“The so-called 'Left-Hand Path' - that of Kaulas, Siddhas and Viras - combines the... Tantric worldview with a doctrine of the Übermensch which would put Nietzsche to shame... The Vira - which is to say: the 'heroic' man of Tantrism - seeks to sever all bonds, to overcome all duality between good and evil, honor and shame, virtue and guilt. Tantrism is the supreme path of the absolute absence of law - of shvecchacarī, a word meaning 'he whose law is his own will'." ― Julius Evola, The Path of Cinnabar.

“It is necessary to have “watchers” at hand who will bear witness to the values of Tradition in ever more uncompromising and firm ways, as the anti-traditional forces grow in strength. Even though these values cannot be achieved, it does not mean that they amount to mere “ideas.” These are measures…. Let people of our time talk about these things with condescension as if they were anachronistic and anti-historical; we know that this is an alibi for their defeat. Let us leave modern men to their “truths” and let us only be concerned about one thing: to keep standing amid a world of ruins.” ― Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World: Politics, Religion, and Social Order in the Kali Yuga.

“We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who died at his post during the eruption of Vesuvius because someone forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one that can not be taken from a man.” ― Oswald Spengler, Man and Technics: A Contribution to a Philosophy of Life.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Sunday, December 25, 2011

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu: A Few Remarks on Democracy

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corneliu_Zelea_Codreanu

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu (Romanian pronunciation: [korˈnelju ˈzele̯a koˈdre̯anu]; born Corneliu Zelinski and commonly known as Corneliu Codreanu;[4] September 13, 1899 – November 30, 1938) was a Romanian politician of the far right, the founder and charismatic leader of the Iron Guard or The Legion of the Archangel Michael (also known as the Legionary Movement), an ultra-nationalist and violently antisemitic organization active throughout most of the interwar period. Generally seen as the main variety of local fascism, and noted for its mystical and Romanian Orthodox-inspired revolutionary message, it grew into an important actor on the Romanian political stage, coming into conflict with the political establishment and the democratic forces, and often resorting to terrorism. The Legionaries traditionally referred to Codreanu as Căpitanul ("The Captain"), and he held absolute authority over the organization until his death. ...On November 30, it was announced that Codreanu, the Nicadori and the Decemviri had been shot after trying to flee custody the previous night.[111] The details were revealed much later: it is most likely that the fourteen persons had been transported from their prison and executed (strangled or garroted and shot) by the Gendarmerie around Tâncăbeşti (near Bucharest), and it was shown that their bodies had been buried in the courtyard of the Jilava prison.[112][113] Their bodies were dissolved in acid, and placed under seven tons of concrete.

From: http://www.ucis.pitt.edu/eehistory/H200Readings/Topic5-R3.html 

Selection from: "Man, State and Society in East European History" Stephen Fischer-Galati, ed. pages 327-330 Translated by Stephen Fischer-Galati from Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, "Pentru Legionuri" (Bucharest: Totul Pentru Tara, l937), pp. 385-87, 396-98.

Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

[The less violent and less visionary solutions proposed by the fascists were more palatable to the East European masses than were the Communist solutions. Among the several brands of fascism that flourished in Eastern Europe between the wars, the most representative of the historical tradition was the Rumanian populist variety expounded by the Iron Guard, which blamed the oppression of the peasant on the Jews and the "Jew-like" ruling establishment. Fascist populism rejected the democratic process and advocated reliance on the "Volk" for the attainment of the fascist revolution in Rumania. The following excerpt from the writings of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, the leader of the Iron Guard, is characteristic of the views of the Rumanian fascists, who attracted a considerable following in the countryside and among industrial workers and intellectuals in the 1930s.]

I should like to make a few remarks, derived from daily experience, in a manner that can be understood by any young legionary or worker.

We wear the clothes and embrace the forms of democracy. Are they worth anything? We don't know yet. But we do know one thing. We know it for sure. That some of the largest and most civilized nations of Europe have discarded those clothes and have acquired new ones. Did they get rid of them forever? Other nations are doing their best to dispose of them and to get new ones also. Why? Have all nations gone mad? Are the Rumanian politicians the only wise men in the world? Somehow I doubt it.

