The USA’s Last War

Paul Fahrenheidt reluctantly comes to terms with the inevitability of the USA’s dissolution and theorizes about how it will proceed.

Depending on when/how this war pops off, I predict casualties just shy of (possibly breaking) 100 million. This is all casualties, including civilian deaths caused by war-related disease, malnutrition, and collateral damage.

The current urban population of the United States is just shy of 275 million. The supermajority of it is concentrated in a half-dozen cities and metropolitan areas on both coasts of this country, most in the projected territory of Team Blue. While I hold that the Civil War will not be “Urban v. Rural,” to say the divide will play no part is dishonest.

Team Red and Team Blue will face different problems, and in all likelihood, different casualty counts. While Team Blue will not have sufficient hinterlands for its massive population (provoking an inevitable starvation crisis that will lop off a significant number of people in said cities,) Team Red will not have enough people to work its own hinterlands, causing a similar (though much less pronounced) food crisis.

The fact of the matter is that the supermajority of food planted, harvested, and distributed by the United States is so automated that a food crisis will occur no matter which way the states go, until smaller man-powered farms can fill the deficit. Either way, we’re looking at tens of millions dead (at least) within the first few months. This is to say nothing of the interrupted power grid, scarcity of medical supplies, outbreaks of cholera, typhus, polio, etc., and any other number of monsters unleashed by kinetic warfare.

I haven’t even addressed the fighting yet.

In a purely military sense, the Second American Civil War will closer resemble the First World War than the First American Civil War. What I mean is that a number of new weapons have been developed by the U.S. Government in the last twenty years, and have only been deployed in limited quantities overseas. Like the advances of weapons prior to WWI, commanders will have very little idea how to properly use them at first, which will contribute to a massive amount of casualties on the front end of the war. Except the otherwise competent WWI Generals will be replaced by careerists, amateurs, and (more likely than not,) women.

I won’t speculate on the tactical particularities of the Second American Civil War. At the war’s beginning, I suspect America’s forces in being to split (unevenly) between Red and Blue. Depending on whether both sides claim to be the Government, or a Government (the difference is important,) you’ll see Active and National Guard units stack on either side of the fence. State Defense Forces, State & Local Police Departments, and Paramilitaries of both stripes will generally go the way their state or sensibility goes.

No matter which way you slice it, I suspect the war will turn into a variety of sieges of Blue cities by Red armies. This is exasperated by the fact that every state in Team Red is geographically contiguous, while every state in Team Blue is split into about three or four islands. The Republicans in the Spanish Civil War faced the same problem, and Franco’s plan to defeat in detail was made the path of least resistance by the drawing of the battle lines.

These sieges will be an absolute bitch. Not only will the massive concentration of urban buildings act as a natural fortress, the United States Interstate System was built to simultaneously serve as military infrastructure and urban fortifications. Ever notice how the Interstates loop around major cities like walls? Ever notice spaces dug for mortar pits, ammo dumps, staging areas for motor-pools (rest stops,) and that each major city has an international airport within that loop of Interstate wall? This is to say nothing about Air Defense assets, which combined with the International Airport will almost assure local air superiority for the defenders of blue cities. Also consider that the Urban battlefield has become 4d, as metro systems and other such tunnels will need to be fought through and won.

The war’s outcome will never be in doubt. But it will be long, and it will cost more lives than we’ve ever thought possible. I can assure the dear reader that America will never be the same afterwards.

Although this time, it’s much more likely that the centrifugal forces will triumph over their centripetal rivals.

I’m always a little puzzled when people asked me why I left the United States more than two decades ago. Yes, of course, I saw this coming. I didn’t know precisely when it would happen, but it didn’t require a great brain to discern that a) it could happen within my lifetime and b) it would almost certainly be something my children would witness.

Consider this: when “the movement of peoples” is synonymous with “war and genocide” in the eyes of regular historians, and when the greatest military historians literally regard “immigration” as being essentially equivalent to “war”, what else could possibly be the result of the greatest movement of peoples in human history to date.

As for what will set it off, while I had previously considered both economic and diversity factors, at this point, it appears more likely that it will be a consequence of WWIII. The partition wars of India and Pakistan may prove a timeline guide in this regard; if we’re correct to assume that WWIII began with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that would put the onset of the Dissolution War in 2030, only three years prior to my original estimate of 2033 for the collapse of the political entity.

DISCUSS ON SG


China Holds the USA Accountable

For all that it makes Americans extremely uncomfortable and quick to cite a panoply of irrelevant tangential facts that don’t excuse their ancestors’ actions, the absolute historical fact is that the European colonists – English and Spanish – committed imperialist genocide against the various American Indian tribes. And China is now utilizing these historical facts to great rhetorical effect to undermine the USA’s false claim to the moral high ground; for all the horrific crimes of the Mao era, at least the Chinese only victimized their own people.

CRI: We noticed that a report from the US Department of the Interior last month said a large number of Native American children died at Indian boarding schools. After that, more and more survivors and their descendants have spoken out and accused the US government of genocide against American Indians. Do you have any comment?

Zhao Lijian: We are deeply sympathetic to the tragic experience of the Native American children. Those so-called boarding schools that carried the motto “Kill the Indian, save the man” were in essence crime scenes of the US cultural genocide against Native Americans. What happened at these schools is also important evidence of the racial genocide committed by the US against Native Americans. More and more facts have come to light and shown that the US committed systemic genocide against Native Americans in three dimensions, which has lasted hundreds of years and continues to this day. 

