National Socialism

Pretexts and PNAC

By M.K. Styllinski

  “There is no telling how many wars it will take to secure freedom in the homeland.”

George W. Bush, speech on August 7, 2002


Hoodwinking the public into accepting wars is a very old tactic indeed. Under the tutelage of the British Empire, the United States of America has been one of the most violent “democracies” on earth. So-called US “interventions” as world policeman have been taking place in the most vulnerable regions of the world for well over one hundred years. Given that most of the so-called threats against Western democracy are either a) weak and debt-ridden countries; b) installed with a US-NATO proxy dictator and c) ripe for resource picking, it comes as no surprise that a huge back lash is taking place against Anglo-American hegemony. America and Britain’s record of invasion doesn’t stack up with the “axis-of-evil” regimes such as Iran who have never attacked anyone in over 200 years.

bush-rove

Another overshadowing Iago: Karl Rove

There was a reason that the Bush Administration’s then Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove had on his desk copies of The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and The Art of War by Sun Tzu: they are  both classics in the psychology of deception and tactics of military warfare, something dear to this man’s shrivelled heart. This was the same senior advisor of the most powerful man who believes in the idea of a “reality-based community,” or that “… solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” Rather like his colleague Michael Leeden, another Neo-Conservative authoritarian who believes in deception and lies as a way to gain the upper hand. (More on Leeden in a later post).

Rove seems to be a fine example of political psychopathy which advocates an entirely subjective reality based on Empire-desire where reality is what you make it.

Or in his own words: 

“That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” …“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” [1]

Government-sponsored terrorism or “synthetic terror” has been a part of warfare since before Sun Tzu’s Art of War from the 6th Century BC. If the enemy is too large then the abiding manoeuvre is always to divide in order to conquer. Since “All warfare is based on deception” it stands to reason that secrecy under the guise of freedom must underlie all operations, where future plans are as:

“… dark and impenetrable as night …” and where the public are programmed to: “Engage … with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate.” [2]

The September 11th attacks was one such moment.

The focus of deception was gradually transferred from the battle-field and mercenary colonialism to the civilian populations as targets. Western democracy began to rise through electoral politics and International banking and their weapons manufacturers had to move with the times by using propaganda and social science to deliver jingoistic consent for globalism. After all, if a British or American Empire is seeking new countries to invade, convert and exploit you need a ready supply of willing young men to die for it.

From the British Empire to Pax Americana, once the belief that “God is on our side” is promoted as self-evident through the progress of power, then targeted countries inhabited by “savages”, “communists” or “Islamists” are then cultivated and demonised as “evil,” the beliefs systems of which have been purposely assisted to manifest extremes in order to make it easy for the mass mind. Bombing and black ops can begin so that Christian democracy can elevate a backward nation and control its destiny for resource management. The public consciousness is then flooded with propaganda in press, film and chat shows to “stiffen the sinews” and “conjure up the blood” so that they might find themselves in a condition of self-righteous indignation and actually demand that their governments take action. It becomes as easy to equate the Sandinistas of Nicaragua with an insidious plot to topple American freedoms as it is to fuse Osama bin Laden with Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destructions with Iraq.

US-Israeli hegemony steered by the hidden hand of British banking interests has made the business of neo-imperialism the number one reason for conflict in the world. As long as the cosy relationship with arms manufacturers and US defence Dept. continues to buy Congress, which in turn, restricts any alternative economic models then the Empire can continue to expand under the guise of “intervention.”

So, why the constant reference to pearl harbour when people mention the Neo-Cons and 9/11?

Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence designed an eight step plan for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in order to provoke an attack from Japan and thus involve the United States in the War. The October 1940 memorandum called for an economic embargo, stopping weapons shipments to Japan’s adversaries and the blockade of Tokyo’s ports preventing access to essential raw materials. This could only lead to a confrontation with America.

