into a technological one. In the mid-teens for the first time in the United States there were more urban residents than there were rural residents.
New demands were placed on consciousness as more precision was required of the human mind. Man had had little difficulty adapting his methods to cycles of the seasons but the adaptation tothe rigors of the assembly line caused him problems.
That there was a backlash from this tremendous succession of changes should take no one by surprise. Adjustments were difficult and critical. In 1930 the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, published what may be his most famous title: Civilization And Its Discontents in response to this challenge. His notion of who the discontents were and of what they were discontented about is vague, indeed undecipherable.
In my estimation he doesn’t deal with the malaise at all.
On the other hand Edgar Rice Burroughs not only dealt with the malaise but offered a reasonable, if difficult to apply, solution to the problem.
page 1.
The malaise found many expressions. On the political front the socialists, Communists and anarchists were the most prominent reactionaries. Their activities reached a fever pitch in the first two decades of the Twentieth Century resulting in the two phases of the Russian Revolution of 1905 and ’17. The institutionalized discontents had their homeland after the latter date.
While Freud’s discussion of Discontents sounds generalized by the way he writes he is actually talkiking about himself and the members of his own Jewish culture and their problems with Western Civilization.
Thus Freud’s notion of Discontents falls somewhere between a general malaise and the discontent of the Communists.
The Religious Conciousness of course faced a problem that could only be resolved by surrender or reaction. There was no middle way. The evolution into Scientific Consciousness completely invalidated the religious approach. All religions are based on a false premise and Science exposed that falsity.
The transition to the Scientific Consciousness must be difficult and demanding as so few attain it. In my opinion this is because of the ongoing evolution of the brain. The Scientific Consciousness can apparently only be grasped by the further evolved. This doesn’t mean that those of a Religious Consciousness can’t work with scientific knowledge which requires only basic intelligence and a scientific environment provided by others but they are unable to envision advances.
Thus they find themselves left behind intellectually. It is the same as the difference between high and low IQ. Nothing can be done about that. However the Religious reaction is to attack those of the Scientific Consciousness to lower them to their own level.
page 2.
The problem was especially acute with Freud and his culture as Science per se invalidated all Semitic religious pretensions. This means all Semites and not just Jews. Neverthless as Jews were embedded in Western Civilization at that time and other Semites weren’t the Jewish culture was ‘discontented’ and was forced to negate science and the Scientific Consciousness.
Led by the Semitic surge of both Judiaism and Moslemism the very serious attempt to bury the Scientific Consciousness through genocide might just succeed.
As I point out in Part VII of The Deconstruction Of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America the Jewish campaign to ‘abolish the White ‘race’ should be taken very seriously. Just because it sounds preposterous doesn’t mean it’s a joke. A segment of Whites is the bearer of the evolved gene or genes or combination of genes so that if this advance species were destroyed the wild religious reaction would succeed. Sounds just like some science fiction movie doesn’t it? Well, it isn’t.
The Scientific Consciousness created its own malaise in the newly evolving species. As literary and artistic types are always the monitors who pick up these trends first, if they don’t necessarily understand them, we shouldn’t be surprised to find a number of literateurs immersing themselves in the problem. One of the big texts is H.G. Wells important but neglected novel: The Food Of The Gods. In this novel Wells postulates that the emerging scientific Consciousness is a new species of human being. As with the real religious reaction Wells’ predecessor people wish to kill the new species. In earlier times when the world was less populated new or different species of human beings could move away from the old species. Now, the question is what makes Homo Sapiens Homo Sapiens and makes it different from the Last Hominid Predecessor? It is assumed by our scientific community that the Negro is the first Homo Sapiens species having evolved in Africa. This means that the Negro evolved from some sub-human Homo Sapiens predecessor. It’s easy, it has to be. So far no one has been able to produce an example of the Last Hominid Predecessor.
Now, the Negro was not the only, how shall we say, hominid species in Africa. The Negro apparently orginated in West Africa. The rest of Africa was inhabited by other species such as the Bushmen and Hottentots. These peoples are not Negroes and originated in Africa so the question is are they predecessors of the Negroes who we are told are the first Homo Sapiens or are they Homo Sapiens who precede or follow the Negro in evolution. Or, are they a separate non-Homo Sapiens species or are they perhaps the Last Hominid Predecessor. They are not Negroes so a place has to be found for them.
In any event the Negro and Arab combined to produce a new race or sub-species known as the Bantu peoples. The Bantus then invaded the territories of the Bushmen and Hottentots who ranged all of Africa South of the bulge, so we are told, driving the Bushmen before them. As I understand it the Hottentots are now extinct while Bantu pressure on the Bushmen is driving them toward extinction.
At the same time a newer hybrid of Black and Semite is driving the Bantu before it from its base in the Northeast corner of Africa known as the Horn.
So, Wells novelistic problem was that there was no longer a place on Earth for his new species to isolate itself. He was presented with the choice of his new species either displacing or killing off the anterior species or being eliminated itself much as the Hottentots and Bushman have been eliminated by the Bantu and as the Bantu and Negroes are being displaced and elminated by the new Black and Semitic Hybrid.
page 4.
So this was the problem c. 1900. This solution was repulsive to the existing Religious Consciousness that was psychologically unequipped to deal with this impasse.
As can be seen the Semitic special consciousness does not fear the problem In Africa in Darfur and the South of the Sudan they are actively pursuing genocide. In Euroamerica the Jewish Semitic culture is pursuing or advocating the same resolution of their problem with the White Euroamerican population. Following Semitic actions in Africa it should be clear to American Blacks what is in store for them.
So, Wells dealt with the problem in its political aspect. The internal aspect, the split in consciousness between the old and new was ably handled by a number of writers.
For a good introduction to the contrast between the Scientific Consciousness compare Holmes and Watson in Conan Doyle’s stories. In this essay I will concentrate on three others as well as Freud- H. Rider Haggard, Joseph Conrad and Edgar Rice Burroughs. Not coincidentally, I think, all three writers place their most important work in Africa. Haggard as the earlier writer rising to fame in Burroughs’ youth quite naturally had a great influence on the younger man, although I think Burroughs would have written of Tarzan and Africa with or without Haggard’s influence. The appeal of Africa is the contrast between the civilized White and the primitive Black. The two aspects of White consciousness. I hope to tackle this problem in more detail in my next essay, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Sigmund Freud And The Holy Grail.
There was nothing clearer to the English explorers, as well one might note as to the Southern planters of the US, than that there was a gulf between the intellect of the African and that of the White man.
Haggard expressed this difference in his novel Allan Quatermain. I’ve used the quote before but I will include it again here to keep the problem clear before us:
Quote:
All this civilization what does it come to? Full forty years and more I spent among the savages, and studied them and their ways, and now for several years I have lived here in England, and in my own stupid manner have done my best to learn the ways of the children of light, and what do I find? A great gulf fixed? No, only a very little one, that a plain man’s thought may spring across. I say that as the savage is, so is the white man, only the latter is more inventive and possesses a faculty of combination; save and except also the savage as I have known him, is to a large extent free from the greed of moey, which eats like a cancer in the heart of the white man. It is a depressing conclusion, but in all essentials the savage and the child of civilization are identical.
The great Liberal H.G. Wells was also clear on this difference. The nature of the gulf was the Scientific intellect of the White and the non-Scientific intellect of the Black. The question is how large did these nineteenth century men perceived the gap to be. Haggard in his Allan Quaterman, quoted above perceived the gap to be small while if one is to judge by the distance between Tarzan and the Africans Burroughs perceived it be not only large but insurmountable. Haggard thought the gap easily bridged while judging from Tarzan Burroughs thought it unbridgeable.
page 5.
It should be noted that Haggard was of the Old Religious Consciousness while Burroughs was of the advanced Scientific Consciousness. Of the two men Haggard writes from the experience of having viewed Africa or at least South Africa first hand. Everyone talks of Africa as though it were a county in Kansas whereas it is a huge continent of many diverse cultures. But, perhaps as the cultures seem to share the same level of consciousness perhaps that is the justification for speaking of Africa and Africans as a single unit.
Haggard lived in South Africa for several years as a young man while he was an astute historian and anthropologist. As a mythologist he was of the most gifted. His understanding is astonishing. He was quite familiar with all the Black peoples from the Zulus, Swazis and Basutos tothe Hottentots, Bushemen and Griquas. His judgements of the various intellects seems quite reliable. His writing is of most interest for the current rage of Zulu interest. His actual story telling ability is beyond compare.
Now, this is difficult to speak of because of the ideological stance of the Liberals and their Religious Consciousness that take the procrustean stance of trying to fit facts and reality into ideology whether they can be conveniently forced or not. They are currently anti-White and pro-African even going so far as to call for the genocide of the White species as I pointed out in the Deconstruction Of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America. This is more than evidenced in their support of the genocide being executed in South Africa by the Shona chief robert Mugabe and the Bantu peoples of the Union of South Africa.
page 6.
There’s not much evidence that Haggard was interested or even aware of the theories of evolution which, if I may be so daring, it seems clear that Burroughs either was at the beginning of his career or became so as he aged aware of all the various strands of evolutionary theory. Thus Haggard comes across as more humane while Burroughs is more accurate.
A third opinion on the nature of the situation was provided by Joseph Conrad in his novelette: The Heart Of Darkness. One can’t be sure how much contact Conrad had with the situation he describes, but the influence of the primitive African mentality had the effect of dragging down the White intellect. As the advance in intellect was not so pronounced as Haggard noted the attraction of the primitive was so strong that many Whites retrogressed. Conrad’s hero Kurtz was an ivory buyer in the heart of the Congo. Through fraternization with the African he indeed loses his ‘thin veneer of civilization’ going native. On his death bed in viewing his period in the interior he exclaims ‘The horror, the horror’ and then ‘Exterminate the brutes.’
In point of fact if, as we are told, Homo Sapiens originated in Africa and the Negro is the departure point from the Last Hominid Predecessor which may be the Bushman or Hottentot then if this departure occurred c. 150,000 years ago, at the time the African came into contact with Whites he had made no move toward becoming civilized. Nor was he inclined to when given the example.
When H.M. Stanley interviewed the Uganda chief Mtese, that chief was incapable of visualizing anything other than trading. As he said he noticed that goods traded by the Arabs, who were first in the area, all came from Europe so he assumed that Europeans were more clever than the Arabs however he had no inclination to acquire the knowledge or skills. Nor have Africans attempted it to this day.
page 7.
As unpleasant as it may be to deal with facts or accept the science of the matter it is nevertheless necessary to consider that in the course of evolution the African brain has evolved to a certain level and stopped much as all the Hominid Predecessors did. Although Bruce Lahn of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute has been silenced his researches made it clear that the human brain was still evolving but not in all human species, only one.