First, the US has committed physical genocide against the Native American population. Statistics show that since its independence in 1776, the US government has launched over 1,500 attacks on Indian tribes to slaughter the Indians. Before the arrival of white settlers in 1492, there were five million Indians, yet the number plummeted to 600,000 by 1800 and only 237,000 in 1900. Among them, more than a dozen tribes, such as the Pequot, Mohegan, and Massachusetts, were completely extinct. The US government also applied forced sterilization to Indians. Between 1930 and 1976, the US Bureau of Indian Affairs forcibly sterilized approximately 70,000 Indian women through the “Indian Health Service program”. In early 1970s, more than 42% of Indian women of childbearing age were sterilized.

Second, the US has committed spiritual and cultural genocide against Native Americans. They have long suffered hostility, discrimination and oblivion. The inter-generational inheritance of indigenous spirits and culture of Native Americans have long been hindered. In the 1870s and ’80s, the US government adopted a policy of “forced assimilation” to obliterate the social fabric and culture of Indian tribes and destroy the ethnic and tribal identity of the Indians. To attain the dual goal of cultural assimilation and taking Indian lands for itself, the US government began with forcing Native American children into the Indian boarding schools, banning them from speaking their native language, wearing their traditional clothes, or carrying out traditional activities. The children also suffered serious abuse and torment. US-based scholar Preston McBride estimates that the total number of deaths could be as high as 40,000, adding that “basically every school had a graveyard.” Even today, the US is still trying to deliberately obliterate the historical memory and information of the indigenous people in education and media reports. According to a report by National Indian Education Association, 87% of state-level US history textbooks do not mention the post-1900 history of indigenous people. 

Third, the US has committed deprivation of the rights of Native Americans. The US has systematically deprived Native Americans and other ethnic minorities of a wide range of their rights, leaving them mired in a crisis of survival and scarcity of rights. A report by the Indian Health Service shows that Native Americans born today have a life expectancy that is 5.5 years less than the national average, and they have the highest infant mortality rate. The suicide rate of Native American adolescents is 1.9 times that of the national average. By June 2022, the COVID-19 mortality rate among Native Americans is about 2.1 times that of the White population. From 1969 to 2009, the US government conducted 928 nuclear tests in the Shoshone tribal region, resulting in nuclear fallout of around 620 kilotons. Cancer incidence rate in Native Americans’ reservations is far higher than other areas. High levels of radioactive substance has been detected in the systems of about a quarter of Navajo women and infants. According to 2018 US Census Data, the poverty rate among Native Americans was 25.4%, far higher than 8.1% among the White population.

Genocide against Native Americans is an original sin of the US that can never be erased. The untold tragedies of Native Americans should never be forgotten. The US government has every reason to admit its crimes of genocide against Native Americans, and offer sincere apologies and repentance to the victims and their descendants. The US government should also credibly make up for the trauma Native Americans are suffering, and seriously face up to grave human rights issues and crimes of racism that exist within the US.

Zhao Lijian, Foreign Ministry, 29 June 2022

Before you react like a Pavlovian dog hearing a dinner bell, please remember this, White American: YOU ARE THE INDIAN NOW.

All of the lies and twisted truths you repeated in order to try to rationalize the sins of the past are now being told to justify your dispossession. The only difference is that the replacement peoples are unlikely to treat your great-great-grandchildren quite as kindly as your great-great-great-grandfather treated some of my ancestors. Imagine the lies and twisted truths that will be accepted as historical fact by the Post-Americans once Americans are a statistical minority similar to the American Indian population today.

Contemplate how many of your Asian and African great-grandchildren will be in my position, with most of their Asian and African peers refusing to believe that they have any European ancestors. After all, they won’t LOOK white…

What is happening today is directly traceable to the sins of the founding fathers and their abominable behavior toward “the merciless Indian Savages”, as the Declaration of Independence described them. Note in particular that the very concept of racism, upon which the entire American population has been condemned and crucified, was specifically coined by an American in order to destroy the American Indian. It is, therefore, both ironic and fitting that “racism” has been the primary weapon utilized in the rhetorical demolition of America.

I don’t remind you of these historical wrongs because I want revenge for my Indian ancestors or because I dream of Chung Kuo. What is done is done, and nothing is going to change that. To the contrary, I remind you of them because I do not wish for the American to go the way of the American Indian.

Perhaps, unlike the American Indian tribes, Americans can put all their ideological and individual differences aside in time to unite against the foreign peoples invading their lands and prevent their replacement. But most likely, as Sitting Bull and the Ghost Dancers learned to their dismay, it is already too late. It may be worth noting, in this regard, that while in 1890, the population of the United States, excluding the Indian and Negro minorities, was around 55 million, the post-1965 foreign population resident in the USA is presently about twice that number.

DISCUSS ON SG


The War for the Future of Man

An extremely important interview about WWIII with the man who could not unreasonably be considered Russia’s Wang Hunin, who forecast the current conflict after 2008. Definitely read the whole thing.

RUSSTRAT Institute presents a transcript of the speech of Sergey Glazyev, Member of the Board (Minister) for Integration and Macroeconomics of the EEC, at the round table “Russia” held on June 1, 2022 in IA REGNUM: what image of the future meets the goals of national development?”, organized by the RUSSTRAT Institute and REGNUM News Agency.

We are now addressing the fundamental questions of our existence. And a special military operation is a catalyst for this process of understanding our place in the world, and of course, we need an image of the future. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the special military operation, which was initially announced as denazification, demilitarization – we understand what this means for Ukraine – is now gradually raising the stakes on this front.