The FDR government and the US Navy had foreknowledge of the attack in much the same way as factions within the Bush Administration and related shadow government agencies knew about 9/11 and perhaps had a hand in its planning.  US cables tracked the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbour, keeping tabs on its course right up to the “surprise attack”. While top US Navy personnel were barred from accessing intelligence reports regarding the approach of the Japanese destroyers and their pilots. The deaths of over three thousand American service men; massive destruction of the US Navy fleet and the transformation from huge public resistance to the war to unbridled horror and outrage at such a dastardly act, ensured entry into the War, central to US dominance in the Asia-Pacific. [3]

PNAC_logo

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank with a blueprint for a contemporary Pearl Harbour writ large in Neo-Conservative lettering. PNAC signatories and members included Florida governor Jeb Bush; Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was indicted for perjury in October 2005; Elliot Abrams, who became Bush’s top Middle East aide at the National Security Council; John Bolton, Bruce Jackson, Norman Podhoretz, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Dr. Dov S. Zakheim, chairman William Kristol, directors Robert Kagan and the Dark lord Dick Cheney himself, were all hawks desperate for perpetual war as policy.

PNAC’s 1997 statement of principles wished to remind Americans of past “lessons” and “consequences” which called for a “Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity.” Signatories believed: “we need to increase spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future.”

Reading beneath the euphemistic verbiage, it means they desperately wished to increase defence expenditure in order to float their imperialistic visions or in other words : “strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.” This translates as power-sharing with countries who think the same, but only insofar as it supports their objectives for global dominance. Regime change equates to “challenging” nations which do not agree with US foreign policy having little to do with humanitarian and democratic values. Thus the: “need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad” means an expansion of covert strategic, tactical and psychological operations or “dirty tricks.” This is all wrapped up in the polite, civilised language of politicians seeking only a benign form of interventionism which actually masks a ponerological injunction of decidedly grim intentions. They state a: “need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.” [4]

The term “Neo-Conservatism” was coined by political scientist Michael Harrington in the mid 1970s to describe a new form of conservatism which incorporated elements of intellectual liberalism and socialist principles. It claimed to be anti-Utopian yet was even further removed from the pragmatism and reality consensus it professed to embody. Jewish Intellectual and former Trotskyist Irving Kristol has been dubbed the “godfather” of Neo-Conservatism and generally recognised as being responsible for its genesis. As discussed in the World State Policies  and World Revolution series, Neo-Conservatism is an exact fusion of Fabian socialism, Keynesian/neo-liberal economics and the ideology of international revolution suffused with a Christian Zionist bias. In other words, it is a new form of neo-fascism most obviously through the complete corporatisation of the State which is then exported internationally through the geopolitics of coloured revolutions. It is little wonder it has attracted turbo-charged psychopaths like bees to honey. It is political psychopathy writ large, or as exactly as psychologist Andrew M. Lobaczewski described such channels of pathology in the title of his profoundly important book: Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes. 

kristol1

Irving Kristol circa 1965

Getting high on Irving Kristol’s intellectual justification for a new kind of conservatism wasn’t the only major influence for the rise of Neo-Conservatism and the subsequent formation of PNAC. A bedrock of inspiration and ideology can be found in an 1999 essay called “Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (by Which we do not mean Nous)” written by Neo-Conservative academic Abram Shulsky and PNAC co-founder Gary Schmitt. Both of these intellectuals studied under the Jewish political philosopher Leo Strauss who arrived in the United States in 1938 and a key figure in Neo-Conservative ideology. Given that he believed that all intelligence work comprises of deception and counter-deception across governments and society at large, the essay can be seen as a subtle exercise in the importance of understanding the vagaries of cultural differences assigned to “regimes” and how such knowledge could institute a form of change. It doesn’t take an academic’s mind to reveal that the type of change sought for is distinctly fascist in flavour,  with a high proportion of its advocates straddling both Zionist and Conservative Establishment circles. Thus, “Zio-Conservatives” is often a more appropriate label.

Kristol maintains, it is not an ideology but a “persuasion,” a way of thinking about politics rather than a compendium of principles and axioms. [5] The importance of concealing one’s true intentions from the public while informing the party faithful with coded words is also a part of the the art of deception. In terms of polity and the intelligence apparatus, it has never been clearer that this is the only thing that mattered. Necessity is not the mother of invention for Neo-Conservatives; rather necessity gives birth to deception as a means to policy ends. [6]

Schmitt and Shulsky admit that political life: “… may be closely linked to deception. Indeed, it suggests that deception is the norm in political life, and the hope, to say nothing of the expectation, of establishing a politics that can dispense with it is the exception.” So, they chose to embrace this deception fully and completely,  which is hardly a surprise given that Strauss was an advocate of secrecy, hierarchy and Elite authoritarianism where the psychology of leaders was of little consequence.