Those who have changed them and those who want to change them must each have their own reasons.

But why should we concern ourselves with other nations' reasons? Let us rather concern ourselves with the reasons that would make us Rumanians ready to change the clothes of democracy.

If we have no reasons to do so, if the reasons are no good, then we shall keep the clothes, even should all of Europe get rid of them.

However, they are no good for us either, because:

1. Democracy destroys the unity of the Rumanian nation, dividing it among political parties, making Rumanians hate one another, and thus exposing a divided people to the united congregation of Jewish power at a difficult time in the nation's history.

This argument alone is so persuasive as to warrant the discarding of democracy in favor of anything that would ensure our unity--or life itself. For disunity means death.

2. Democracy makes Rumanian citizens out of millions of Jews by making them the Rumanians' equals. By giving them the same legal rights. Equality? What for? We have been here for thousands of years. Plow and weapon in hand. With our labors and blood. Why equality with those who have been here for only one hundred, ten, or even five years? Let's look at the past: We created this state. Let's look at the future: We Rumanians are fully responsible for Greater Rumania. They have nothing to do with it. What could be the responsibility of Jews, in the history books, for the disappearance of the Rumanian state?

Thus: no equality in labor, sacrifice, and struggle for the creation of the state and no equal responsibility for its future. Equality? According to an old maxim: Equality is to treat unequally the unequal. What are the reasons for the Jews' demanding equal treatment, equal political rights with the Rumanians?

3. Democracy is incapable of perseverance. Since it is shared by political parties that rule for one, two, or three years, it is unable to conceive and carry out plans of longer duration. One party annuls the plans and efforts of the other. What is conceived and built by one party today is destroyed by another tomorrow.

In a country in which much has to be built, in which building is indeed the primary historical requirement, this disadvantage of democracy constitutes a true danger. It is a situation similar to that which prevails in an establishment where masters are changed every year, each new master bringing in his own plans, ruining what was done by some, and starting new things, which will in turn be destroyed by tomorrow's masters.

4. Democracy prevents the politician's fulfillment of his obligations to the nation. Even the most well-meaning politician becomes, in a democracy, the slave of his supporters, because either he satisfies their personal interests or they destroy his organization. The politician lives under the tyranny and permanent threat of the electoral bosses.

He is placed in a position in which he must choose between the termination of his lifetime work and the satisfaction of the demands of party members. And the politician, given such a choice, opts for the latter. He does so not out of his own pocket, but out of that of the country. He creates jobs, sets up missions, commissions, sinecures--all rostered in the nation's budget--which put increasingly heavy pressures on a tired people.

5. Democracy cannot wield authority, because it cannot enforce its decisions. A party cannot move against itself, against its members who engage in scandalous malfeasance, who rob and steal, because it is afraid of losing its members. Nor can it move against its adversaries, because in so doing it would risk exposure of its own wrongdoings and shady business.

6. Democracy serves big business. Because of the expensive, competitive character of the multiparty system, democracy requires ample funds. It therefore naturally becomes the servant of the big international Jewish financiers, who enslave her by paying her.

In this manner, a nation's fate is placed in the hands of a clique of bankers.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

A Letter on Saddam Hussein

This is another letter I just sent to my friend's private email group, basically backing him up against a handful regurgitating debunked arguments for US intervention in Iraq vs. Saddam Hussein:

Saddam Hussein brought Iraq into the 20th century, created an economic infrastructure, brought in "modern" technology, medicine, etc. and developed a national educational system that drastically increased general literacy in Iraq for adults and children.

Although he had stylistic similarities to Stalin, I see him in terms of his actual achievements more similar to Mussolini, and I think he came into conflict with the "Far West" (mostly the Anglo-American sphere) on much of the same terms as Mussolini and Hitler.