Everyone is already saying that this is a global hybrid war, although it was clear from the beginning that the special operation should be considered in a much broader context. Now many people believe that this is a civilizational war, where different worldview systems are opposed. It is clear that this is a war of good and evil and a war for the survival of humanity in the end.

Before we talk about the image of our future, I would like to draw your attention to the patterns of long-term socio-economic and political development. We – I mean a group of scientists from the Academy of Sciences who work in long cycles of economic and social development-first of all, we managed to foresee this particular war in 2022. Back in the 14th year, it was clear that the challenge that we faced and the result of which was reunification with the Crimea, will necessarily affect the entire Russian world, including the territory of Ukraine. I even published a book, The Last World War.

Somewhere, what we see today was absolutely and almost precisely formulated, including the number of Ukrainian Armed Forces and the role of the Americans and the British in this occupation of Ukraine, as well as the cultivation of Ukrainian Nazism. All this was predicted almost to the last detail. We are continuing our research. According to which the peak of the confrontation falls on 2024. This is the forecast that my colleague gave 10 years ago, even before the current military operation and even before 2014. And then there were no new political seven-year cycles.

Why 2024 and why are we in such a situation of hybrid warfare? The fact is that the modern period is characterized by two simultaneous revolutionary events. The first is the technological revolution, which used to be talked about a lot. It is called differently, we say that it is a change of technological structures. And always this change in technological patterns occurs through the economic depression, which in this cycle began in the world in 2008 – with the beginning of the global financial crisis.

And during this transition phase, a new technological order has already been formed, a well-known complex of nano-engineering information and communication technologies, which is evolving not only into the economy. But also in the ways of conducting military operations, too. We actually see that we are facing more than just an enemy based in the Pentagon and Mi6. Our troops are facing artificial intelligence. This is already a war of a new technological order.

But a more important point is the change in world economic patterns in the context of our current topic. The change of national economic structures is a process that occurs once a century and during which the management system changes. Previously, we would call this the process of socio-political revolution, but, speaking in a modern way, this is a radical change in the institutions of world economic relations, industrial relations and the entire system of managing socio-economic development, which is also accompanied by a change in the centers of the world economy.

The global economy is rapidly shifting to Southeast Asia, which already accounts for more than half of gross domestic product growth. And in this new center of the world economy, a completely different management system has been formed compared to the one in which we live today. I must say that the change in world economic patterns, as you can see in this picture at the top. These are world economic patterns with a once-in-a-century shift cycle. And at the bottom are technological ones, the change of technological structures, which have a cycle of change phases of about 50 years.

Technological patterns are well known in the literature as long Kondratiev waves, more precisely, the life cycles of technological patterns and their growth phase are a long “Kondratiev wave”. The growth phase of the world economy is a century-long cycle of capital accumulation.

Once a century, there is a dangerous resonance when we simultaneously face a technological revolution, a socio-economic revolution, and a socio-political revolution. In the course of this process, not only the technology changes, but also the mindset changes. The ideology is changing, if you will. As an example, we will cite the previous phase of changing world economic patterns. 

This is a process that always, unfortunately, occurs through world wars. World wars in this case are caused by the fact that the ruling elite of the previous center of the world economy does not want to part with its hegemony and tries with all its might to keep it, up to the outbreak of a world war

DISCUSS ON SG

Continue reading “The War for the Future of Man”


Remember Who Told You the Truth

The Saker has a reasonable request for his readers:

Please remember who told you the truth and who lied to you over the past months. There were many, many such liars, ranging from the official propaganda machine (aka the “free press”) to the “Putin has lost it all” emo-Marxists and assorted 6th columnists who, whether they understood it or not, served the purpose of the Empire’s PSYOPs. Also please remember that Andrei Martynov, Bernard and Gonzalo Lira not only spoke truthfully, but they were right and their detractors totally wrong. We all owe them an immense debt of gratitude!

Frankly, before my forced break, I was getting really frustrated trying to prove to misinformed or even fully brainwashed commentators that the official narrative (produced by the biggest strategic PSYOP in history) was a load of bull, based on lies and/or on a total “misunderstanding” (and I am being kind here!) of the real world outside the “mental Zone A”. Now most of that narrative has collapsed.

I am also confident that a month from today, things will be even more obvious than they are today.

I think it’s time to rehash that old bit of triumphalist doggerel.

Of all the words of screen and pen,

The saddest are these:

Vox was right again!

The current war was never about Ukraine, or Putin’s ego, or reconstructing the Soviet Union, or the tsardom of Peter the Great or Ivan the Terrible. It’s always been about the incessant encroachments of Clown World forcing Russia to choose between submission and war. And thanks to the genius and leadership of Vladimir Putin, Russia found itself in a position to not only go to war, but do so with a very reasonable prospect of winning.

It will probably take at least six years to resolve World War III, and quite possibly an entire decade given the way in which it is more truly global than either of its two predecessors. But we can be optimistic that the world that has been remade by the conflict will turn out to be a better one than the one ruled by the wicked Empire of Lies.

Also, a piece of advice: stop paying attention to those who a) have lied to you and/or b) have been reliably wrong. Just stop!

DISCUSS ON SG


Knock Off the Retardery

The war in Ukraine is not a “distraction”. China is not going to use the “distraction” to invade either a) Australia or b) the USA. The very idea is so prodigiously stupid that anyone suggesting the idea with a straight face should never be taken seriously again.