It should be clear to even the most prejudiced observor that Robert Mugabe the Shona leader of Zimbabwe is in way over his head while as savage in his methods as any character Joseph Conrad could create. Nor is the reason unclear to certain Africans.
Writing in the Kampala Monitor of February 7, 2007 in an article entitled Uganda: Why Black People Have Remained Backward by Elias Biryabarema the author examines the problem:
Uganda has been fairly stable long enough. The conditions for an economic takeoff have been there for 20 years. Mr. Musevini has enjoyed generous goodwill from nearly all the world’s rich governments. Their largesse has poured in ceaselessly and in hefty amounts.
Uganda should have taken off. We haven’t. We’re stuck. And so is Tanzania, Sudan, Ethiopia, Mali, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Eretria, Malawi, Congo Republic and pretty much all of Black Africa, excluding the regions sole economic power, South Africa. This led me to pose a question to myself: Can Black people build prosperous societies?
Just about every reason- from slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism to inequitable world trade rules- cited for the backwardness of Black African nations has been so debunked that it has now become necessary to look beyond the realm of such contemporary explanations.’
http://allafrica.com/stories/200702061131.html
Mr. Biryabarema concludes that Africans ‘only rise and touch a low ceiling.’ A disheartening realization but a cruel fact of nature because of the progression of evolution.
page 8.
So Africa came to represent an attractive past to Whites while the psychical split caused by the evolving brain caused them discomfort too. The brain had not evolved far enough to make a clean break with the animal past. What was Man, all species to do? Haggard relapsed into nostalgia. A longing to go back while nevertheless retaining his cranial development. His hero, Allan Quatermain while retaining his intellectual superiority to the Africans attempts to establish his kinship with his ‘Black brothers.’ Thus he takes a ‘Liberal’ attitude toward African/White relations that while seemingly humane has resulted in the atrocities against Whites being perpetrated by the likes of Mugabe and the South African leaders.
One shudders at Conrad’s Kurtz’s exclamation to ‘exterminate the brutes’ and yet the choice has turned out to be exterminate or be exterminated, while Africans have inexplicably opted for the latter. What can one say?
Burroughs on the other hand working from a philosophical point of view came up with a different solution. Nor is it entirely impracticable on the intellectual level. Both he and Freud begin from the same base. Both are reacting to the inhibitions and repressions placed on Man by civilization.
Burroughs seems willing to accept the ‘thin veneer of civilization’ in certain places and under certain conditions but he demands the right to be able to move freely from the primitive to the civilized state. Thus when Tarzan takes off his clothes he also removes the ‘thin veneer of civilization.’
page 9.
The basic problem for Haggard, Conrad, Freud and Burroughs is that they wish to retain the advantages of the intellectual aspects of civilization; none of them wish to opt for the ‘low ceiling’ of the primitive. They all wish to retain their advantages while indulging their primitive ‘natures.’ In some way each has to remain superior to the primitive state.
One can contrast this attitude with Mugabe of Zimbabwe and the ANC of South Africa who seem to be edging in the direction of removing all vestiges of the civilized state. They seem to be opting for a nostalgic return to the their savage past. They must have some understanding of the results of their destructive acts against civilization but choose to ignor them.
Conrad says simply- exterminate the brutes. Haggard adopts an avuncular attitude toward perpetual children. Burroughs assumes the role of…well…a god. Freud wishes to assume the role of plantation owner. The problem is insoluble except by the Shona method of ‘exterminating the arrogant bastards.’
For Burroughs as well as for Freud sex seems to be the key. Burroughs position is difficult to fathom. In all his cultures, societies and civilizations, and he creates a great many, nudity or near nudity is the ideal although as he is writing for popular consumption his characters remain sexually unexited and incredibly chaste under the most provocative conditions. Freud of course had everybody going at it like bunnies.
In Cave Girl Burroughs’ hero, Waldo Emerson Smith-Jones is the example of the over intellectualized man of extreme and enervating culture. Quite the opposite of Burrughs who obviously feels he has reached an ideal balance between the intellectual and the physical.
Waldo is meager then and consumptive when he lands on the island. He is obligatorily cowardly. He will find his Anima ideal in Nadara who is the antithesis of the civilized Jane being both nude and perhaps the most obviously sexually unihibited of any of ERB’s female characters. Burroughs contrasts her natural uninhibited sexuality with the inhibited sexuality of Waldo. There is a nice comparison with Freud possible here. Also with the Burroughs corpus there is room for an analysis of Nadara, La, and Balza.
During the course of his stay on the island , the natural primitive life will flesh Waldo out, build him up, give him conficence and make him courageous as well as curing his TB. Of course he never loses his intellectual attainments while using them to better his opponents and improve his situation. Thus neither Haggard, Conrad, Freud or Burroughs is able to resolve the conflicts of the discontents caused by civilization. As attractive as the primitive is it must remain an intellectual ideal.
Go to Part 3.
In The Beginning.
During the course
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:
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.
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.
The Deconstruction Of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America
April 14, 2007
A Review
The Lad And The Lion
by
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Review by R.E. Prindle
30 pages,
Now were moving into the twenties. The trans-Atlantic cable was laid in 1859 so telegraphic communications have bridged the Atlantic. Wireless is becoming a reality about to create the great radio networks. Primitive commercial air routes were still a decade or so in the future while the great passenger ships could cross the Atlantic safely in a week.
The Atlantic would be flown within a few years but as of the early twenties the speed and ease of our travel had not yet commenced. Still, it was now possible to closely coordinate activities as was done by the American Communists and their handlers from the Soviet Union.
By 1923 Freudian sex notions, Marxist political fantasies and the pseudo-science of Einstein’s relativity were melded into one intellectual approach by what is known as the Frankfurt school, also known as critical theory.
[ http://.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/index.htm ]
The Institut For Sozialforschung…was the creation of Felix Weil, who was able to use money from his father’s grain busines to finance the Institut. Weil was a young Marxist who had written his Phd on the practical problems of implementing socialism.
—–
Weil negotiated with the Ministry of Education [German] that the Director of the Institut would be a professor from the state system, so that the Institut would have the status of a University.
The school staffed entirely by Jews was also known as the Institute for Social Research. As you can see the sectarian nature of the school was concealed behind fine sounding screen names like Social and Research after the Freudian manner when it was a plan to implement the Jewish Revolution itself disguised as Communism.
In a system of freedom of expression and conscience the School was no problem. But the Jewish Culture at the same time that it claimed the rights and benefits of freedom of expression and conscience for itself denied them to the very creators of the concepts and this denial was made in terms of Orwellian doublespeak.
Thus the so-called ‘Critical Theory’ was used to cast a pall of disrepute over the Other or the non-Jews while sanctifying the mores of the in group. Decontruction went on in both Europe and America.
During the Nazi era the school would be relocated first to Switzerland in 1932 from which it could operate in Germany, then in 1935 the entire school was transferred to NYC. In 1941 the school was moved to Hollywood.
For decades with their control of expression it was virtually impossible to examine problems from any other point of view than the Critical Theory. I was just at Reed College. Going through the book store it was clear that the curriculum was based on the Frankfurt School and Critical Theory.
With the coming of the internet it became possible for opinions that had been savagely repressed to find expression. The current bugaboo of the Semites is a professor from Long Beach State by the name of Kevin MacDonald. He began a research into the methods by which the Jewish Culture established itself in the twentieth century as the dominant culture. That work was titled The Culture Of Critique which has since become the bible of the Right.
A full scale attempt to marginalize MacDonald is now in progress. Needless to say the attack as always is ad hominem with the attempt to defame Mr. MacDonald’s scientific researches as ‘anti-Semitic.’ Nevertheless the door is open a crack, at least temporarily.
The Jewish Culture through Freud established the concept of Multi-culturalism which states that each culture is distanct in identity with a set of objectives that it wishes to implement for itself. We didn’t need the concept of Multi-culturalism to be aware of that but there you have it.
MacDonald’s title the Culture of Critique defines the Jewish cultural technique through the ages as well as that of the Frankfurt School in the twentieth century. The Culture enters another culture immediately beginning to find fault with what up to then had been a successful effort at dealing with problems of civilization. Whatever the response and no matter how successful the Jewish Culture criticized it, tore it down and insisted that the Jewish way replace it.
All of the ancient cultures were grappling with nature through a system of polytheism. Polytheism was the forerunner of science in that it identified and separated the processes of nature attempting to understand each in isolation. As with the rise of Science in the nineteenth century there was no way for the Jewish Culture to establish supremacy. Any argument they had to offer was just another opinion.
So the Culture countered with monotheism which was supposed to be superior to polytheism in some way they couldn’t explain. They just asserted it. Once I slipped from under the conditioning of my religious upbringing that enforced monotheism without an adequate justification I came to the realization that there was nothing superior in monotheism in fact the approach negates scientific inquiry in favor of an inviolable dispensation from ‘G-d’ or, in other words, a projection of the Jewish Weltanschauung.
Having subdued polytheism with monotheism when science broke its bonds from the seventeenth to the nineteenth the Jewish Culture had to come up with an approach to contain and negate science. Hence a number of pseudo-sciences were created to confuse and obfuscate so that these scientific sounding ‘sciences’ that nevertheless served to impose Jewish Culture could be established.
Foremost among these attempts incorporating Marx, Freud and Einstein as aforementioned was the Institute for Social Research. I was aware of most of the leading figures of the school such as Wilhelm Reich, Marcuse, Adorno and Fromm from my college days but I wasn’t aware of their association in the Frankfurt School although I was aware of that name.
Following Freud’s lead, such as in Lang’s Testament Of Dr. Mabuse the members continued the attacks Freud had launched. Central to their issues was sexual theory.
In order to reconstruct society along Jewish Cultural lines they had to deconstruct the existing society. That is to say by the use of Critical Theory they had to subvert existing customs and mores. A first step was to belittle existing beliefs attempting the substitution of ‘superior’ Jewish beliefs. Thus beginning in the twenties a systematic debunking of American heroes and customs began.
The world was turned upside down. Everything that previously had been thought good was now bad which means that everything bad was good. It was all relative; nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so. But the maxim only cut one way in the hands of critical theory. What you believed was bad; what they believed was good. No one ever thought to ask: Compared to what? And they got away with this too. Still don’t know how it worked that way but it did.