Somewhere there is an actual quote from Churchill to the effect that Hitler's first crime was against the international financial system, by opting out of the international finance networks conducting international trade directly in quantity in bartered materials, and becoming as domestically self-sufficient as possible. There are weird examples of this, such as American gas stations offering free Honer Harmonicas made in Germany for buying a specified amount of gasoline because they came in part of international materials bartering for petroleum with Germany. Hitler was establishing National autonomy that would not be subjected to international financial manipulation or pressures, much like Mussolini had already done in Italy. When the League of Nations enacted trade embargoes against Italy in retaliation for Italy's invasion of Abyssinia/Ethiopia it had little effect in Italy - Mussolini had developed the infrastructure to the point of National self-sufficiency that the embargoes had no substantial effect. Sound familiar with Saddam? If you look up "autarky" on wikipedia it includes a list of just about everyone the USA has considered a villian and gone to war with at some point or another. Apparently if a small state aims toward self-reliance refusing to be milked dry by the usual trans-national financial parasite institutions and networks they get moved to the top of the hit list.

Saddam stopped playing lapdog to the USA, who had been manipulating Iraq and Iran against each other for decades, probably to ensure regional instability in favor of Saudi Arabia and Israel. Saddam was and always had been a more "secular" albeit nominally Muslim leader. Anyone who followed information on Al Qaeda or Saddam before 9/11 was aware their relationship was one of overt hostility - al qaeda making several assassination attempts against Saddam and there was an ongoing bloody "shadow war" between Iraqi intelligence and Al Qaeda (as well as other radicalized Islamic groups) for years. The USA didn't invade Iraq because of connections with Al Qaeda, WMDs, or to "Free" the "people" of Iraq any more than they went to war with Hitler to "save" the Jews. There were a number of things bringing the relationship with Saddam to breaking point with the USA - he was on the verge of pegging petroleum to the EURO instead of the Dollar, and other things - basically not being a lapdog, which is unforgivable. That and his bellicose swaggering, lobbing SCUDs at Israel during "Desert Storm" etc.

The so-called "liberation" of Iraq is a train wreck, probably worse than the so-called "liberation" of Italy from Mussolini. Whatever anyone may say against Mussolini, he was a successful and popular leader for over a decade before Hitler even came into power, had he allied with Engand instead of Hitler he probably would have been in power as long or longer than Franco. Mussolini also essentially eliminated the Mafia and Mafia-controlled judges, politicians etc. until they were put back in place after the "liberation" by the USA who collaborated with them in the invasion in the first place. What kind of political stability or integrity has Italy had since Mussolini? Its corruption is the comical section of international news.

The invasion of Iraq by the USA was self-serving only made worse by its own incompetence. Even if a traditional society wanted USA-style free-market "democracy" - which it probably doesn't - democracy requires a middle class, which requires an economic infrastructure, which requires security - which in a country with sharp religious or ethnic divisions can only be maintained by a strongarm leader - which is in such cases better for everyone insofar as he is capable of actually enforcing punishment if they kill each other. The US re-construction of Iraq was a bad joke - you have people without homes, electricity, or running water, much less businesses and any kind of 'status quo' to maintain - being ushered into "voting" for pre-selected and controlled candidates that can't set foot into an open street without being assassinated.

Ironically, if someone wants to argue that the real enemy of the USA was the Afghani Taliban, the best ally the USA could have had against the Taliban was Iran. The USA media maintains the constant portrait of Iran as dangerous paranoid Muslim religious fanatics on the verge of having nuclear weapons, as if Israel and Saudi Arabia aren't dangerous paranoid religious fanatics with nuclear weapons.

Of course Oil is a huge factor in all of this, but it is also worth looking at the opium export of Afghanistan, which is huge. Opium was largely suppressed by the Taliban, since the USA invasion opium production has increased over 200% if I have my numbers right.

The world runs on oil, weapons, and narcotics. Cash is just the wrapping-paper. At least historically Dictators usually know how to fix something they have broken, or at least how to establish order after the fact. What we have is just more mindless short-sighted profiteering disguised as idealistic nonsense leaving disaster and chaos in its wake.

Business as usual.