China is even less likely to invade the West Coast than Japan was, and the historical records show that neither the Japanese Navy nor the Japanese Army ever even contemplated the notion beyond briefly looking at the possibility of invading Hawaii before concluding that they lacked a) the transport capability, b) the logistical capability, and c) the airpower to even bother putting together an actual warplan.

For crying out loud, the military strategists who pay attention to this sort of thing aren’t even sure China has the capability to successfully invade Taiwan island. They do, but the point is the mere fact the issue is even potentially in doubt renders the other hypothetical invasions very highly improbable.

To have any chance of conquering Taiwan, China might need to transport as many as two million troops across the rough 100 miles of the Taiwan Strait and land them under fire at the island’s 14 potential invasion beaches or 10 major ports.

That’s a lot of people—far, far more than the People’s Liberation Army Navy can haul in its 11 new amphibious ships. To transport the bulk of the invasion force, Beijing almost certainly would take up into naval service thousands of civilian ships.

To that end, the Chinese Communist Party has created a legal and bureaucratic framework for taking over control of commercial shipping. Meanwhile, naval engineers have begun modifying key vessels to make them better assault ships.

All that is to say, the vast flotilla that would be both the vehicle for China’s assault on Taiwan—and the biggest target of Taiwanese forces and their allies—is taking shape.

“If the PLA invasion force was a million or more men, then we might expect an armada of thousands or even tens of thousands of ships to deliver them, augmented by thousands of planes and helicopters,” Ian Easton, an analyst with the Project 2049 Institute in Virginia, wrote in a recent report.

The PLAN’s eight modern Type 071 landing docks and three Type 075 big-deck assault ships together can haul around 25,000 troops. A drop in the bucket. To transport the balance of the invasion force, the Chinese navy can take up around 2,000 large commercial vessels crewed by around 650,000 mariners.

The legal framework is a new one. On Jan. 1, 2017, China’s National Defense Transportation Law went into effect. “Among other things, the law mandated that all of China’s basic infrastructure and related transportation platforms would henceforth be treated as military-civil fusion assets,” Easton explained.

“At the CCP’s discretion, they were now legally required to be designed, built and managed to support future military operations. In the event of conflict, they would be pressed into wartime service. Now they had to prepare accordingly in peacetime.”

According to Easton, the roughly 1,000 large vessels belonging to China COSCO Shipping Corporation could comprise the backbone of this improvised fleet.

For what it’s worth, the USA doesn’t have the ability to invade China either, despite its air and naval superiority. Hence the loss of its sole superpower status even if nuclear weapons are left out of the equation.

This really isn’t that hard and requires nothing more than a modicum of military history and basic math. So please, just stop already.

If you want to worry about something that is a genuine threat to the USA and its European satrapies, worry about China one-upping Russia by exiting the neoliberal economic order voluntarily without waiting for sanctions.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Collapsing Tripod

The Atlantic is not exactly a publication in which I have any trust whatsoever. But it is informative to note that even some of the most-hallowed mainstream media institutions are beginning to attempt to come to grips with the ineluctable fact that the economic order is on the verge of collapsing because the foundational principles upon which it rests have proven to be false.

The Anglo-American system of politics and economics, like any system, rests on certain principles and beliefs. But rather than acting as if these are the best principles, or the ones their societies prefer, Britons and Americans often act as if these were the only possible principles and no one, except in error, could choose any others. Political economics becomes an essentially religious question, subject to the standard drawback of any religion—the failure to understand why people outside the faith might act as they do.

To make this more specific: Today’s Anglo-American world view rests on the shoulders of three men. One is Isaac Newton, the father of modern science. One is Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the father of liberal political theory. (If we want to keep this purely Anglo-American, John Locke can serve in his place.) And one is Adam Smith, the father of laissez-faire economics. From these founding titans come the principles by which advanced society, in the Anglo-American view, is supposed to work. A society is supposed to understand the laws of nature as Newton outlined them. It is supposed to recognize the paramount dignity of the individual, thanks to Rousseau, Locke, and their followers. And it is supposed to recognize that the most prosperous future for the greatest number of people comes from the free workings of the market. So Adam Smith taught, with axioms that were enriched by David Ricardo, Alfred Marshall, and the other giants of neoclassical economics.

The most important thing about this summary is the moral equivalence of the various principles. Isaac Newton worked in the realm of fundamental science. Without saying so explicitly, today’s British and American economists act as if the economic principles they follow had a similar hard, provable, undebatable basis. If you don’t believe in the laws of physics—actions create reactions, the universe tends toward greater entropy—you are by definition irrational. And so with economics. If you don’t accept the views derived from Adam Smith—that free competition is ultimately best for all participants, that protection and interference are inherently wrong—then you are a flat-earther.

Outside the United States and Britain the matter looks quite different. About science there is no dispute. “Western” physics is the physics of the world. About politics there is more debate: with the rise of Asian economies some Asian political leaders, notably Lee Kuan Yew, of Singapore, and several cautious figures in Japan, have in effect been saying that Rousseau’s political philosophy is not necessarily the world’s philosophy. Societies may work best, Lee and others have said, if they pay less attention to the individual and more to the welfare of the group.

But the difference is largest when it comes to economics. In the non-Anglophone world Adam Smith is merely one of several theorists who had important ideas about organizing economies. In most of East Asia and continental Europe the study of economics is less theoretical than in England and America (which is why English-speakers monopolize Nobel Prizes) and more geared toward solving business problems.