And then they went back and changed the past. A sort of inverted nostalgia. The way they wanted it to have been when managed by the other. John Dos Passos began to turn out his USA trilogy that many people think is one of the top ten books of the twentieth century. It’s flashy. Even flashier if you don’t know the historical background. The first time I read it, much younger then of course, I was bowled over. Of course my state of mind was perhaps a little more depressed than Dos Passos’ story which is pretty depressed. Second time I read it I began to waver. Seemed awfully one sided. Then I integrated my personality and like the character in Gradiva my projection began to dissolve. My windshield got clearer and I could see more clearly. The third time I read the trilogy I was repulsed by the complete and total negativity, the general nastiness of Dos Passos’ mind. Well, nothing’s good or bad but thinking makes it so. I thought the trilogy was good when I first read it, neutral the second time and terrible the last. It’s all relative, of course, but now my opinion is that the trilogy is absolutely bad and as thinking makes it so it must be bad. Fifty years later or so Greil Marcus’ reinforcing the USA tilogy came out with a book he titled Bad Old America. That could have been the title of Dos Passos’ USA trilogy. So who you going to believe novelists and memoirists who speak of the good old America or those like Dos Passos and Marcus who believed it was a bad old America. Compared to what? It’s all relative. Well nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so so people like Dos Passos and Marcus can get behind their push carts and trundle off into oblivion.
Well, that was flip and satisfying but ignores the tragedy of the people who lived through that era yet were mystified by what they saw going on around them because they were living by rules formulated thirty or forty years in the past but which didn’t work very well anymore because another culture, actually a couple cultures were changing the game before their eyes by disregarding those very rules. There you have a multi-cultural society: if you’re not busy setting the rules you’re busy following those who are. Quite frankly any culture that doesn’t want to set the rules is a culture of saps. Unfortunately I belong to that sappy culture but I’m doing my best to set them on their feet and point them in the right direction.
It was too late for Edgar Rice Burroughs back then but he was a game old bird. This essay started in 1912 with Burroughs scribbling away at a strange story entitled Tarzan Of The Apes. Well, from a jack to a king. From a financial and emotional bankrupt Burroughs’ story of Tarzan improbably caught the imagination of not only the United States but pretty much the whole darn world.
Apart from being an amusing but fantastic story that given your frame of mind is a very difficult tale to take, one is astounded at the influence of Tarzan on the world stage. The literate were absolutely repulsed by the story and I’m not so starry eyed I can’t see why. A certain type of mind can only see the ridiculous aspect of Tarzan. I don’t have any good arguments to convince those who believe so, I see the reason for their revulsion but I don’t share it.
page 5.
My first introduction to Tarzan was of course the movies. I was entranced by Johnny Weissmuller, although watching the movies now I’m not sure why. From there I bought what was available from Grosset and Dunlap. I found the books better than the movies. There was that about Burroughs, the man himself, telling his stories of Tarzan that made the stories seem very significant so that not only me but thousands of others accept Tarzan as, what shall I say, their savior, their role model, their leader, their intellectual ideal?
Whatever it is it is the very antithesis of the Judaeo-Communist-Liberal school. Tarzan is self-sufficient; he is his own man. He is the very antithesis of the Liberal ideal which is, in the words of Vance Packard, an organization man, a member of the collective, subordinated completely to the ideology. Buzzing around in the hive.
There are many, even among his fans, who think of Burroughs as a simple minded boob who had the skill for escapist literature. I can see how they form their attitude too but, once again, I don’t share it.
I think it just as obvious that Burroughs was deeply interested in the social, psychological, political, religious and scientific concerns of his time. Wisely, he decided to employ such details in a casual way without emphasizing his opinions because to call attention to them would have been beyond the scope of entertainment. He believed the sole purpose of fiction was entertainment however he construed the word. Still the serious reflections come through to the perceptive reader. For instance the Oakdale Affair is a wonderful little study packed full of perceptive and fairly profound observations.
page 6.
Burroughs had a large public who were devoted to Tarzan. the impact of the character seems to go far beyond the book sales. Of course book sales were amplified by the movies that became the established form of fictional entertainment as Tarzan’s popularity grew from 1912 to 1920 or so. In the late teens several very popular movies of Tarzan were made.
Regardless of what the critics thought of Tarzan the Liberal/Communist faction perceived a threat to their collective mindset. The ideals Burroughs infused into Tarzan that educated his public were in opposition to the Liberal collectivity. One good Tarzan novel combined with a movie could more than offset the influence of the whole Frankfurt School plus.
Before the October Revolution there was no political opposition to Burroughs but as the war ended and the twenties began attention was directed toward Tarzan and Burroughs. It seems quite obvious that the Jews recognized the importance of the movies for influencing culture from the beginning. One may argue that they took control of the movies because it was a new industry and it was open to them. It’s a good argument but not necessarily the real one. As the technological age dawned all industries were new and open to anybody. The argument might equally apply to the auto industry in 1908 yet Jews shunned the formative years of the industry.
The newspaper and publishing industries were dominated by goys yet Jews gained access to the industries and shouldered them aside. The same may be said of department stores. Yet Jews seized on movies and as radio became a business that industry and then television. So there seems to be another reason for Jews seeking control of such culture forming areas as stage, screen, radio and publishing. One hates to state the obvious.
After the October Revolution Jews worldwide were in a position to control culture. Thus, as in the US, they could issue volume after volume debunking older cultural heroes and national customs. The Liberal/Judaeo/Communist coalition could control the images of current cultural figures like Edgar Rice Burroughs also. While Burroughs always had publishing difficulties for other reasons, after 1920 it got worse until in 1930 he was forced into self-publishing.
page 7.
It may be a coincidence that after 1922 no more Tarzan movies were made until 1928 or not. But it was about this same time that Burroughs began having troubles everywhere. His English publishers began to neglect him. His Tarzan novels which were very popular in Germany came under attack because Burroughs’ novels written during he war were considered Germanophobic. As the campaign was successful it had to be led by Communists.
And in Russia Burroughs aroused the ire of the Communist government because the proletariat preferred Tarzan novels to Communist doctrine. So, in the period 1920 to 1924 a concerted worldwide attack was carried on against this poor fantasy writer.
The Soviet government enlisted the services of a writer of great fame to denigrate Burroughs discreetly in print. That writer was no less than H.G. Wells. His opening shot across the bow was Men Like Gods which was so discreet I may be the only person who ever saw it other than Burroughs. However Men Like Gods was followed in 1928 by a work clearly referring to Burroughs entitled Mr. Blettsworthy On Rampole Island. As his point of departure Wells chose a 1914 novelette entitled The Lad And The Lion. In Blettsworthy he postulated that Burroughs was insane. That is a pretty heavy defamation of a living author if anyone read Wells’ book. Not many did. After 1920 Wells had a very limited appeal as a novelist. His attack had an influence on the publishing history of the The Lad And The Lion that will require some detailed attention.
page 8.
The original of Lad was written in February-March of 1914 immediately followed by Beasts Of Tarzan while The Girl From Farris’s begun in 1913 was finished at the same time. The three novels then were written at the height of Burroughs recovery from the despair of his earlier failure. They represent a response to his success as he tried to find a new footing.
Burroughs’ father had died on February 13th, 1913. In September, at the time of his birthday, ERB left for an extended stay in California. All three novels were written or finished in California in the final three months of the stay. That Lad and Girl were both completed in March indicates their close connection in his mind. Lad being concerned with his Animus and Girl undoubtedly with his Anima.
Wells’ analysis of Lad convinced him that Burroughs was insane as he said in his ad hominem attack in Blettsworthy. Even if Burroughs were ‘insane’ at the time he wrote Lad that would have no effect on the influence of Tarzan.
While Burroughs suffered from mental distress from the time the events of Lad took place, which I put as his entry into the Michigan Military Academy, to what I would call his emergence and recovery here in 1914, that is far from insanity and I might add no worse than the symptoms of distress Wells showed in his In The Days Of The Comet. Even Men Like Gods in 1923 is a lttle bonkers. Nevertheless his analysis of the state of mind Burroughs displays in Lad seems to me to be fairly accurate. That Burroughs passed through such a stage of suffering is normal, which Wells if he weren’t in a partisan attack would or should have recognized.
page 9.
At any rate the story Wells read has to be separated from the book edition that was rewritten and published twenty-four years later. Every other chapter has to be removed, those concerning the events in Moscow- or at least an imaginary Eastern European city.
That leaves you with the story of Michael adrift off the Atlantic coast of Africa and his subsequent landing. The manner in which the story relates to Burroughs’ life and state of mind is fairly transparent if one knows his life and psychology.
George T., Burroughs father, had transferred him from one school to another jerking him out at the critical moment. Anyone who has experienced this knows how difficult it is. It makes you a little bit buggy. The final straw came when George T. sent him away to the MMA. Burroughs tried to escape but his father sent him back. We don’t know what he said to the boy but it must have had a terrific effect on him.
It was the feeling of rejection from this inident that lay behind the story of the Lad And The Lion. The MMA completely declassed Burroughs so that he was able to fit in nowhere. He characterized this feeling as one of shipwreck. The shipwreck figures into several of his novels not least of which are Tarzan Of The Apes and Son Of Tarzan.
So, in the story of Lad. As usual Burroughs weaves in several literary influences. Underlying the story is that of Mark Twain’s Prince And The Pauper that so influenced Burroughs. In a 1923 newspaper article the writer declared that he had read Prince approximately six times. One doesn’t read such a light weight fantasy six times unless it closely relates to one’s own experience. Thus until the MMA one can conclude that Burroughs thought of himself as a little Prince. In the same article he said he also had read Little Lord Fauntleroy six times. After the MMA he lost the feeling of being a Prince and Lord to become a pauper. In Lad then, the hero (a version of himself) is a prince who after the shipwreck becomes a pauper.
page 10.
The shipwreck itself was influenced by the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. Several tales of the Titanic are retold. The young Prince Michael who because of his age was entitled to a place in a lifeboat generously and manly gives up his place to a woman.
When the great ship rolled over we are led to believe that Michael was catapulted some distance away. His guardian had thoughtfully put a life jacket on him so he doesn’t drown. But just as the shipwreck repesented the second of Burroughs’ great fixations as he is in the water a life raft descending a wave crashes down on his head ‘in a glancing blow’ knocking him unconscious causing a total loss of memory that lasts for over five years.
When he comes to an empty lifeboat is floating by him. Not recognizing it as a boat as he has total- and Burroughs means total- memory loss yet Michael reasons that it will be more comfortable than the water. Clever kid.
The shipwreck and lifeboat are prominent themes taking several different forms in Burroughs’ work. Tarzan’s parents are marooned in the opening novel of the series put ashore in a lifeboat while the ship they were sailing on was subsequently wrecked and sunk. There were several such incidents in the sequel, The Return Of Tarzan, all of them occurring within a few miles of each other and close to where Tarzan’s parents were marooned, which is to say Burroughs himself. These are one or two too many coincidences for most readers. If this were a traditional adventure series perhaps that would be true, but in the psychological sense in which Burroughs is writing there is a logical imperative controlled by Burroughs’ fixations.