Straussian principles of “Might is Right” and the “Ends justify the Means” is music to the ears of authoritarian personalities which channel their frustrated energies into modern think-tanks, much like PNAC forerunner. Secular democracy was contemptuous for Strauss and in true authoritarian form he believed in the fusion of Church and State as a means to exert control over the masses, but not necessarily to prop up any religious belief in the architects themselves. Ordinary people once again, are seen as a mass of uncontrolled instinct to be sternly managed by Papa Strauss.

leostrauss

Leo Strauss

And this brings us back to Pearl Harbour. What is perhaps most telling in the context of 911 and PNAC is the Machiavellian nature of Straussian belief which was twisted into something beyond the mere philosophical. Shadia B. Dury Professor of political science at the University of Calgary and author of Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999) states: “Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in,” which stems from Strauss’s belief: “… that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat,”… he maintained that “if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured.[7]

Military pre-eminence via the changing face of technology is the subject explored in the figurehead document of PNAC which we have mentioned before: “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (1997) and which discusses “… the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. The Pearl Harbour event is mentioned again later on in the document: “Absent a rigorous program of experimentation to investigate the nature of the revolution in military affairs as it applies to war at sea, the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor – as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age”. [8]

Though the emphasis is on the unpreparedness of military technology, when taken with Neo-Conservative politicising as a whole, this is merely cover for a pre-emptive doctrine which, if not signalling a nudge and a wink towards the planning of a monumental false-flag operation of which only a select handful may have been aware, then it was the tacit support of such a scenario, should the opportunity present itself.

911-terrorist-attack-Pearl_harbour

9/11: The New Pearl Harbour?

From banking, think-tanks and the military the same script is being followed. The reference to “catastrophic and catalyzing event” can be found by arch-esoteric writer for the Elite crowd Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book, The Grand Chessboard and his discussion on America where he states: “… it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” This is no throw-away comment coming from one of the creators of the Al-Qaeda network, alongside the CIA involvement in the Soviet-Afghan conflict. Tracing this meme further, we can find his comrade David Rockefeller in an address to the United Nations Business Council in 1994 touting the same fervent desire: “We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

execu3

Executive laws laid down by the Bush Administration and ready to enforce for President Barack Obama (click on above text for greater resolution) Source: Infrakshun.

Following the PATRIOT Act and PATRIOT Act II was the Home Security Act which was recently updated by former human rights lawyer President Barack Obama. The executive orders currently in the Federal Register can be passed without a whiff of red tape should a National emergency suddenly materialize. And most importantly, prior congressional approval is not needed for such directives – they are instantly effective once the National Emergency is implemented.

The body responsible for enforcing these orders is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) which has long been recognized as being a whole lot more than just an administrative agency during times of environmental disaster or National emergency. In fact, it has the most extraordinary capabilities that would leave any dictator beaming with anticipation. The true nature of FEMA has been nurtured for its role in overseeing the coming police state by branches of a Shadow Government that have been working steadily behind the scenes in conjunction with the military to ensure that a potent National Emergency can be engineered as part of the Plan for World Order. These branches include the National Security Council, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Program Office, all of which have an interesting history of deception. FEMA is a hermetically sealed symbol of totalitarian muscle, answering only to the National Security council, which in turn answers only to the Shadow Government.

100_3257© infrakshun

Executive laws are immediately enforceable but they cannot be restricted or altered by any department or individual – not even congress. If we follow the narrative from commentators in the last ten years from all sides of the political divide are we to expect, at some point in the future, a “terrorist attack” on Congress? Striking at the heart of a perceived democracy would put paid to any ideological resistance at home, and to certain degree, abroad. Remarkably, there already exists a commission to take over in the event of all or most of congress somehow being unable to fulfil their civic duty. Ingeniously named the “Continuity of Government Commission” they had this to say on their main page:

“In the fall of 2002, the Continuity of Government Commission was launched to study and make recommendations for the continuity of our government institutions after a catastrophic attack. September 11th raises the possibility that foreign enemies might seriously disrupt the filling of vacancies in Congress, presidential succession, and achieving a quorum for the Court so much so that our basic institutions might not function in a normal constitutional manner.” [9]

Behind these apparently measured PNAC proposals was masked a virulent form of war-mongering. In January 1998, PNAC published an open letter to President Clinton urging “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power”, by military force if necessary in order to protect: “… our vital interests in the Gulf.” Clinton, running along more Fabian lines did not like to be pressured by anyone, least of all the Zio-Cons who were commonly known by lower level CIA personnel as the “Crazies.” Nevertheless, these signatories which included Abrams, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, and U.N. ambassador John Bolton went on to become the main backers of the 2003 genocide in Iraq and their dreams of conquest. [10]