First, Rousseau was always an absurd and nonsensical joke. Second, Steve Keen has mathematically proven the fundamental incorrectness of Adam Smith due to the unreliable nature of the collective demand curve. Third, List is not the solution to Smith, and for the same reason.

The hardest thing for even many of the people on the so-called ideological Right to accept – so-called because Left-Right ideology is incoherent, irrelevant, and entirely outmoded – is that the Enlightenment has proven to be an intellectual and philosophical dead end. Reason, at least in its human embodiment, has turned out to be irrational; all of the models and creeds and policies that rely upon the basic concept of human rationality have not only failed, but have been conclusively proven to be false.

It was simply inertia from Christendom that allowed the Enlightenment to pass itself off as progress. But the systematic eradication of Christianity from intellectual, professional, and public life combined with the adulteration of the European nations is finally overcoming that centuries-old inertia, to disastrous effect.

DISCUSS ON SG


Some Thoughts on Hitler

In the aftermath of having been publicly accused of harboring “sympathies for Hitler” by certain individuals in the Swiss media on the basis of a single accurate reference to National Socialism, I’ve been cataloguing the public record of my statements in my books, columns and blog posts concerning the late leader of Germany over the last 21 years on the advice of the lawyers. As it happens, I went into some detail on the subject in the first part of Chapter XII of THE IRRATIONAL ATHEIST, published by BenBella Books in 2008.

HITLER, THE INQUISITION, THE CRUSADES AND HUMAN SACRIFICE

“Now, you will stay in the Comfy Chair until lunch time, with only a cup of coffee at eleven.”

– Cardinal Ximinez

It would be impossible to write a book of this sort without addressing the three subjects that inevitably come up when atheists are contending with Christians. Just as atheists anticipate the need to answer for Stalin and Mao, Christians are expected to answer for the Inquisition and the Crusades. And both sides recognize the need to deal with the Hitler Question. Like Einstein,(1) the Führer made enough ambiguous statements to leave the matter up for discussion, unlike Einstein,(2) no one is eager to claim Hitler and his National Socialists as members of their intellectual camp.

The Unholy Trinity have no choice but to concern themselves with the matter, of course, and they do so largely in the manner that one has come to expect from them.(3) Harris wastes eight pages attempting to tar the Catholic Church and Pope Pius XII with guilt by insufficient opposition,(4) then on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, declares that Auschwitz was a logical and inevitable consequence of the Christian faith.(5) Hitchens also complains about the Catholic Church and relates a few irrelevant anecdotes about Italian Fascists and Irish Blue Shirts, but then shows genuine insight when he notes that the Hitler regime shows us “with terrible clarity what can happen when men usurp the role of gods.”

Dawkins, on the other hand, demonstrates that he is perfectly capable of presenting a reasonable case when he chooses to do so and lays out some reasonable evidence for the reader to reach his own conclusion on the matter. He avoids making the common case for Hitler’s religious faith on the basis of his abused childhood,(6) wisely, considering that one could apply precisely the same argument to Christopher Hitchens and Dawkins himself. Instead, after quoting Hitler’s public statements which state outright that he is a Christian, and a very devout one at that, Dawkins quotes private statements which reveal a deep hatred for Christianity surpassing that possessed by even the most militant New Atheist.

“It is possible that Hitler had by 1941 experienced some kind of deconversion or disillusionment with Christianity. Or is the resolution of the contradictions simply that he was an opportunistic liar whose words cannot be trusted, in either direction?”(7)

It is worth noting that most of the statements which indicate Hitler’s Christian faith were made in public, prior to 1934, when he was still a politician running for elected office. Given his subsequent actions once he had secured political power, there is no reason to believe that Hitler meant them any more sincerely than George W. Bush intended to keep his promise to pursue a “more humble foreign policy” three years before he launched an invasion to bring democracy and freedom to the Middle East. But Hitler was no atheist, neither was he agnostic, the evidence tends to suggest that he was a pagan(8) who was skeptical, but open to the possibility of acquiring temporal power through supernatural means.

The Thule Society which founded the German Workers Party that was the predecessor of the Nazi Party was an esoteric society connected with the occultist Madam Blavatsky and the Theosophists. Hitler was the 55th member of the DAP, which was renamed the National Socialist German Workers Party, or NASDAP, only four months after he joined on October 19, 1919. While the Nazis suppressed their early connection with the Thule Society and even arrested its founder, Rudolf von Sebottendorff, when he published a book about the relationship between Hitler and the society, the Nazi interest in esoteric matters, primarily on the part of Heinrich Himmler and the SS, is well known and has played a role in everything from Charles Stross’s excellent novel, The Atrocity Archives, to Wolfenstein 3D and the Indiana Jones movies.

It is not known to what extent Hitler shared Himmler’s enthusiasm for the supernatural, but it is reasonable to assume that if he was as skeptical about its existence as the New Atheists are today, he would not have allowed the Reichsführer-SS and founder of the Studiengesellschaft für Geistesurgeschichte, Deutsches Ahnenerbe(9) an annual budget of the modern equivalent of $5.6 million to spend on occult research, medical experiments and expeditions to Sweden, Syria, Iraq, Finland and Tibet.