Waldo Emerson Smith-Jones is a castaway in 1913’s Cave Girl while the first large scale run through of the theme is in the later novel of 1913 The Mucker. These two novels were conceived before the father, George T. died.
His death shifted Burroughs mind back a decade or two so that the shipwreck of Lad is psychologically the first in the sequence.
page 11.
Discarding Freud’s interpretation of the unconscious let us view Burroughs’ shipwreck through the version of the subconscious I have outlined which is truer than that of Freud. Now, the events of Burroughs life were filtered through his three great fixations. Certainly up to 1914 he had been unable to relax their hold at all. He was subject to terrifying nightmares because of the fixations and why not. The daily happenings thus would be constellated around these fixations and distorted to meet the experience of their horrific traumas.
Over the years as his circumstances changed even though he was apparently unable to exorcise these fixations his new circumstances were powerful enough to alter the consequences of the experiential fixations. Since he dwelt on these central symbols in which his traumas cast his dreams he uses the same situation over and over which causes some readers to accuse him of repitition. While the situations do repeat the same symbolism they do not do so in a deadening manner but are variations on the theme that evolve with Burroughs’ evolving consciousness.
Thus in Lad he is in the lifeboat alone, no Anima figure. In the Mucker all the survivors of the shipwreck end up in one boat with the Anima figure Barbara Harding. It must be true as this is dream material that the figures in the boat represent real people that were associated with Burroughs in these traumas. Later in 1924 when Burroughs has edged back to a prince from a pauper there are two lifeboats, one for the gentlefolks and one for the criminal class. Chase III, the Burroughs Animus figure was supposed to have been with the gentlefolk but in the confusion he is thrown in with the criminal class. This undoubtedly represents the MMA. Marcia, the Anima figure is also taken in that boat by mistake. Thus we have another variation on the MMA fixation.
page 12.
It must be true that these differences were reflected in Burroughs’ dreams as his fixations and his reality drew apart and conflicted. Apparently troubled all his life by this conflict Burroughs even bought a book on scientific dream interpretation in 1932.
Drifting along in his life boat, breathing being the only thing he can remember, he is spotted from a drifting derelict by its sole human inhabitant, a crazy epileptic deaf mute. Add to his infirmities the fact that Michael has no memory and one has quite a combination. The old loony draws him from the lifeboat to a four or five year life on this drifting derelict. Michael drifts thus until the old loon is killed upon which being released from his control or enchantment Michael lands on the coast of North Africa having no memory of land whatsoever.
The dream ship was adequately provided with all the necessities for this interminable drifting about as a dream ship would.
As they drift up and down the coast of Africa one is compelled to ask why. Very likely Africa had taken on a mythic quality for Burroughs from the works of Stanley, Livingstone, Du Chaillu, Buel and others. Africa was a world where the White man was supreme and unfettered much as was Tarzan. Thus the Africa of the Tarzan novels should be considered a dream or fantasy Africa that bears little resemblance to the real geographical Africa. Burroughs’ Africa was a place inhabited by lions and tigers and deer. More’s the pity for the psychological reality of the continent that his fans wouldn’t allow him to populate the place with tigers and deer. Psychologically these things were essential to the story he was telling.
As in all dreams the most improbable coincidences have to be accepted. Thus as unbelievable as it may be to a rational mind, this old epileptic deaf mute insano had a very young lion cub in a cage on deck. It is impossible for him to be there rationally but there you have it. Psychologically he belongs there. It is noteworthy that over five years the ship encountered no storms so the lion didn’t wash overboard as he must otherwise have.
page 13.
The old guy is cruel and sadistic. He beats the Lad, who no longer has any other identity which must be why he’s called the Lad, on a daily basis as well as torturing the lion. As a lion is Burroughs’ Anima figure he naturally forms a close friendship with the cub. Both Lad and cub grow huge with the result that the Lad challenges the old coot who never has a name. The old coot knocks the Lad senseless with an iron bar. That’s two blows to the head within twenty pages. Seeing his friend threatened the lion bursts from his cage grown rickety over the years despatching the coot in one chomp as he tears the old bastard’s face away. Thus Lad and Lion are delivered from the mastery or enchantment of the old crazy.
Now, who in Burroughs aching life could this old monster be? Well, his father died about a year earlier. His father did rush him from school to school finally placing him with what Burroughs considered the juvenile delinquents of MMA. Burroughs always professed the greatest love for his father, celebrated his birthday annually; yet on his dad’s hundreth anniversary he created the zany loony mad Doctor, ‘God’ who bears some similarity to this crazy old coot of Lad. I don’t think there’s any doubt that Burroughs had ambiguous feelings about George T. It is even quite probable that he didn’t recognize the crazy old coot as his father so he would suffer no guilt from ripping the old loony’s face off. Indeed, removing his face was removing his identity.
The Lad and Lion did not land immediately but continued to drift for a period of several months. From that one might reason that Burroughs and his Anima figure while released from subjugation by George T.’s death took several months to move from beneath the father’s shadow. Indeed this novel was written approximately nine months after his father’s death.
If one construes the period from 1891 the year Burroughs entered the MMA to his father’s death as symbolic of the years of drifting under the domination of the old weirdo one might interpret Burroughs situation in this way.
page 14.
His father had humiliated and shamed him so thoroughly that the boy was psychologically barred from following in his father’s footsteps as a businessman. Hence from 1891 to 1911 or 12 Burroughs drifted from job to fairly disreputable job a complete failure. Realizing he could never be a success as his father had Burroughs in desperation was forced to take another tack outside the business world. Thus he took up pen and began to write. Here he was successful. It is significant that he used materials, old letterheads and pencils, from his own failed enterprises. His father died just as Burroughs was receiving the first fruits of his new career which was probably just as well. But now he had to get away from the proximity of the man so he packed wife, kids, car and all his belongings fleeing to the West Coast. At the end of this voluntary exile and just before returning he completed The Lad And The Lion. Having made the attempt to exorcise the demon he could return to Chicago which he did.
I haven’t read the magazine version which may differ a little or quite a bit but the above story is the crux of The Lad And The Lion. The above must have been what convinced H.G. Wells that Burroughs was insane.
Dream symbolism is not however an indication of insanity but the problem of the interactions of the conscious and subconscious trying to make sense of experience it finds difficult to understand. Contrary to Freud’s belief that dreams are a product solely of the unconscious it is impossible for consciousness to abandon itself completely to the subconscious.
Burroughs relation of his dream is no more a sign of insanity than Freud’s dream of Irma’s Injection. In fact Burroughs, as one aspect of his story may very well have been dealing with his own interpretation of dreams. As this story was modified in 1938 long after psychoanalysis had entered the popular domain the story that Wells read c. 1920 may be significantly different than the altered 1938 version. Burroughs may very well have developed his psychological theories significantly since 1914. This version would also have been written after he had had time to digest the scientific dream book he bought in 1932.
page 15.
As Burroughs acquired his initial interest in psychology from Lew Sweetser in 1891 which is evidenced from his earliest works there is no reason not to believe that by 1938 he had definite ideas of dream psychology.
Wells himself was read in Freudian psychology as his analysis of Burroughs in Blettsworthy indicates. The depth of his undertanding appears to be somewhat superficial but, still, informed. His attack on Burroughs is ad hominem in the Liberal tradition. As a writer Wells should have known better than to take Lad at face value, especially as several of his own stories vary into paranoia and other mental disorders or, rather, states of mind. One might even say that the interest of the stories rise from these projected states of mind. Two of Wells finest novels reflect disordered states of mind. The magnificently portrayed paranoia of ‘When The Sleeper Wakes’ is unparalled unless it be by his own ‘In The Days Of The Comet.’ Both can compete with ‘Lad’ in terms of insanity.
Very likely ‘Blettsworthy’ was a calculated attack motivated by orders from Moscow. Those orders were probably received about 1921 when Wells visited Lenin and the Soviet Union. By this time Wells was religiously committed to the Revolution. Thus, as indicated, during this period the attack on Burroughs was commenced on the international level. His English publishers inexplicably lost interest in a key commerical product like Tarzan. The same may be said of his American publishers and movie makers. His German sales were destroyed on political charges and finally the Soviets ordered Wells to attack him personally to destroy his credibility. These actions should throw some light on Burroughs’ financial difficulties of this critical period when he lost control of the Tarzana estate.
The period from this attack to 1928 and 1930 when Burroughs elected to self-publish has not been examined from this point of view. Suffice it to say that Burroughs first self-published title, Tarzan The Invincible concerns an actual war between Tarzan and no less than the Soviet dictator, Josef Stalin. This was continued in the sequel, Tarzan Triumphant, while being continued through 1934 and the release of Tarzan And The Lion Man.
page 16.
The rewriting of The Lad And The Lion in 1938 may be taken as a heavy salvo in this war. By 1938 the history of the two Russian Revolutions, 1905 and 1917 would have been known in their broad outlines. The minor details have been guessed from the very beginning having been recently confirmed by research. So, his ‘head bloody but unbowed’ Burroughs returned to the battle.
Aware of Wells’ interpretation of the 1914 magazine version of Lad Burroughs may have altered the details to correspond with his state of mind in 1938 blending the earlier story into the later additions dealing specifically with Wells and his Soviet handlers.
By 1938 Wells had been abandoned by his Soviet mistress Moura Budberg. He had met her during his 1921 visit to Russia. She had then been assigned to him by Stalin from c. 1928 to 1935, the height of the war on Burroughs. She had abandoned him probably because his usefullness was considered minimal because of his independence and criticism of Stalin. In 1939’s Holy Terror Wells would actually call for the assassination of Stalin in much the same way he had declared Burroughs insane. The amazing thing is the casual way in which Wells advocates assassination as a political means. Wells was an outstanding Liberal who here displays the absolute bigotry of Liberalism. They denounce capital punishment unless it serves their own purposes. Once again it is impossible to be religiously devout without being a bigot. It make no difference whether it is character assassination, or individual murder, or the genocide of a billion all is justified by religious bigotry, in this case Liberalism.
Did I see eyebrows raised at the mention of genocide of a billion? Please to follow the line of argument.
page 17.
Liberalism began with the French Revolution. The Liberals began by murdering aristocrats individually or as a group, genocide. When the aristocrats resisted, revolting in La Vendee, genocidal massacres began. Barges loaded with the royalist party were towed into the middle of rivers and sunk drowning all aboard.
These proceedings were justified about seventy years later by the Liberal pundit Victor Hugo in his novel 1793. He doesn’t mention atrocities like the above but he justified the holocaust in this way:
These people stand in the way of the New Order. So long as they live they are a threat to the New Order, therefore it behooves us to kill them all to give birth to the New Utopia.