A Letter on "Evolution"

This was written to a good friend of mine of many years, he’s German, in his 80s, and his family left Germany for Chile when the tide shifted against Hitler. I’m on his email list comprised mostly of Germans over 80 years old from various places in Europe, S. America, and the USA. Most of them are from various political stripes, many “liberal”, mostly mainstream. My friend is very well-educated and very thoughtful, but you won’t hear him overtly praising anything like National Socialism. Mostly he comes across as a mainstream European conservative-socialist vs. American-style capitalism/consumerism.He baits his fellow senior citizen friends into debates over various subjects, especially since many of them are religious (which he detests) or have a Pollyanna view of the world, which he also detests. This was an email I sent to his list in the course of their discussion of evolution vs. mainstream Christian objections to Darwin:

The most amusing part of all this is that the Catholic Church has officially acknowledged evolutionary theory for some time and expanded their doctrine of creation to allow for Darwinian evolutionary theory as working within their theological worldview - that "evolution" is God's handiwork. It is only fundamentalist Islam and Protestant sects (such as dominate the religious element in US politics) that view Darwinian evolutionary theory as a threat.

So the next time you encounter a fundamentalist Christian railing against evolutionary theory, ask them, "How does it feel to be lagging behind the Catholic Church when it comes to science?"

The only thing I find objectionable about a man/ape evolutionary link is the embarrassment I feel on behalf of apes for being linked to the vile human race at any point in evolutionary history.

I'm essentially anti-modernist, highly skeptical of most of what the so-called "enlightenment" contributed to the current of Western intellectual history - such as the idea of "progress", human "equality", "the blank slate", the "noble savage", "democracy", etc., but in reality, as understood and practiced by actual scientists, that "evolution" does not imply "progress" (in the Enlightenment and Victorian sense). Adaptive changes are random. An adaptation that contributed to survival at one stage of "evolution" may contribute to a species extinction at another stage, so there is no real conflict with a doctrine of "the fall", or with the idea of devolving "ages" and cycles of time expressed in mythological terms in most Indo-European traditions - the Vedic "Kali Yuga", Hesiod's "Iron Age" and the "Age of the Wolf" mentioned in the Norse Eddas.

It is entirely likely that quantitive cumulative scientific "progress" is operating alongside an escalating qualitive devolution in human character and general intelligence. What "adaptively" becomes of a species that invents machines to do their "thinking" for them? In the early-modern era there were arguments against the printed book, that it would contribute to the decline of intelligence because men would no longer make the systematic disciplined mental effort to read and remember the contents of manuscripts that they could not keep for themselves, and sometimes had to make long perilous journeys to read. Famous scholars of the ancient and medieval world were known to have memorized long complex historical and philosophical works, being able to quote them exactly and in detail from memory. With the advent of the printed book men became content to know the knowledge was resting on their shelves, they no longer have to "know" it in a committed way, they have it stored at home and can dig it out when needed. Now people have pocket sized computers they carry with them and can look up anything they need to know on the internet, thus they no longer need to "know" anything. What becomes of "memory" for these people, or for the children coming up in a world where this is the norm and nothing is expected of them, intellectually? How does someone "reason" from no knowledge.

One of the weakest ideas that entered the mainstream of western thought in the so-called "enlightenment" of the 18th century is that of "the blank slate" - that humans are born with a mind that is "tabula rasa" - to be filled with knowledge and education like a blank notebook. I think they had it perfectly backwards - people aren't born with a blank slate, but now they are committed to erase what little they are born with, including basic instincts for individual and collective self-preservation, so most of them are walking around with "slates" (minds) that by any other historical and cultural standards are indeed BLANK.

At most times in history it seems the thinking minority observed the degenerate state of the general run of humanity and felt warranted to think they were in the "end times" of a long cycle of devolution. I think this time we may be right.


Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Hitler's Economic Revolution

For some reason I never archived this here. This was originally posted on another list c.2009, and subsequently archived on the IRONLIGHT blog.