And yet, if Dawkins is not quite able to definitively conclude that Adolf Hitler was not a Christian, Robert Wistrich, the professor of modern Jewish history at Hebrew University, has no such qualms.
In “Hitler and the Holocaust”, Wistrich writes:

“Indeed, the leading Nazis – Hitler, Himmler, Rosenberg, Goebbels, and Bormann – were all fanatically anti-Christian, though this was partly hidden from the German public…. The conviction that Judaism, Christianity and Bolshevism represented one single pathological phenomenon of decadence became a veritable leitmotif for Hitler around the time that the “Final Solution” had been conceived of as an operational plan.”(10)

But the most convincing proof that Hitler was neither an atheist nor a Christian can be seen in two documents that the various New Atheists and Wistrich were probably not aware of at the time they wrote their books. The first of these was prepared by the Office of Strategic Services in preparation for the Nuremburg trials in 1945. Released to the public in 2001, the report from the archives of of Gen. William J. Donovan, special assistant to the U.S. chief of counsel at the Tribunal, is a fascinating description of the Third Reich’s methodical plan to coopt, pervert and ultimately usurp the Catholic and Protestant churches of Germany. As an editor of the the Nuremberg Project for the Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion described it: “They wanted to eliminate the Jews altogether, but they were also looking to eliminate Christianity.”(11)

The first installment, entitled “The Nazi Master Plan; The Persecution of Christian Churches”, shows how the Nazis planned to supplant Christianity with a religion based on racial superiority. The report, prepared by the Office of Strategic Services – a forerunner of the CIA – says: “Important leaders of the National Socialist party would have liked… complete extirpation of Christianity and the substitution of a purely racial religion.”(12)

The second document is equally significant. It is the 30-point plan for a National Reich Church, drawn up by Alfred Rosenburg, the Nazi ideologist who was Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories and head of the Centre of National Socialist Ideological and Educational Research. Three of its more significant points are as follows:

  1. The National Reich Church is determined to exterminate irrevocably and by every means the strange and foreign Christian faiths imported into Germany in the ill-omened year 800.
  2. The National Reich Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible in Germany as well as the publication of Sunday papers, pamphlets, publications and books of a religious nature.
  3. The National Reich Church does not acknowledge forgiveness of sins. It represents the standpoint which it will always proclaim that a sin once committed will be ruthlessly punished by the honorable and indestructible laws of nature and punishment will follow during the sinner’s lifetime.

One need not be a theologian to recognize that whatever religion happens to lurk behind a church that does not recognize the forgiveness of sins and is determined to suppress the Bible, it is not Christianity.

Although the only logical conclusion is that Hitler was neither a Christian nor an atheist, there are still lessons that Christians and atheists can learn from his pagan totalitarianism. Christians must recognize that it is possible for their institutions to be infiltrated and utilized for evil purposes even as they religiously attend church and participate in the mainstream of society. Had more German Christians demonstrated the courage of the evangelical Confessing Church and openly opposed Hitler, as did the pastors who signed the 1934 Barman Declaration,(13) much tragedy might well have been averted. Despite the deception that was undeniably involved, Christians have no excuse for being blind to such things, not when they have been warned in the Bible to be on their guard against deceitful wolves in sheep’s clothing.

As for atheists, they must recognize that science is a deadly foundation on which to build future utopias, and it should make them more than a little uncomfortable to consider the striking similarities in the following three quotes, one from a Humanist, one from a New Atheist and the other from a leading Nazi.

  • “Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence; it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines.“ – Bertrand Russell
  • “The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advance of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble.” – Adolf Hitler
  • “Religion has run out of justifications. Thanks to the telescope and the microscope, it no longer offers an explanation of anything important.” – Christopher Hitchens

CHAPTER 12 FOOTNOTES

  1. I concur with Richard Dawkins on this point, despite a few metaphorical statements about God. It is not reasonable to conclude that Albert Einstein was anything but an agnostic or atheist.
  2. What is unexpected, however, is how much the Nazi Martin Bormann’s description of a metaphorical God sounds almost exactly like Albert Einstein’s as described by Richard Dawkins.
  3. Given the non-polemical nature of his book, Daniel Dennett commendably sees no reason to mention the matter.
  4. Harris, The End of Faith, 104. Harris finds it extraordinary that no German Catholics were excommunicated, but then, other than Hitler, there were no former Catholics in the Nazi hierarchy. The most notable Catholic, former Reichkanzler Franz von Papen, was jailed after speaking out against Hitler after Kristallnacht and was acquitted at Nuremberg.
  5. How strange that it should happen only once in more than 2,000 years, and at the behest of a few fanatical anti-Christians, no less. I further note that the Buddhist Harris neglects to mention the fact that Professor Walter Wüst, who commanded the SS-Ahnenerbe under Himmler after February 1937, publicly declared that Hitler’s ideologies corresponded with those of the Gautama Buddha.
  6. I seem to recall someone informing us that a Catholic upbringing is even worse than sexual abuse for a child.
  7. Dawkins, The God Delusion, 276. Given that Hitler was not only a politician, but a stunningly effective one, the answer has to be yes.
  8. Hitler once made an interesting statement to Bormann about the foolishness of restoring Odin worship, which he refers to as “our old mythology”. As he goes on to talk about getting rid of Christianity, it’s apparent that his goal is to create a new and better Teutonic mythology compatible with science and philosophy.
  9. The Study Society for Primordial Intellectual Science, German Ancestral Heritage, usually known as the Ahnenerbe, was an SS department set up by Himmler to investigate the ancestral German heritage. It is this group which attempted to find the Holy Grail and other mystic treasures, as portrayed in the movies. The Atrocity Archives, by Charles Stross, are probably the most interesting fictional portrayal of this occultic bureaucracy; my own novella which briefly touches on the subject, “The Lesser Evil”, can be found in the short story collection entitled The Altar of Hate.
  10. Robert S. Wistrich, Hitler and the Holocaust (New York, 2001), 131-132
  11. Edward Colimore, “Papers Reveal Nazi Aim: End Christianity” The Philadelphia Inquirer, January 9, 2002.
  12. “Nazi Trial Documents Made Public”. BBC News, January 11, 2002. The entire OSS report can be downloaded in four PDF files from http://www.lawandreligion.com/nurinst1.shtml.
  13. “We reject the false doctrine that the Church could have permission to hand over the form of its message and of its order to whatever it itself might wish or to the vicissitudes of the prevailing ideological and political convictions of the day.” The Barmen Declaration, The Confessing Synod of the German Evangelical Church, 1934.