A few days after the 9/11 attacks, a PNAC letter pressured President Bush to extend the parameters of engagement regarding the War on Terror by including Saddam Hussein and Lebanon’s Hezbollah. The need to encompass any and all – even if entirely unconnected – was a driving force in the minds of PNAC members. So, too were the groups true colours revealed in relation to the prevalence of Zionism and its agents. In an April 2002 letter to Bush on Israel, Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were deemed “a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism,” and that America must therefore end support for not only the PA but the Israeli-Palestinian peace process itself. And peace is the last thing Zio-Conservatism wishes to see, being counter to the policy of perpetual war and the theocracy of Zionist visions.  PNAC members wrote that: “Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight,” calling for Bush to “accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power.” [11]

Though The Project for a New American Century hung up its armchair warmongering in 2006 in part due to bad press, it was unlikely that Neo-Con hawks would simply fade into the background. True to form, Son of PNAC made its debut in 2009 yawningly named The Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) founded by the same Straussians William Kristol, Robert Kagan and former Bush minion Don Senor. Unbelievably, the faintest whisper of humility and caution was notably absent when it sponsored a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan and a greater involvement of the US military in the country. As reporters Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe write: “… the formation of FPI may be a sign that its founders hope once again to incubate a more aggressive foreign policy during their exile from the White House, in preparation for the next time they return to political power.” [12]

They have never left however. A May 2010 report (PDF) from the a Washington, DC think tank, Brookings Institute state quite clearly that Neo-Conservatives such as former Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Irving Kristol’s son Bill Kristol and writer and former politician Richard Perle are working their (black) magic within the Obama Administration.

Keep in mind that just because a fusion between certain elements of the Three Establishment Model (3EM) defined the 1990s and early 2000s does not mean the pathology behind it has suddenly been replaced. Obviously, no such redemption was forthcoming since Obama-Biden administration has brought with it the same strains of pathology with even more disasterous results. That ideological baton has merely been passed to the Liberal Establishment who have exactly the same objectives of globalism as the Conservatives and Zionist arms, they just differ in the means to get there. Once again, what is at stake here is the choice, not between different parties or ideologies – that is an illusion – but the choice between a world locked into a perpetual high-level psychopathy that normalises greed, hatred and destruction to erode the human spirit, or the clawing back of a state of equilibrium where such extreme negativity is called out for what it is – evil. As the US police state gains momentum it seems that they are, once again, a step closer to their ideal.

For the PNAC and FPI teams the September 11th Attacks were so well timed it was miraculous.

The question is, do you believe in miracles?

 


Notes

[1] ‘Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush’. By Ron Suskind, The New York Times Magazine.October 17 2004.
[2] Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Ch. VII.
[3] Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor By Robert Stinnett. Published by The Free Press, First Edition, 1999. ISBN-10: 0684853396.
[4] http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
[5]‘Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (by Which We Do Not Mean Nous)’ by Gary J. Schmitt and Abram N. Shulsky 1999.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Leo Strauss’ Philosophy of Deception’ By Jim Lobe, AlterNet, May 18, 2003. | Leo Strauss and the American Right by Shadia B. Drury, 1999. Published by Palgrave MacMillan ISBN-10: 0312217838.
[7] PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses ( p.51) | Ibid. (p.53)
[8] Continuity of Government: Current Federal Arrangements and the Future Harold C. Relyea Specialist in American National Government Government and Finance Division: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21089.pdf
[9] PNAC Letter to President Clinton on Iraq, January 26, 1998 -www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[10] PNAC Letter to President Bush on Israel, Arafat and the War on Terrorism, April 3, 2002. http://www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[11] ‘Neo-Con Ideologues Launch New Foreign Policy Group’ By Jim Lobe and Daniel Luban, Inter Press Service News Agency http://www.ips.net

Dark Green VIII: Waldheim’s UN, Lebensräum and Sustainable Development

The-United-Nations“Governments must take action to support institutions and mechanisms that will improve coherence, as well as bring about integrated policy and action across the social, economic and environmental pillars.

Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level.

There is also strong support for strengthening global governance by including civil society, business and industry in decision-making at all levels.”