This notion has been the guiding principle of Liberals ever since. At every opportunity they massacre those standing in the way of the New Order. In the horrific aftermath of the October Revolution Jews massacred millions. Picking up the baton Stalin engineered a famine in a genocidal attempt to murder independent farmers called Kulaks. A few years later the Leftist Adolf Hitler attempted to exterminate a number of enemies of his New Order. Mao added his tens of millions. But, that’s not a billion you say? Well, that is a possible if seemingly not probable next step. It is already in the works.
I don’t know how many of you have heard of Noel Ignatiev. He is a Jewish Harvard graduate who has formed an organization called Race Traitor. In a Winter 1991 article in his magazine called RaceTraitor [ http://racetraitor.org/abolish.html ] the lead article was entitled: Abolish The White Race– By Any Means Necessary. Perhaps wisely, the article is unsigned. The article is sheer rhetoric with so many logical flaws I can’t begin to go into them here. The article intends to be divisive. The intent is to persuade as many White people as possible to renounce their ‘White Skin Privilege’, whatever that might mean. This will be a step in abolishing the White ‘race’ which Ignatiev perceives as a monolith, perhaps along the lines of his own Jewish culture. The above notion provides Ignatiev and his Culture an escape clause because, although nominally White, they, we are led to believe, have renounced their White Skin Privilege.
page 18
As a New Aboloitionist as Ignatiev refers to his organization the Jewish Culture is safely on the side of the colored ‘races’ of the world. The destruction of a billion Whites still seems improbable but Ignatiev and his fellows have already induced guilt into a very large number of Whites neutralizing them while cadres of White ‘youths’ have been enlisted in the cause. They are supposed to renounce their Whiteness by breeding with colored people thus losing Whiteness in color.
At the same time those who seem more aggressively White, refusing to be intimidated have been defamed and castigated as ‘White Supremacists’ being reviled and hated by not only the New Abolitionists and colored peoples but also by all White People who have not been so designated. So, if you allow for 10% of the Whites to be unrepentant that amounts to about 100 million people spread over hundreds of locations. As this sub group has now been demonized as sub-human while standing in the way of Ignatiev’s New Order of a world without White people it is historically perfectly permissible to kill them all.
Now, concentration camps have been set up in the US, you can find pictures of them on the internet, huge tent cities that have ostensibly been set up to house illegal immigrants. Why anyone would want to house illegal immigrants who no one is interested in arresting anyway remains a mystery. Then who are these camps on which a vast sum has already been expended for? I suggest you examine certain legislation before Congress concerning ‘Hate Laws’ and draw your own conclusions.
So, with the obstructionists of the New Order safely out of the way the next batch of the less than enthusiastic Whites can be safely dealt with by the New Abolitionists. Diminished, disarmed and defenseless it will be a small matter to finish off a mere half billion or so, if they haven’t already had the sense to blend in with the coloreds. As I have pointed out before the rule is to keep the women and kill the men so in reality it would only be necessary for a holocaust of a quarter billion. Get’s easier, doesn’t it?
page 20.
As a historical process this would complete the Semito-European war that began approximately 6000 years ago with a total victory for the Semites.
Let us go back to the mano a mano duel between Wells and Burroughs as centered around The Lad And The Lion. We still have two stories to deal with, one is the desert story when The Lad now known as Aziz is made a member of Arab society and the Moscow story. Having never read the original magazine story it still seems reasonable that Burroughs adapted the 1914 story to his 1938 needs.
When the ship was grounded a new life began for Aziz and the Lion. The change was complete. The ship drifted ashore at high tide, the tide went out so far that the ship left high and dry rolled over on its side allowing the pair to walk ashore over dry land.
This is a dream representation of Burroughs own transition from being adrift to realizing success as a writer. As the old tyrant had died just previously one may believe that the death of his father coinciding with his success released Burroughs from thrall.
The situation now is more perfect than Tarzan, indeed this story may be a bridge between the Russian Quartet and the rest of the series. It falls between Beasts Of Tarzan and Son Of Tarzan prefiguring the latter in many ways, while the lion may be considered the predecessor of the Golden Lion linking the rest of the series.
page 20.
Naked came Aziz. Not only naked but illiterate and speechless. The epileptic deaf mute was unable to teach him anything. The blow to his head from the raft had obliterated his memory that obviously included the memory of language. He has learned lion talk however, he has a pretty impressive roar. Aziz does have remarkable native intelligence however so he learns with an alacrity that is astonishing.
Actually both he and the lion have no survival skills whatever not even knowing how to hunt. Contrary to most feral children Aziz is able to evaluate a situation and come up with an appropriate solution. Thus when he and the lion fail at chasing the prey down Aziz does a quick analysis then places himself above the prey and lion driving the beasts into the jaws of the lion. Not bad for a complete novice.
In a scene reminiscent of the Percival story of King Arthur Aziz when he sees his first Arab horsemen is as entranced as Percival was when he first saw the knights. By 1914 I doubt if Burroughs had read much of the lore of King Arthur but by 1938 he may have, must have. One odd item that may be coincidence of course is that when Percival is asked his name by the knights in Chretien de Troyes’ Grail he replies that it is ‘darling boy’ which is how his mother referred to him. When Nakhla names the Lad she calls his Aziz which in Arabic means ‘beloved.’ The French officer’s daughter when she learns his name remarks that he must have been named by his mother or a sweetheart as she explains the meaning of Aziz to him. Aziz has obviously mastered French within a couple weeks having kicked off his linguistic skills with lion and Arabic.
Aziz’ romance with Nakhla had been abandoned when he was told she had married. Thus when with the French woman and a group of French soldiers they visit Nakhla’s Arab camp the young woman is devastated to see Aziz in the company of another woman, dressed as a European soldier. Burroughs likes the comedy of errors approach.
page 21
The situation changes rapidly when Aziz overhears the Captain describe himself in an uncomplimentary fashion as unfit for his daughter. Stripping down to loin cloth Aziz heads back into the desert as the wid beast he is, although by this time he knows lion, Arab and French which places him two languages ahead of most civilized people. On the way back his two lion friends pounce on him which must have hurt not a little. Kind of like being embraced by a speeding freight train.
Burroughs begins to describe Aziz as a lion man. I think this would be the first reference to a lion man in the corpus unless the reference was only included in the rewrite of ’38. Tarzan is described as a lion man while at the same time he has parallel indenties as a Monkey Man and an Elephant Man. In this case Aziz is solely a lion man. He left the ship with the male lion who has no name and acquired a female lion who was attracted by the male at about the same time Aziz became aware of Nakhla. As with De Vac of the Outlaw Of Torn the lion seems to be associated with Aziz’ Anima. With the arrival of the female the Anima shifts to the female with the male moving to the Animus while Aziz makes a ‘real life’ connection to a living female forming the appropriate quaternity.
Having left the French where he also learned that Nakhla wasn’t married he visits the Sheik’s encampment to make up. Here the Sheik is indignant at Aziz presumption called him worse names than the Captain did. Aziz is so crushed that one wonders if Burroughs himself wasn’t grossly insulted by old Mr. Hulbert, Emma’s father. While he is debating with himself Nakhla is captured by his rival Ben Saada.
At this point it would be good to have read the magazine version for comparison. As this story is running parallel with the Moscow story Burroughs may have coordinated the two, changing the orginal version considerably. If that were the case then the desert story is almost certainly influenced by E.M. Hull’s 1921 novel, The Sheik and the movie of the same year starring Rudolph Valentino.
page 22.
In any event in the denouement Burroughs does his usual action razzle dazzle but Aziz still has no memory of his origins. In a battle with the outlaws he gets clubbed with a rifle on the forehead. He is out of it for a couple days. There is concern whether he will survive. His skull is torn open the familiar way. This is the third major blow Aziz has received in this story and it’s a short one. When he comes to his head is being bathed on the lap of Nakhla and wonder of wonders his full memory has returned. He knows who he is: he is no longer a pauper but a Prince. Little Lord Fauntleroy has come into his own.
We will leave Aziz at this point and turn to the parallel story of Prince Ferdinand, Hilda de Groot and the Revolution.
Prince Ferdinand and Hilda is a retelling of George W.M. Reynold’s second series subtitled, Venetia Trelawney. Hilda is Venetia while Ferdinand represents George IV. Hilda’s brother Hans probably represents Venetia’s husband, Horace Sackville. If I am correct in supposing that Burroughs read The Mysteries Of The Court Of London c. 1898 then the memory of the story surfaces here forty years later in 1938. Not bad.
Burroughs telling of the story here may be a parody on H.G. Wells. Like George IV who had rather womanize than pay attention to affairs of State Ferdinand does also. Unlike George who maintained the throne Ferdinand is caught in the Revolution being murdered, perhaps a reference to Nicholas II.
I am sure the story is replete with references and insults I am not getting or they are tenuous enough to prevent certainty. The first revolutionary chieftain for instance is named Meyer which is not too far from Mayer perhaps referring to Louis B. Mayer of MGM.
page 23.
Burroughs is writing this in 1938 after he has been under attack for twenty years. This book is addressed to Wells who began his literary attack in 1923. There is no reason to doubt the major battles took place from 1930 to 1934. In 1931 MGM whose President was the highest paid executive in the US, Louis B. Mayer, filched control of Tarzan’s image from Burroughs. By 1934 when the second MGM Tarzan was released Burroughs was thoroughly beaten.
You know, a man has to think about things. You have to be pretty slow or psychologically sanguine to think that things just happen. As we can see from Lad Burroughs was well aware of Wells’ involvement. The studio heads did not stand in the way of the Red infiltration of Hollywood. They welcomed the Red movie makers who fled Hitler into the studio system. They had no trouble blending in the Frankfurt School when it arrived in Hollywood in 1941. If as John Howard Lawson said that the studio heads approved of every single scene and line in every single movie then while they may have rejected some overt Red inferences it may not have been because they were Red but because they believed the country wasn’t ready for them.
Even though everyone talks about the Hollywood Black List of HUAC there was always a Hollywood Black List. After the so-called post-1950 Black List most people who weren’t objected to for other reasons eventually found their way back into movie work. It didn’t take that long. This could not have been done if these ultra-authoritarian studio heads hadn’t permitted it. So while I have never heard that Louis B. Mayer was following a Red agenda yet talking movies have always had a Red tinge becoming more open as the decades wore on.
Mayer was subservient to the ‘money’ men in New York City. The actual control of the movies came from that quarter so Mayer in no way was an independent operator. One would have to examine Loew’s in New York City for Communist influence before one cleared Louis B. Mayer. I have the feeling that Burroughs may have been telling us something.
page 24.