PS: If anyone can send me the transcripts of my debates with Andrew Anglin and Greg Johnson on the subject of National Socialism, that would be appreciated.

DISCUSS ON SG


Who Deceives Wins

Even relatively recent history is fake and gay. The great hero of the SAS was a complete fictional construct:

In 1942, a downtrodden Britain desperately needed a hero. The widespread respect – even grudgingly – enjoyed in Britain by charismatic General Erwin Rommel, the commander of Hitler’s Afrika Korps, was a source of particular frustration to Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

Rommel’s capture of the Libyan port of Tobruk that June, leading to the surrender of 34,000 men to his German-Italian troops, was one of the worst moments not just of the western desert campaign but of Britain’s entire war.

What was required, in Churchill’s mind, was a counter to the adulation of Rommel. A soldier who was not just Rommel’s match but who was his superior in guile and courage. A warrior of whom the British could be proud.

That September, newspapers carried a scoop: the tale of the ‘Phantom Major’, a military mastermind whose covert team of guerrilla soldiers was striking terror into the hearts of Rommel and his men.

The major in question was David Stirling, and his new elite fighting squad the Special Air Service, or SAS, would become one of the most celebrated units of the British Army with its fearless motto Who Dares Wins.

Stirling was described as ‘the newest terror of the desert’ who, ‘towering 6ft 4in, is as lithe as a panther, a former boxing champion, one of the finest horsemen in the Army’. He was fluent in German, capable of fooling his way through enemy checkpoints and was, they claimed, a veritable ‘Robin Hood in battledress’.

In the space of a year, Stirling had risen from a humble lieutenant to a major with a Distinguished Service Order – a truly startling ascent. For, in reality, David Stirling was a man of limited capacity with a troubling, error-strewn history.

He might have been the Phantom Major to the British tabloids but to his soldiers, Stirling was a liability who had repeatedly gambled with their lives in his pursuit of glory. His languor and fondness for drinking and gambling in the clubs of Cairo, meanwhile, had earned him the nickname ‘the Giant Sloth’.

Born to a wealthy aristocratic family whose ancestral home was Keir House in Perthshire, Stirling, the fourth of six siblings, had underwhelmed since childhood, overshadowed academically and in charm by his older brothers Bill and Peter. His mother Margaret Fraser was also a force of nature whose father, the 13th Lord Lovat, had been aide- de-camp to Queen Victoria.

When war broke out, Stirling joined the Scots Guards but struggled from the start. He lacked the discipline to knuckle down and submit to the drudgery of drilling. Meanwhile Bill, who had also trained with the Scots Guards, submitted proposals to the War Office to develop a guerrilla warfare training programme to prepare troops for special missions.

This was set up at the Commando Special Training Centre at Inverailort House in the remote north of Scotland, and among the first recruits – thanks to Bill’s intervention, and to the relief of the Scots Guards – was Stirling.

Bill quickly discovered what the Guards had known for several months: David Stirling was indolent and temperamental, a disruptive influence. Now it was Bill’s turn to look for a way to offload his wastrel sibling. The man who would, indirectly, prove his salvation was Winston Churchill.

Keep this little historical detail in mind if you’re ever tempted to fall for the grand heroics of the Navy SEALs or any other brave and daring special forces that are publicized for the benefit of the public. Remember, the Official Story is always false in at least some important detail.

DISCUSS ON SG


Feminism, Transgenderism, and the Devil

The present battle between feminazis and trannies is a red-on-red conflict, as both evil ideologies spring from precisely the same source:

Conceptually, people think of the Devil as masculine. He is the ultimate “bad guy”, double emphasis on the “bad” and the “guy”. Traditionally theologians have largely conceptualized the Devil as a man, or manlike figure, and denoted him with the masculine pronoun, ‘he’.[6] However, as Faxneld notes, not all have agreed with this summation. As the Devil is an angel, this means he does not conform to the gender norms that men and women are formed in. Christian theological tradition does not require that the Devil conforms to a particular sex, indeed it was recognized that demons could take the forms of any gender as they chose.

Anyone who has read the ancient Greek tales will be familiar with the way that the Greek deities could change gender at will, often using this to trick their victims and even at times the heroes of the tale. Minerva in Homer’s Odyssey is one example, but Odin was known to do the same thing, and many others. In fact, it was a consistent theme throughout the pagan pantheons to have gods transgressing all boundaries, including gender boundaries.

From a Christian perspective these beings were neither fake, nor gods. They were a combination of legends and people’s encounters with demonic beings. It is easy to understand why the early Church, and many in the Medieval Church, viewed Satan neither as male nor female, but as a boundary transgressing being, who took on the form that was useful in the moment.