State of the Planet Declaration


Strains of eco-fascism have been worming their way through the insides of the United Nations and genuine initiatives since it first arrived on the scene, care of Rockefeller funding. The Malthusian influence didn’t fully get underway until 1967 with the Trust Fund for Population Activities, a result of the 2nd World Population Conference in Belgrade, two years earlier. After this, a steady outflow of population bomb hysteria linked with environmentalism, education, international aid and health began to emerge. Ever looking for a way to push through its “scientific technique” of humanism, UNESCO held their conference on the Scientific Basis for the Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere in 1968, complementing the publication of Paul Erhlich’s book The Population Bomb in the same year. The World Population Conference in Bucharest followed in 1974. [1]

Pertinent to our exploration of Elite-induced eco-fascism, Austrian-Czech Kurt Waldheim seems to have played an important part in its genesis when he became General Secretary of the United Nations from 1972 – 1981. When we look at his background it is not hard to understand why.

After the German annexation of Austria in 1938 Waldheim was attending the Boltzmangasse Consular Academy and the University of Vienna’s Law Faculty which had built a tradition of Nazi recruitment and indoctrination. [2]In the same year, 20-year old Waldheim became a member in the National Socialist German Students’ League (NSDStB), a division of the Nazi Party. Not long after, he applied to become a member of the mounted corps of the SA but it is not clear if he actually became a member. [3]In early 1941, he then served as a squad leader in the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front and soon discharged from further service after being wounded, spending the rest of the war studying for a law degree at the University of Vienna. He also married Elizabeth Ritschel in 1944 who was uncompromising in her belief in Nazism. [4]

It seems Waldheim did rather well as an intelligence officer of the Wehrmacht obtaining the rank of Oberleutnant. According to The International Commission of Historians Waldheim’s functions in the German Army Group E from 1942 – 1945 were as: “… an Interpreter and liaison officer with the 5th Alpine Division (Italy) in April/May 1942, O2 officer (communications) with Kampfgruppe West in Bosnia in June/August 1942, Interpreter with the liaison staff attached to the Italian 9th Army in Tirana in early summer 1942, O1 officer in the German liaison staff with the Italian 11th Army and in the staff of the Army Group South in Greece in July/October 1943 and O3 officer on the staff of Army Group E in Arksali, Kosovska Mitrovica and Sarajevo from October 1943 to January/February 1945.” [5]

Kurt Waldheim

Kurt Waldheim

By 1943 he was in Yugoslavia and embroiled in the massacres carried out by the German and Croatian military. Waldheim claimed no direct knowledge of these atrocities but had heard such things took place. He stated he had been “horrified” but believed he was powerless to prevent such things from happening, which was probably true. [6]However, as author William Walter Kay mentions, this was standard protocol in German Army units in which Waldheim served. He tells us: “In 1942 the multi-national Axis army enacted a system of reprisals for acts of resistance including punitive executions of suspects. SS units randomly lynched Serbs from Belgrade street-posts to meet quota. Worse atrocities were committed by the Axis puppet state of Croatia – a front for the genocidal Ustasha movement …”

Walter Kay also notes: On March 19, 1942, after a spike in resistance, the German 12th Army decreed: ‘The most minor case of rebellion, resistance or concealment of arms must be treated immediately by the strongest deterrent methods… It is better to liquidate 50 suspects than have one soldier killed’ ” These standards were mild. In Bosnia, where Waldheim was, ratios were: ‘100 Serbs to be executed for every German killed, 50 Serbs for every German wounded.’ ” [7]

What came under the spotlight more than any other period of Waldheim’s history is his role in Operation Kozara in 1942. Also known as Operation West-Bosnian by the Axis, fierce fighting took place around the mountain of Kozara in North-Western Bosnia involving Yugoslav Partisan resistance against the Germans, Croatians and Chetniks. Over 25,000 Serbs were sent to concentration camps and many civilian atrocities carried out by the invading forces [8]

One of the biggest and most notorious camps was Jasenovac based in Ustaše (Croatia).

In 1942, when victory over the Bosnian Resistance had been declared, Waldheim was cited for valour before joining General von Stahl’s 72,000-troop Battle Group in West Bosnia in order to rout the partisans once and for all. The General went to work in no uncertain fashion, ringing the surrounding area with barbed wire before advancing. The aftermath saw: “4,735 insurgents/suspects were executed and 70,000 civilians were shipped to camps. Rape and robbery were rampant.” Indeed, Waldheim’s role as an intelligence officer was to keep casualty statistics and to organise transportation for detainees. His name appears on a fine paper commemorative ‘list of honour’ a Wehrmacht document for distinguished service in Kozara. The Croatians awarded him a silver Crown of King Zvonimir medal “for courage in the battle against the rebels in West Bosnia.” [9]

Not exactly standing on the side-lines.