Hitler’s Economic Revolution
by James D. Sass

In response to a bulletin in circulation I am posting this small fragment of a much longer article on the 20th century that I wrote in 1992 that I am in the process of rewriting, expanding and updating for a collection of essays on social/political topics. (Another earlier part of this longer essay was adapted for the afterword to the Underworld Amusements reprint of Nietzsche’s The Antichrist.) JDS

{SNIP}….Therefore the media-created picture of the Nazis as abject monsters and the German people either as barbarians or gullible fools and sadists, must be transcended in order to examine the years in which the monetarists emerged as a force in world affairs. Since reason and our knowledge of human nature and history forces us to reject the notion of one set of human beings as the epitome of evil while another set are the epitome of heroic liberators imbued with all the ideal qualities of human justice, there is no escaping the fact that the history of the twentieth century must be reexamined. ...Until the record of the last century, including specifically the distortion of historical events and personages in post-Weimar Germany, is corrected, we will be unable to make sense of our times.

....Once the fictitious layers of histrionic personality attacks have been peeled off to reveal the essential reality, then one must peel off the distortions of motives and events. The whole trajectory is suspect when viewed from a detached perspective. Hitler is a psychopath; Stalin is a sympathetic heavy-drinking avuncular figure, (yet somehow boding ill for the future); Churchill is the heroic archetypal Englishman fighting for freedom with his back to the wall; Roosevelt is the American aristocrat prepared to sacrifice his life for freedom, etc. The current view of Weimar Germany as a glorious Mecca of free artistic expression and culture is a gross distortion of the degradation and anarchic conditions that called out for renovation and renewal, which was just what the National Socialists brought to that cesspool of economic and social chaos, rapidly transforming Germany into the leading industrial nation in Europe with restored self-respect. The current mythology of Hitler as a demonic lunatic bent on world domination is perhaps the most pernicious distortion of facts in the whole spectrum of this time period. The irony of it being that England was in reality the country that had been and continued to be the country of global domination. As Hitler pointed out, “A minority of 45 million Englishmen rule 600 million inhabitants of the British Empire.” Yet according to status quo history Hitler’s alleged desire for “world domination” was a lunatic project that had to be stopped. What in fact did Hitler want? What was his world-view? What was his critique? How far was he right? What went wrong? All these questions must be answered within a framework allowing us to see the crucial matter of how and by what structural and dynamic methods did trans-national financial power come to dominate and control political entities.

It is worth noting that among the famous 20 Points of Hitler’s National Socialist Party was the commitment to “break the bondage of interest.” It is this that lies at the heart of the convulsive tremors that went through middle Europe in the twenties and thirties. It was also the failure of that era to realize what forces were in play, unleashed by the first significant attempt to allow a nationalist state power to control its own wealth system. In his monumental Military History of the Western World, J.F.C. Fuller, (the British Fascist, Major-General in the British Army, and respected military historian), writes, “Among these artists of power were two men possessed of a new philosophy – Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. They challenged the myth of Economic Man, the fundamental factor in Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism, and exalted in its stead the myth of the Heroic Man…. In Hitler’s eyes the aims of international Capitalism and Marxism were one and the same. Both, he said, repudiated ‘the aristocratic principle of Nature’; both were destroyers of quality, not of things but of life…. Unless this struggle between these two myths – Economic Man and Heroic Man – is accepted and understood, the cataclysm which in 1939 submerged the world is almost incomprehensible and the age to which it gave birth little more than the plaything of chance.” Aside from a natural gift for leadership, continues Fuller, “The demons that exalted him were the Treaty of Versailles, which bore no resemblance to Wilson’s Fourteen Points… the invasion of the Ruhr by Poincare in 1923, which debauched the German currency and wiped out the German middle classes; the influx of £750m. in foreign loans between 1924 and 1930, which debauched the German people, and lastly the crash on the American stock exchange, which begat the world-wide monetary depression of 1929-31. In 1930, 17,500,000 Germans were supported by the state, and in 1931 the Communist electorate in Germany rose to over five million. In that year the American journalist H.R. Knickerbocker… estimated that at least 15 million Germans were partially starving; that two-thirds of the voters were hostile to Capitalism, and more than half were hostile to the existing political system called democracy. In the following year these calamities led to Hitler’s triumph… Save by those who witnessed it, the exultation of the masses on Hitler’s advent to power is unbelievable… Whether this extraordinary man was devil or madman, as his enemies proclaimed him to be, in no way belittles the fact that he stamped out Bolshevism in Germany and accomplished astonishing things.”