In the intervening twenty-four years from the first version of Lad Burroughs was not idle. Even though not considered a serious writer yet he allows serious topics to creep in that indicate wide reading if not study. There were two items I found interesting. The first is a psychological reference. Even though I was laughed at for suggesting Burroughs had psychological interests consider this: Lad, p. 56:
“Meyer was too rabid and too radical,” said Carlyn. “He wanted to accomplish everything at a single stroke. I can see now that he was wrong.”
“Meyer wanted to be dictator,” said Andresy. “He was mad for power, and too anxious to obtain it quickly. That came first with Meyer, the welfare of the people second. It is strange what small, remote things may affect the destiny of a nation.”
“What do you mean?” asked Carlyn.
“Because Meyer, as a child, was suppressed and beaten by his father; because on that account, he had a feeling of inferiority, he craved autocratic power that would permit him to strike back in revenge. Meyer did not realize it himself; but when he struck at government, he was striking at his father. When he ordered the assassination of the king he was condemning his father to death in revenge for the humiliation and brutalities the father had inflicted on him. Now the king is dead and Michael and Meyer and Bulvik and hundreds of men and women who believed in Meyer; but Meyer’s father is still alive, basking in the reflected glory of his martyred son. Life is a strange thing, Carlyn. Civilization is strange and complex. The older I grow the more I realize how little any of us know what it is all about. Why do we strive? Everything we attain always turns out to be something we do not want, and then we try to change it for something else that will be equally bad. Oh well, but I suppose that we must keep on. How do you plan to kill the king?”
page 25.
Carlyn strarted, as though caught red-handed in a crime.
“God!” he exclaimed. “Don’t spring it on me like that.”
Andresy laughed. “You have nerves, don’t you?…I shall put it in an emasculated style.”
In the first place we have a full blown psychoanalysis of Meyer’s motives that demonstrates study and thought. What is of more interest to me is Carlyn’s reaction to Andresy and the latters unusual joking of let me emasculate my comment for you. That is a very unusual way of expressing the point. That would indicate to me that Burroughs has been studying and thinking about emasculation possibly from reading Freud himself or magazine articles discussing Freud’s concept of emasculation. In any event Burroughs is much deeper into psychology at this point than readers have been willing to acknowledge. As a response to Wells’ ‘Blettsworthy’ this is turning into a psychology duel to which Burroughs gives the coup de grace in the very short and pointed last chapter. That chapter would lead me to believe that Burroughs had rewritten the whole of Lad from stem to stern to deal with the Wellsian attack.
One can imagine Burroughs with Blettsworthy in one hand and the first Lad in the other musing on what course to take.
Apropos of assassination in general the story of Wesl is a general blueprint. This gets into a little speculation but in 1937 a year before book publication of Lad Burroughs lived in an apartment building also lived in by the Chicago Outfit mobster Johnny Roselli. Roselli would later figure in Burroughs’ war novel, Tarzan And The Foreign Legion as Johnny Rosetti. It would seem more than probable that Roselli would make it a point to get to know the world famous author of Tarzan. Roselli would wish to impress Burroughs with inside criminal information. From my study of Burroughs I have come to the conclusion that he borrowed a significant amount of detailing from elsewhere. I have already mentioned the Venetia Trelawney aspects of th Ferdinand/Hilda story. If one reads the Wesl story one will notice a general resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald’s supposed assassination of John F. Kennedy. There are those who maintain the assassination was a mob hit. As the assassination fits so well with the Wesl story one is led to believe that the Outfit had a general assassination plan that Roselli related to Burroughs. I have no proof of this other than the fact that Roselli knew Burroughs and that the latter would probably have borrowed the plan rather than have invented it.
page 26.
In the story Wesl (pronounce it, Weasel) is told by the revolutionaries to enter the palace grounds at a certain hour and stand in a certain place. He is told to wear gloves and be unarmed. He is the Fall Guy.
The crime involved here is the assassination of King Otto. Carlyn enters the kings room which was just above Wesl’s post and shoots the King. Tossing the gun out the window it lands at Wesl’s feet. While Wesl dithered Carlyn using another gun, different caliber, shot at him. Wesl began to run. As he reached the gate Carlyn dropped him. Thus all the testimony of ‘eye witnesses’ and the circumstantial evidence pointed to Wesl. Case closed.
If the outfit were involved in the Kennedy Assassination, which is more than probable, then following the Roselli scenario it is more than probable that Oswald was the Fall Guy as he himself said on television. He would have realized this as he watched the action in Dealy Plaza from his prime vantage point. He immediately realized he was the expendable fall guy, threw down his rifle and raced to his apartment to get his hand gun. Officer Tibbets was on the way to assassinate him but Oswald got the drop on Tibbets first then entered a public place where the hit on him would be obvious. It therefore follows that like Wesl he had to be eliminated. It was therefore made easy for Jack Ruby to make the hit on Oswald. That Ruby was connected to the Outfit makes his ‘patriotic’ story wash ‘thin as piss on a rock’ to use President Nixon’s expression.
page 27.
While the above proves nothing about the Kennedy Assassination it should give food for thought. Johnny Roselli claimed to have risen out of the sewer to deliver the actual shot that did Kennedy in. I just love this stuff.
At any rate it is almost certain Burroughs got the assassination plan from somewhere else. If not from Roselli than from some forgotten short story or elsewhere. I’m betting on Johnny Roselli.
So, there we have the Ferdinand/Hilda story adapted from G.W.M. Reynolds and the revolutionary story from events in Russia from 1905 to 1917 and beyond. A third influence seems to be the Ruritania/Graustark stories of Burroughs first novels which would be constellated around the magazine version of Lad. The combination with later events gives a nice illusion of continuity.
The account is very generalized so that there is no obvious reason to retaliate on Burroughs. There can be no mistaking that Meyer was meant to be a Jew as Meyer is a Jewish name. That would have been daring enough for Louis B. Mayer to know who Burroughs was referring to.
The evidence is that this was Burroughs last intended shot in the war as at the very end in reference to Wells he throws in the towel. It might be well to quote the entire chapter 25 with some commentary.
Quote:
Chapter Twenty-five.
Magazines from civilization seep into many far corners of the world. One such, an illustrated weekly of international renown found its way into the douar of an Arab sheik. The son-in-law of Ali-Es-Hadji was reading therein an account of happenings in a far-off kingdom. He read of the assassination of King Ferdinand and Hilda de Groot, and he examined with interest their pictures and pictures of the palace and palace gardens. There was a full page picture of General Count Sarnya, the new Dictator. There was also a picture of an elderly, scholarly looking man, named Andresy who had been shot with many others by order of Sarnya because they had attempted to launch a counter-revolution.
One day General Count Sarnya received a cablegram. It was from from Sidi Bel Abbes. All it said was, “Congratulations! You have my sympathy.” and it was signed, “Michael.
That’s a well packed paragraph that might have been expanded to three pages or so. It weems too compact to me yet I suppose it contains all the information to make its point even if it lacks color and shading.
The opening sentence is a direct reference to E. M. Hull’s The Sheik. In that novel the heroine, Diana, is presented in nearly the exact scene. She was the captive wife of the Sheik; Michael is the husband of the Sheik’s daughter. So we have a reversal of roles. I believe Burroughs is an adept at this.
The question is to whom is the paragraph addressed. It is obviously meant to be read by someone: is it Stalin? is it Wells? or is it intended for both? You may be certain that both men read it. Let us take Wells first.
By 1938 Wells had had a definite falling out with Stalin. As I pointed out, in next year’s Holy Terror He would call for the assassination of Stalin. Wells had reason to be bitter. He was definitely in love, even dependent on the Soviet state prostitute, Moura Budberg. Stalin had sadistically let him see Budberg and Maxim Gorky together when Budberg told him she was somewhere else. Then Stalin ordered Budberg to break off with Wells. One can’t be certain but I most certainly believe Burroughs was keeping up on these details of Wells’ life which, while not perhaps common knowledge, were no secret while probably being an item of gossip among the cognoscenti.
page 29.
Now, Burroughs had recently taken a new young wife so that he was able to flaunt her to a broken hearted Wells. In Blettsworthy that hero who had been living a fantasy life along the lines of Burroughs’ stories has been under the care of a psychiatrist. When he regains his sanity he learns he hasn’t been living on Rampole Island but in his imagination in New York City. New York City?
As the Lad is an answer to Blettsworthy, consider: Michael as a child has a raft fall on his head giving him total amnesia. Unlike Blettsworthy he is actually living the fantasy at sea and in the African desert. Than, a la Tarzan, not to mention Burroughs self, he gets his forehead bashed and torn open suffering excruciating head aches, as did Burroughs in real life. Then Aziz’ collapse. When he recovers, voila! his memory is completely restored but rather than being in New York City he is still in his exotic location in the desert his head in the lap of his beauteous new wife, Nakhla. So we have a probable sneer at Wells who will read the novel.
To Stalin: As remote a possibility as it may seem there is every evidence of some kind of duel between Stalin and Burroughs. There is no other reason for him to introduce Stalin into Invincible and Triumphant by name. The alternate Russian story of Lad is a fictional account of the two Russian Revolutions. Count Sarnya is obviously meant to be Stalin. The execution of Andesy and the counter-revolutionists must refer to the show trials of 1936.
So here we definitely have a sneer at Stalin. Burroughs waves both men off as though he’s finished with them. Burroughs had had enough, he will be content to tend his own garden.
page 30.
By 1938 Burroughs had been pretty thoroughly plundered in a fight that was not of his own makiing. MGM had Tarzan, his writing career was effectively over. If the pulps were inflitrated by Reds giving him trouble the talkies had him on the ropes. When Burroughs said he no longer read fiction he was still watching many volumes of fiction on the screen. The fiction laden pulps couldn’t compete with the movies. That market if not closed was no longer lucrative. He was out of radio. The only steady income he had came from the comic strips. Within a couple years he would be run out of Hollywood.
All the bright new young writers were Communists, no one else could get their foot in the door. As one of the old dinosaurs Burroughs had pretty effectively been cut from the tree.
The America he had known in the nineteenth century was gone. The last buffalo robe had been sold in the twenties. Even the America of the first and second decades were gone. Heck, the twenties were only a fond memory. The grim Communist politics of FDR had arrived with the Dust Bowl. Hitler had flushed out all the Freudian Jewish psychoanalysts of Europe into New York and Hollywood. The Frankfurt School that had fled to Switzerland in 1932 gave up Europe in 1935 fleeing to New York City. In 1941, probably to escape any danger from a Nazi invasion of New York they fled further West to Hollywood to find Santa Barbara shelled by the Japanese in 1942.
The extermination camps of Hitler accellerated the success of the Jewish Revolution by more than somewhat. In 1946 a direct frontal attack on America began with the release of the movie, Gentlemen’s Agreement.