Yet, once again, Waldheim claimed ignorance even though he was in the thick of atrocities and as an intelligence officer it was his job to collate statistics and be acutely aware of the numbers game relating to all aspects of operations. One such operation took place in the Greek city port of Salonika on July 11, 1942 where: “… several thousand Jewish men were corralled into the city square and forced to perform difficult yoga positions under the hot sun while German soldiers hooted, clapped and took photographs. Elderly Jews died on the spot. The photos circulated widely in the Axis press including in a Croatian newspaper popular where Waldheim was then stationed.” [10]

If not directly involved, Waldheim was part of the enabling intelligence apparatus which had detailed knowledge of atrocities. As Walter Kay highlights: “Deporting Jews was a labour intensive operation, much discussed by the soldiers, and unavoidable to an intelligence officer like Waldheim who later pled ignorance.” [11]

Without such enthusiastic support for Croatian fascism Waldheim’s name would scarcely have appeared on the Wehrmacht’s “honor list” of those responsible. In the same year and probably as a reward for a job well done, Kurt Waldheim was allowed time off to complete his PhD thesis ‘The Concept of Reich according to Konstantin Frantz.’” In it he argued that “… the Germanic Reich was the new ‘body of Christ’ inspired by the theory of Prussian statesman Konstantin Frantz (1817-1891) who was part of the Lebensräum ethic of a Greater Germany extending to across Western and central Europe. Poland, Belgium, Switzerland, the Balkans, and the Netherlands were all to be absorbed into the Reich according to Waldheim’s thesis.[12]

Part of the problem with Waldheim’s denial of his own history is the access he had to military information, special briefings, reconnaissance reports, logistics and statistics. As an intelligence officer he was at the sharp end of covert operations. This was best represented by his position as an “O3” officer which: “… were the army’s best informed men.” Walter Kay’s research reveals that Yugoslavian authorities accused Waldheim of involvement in the destruction of villages and massacring civilians, stating: “Orders were planned in detail with the cooperation of the [intelligence] unit at the army corps headquarters, and in particular with the collaboration of Lieutenant Waldheim.” They relied on numerous direct witnesses including three officers from General Loehr’s staff who confirmed Waldheim’s job was “to offer suggestions for reprisals, the fate of prisoners of war and imprisoned civilians.” [13]

After the war in 1947 Waldheim’s record was formally presented to UN War Crimes Commission by the Yugoslav delegation. 75 percent of Yugoslav prosecution requests were rejected by the British-chaired UN Commission. Yet the following year prosecution was recommended in part from British and US veterans’ eyewitness reports and persistent allegations of “putting hostages to death and murder.” [14]And here’s where Waldheim managed to get away with the biggest conjuring trick of his life, which would eventually result in the helmsman ship of the United Nations.

After the summer of 1945 where he had spent most of it in a POW camp he cut a deal with Anglo-American Intel and offered all he knew. In return, Waldheim gained safe passage back to Austria and a new life knowing that various intelligence agents had powerful bargaining chips over his destiny. With the War Crimes Commission concluded by the end of the 1940s with over 36,000 accused Nazi criminals dismissed without trial communism took over as the new bogeyman and Nazis disappeared into the system. His fate was very much in their hands. Like the Nazis of Operation Paperclip and those that fled to Brazil and Argentina it was life that could be both lucrative and powerful provided you would play ball. Waldheim was no different to many who had their war experiences washed cleaned in return for determining policy for vested interests. The next step was to get Waldheim into a position where he could be useful.

After Austria joined the UN in 1955, it was Waldheim who led Austria’s UN delegation until in 1965, whereupon he took up the post of Austrian diplomat in Czechoslovakia. With a failed bid for the Austrian Presidency with an ultra-right wing People’s Party in 1971, he was ushered into pole-position as an authentic candidate for UN Secretary-General.