Fuller further describes Hitler’s financial reforms as of foremost importance among these astonishing accomplishments, “Hitler’s goal was Napoleonic: to establish a German Continental System under the aegis of Germany. Also his means were not far removed from those of the great emperor: to liberate Germany from the shackles of international loan-capitalism, to unite all Germanic peoples into the Third Reich, and to establish in eastern Europe what he called the German Lebensraum (living space) which he considered as essential to the economic security of Germany as Napoleon had considered the confederation of the Rhine essential to the strategic security of France. Hitler held that, as long as the international monetary system was based on gold, a nation which cornered gold could impose its will on those who lacked it. This could be done by drying up their sources of exchange, and thereby compelling them to accept loans on interest in order to distribute their wealth – their production. He said: ‘The community of the nation does not live by the fictitious value of money, but by real production which in its turn gives value to money. This production is the real cover of the currency, and not a bank or a safe full of gold.’”

Fuller continues by outlining Hitler’s reforms, “He decided: (1) To refuse foreign interest-bearing loans, and to base currency on production instead of gold. (2) To obtain imports by direct exchange of goods – barter – and subsidize exports when necessary. (3) to put a stop to what was called ‘freedom of the exchanges’ – that is, license to gamble in currencies and shift private fortunes from one currency to another according to the political situation. And (4) To create money when men and material were available for work instead of running into debt by borrowing it.” This had a tremendous impact on the trans-national financiers, “Because the life of international finance depended upon the issue of interest-bearing loans to nations in economic distress, Hitler’s economics spelt its ruination. If he were allowed to succeed, other nations would certainly follow his example, and should a time come when all non-gold-holding governments exchanged goods for goods, not only would borrowing cease and gold lose its power, but the money-lenders would have to close shop… This financial pistol was pointed more particularly at the United States, because they held the bulk of the world’s supply of gold, and because their mass-production system necessitated the export of about 10 percent of their products in order to avoid unemployment. Further, because the brutalities meted out to German Jews by Hitler understandably had antagonized American Jewish financiers, six months after Hitler became Chancellor, Samuel Untermyer, a wealthy New York attorney, threw down the challenge. He proclaimed ‘holy war’ against National Socialism and called for an economic boycott of German goods, shipping, and services.” Hitler’s reforms also had a tremendous impact on his domestic economy, further arousing international resentment. Fuller continues, “Between 1933 and 1936, Hitler had reduced German unemployment from six millions to one, and prosperity had so far returned that… in 1936 Winston Churchill is reported to have said… ‘Germany is getting too strong and we must smash her.’” Fuller astutely observes of the world situation at this juncture, “When we consider these economic causes of the Second World War it must be borne in mind… that the struggle between the two economic systems is not a question of right and wrong but of survival values.”

Other political events brought the impending conflict to a head; Germany withdrew from the League of Nations in 1933, negotiating with Poland to secure the eastern flank, repudiated the arms provision of the Versailles Treaty and reintroduced conscription in 1935; then after dishonorably failing to fulfill treaty agreements with Italy over Abyssinia, the League of Nations was not only discredited but instrumental in driving Mussolini into strategic alliance with Hitler.

These and other crisis, Fuller writes, “…generated a violent propaganda against Hitler. Foreign affairs lost all objectivity and became wrapped in an explosive animosity which so perturbed Dr. Goebbels… that he appealed to the American Ambassador in Berlin, who replied that the ‘most crucial thing that stood between any betterment of American Press relationships was the Jewish question.” The situation deteriorated when a young Polish Jew assassinated the third secretary at the German Embassy in Paris (1938), precipitating an immediate pogrom against the Jews in Berlin, which added fuel to the anti-German propaganda mills in the United states.