That tall thin guy watching The Testament Of Dr. Mabuse in 1943 and The Iceman Cometh in 1946 staged his The Death Of A Salesman in 1949. the play had a curious affect on the nation seeming to undermine its confidence although it is difficult to understand why. That is the reason Arthur Miller is lauded as a genius not from any ablility as either a thinker, or a playwright.
From then on the deconstruction of America was a piece of cake. The reconstruction along Jewish Cultural lines began in earnest in the sixties being nearly complete today except for some counte-revolutionaries in the odd nook and cranny, here and there.
Freud
March 16, 2007
Freud And His Unconscious
Redefining A Fallible Idea
by
R.E. Prindle
Sometime after I wrote the first part of Something Of Value (see erbzine.com) I read David Bakan’s Freud And The Jewish Mystical Tradition. Bakan’s book confirmed my findings while developing Freud’s relationship to his culture’s mystical tradition based on Bakan’s understanding of the Zohar and the Jewish Kabbalah that I haven’t read or studied, nor do I intend to unless I exhaust other pursuits which doesn’t seem likely. You never know though.
However a point to consider is how Jewish is the Jewish mystical tradition, that is, what are its roots? Are they rooted in Judaism or elsewhere? Bakan seems to believe that the Jewish Kabbalah is derived entirely from Jewish sources independent of the general milieu. I don’t believe this to be true. The Jewish mystical tradition like all others is based on the very ancient Egyptian. Bakan believes that the Kabbalah arose in the first century AD. This is probably true.
The Hermetic tradition which is equivalent to a European Kabbalah took form as such in Alexandria during the Ptolemaic period when Greek and Egyptian ideas interreacted. Hermiticism evolved from much earlier doctrines centered around the Egyptian god Thoth. The Zohar and Kabbalah then is Hermetic material adapted for Jewish needs. The whole can be traced back to Alexandria.
The Zohar, or primary mystical book, which is attributed to the first and second century Rabbi, Simeon Ben Yohai, was rewritten, edited and whatever in twelfth century Spain by Moses de Leon reaching the Middle East after the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in the sixteenth century. Its influence then was transmitted to the seventeenth century messiah, Sabbatai Zevi.
According to Mr. Bakan Freud was familiar with the Zohar and Kabbalah. I couldn’t go so far as to claim so myself but Mr. Bakan can quote chapter and verse. While Freud claimed to be scientific Mr. Bakan relates almost all of Freud’s psychology to the Kabbalah showing Freud’s dependence on Sabbatianism and Frankism as I indicated in Something Of Value Part I.
page 1
Thus while seeming to be working from a scientific point of view Freud is actually blending a bit of scientific approach acquired from European sources, as there is no science in Jewish culture, with his Jewish religious material to subvert the European moral order. While Freud himself was at war with European civilization the international Jewish organizations extended his field of operations to the United States and Canada. Thus while Freud speaks specifically of Europe he can be taken to mean Euroamerica.
2.
A further background for his psychology, Freud’s central childhood fixation, appears to be the incident in which a European knocked his father’s hat into the gutter which his father meekly, or wisely, depending on your point of view, accepted without a demur. Because of this story Freud wished to avenge himself on Europeans.
Probably at this point Freud assumed the Moses complex that stayed with him to the end of his life. He, Freud, would lead his people to triumph over the Europeans as Moses had led the People out of Egypt while Pharaoh and his army were drowned in the Red Sea.
However, oddly enough, as he claimed to be wholly Jewish, Freud was conflicted in his attitude toward Europeans. As a child he had a Roman Catholic nurse who introduced him to Christianity by taking him to church. Most probably she also tried to wean him from Judaism. This experience had a great effect on young Freud. In the following anecdote, as with most fixations, he seemed to have lost the exact memory of the situation. From Bakan:
Quote:
…that my ‘primary originator’ [of neuroses] was an ugly, elderly, but clever woman who told me a great deal about God and hell, and gave me a high opinion of my own capacities.
On October 15, 1897, he quotes his mother about the old nurse who took care of him when he was very young.
“Of course,” she said “an elderly woman, very shrewd indeed. She was always taking you to church. When you came home you used to preach, and tell us about how God conducted his affairs.
Unquote.
His memory had become confused while it does not appear that he ever exorcised his fixation, for fixation this is. He apparently loved this nurse at the time rather than hated her. When she was later accused and convicted of stealing from the Freuds being dishonored and actually sent to jail, Freud was heartbroken while changing his opinion of her. But, he had had contact with Christian Europeans which left a lasting impression on him that he could not consciously recognize or acknowledge. If I am correct, this impression resurfaced when he came into contact with C.G. Jung who he adopted as a surrogate for this nurse transferring his love and hatred for her to Jung.
page 2.
Just as he loved this nurse there were apparently strong homosexual overtones in his relationship toward Jung. As Freud would have known, the compulsion toward repitition would have been a component in his relationship with Jung as with his nurse although he apparently did not recognize this. So much for his self-analysis. He found reasons to break off with Jung or drive him away while bitterly claiming to be betrayed by Jung just as his nurse had been accused and convicted of theft thus betraying the child Freud. Thus once again his contact with a Christian European was brief ending in sorrow for himself.
A third situation occurred late in life when he wrote Moses And Monotheism. Rather startlingly he claimed that Moses was not Jewish but was an ethnic Egyptian. This means Freud, who had a Mosaic fixation, split his personality between his Christian longings and his professed Jewish identity. Another result would be that monotheism was not a Jewish invention but actually a goyish invention so that all the evil arising from monotheism was not the fault of the Jews but the goys. They had no one to blame but themselves. Thus Freud’s notion of Moses may have been a sort of dream reversal of the facts.
Whatever the results of Freud’s self-analysis back before the turn of the century it is quite clear that he was unable to resolve his fixations nor, one believes, was he aware of their influence on him. He never integrated his personality remaining under the influence of his subconscious fixations. No wonder he ignored the conscious mind.
3.
Like most people Freud had to find his way from adolescence to adulthood and his true ambitions by a circuitous route.
This editor’s note to 1927’s The Future Of An Illusion says this:
Quote:
In the ‘Postscript’ which Freud added in 1935 to his Autobiographical Study he remarked that a ‘significant change’ had come about in his writings during the previous decade. “My interest,” he explained, “after making a long detour through the natural sciences, medicine, and psychotherapy, returned to the cultural problems which fascinated me long before, when I was a youth scarcely old enough for thinking.
Unquote.
page 3.
He undoubtedly refers to his experiences in church with his Christian nurse contrasted with the ‘Christian’ who knocked his father’s hat into the gutter. As Freud is very duplicitous in his use of language one should try to be very sensitive to the meanings behind the obvious meanings of his words. Thus I believe his use of the term ‘cultural problems’ can usually be understood as his inner conflict between his Christianity and Judaism.
As Bakan points out, that while Freud rejected Rabbinical religious Judaism he was deeply immersed in the Jewish mystical tradition of the Zohar and Kabbalah. Thus one can discount his claim to be an ‘atheistic’ Jew. Or atheism has a more specific meaning for him.
I would place the change of emphasis in his writing or, at least the beginning of the change, in 1915. My guess would be that Freud was unaware of the Jewish Revolution until he joined B’nai B’rith in 1895. That knowledge would have shaped the direction of his researches. Whatever science was involved would have been subordinated toward achieving the Revolution. At the same time that he was working out the nature of psychoanalysis as Bakan indicates he must also have been studying the Zohar and Kabbalah. I haven’t read or studied either so I have to rely on Bakan’s analysis of their influence. Bakan traces strong mystical influences running side by side with what passed for science in Freud’s mind. As Freud persistently says he’s going to ignore facts in favor of projections one must assume that there is more mysticism than science in Freud’s construction of psychoanalysis- as he says ‘his creation.’
Bakan points out that Freud transited from the role of physician to that of ‘healer.’ That is analogous to the hands on approach of Christian Fundamentalism. Freud then for all practical purposes abandoned medicine for healing. Then, sometime between 1913 and 1915 he abandoned psychoanalytical research for his ‘cultural’ studies. In other words, he began to apply his psychological studies to the manipulation of cultures through his developing ideas on Group Pschology.
page 4.
Just as Freud learned that there were screen memories that transformed more painful memories into something more acceptable to salve those injured feelings so Freud learned that he could develop ‘screen’ language to serve up unpalatable meanings in palatable ways. Thus what he says has a reasonable meaning to the uninitiated but has a totally different meaning to the initiated- those with the key. In many ways it is the same as a criminal argot. Those who understand the argot can discuss topics openly while only those with the key can twig it. Ya dig?
The key incident that fixed his mind on ‘cultural interests’ was his father’s story of the guy who knocked his hat into the gutter. Freud then, in attempting to disguise his hatred for ‘Christianity’, while secretly admiring it because of his nurse, and his desire to avenge his father and hence, all Jews, through his Moses fixation developed his program. Thus he acting in his own mind altruistically and need feel no guilt.
Freud was very seriously conflicted, also suffering from depression according to Bakan. Hence his purpose was to knock the whole of European Christianity into the gutter, which is to say the actual persons of Europe.
Thus the use of terms like ‘Culture’ and ‘Civilization’ should always be placed in the context of Jews and Europeans. In this manner he avoids the appearance of bigotry and hatred while sounding ‘scientific.’
Now, this obsession and extreme form of vengeance for something that, after all, didn’t happen to him nor did he witness it, might certainly be considered a neurosis, probably a psychosis and possibly a degree of insanity. In reading Bakan there is a hint that he believes Freud had a disordered mind. Indeed, Lang’s Testament Of Dr. Mabuse should be held steadily in mind when reading of Freud’s later career. Lang must have had Freud in mind when he filmed Mabuse.
page 5.
Lang,s departure from the denouement of the Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari ended on the conventional note of the victim, or whistle blower, being declared insane. Lang reversed this by making the perpetrator, Caligari/Mabuse insane as in real life with Freud. Further the disciple of Mabuse, the head of the asylum, Dr. Baum was also declared insane. Although the problem appears to be solved the threat of the conspiracy continuing from the cell now occupied by Dr. Baum looms like a spectre over the ending.
While Freud was never incarcerated as he should have been, he was imprisoned in his mind no less than Drs. Mabuse and Baum or the character in Gradiva. It is interesting that Freud had a plaster cast of the relief on which the story of Gradiva was based that he displayed prominently in his office. The story obviously had greater significance for him than his ‘objective’ analysis of the story would lead one to suspect.
Thus from 1915 to 1935 like Dr. Mabuse he sat imprisoned in his projection of reality churning out page after page, volume after volume of criminal plans for the subversion of civilization which is to say of Euroamerican civilization but not Jewish culture. He makes a definite point of that illusion of whose future he is discussing applies only to Europe and Christianity rather than religion in general which would include his own Judaism. At this point he is not aware of the burgeoning Wahabi Moslemism so that his message is that Jewish beliefs are real while Christian beliefs and Scientific reality are illusory. One has to penetrate the screen language and convert it into the proper psychological intent.