In many medieval and early modern representations of the Devil he is shown to be an “hermaphrodite monster”. Demons were viewed as ontologically unstable creatures that crossed gender and species boundaries. “Gender-bending would then be another sign of the liminal and blasphemously category-defying nature of Lucifer and his demons (figures 2.2 and 2.3).” Faxneld shares with us some abominable examples of how the early modern artists visualized the Devil in figures 1 and 2.

As you can see, it was common for the Devil, and demons, to be visualized as inherently unstable beings that conformed not only to no gender boundaries, but no natural boundaries either. The devil is the ultimate boundary breaking entity, which is really a good description of evil itself. Evil intent consists in the desire and intention to transgress the boundaries laid out by God himself. Indeed, one of the words for sin in the Bible is transgression, which literally means to transgress the boundaries of what the Lord says is good. Evil inherently transgresses all of God’s good boundaries.

But not only was the Devil represented by such boundary transgressing beings, he was also conceptualized or represented as a woman, or a serpent-woman. For instance, in one Christian work “Livre pour l’enseignement de ses filles (‘Book for the Education of his Daughters’, 1371–1372), the author,

“…Geoffrey attempts to instil in his daughters the lesson that women should defer to fathers and husbands in anything but domestic matters and makes his point by retelling how Eve broke this rule when she conversed with the serpent, ‘whiche as the Hystorye sayth hadde a face ryght fayre lyke the face of a woman’.”

It may be strange for us to conceptualize a feminine Satan, because it is more common to view him as masculine, but this was a consistent image throughout Church history.

“…A more straightforwardly female Satan can be seen in the actually very common depictions of the snake in the Garden of Eden with a woman’s head on its serpentine body and sometimes also the breasts of a woman…Exactly when the notion of a female snake was established is difficult to say, but the earliest translation of the Bible into Latin rendered the word as serpens—feminine gender.”

Indeed, according to J. B. Trapp “it was the most frequent way of representing the Edenic serpent from the late twelfth century until the late sixteenth century, when the human features of the creature disappear and it becomes, once more, only reptilian.” This is interesting that the devil would be represented by feminine imagery, but again, note, the Devil is not a man nor a woman, Satan is a fallen spiritual being. The Devil is inherently in a different category. Even if you want to argue the Scriptures lean towards presenting him as male figure, note, the view that he transgressed all boundaries is inherent in his rebellion against God’s good boundaries and in his role as ‘The Evil One’.

The most famous image representing the Devil’s transgender nature is the Baphomet. Baphomet is a hermaphrodite figure, and one of the most recognized symbols of Satan in the last century or so. Baphomet was first visually conceptualized by French occultist Éliphas Lévi “in his book Dogme et rituel de la haute magie (‘Dogma and Ritual of the High Magic’, 1855) and elsewhere.”

Note, we are not seeking here to establish precisely how Scripture describes the gender of the Devil. The point is to establish that a lot of historical Christian theology viewed the Devil as a being that transgresses all boundaries, and early feminists were inspired by this and took this idea and ran with it. They turned this transgender being into a liberator of women.

Notice how evil always inverts. “The Light of the World” became “the Dark Ages”. The revival of satanic darkness became “the Enlightenment”. And the enslavement of women to sin and self-destruction became “Women’s Liberation”.

If you want to discern if something has satanic roots, look for the inversion. Once you spot it, you’ll scent the sulfur soon enough.

DISCUSS ON SG


The End of Globalization

The economic insanity of the post-Cold War era is rapidly coming to an end, as the global economy is dividing again into three parts, Clown World (USA-UK-EU-Israel), Sovereign World (China-Russia-Iran), and the unaligned countries.

Moscow expects increased economic cooperation with China as the West takes a more dictatorial stance, in global affairs, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned on Monday. Russia intends to build relations with independent countries and will decide how to deal with the West if and when it comes to its senses, he added.

“Now that the West is taking the position of a dictator, our economic ties with China will grow even faster,” Lavrov told students at the Primakov School… If and when the West comes to its senses and wants to offer something in terms of resuming relations, Russia will “seriously consider whether we will need it or not,” the foreign minister told the high-schoolers.

Moscow isn’t just implementing a strategy of import substitution in response to anti-Russian sanctions, but “must stop in any way being dependent on the supply of anything from the West” and rely on its own capabilities and those countries that have “proven their reliability” and act independently, Lavrov explained.

The difference is that whereas the First World previously had the advantage because the Second World was subject to a dysfunctional economic ideology, it’s now Clown World that is subject to an insane ideology that permeates and weakens every single aspect of its societies. This means that the odds of success are heavily in favor of Sovereign World, a situation that is compounded by the pressure that Clown World is presently putting on the unaligned countries to support its insanity.

Those who think that the lessons of history support the probability of Clown World success are looking superficially at the nominal labels of the parties involved rather than the substance of the various parties and their relative capabilities. Consider this: whereas the populations and the industrial capacities was heavily stacked in favor of the Triple Alliance in WWI and the Allies in WWII, they are even more heavily stacked in favor of Sovereign World now.

And whereas Britain was once powerful enough to force Chinese submission in the First Opium War of 1839-1842 by itself, it no longer has the ability to meaningfully oppose Iran, let alone Russia or China. Not only are the states of Clown World no longer what they were, unlike the nations of Sovereign World, they are no longer even proper nations anymore.

DISCUSS ON SG