Fuller quotes at length the very revealing report to the Polish Foreign Office from Count Jerzy Potoki, the Polish Ambassador to Washington, dated January 12, 1939; “Public opinion in America nowadays… expresses itself in increasing hatred of everything… connected with National Socialism. Above all, propaganda here is entirely in Jewish hands… when bearing public ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people here have no real knowledge of the true state of affairs in Europe…. It is interesting to observe that in this carefully thought-out campaign – which is conducted primarily against National Socialism – no reference at all is made to Soviet Russia. If that country is mentioned, it is referred to in a friendly manner and people are given the impression that Soviet Russia is part of the democratic group of countries. Thanks to the astute propaganda, public sympathy in the USA is entirely on the side of Red Spain. Side by side with this propaganda an artificial war-panic is created…. No effort is spared to impress upon the American mind that in the event of a war the USA must take an active part in a struggle for freedom and democracy. President Roosevelt was first in the field to give expression to his hatred of Fascism. He had a two-fold purpose in mind: firstly, he wanted to divert American public opinion from difficult and complicated domestic problems… Secondly, by creating a war-panic… he wanted to induce Americans to endorse his huge program of armaments…. Furthermore, the brutal treatment meted out to the Jews in Germany as well as the problem of the refugees are both factors which intensify the existing hatred of everything connected with German National Socialism. In this campaign of hatred, individual Jewish intellectuals such as Bernard Baruch, Lehman, Governor of New York State, Felix Frankfurter, the newly appointed Supreme Court Judge, Morgenthau, the Financial Secretary, and other well known personal friends of Roosevelt have taken a prominent part. All of them want the President to become the protagonist of human liberty, religious freedom and the right of free speech…. This particular group of people, who are all in highly placed American official positions and who are desirous of being representatives of ‘true Americanism’, and as ‘Champions of Democracy’, are, in point of fact, linked with international Jewry by ties incapable of being torn asunder. For international Jewry – so intimately concerned with the interests of its own race – President Roosevelt’s ‘ideal’ role as a champion of human rights was indeed a godsend. In this way Jewry was able not only to establish a dangerous center in the New World for the dissemination of hatred and enmity, but it also succeeded in dividing the world into two warlike camps. The whole problem is being tackled in a most mysterious manner. Roosevelt has been given the power to enable him to enliven American foreign policy and at the same time to create huge reserves in armaments for a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for.”……..{SNIP}
….(c)2009 JDS.

Monday, December 12, 2011

1592 Geneva Bible (Folio)

It's been awhile since I've posted any Antiquarian Bibliophilia eye-candy. The beauty of real antiquarian books cannot be simulated, especially the wear and decay. I prefer things to show their age rather than looking as if they have been Hermetically sealed in a time capsule. I have actually handled one of these, although in far worse condition (it was a bookseller's horror story, involving Vaseline and plastic-wrap). This copy looks like it has period hand-copied sections pasted in where the original pages were damaged or missing. This one is currently on ebay for $4K+. A beautiful albeit somewhat distressed Geneva Bible.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Druse/Cluster Quartz Rock Crystal Skull and Snakes

Nice piece from China; 12.2" Druse/Cluster Quartz Rock Crystal Skull and Snakes w/Ruby Eyes, Red Coral Tongues. Personally I would have opted out of the Coral tongues, verging on too much, but overall a magnificent piece. Now on ebay at $28,900.00

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Old mail from James Mason and The Universal Order circa mid-late 80s

Speaking of Orthodox Gonfaloniers....

A belated Thank You to a devoted COSMODROMIUM reader from Eastern Europe who sent this generous gift to enhance my crusty bearded-in-black chic in response to my first blog post on The Orthodox Gonfaloniers. Very nice. I thought Medieval Catholic Iconography was the Cat's Pajamas until I discovered Eastern Orthodox Iconography. Very Good!

Orthodox Gonfaloniers vs. Faggotry

My Lost Tribe is at it again, this time harpooning Tom of Finland, calling the wrath of God down on degenerate homosexuals. These guys know how to make Christianity fun!