As David Bakan points out Freud lived his whole life in a sort of Jewish ghetto having very little contact with Europeans.
His choice of Jung as the potential heir to his ‘creation’ may have had as much to do with a desperate attempt to reestablish a connection similar to that of his childhood Christian nurse. Thus his overtures to Jung while under extreme stress were driven from his unconscious while he himself was unaware of his true motivations. This would have been an expression of a repetition compulsion. Thus as his nurse disappeared from his life under discreditable circumstances he replicated the situation in Jung. His attempt to convert Moses (hence himself) into an Egyptian may have been a last attempt to replicate and resolve this early contact with Christianity. His view of European civilization then was filtered wholly through a Jewish projection of possibilities. He really had no intimate knowledge of European mores.
page 6.
From 1915 on, then, his writings were obsessed with hatred for Euroamericans and a desire to wreak vengeance on them by destroying the basis of their civilization. His ideas for the subversion of European civilization were carried to America by the international B’nai B’rith organization to be adopted and employed there. In addition Revolutionary plans executed in Europe in 1917 were financed and organized by the world Jewish government in the US. While functioning according to local conditions the Revolution was conducted an an international scale. Act locally, think globally. Hence Jewish revolutionaries left the US for Russia after 1918 to aid in the consolidation going on there. This is really an incredible if repressed story in the Freudian cultural manner. Very Freudian that such phenomenal criminal activity that were best left invisible was repressed into humanity’s unconscious.
At this point I think it might be well to examine Freud’s vision of the unconscious in more detail. While there can be little doubt that there is a subconscious function to the human mind usually referred to as the unconscious after Freud that had been an accepted fact amongst scientific researchers for a hundred years. The exact nature had not been determined nor does Freud determine it. His view is merely a projection of his own conscious and subconscious needs.
In David Bakan’s view Freud had made ‘a compact with Satan.’
page 7.
Certainly not in the literal sense but in the figurative sense that Freud would do anything, abandon any moral precepts, to achieve fame. Bakan points out the superscription to Freud’s ‘Interpretation Of Dreams’ quote from Virgil: Flectere si nesqueo superos, Acheronta movebo. Translated as: If the gods above are no use to me, then I’ll move all hell. Freud further blurred the line between good and evil or amalgamated the two from the influence of Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank who cast off all morality. Since Freud has been successful in altering both Euroamerican and Jewish morality toward these immoral or amoral beliefs by false ‘Satinic’ criminal doctrines it is imperative to debunk his personal projection of the subconscious.
As he ‘made a pact’ with powers below- the unconscious- against the powers above- the conscious- he invested his projection of the unconscious with the attributes of ‘Satan’ or evil. This view of the subconscious is a self-serving fiction not based on any science.
He sets up the unconscious as an autonomous entity with the main function of blighting the conscious. He give the powers of hell supremacy over the powers of heaven. This notion is mere fantasy; it cannot be. There is no possibility that the function of the subonscious doesn’t have a positive function in and of itself and in relation to the conscious. If you actually think about it for a moment you will realize this must be true; every part of the body works to the benefit of the whole; there can be no exception for the subconscious.
Now, Nature is not flawless. The order that the religious seem to find is not there. Nature functions in a much more haphazard way. It takes only one peek through the Hubble to see that.
However the relationship between the conscious and subconscious is delicate and easily disrupted especially in the early years of the organism when it has no experience with which to evaluate the events occurring to it. The Ego and Anima are not part of the subconscious and possibly not of the conscious but function through the conscious and unconscious minds.
page 8.
The conscious mind perceives phenomena and acts on them but the terrific inflow of impressions is more than it can deal with so the day’s input is received into the subconscious for further reference. Thus a major function of dreams in the sleeping state is to review and process, organize the information into a coherent whole for future reference. The subconscious then is able to compare incoming information with experience for response. When the conscious and subconscious minds are attuned, that is to say the personality is integrated, the system works properly, otherwise the response is distorted by one’s fixations. This is very easy to see in Freud.
However, especially in youth when experience is scant, the mind may be challenged with some devastating new experience for which there are no reference points. If an appropriate response is made there is no problem. If an inappropriate response is made against which future experience is in variance, the earlier resp0nse which has become fixated will over rule an attempt at an appropriate response and substitute the fixated inappropriate response. Thus the current response will constellate around these earlier fixations which gives one bizarre symbolic dreams and inappropriate responses.
The inappropriate response will usally result from an insult to the Ego or, in other words, the Sexual Identity. In turn the response to this insult will be expressed in a sexual affect.
The purpose of psychoanalysis, which is real science, although Freud didn’t see that, is to locate and exorcize them allowing the conscious and subconscious aspects of the mind to function properly as a unit. Dreams are actually important because they are an analysis of life’s experence providing responses. None of this, of course takes in intelligence, discipline and other functions of mind and character that Freud dismisses as irrelevant.
page 9.
Now, in the cultural war between Judaism and Euroamerica, or as Jews express it, Christianity, Freud infused the Jewish subconscious with a disregard for morality a la Jacob Frank in relation to Sabbatai Zevi. Any evil was excused so long as it seemed to advance the cultural war. While this infusion may not have reached down throught the ranks of Jewry- which is to say they behaved in a certain way but didn’t know why- the ideas were thoroughly planted in the minds of what Henry Ford would call the international Jew.
The cold war between Jews and Europeans became a shooting war in the wake of the Great War. Men, money and munitions flowed in a wide steady stream from the United States to Russia. Coordinators established themselves in strategic locations. If one reads restricted, censored literature the impression is made that horrible anti-Semites harassed and hated innocent unresisting Jews. Jews may have been killed but they were not innocent and unresisting. To the contrary freed from guilt, or supposedly so, by Freudian/Sabbatian/Frankist precepts, abattoirs were established throughout Russia where unsuspecting Russians were led in one door and flowed out the other in liquid form. This is not the place to dwell on gruesome details. The literature exists but the collective Jewish mind has repressed the deeds into the collective unconscious. In other words, history has been denied and censored so that the crimes can’t be known. Actually Whittaker Chambers, the Red spy, translated a number of these books concerning the Hungarian atrocities of Bela Kun and Tibor Szmuelly, but those are impossible to come by. All this slaughter was made possible and justified by the doctrines of Freud.
In relation to the 1919 atrocities of the Jews in Hungary and the response which expelled them from power it should be noted that Israeli troops were recently introduced into Hungary to reestablish the tyranny of Kun and Szmuelly. Don’t ever think the historical memories are short.
Freud sat comfortably in Vienna looking on as the carnage occurred. If, as believed, the tenor of his writing changed in 1925 that was probably due to the death of Lenin in 1924. By 1925 it was apparent that the Jewish Revolution was on shaky grounds as Stalin began his rise to power so that Freud may have renewed his cultural attack or, on the other hand, as 1928 was the terminal projected year of the Jewish Revolution Freud may have been celebrating the death of European Civilization when he published The Future Of An Illusion. By the illusion he meant European Christianity and he meant European civilization was finished. The Rome of the Popes would have fallen.
page 10.
In Illusion and Civilization And Its Discontents Freud makes us believe that the malcontents of civilization are synonymous with civilization rather than being a minority that always exists during great revolutionary changes. Freud whose Judaism was challenged by the Scientific Revolution as much as Christianity or Moslemism must have been aware of the reactionary ‘instinct’ as he himself was in reaction to both European Christianity and the Scientific Revolution.
David Bakan closes his volume with these words:
Quote:
…under the ruse of “playing the devil” (Freud) served Sabbatian interests. In this respect, however, just as Freud may be regarded as having infused Kabbalah into science, so may he be regarded as having incorporated science into Kabbalah. Sabbatian-wise, by closing the gap between Jewish culture and Western Enlightenment he acts as the Messiah nor only for Jewish culture but for Western culture as well.
Unquote.
Note that Western Enlightenment is reduced to Western culture putting it on a par with Jewish culture which is a tacit admission that there is no science in Jewish culture and none is wanted in Western culture. Language as a screen.
Bakan’s is a hefty statement. Under the guise of the Devil Freud becomes the Messiah not only for Jews but for Euroamericans. Truly in this scenario good comes from evil, assuming that the Messiah is good. In case you missed it, Freud according to Bakan was the Second Coming. Narrowing the gap between the two cultures means the imposition of Jewish culture as the Chosen or Abelite people over Western or Cainite culture. Thus the age old goal of reversing the Cain and Abel story so that Cain is obligated to give preference to Abel is accomplished.
page 11.
By infusing Kabbalah into science, science has been subjugated to the unscientific Jewish culture so that the Catholic/Jewish situation of Medieval Europe has been restored. The Enlightenment that invalidated Judaism, Christianity and Moslemism has been obliterated, hence the revival of religion happening today. Thus in Bakan’s eyes and according to Freud’s intent Judaism has deconstructed Euroamerican society so the reconstruction according to Jewish cultural mores can commence.
The result has been accomplished by the destruction of the Scientific Consciousness as there is little of science in Freud’s cultural writings. He just says what he believes and wants you to believe and asserts it as fact. As always there were some Westerners who resented the encroachment of the strict limits of science. Rider Haggard in his Allan Quatermain made that as clear as possible. The topic is the dominant theme of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Tarzan novels. Henry Ford and his mass production methods was a symbol of that rebellion against the strict limits set by the clock. Some denounced it as Taylorism; but with each passing decade the West became more acclimated to the change as the reactionary mood became acclimated to the new reality.
Freud invents ‘instincts’ and their ‘renunciation’ to give sense to his arguments; the ‘renunciation of instincts’ almost sounds scientific but it isn’t. There are no instincts nor does Freud even attempt to demonstrate their existence. Like the rest of Freud’s psychology the notion is just something Freud made up. As always he notes only the negative societal destructive effects. He says nothing of the ‘instinct’ to be around people which would conflict with his instinct against civilization- the last is a vague enough term the way he uses it. But, as Lang points out the hypnotic spell cast by Mabuse negates criticism so that the head psychologist, the objective scientist himself, Baum, suspends critical judgment falling under the spell to the point of becoming a disciple just as Lang himself did. Indeed, as the West has. Hitler was a blessing in disguise for the Jewish Revolution. The guilt caused by Hitler completely disarmed the West allowing the Reconstruction of Western mores to proceed at a faster pace than would have been possible without Hitler. Indeed, the Nazi Era drove the entire pyschotic Jewish Revolution to the shores of the United States beginning in the early thirties. Thus the deconstruction of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America was assured.
To return to 1919.
I, Dynamo 