Quite apart from the fact that Waldheim had a negative reputation within the UN itself (in one individual’s opinion: “a scheming, ambitious, duplicitous egomaniac ready to do anything for advantage or public acclaim.”) he presided over the greening of the institution in ways that established a cast iron, bureaucratic platform for the global warming industry and subsequent green washing in general. [15]In effect, Waldheim used the UN to usher in his global Lebensräum, a practical expression of Nazi land ethic and race theory. EU states supplied 40 percent of the UN’s budget and 50 percent for funding and programmes with most UN head offices located in Europe and two-thirds of environment offices and staff situated in Europe, prominence and complete bias of European Elite dominated the UN during his tenure. American and Russian influence was eroded by allowing mini-states to enter the consensus building process and creating complex and protracted meetings within the UN General Assembly (UNGA).

Meanwhile, Waldheim allowed a particular brand of European environmentalism to take precedence within the UN. Euro-Environmentalism and the UN are now one and the same with the UN’s Economic Commission of Europe (ECE) – which works closely with European Environment Agency (EEA) headquarters in Copenhagen – forging major treaties and subsidiaries for their implementation sourced from a £30 million annual budget. It is linked to the UN Millennium goals project by overseeing better coordination and continuing to usurp its otherwise economic mandate by making sure the “rational use of natural resources and sustainable development” continues apace. [16]

UN Agenda 21 and sustainable Development being the pinnacle of elite objectives. More on this in future posts.

In 1971, Maurice Strong had commissioned a report on the state of the planet, entitled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet” co-authored by Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos. 152 experts had given their analyses as to the “State of the Earth”, the first report of its kind. This was to act as a foundation report for the first major UN meeting on the environment in Stockholm the following year.

When Waldheim chaired the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 it was attended by 113 states, setting for a global environmental textbook for a new industry of activism, operations, institutions and organisations. Twenty-six principles were listed which member states needed to focus their attention, with education, overpopulation, awareness of biodiversity and conversation as the key proponents of a green campaign. Science and society did not feature. The framework for change was predicated on maintaining a capitalist system but placing the ecological principles in the consciousness so that they may be later expanded. In other words, exploitation of resources was fine as long as reserves were not depleted or the environment polluted.

UNESCO’s roots in depopulation, eugenics and humanism was dipped in Waldheim-Green and found to fit remarkably well. Mass education on the perils of global warming and ecological disaster was implemented. The world was running out of oil and radical change was needed in societies. Climate change became an eco-cause.

1971-72 saw a veritable explosion of environmental awareness. Limits to Growth was published, and Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) headed by Maurice Strong all arrived just a few months apart. The UNEP covers a complex range of issues including: the atmosphere, marine and terrestrial ecosystems, environmental governance and green economy. Developing international environmental conventions, promoting environmental science, information and policy integration with national governments, regional institutions and in conjunction with environmental NGOs occupies the headquarters, six regional offices and various country offices around the world. Based in Nairobi, Kenya, with offices worldwide, UNEP’s task was to: “organize regulation of industrial agricultural products, gather data on the detriments of mining, and formulate a global energy balance sheet. UNEP’s inaugural budget financed 100 air pollution measuring stations and 10 stations to record environmental change.” [17]We will be coming back to the UNEP presently. For now, we must jump forward fifteen years.

dreamstime_l_33071801© Cienpiesnf | Dreamstime.com – Go Green Transparent Colorful City

Happy colours! Volunteering and a bright fresh, SMART future for all! I wish that was the reality. This isn’t about tearing down optimistic, and sincere concern for our environment. It’s about calling out elite pathology masquerading as constructive discourse and positive action – and it goes deep indeed. Stay with me here as it’s going to be a long haul.

The term “sustainable development” emerged from the 1987 report of the UN’s World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (otherwise known as the Brundtland Commission) chaired by CoR member Javier Perez de Cuellar, of which Maurice Strong was also a member. (Surprise!) The report was entitled: “Our Common Future” and placed sustainability and the focus on environmental resource management at the forefront of UN projects.

The report stated that the governments of the world have a responsibility to “… maintain eco-systems and ecological processes for the functioning of the biosphere, shall preserve biological diversity, and shall observe the principle of optimum sustainable yield in the use of living natural resources and eco-systems.” [18] Sounds logical and responsible, as all these initiatives do until you read the small print and place it in context. The report defined sustainable development (SD) to mean: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This means that: “Sustainable global development requires that those who are more affluent adopt lifestyles within the planet’s ecological means.” Which is an admirable desire though contradicted when: “Sustainable development can only be pursued if population size and growth are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem.” Hence, the targeting of the third world and very little targeting of those who create and keep the systems in place that defines such a world.  [19]

Due to the vague definition of what constitutes SD, there is still no consensus as to what fulfills the criteria for sustainable practice. Consequently, it has been used to denote and define a wide variety of different beliefs and eco-ideologies from eco-psychology to green capitalism and even domains which have nothing to do with environmental concerns but may feature in the grand scheme of what is perceived as “sustainable.” After all, the architecture of global economics and the dynamics of geo-political strategies connected to securing the world resources can in no way be said to be sustainable. They are based on a “grab and run” mentality. But they both derive their impetus from the environmental fruits of water, energy and food. The sustainable development issue can be used to justify a form of security on the part of the Establishment in order to secure future generations (i.e. their families) with sustainable supplies, despite those resources being finite. That is not to say that SD should not be a vital part of humanity’s endeavours at the local and global level. However, “sustainable” is not synonymous with “green” but it can be a darn good pitch for neo-imperialism.

The recycling and alternative-energy industries employ millions while The World Bank and the UNEP use SD to select which projects to finance. So, if the company walks the green talk and donates to saving a patch of rainforest in the South, he receives the World Bank stamp of approval whilst the company continues to “slash and burn” the Northern section of the forest. Know that your massive mining project will be viewed with disdain by the Structural Adjustment Team? Create a tree foundation and pay the fine. Business will continue as usual, provided you have a good PR dept. Thus a new “Green Capitalism” emerged at the end of the Wall St. eighties which promoted “pollution control pays” as a slogan and where big multi-nationals realised: “environmental management is a powerful corporate tool for improving efficiency” and improving public image even if there was no real change in corporate objectives, commonly known as “green washing”. Which meant the greater the benefits the more willing corporations would be to pay a fine and everyone would be happy. This hasn’t stopped some of the biggest environmental organisations from happily snuggling up to the corporate sponsors.

Mike Wright editor of Green Futures magazine recently commented: “… when it comes to working with business in general, one thing is certain. If our society is to make the decisive shift towards a sustainable future which is so urgently needed, then we need business – including the world’s major corporations – to play a key role in making that happen.” [20] Unfortunately, the nature of the corporation and the financial architecture from which they are birthed simply cannot entertain such a “key role” no matter how hard its employees, environmentalists and the public may want it to happen. Unless that is such dynamics can be turned on its head so that new industries can be borne, tied into the exact same market wheel. If psychopaths cannot be cured and nor can business models cast in their image.

While corporations were “greening” so too was their counterparts in crime.

The World Bank, IMF and UN were tinged with green as part of the international environmental movement’s on going penetration of ecological reform set in motion by the UN’s own Kurt Waldheim. The irony is that advocates of sustainability and self-sufficiency for the developed and underdeveloped world alike see no problem working away within the Structural Adjustment Team who despite every green initiative and conference declaration remain a part of the very economic architecture they wish to dismantle. While the Establishment and the wealthy stay the same, the working class and poor bear the brunt of new ecological systems designed to bring the world closer to a sustainable vision.

One example of the SD complexity inherent in non-linear eco-systems is the latest excitement that is producing ethanol from corn to make fuel. This product was once heralded as a saviour of environmentally sound agriculture in much the same cynical way as GMO foods were for feeding the world’s poor. Although corn is a renewable resource and replacing petrol with corn ethanol seems like a reason to be hopeful. But the cultivation, harvesting and conversion of corn is extremely energy intensive. Even if you succeed in making ethanol more sustainable than petrol you will leave a trail of environmental and social carnage behind you. When you divert corn to make ethanol it translates as less corn to feed your cattle, less corn to feed people which means the cost of corn goes up. That means more land is needed to turn into farmland and depending on the country and / or region that can mean more pressure on fallow or rainforest land which is razed to the ground once more. Open to alternatives sources of fuel and energy still inside the insatiable market maw cannot work unless the root perceptions and thus the economic frameworks upon which they are based has also changed. There lies the real “World Problematique.”

Sustainable Development is a buzzword with the best of intentions behind it. But it remains to be seen how much authentic sustainability can truly take hold in the present. The depletion of natural resources is a reality as is the scope for implementing solutions from permaculture to woodland management. The dark side sees SD fall into the hands of the World State advocates and their technocrats who see it as an opportunity not just to protect Nature over man, but as another avenue from which humanity can find themselves (literally) trapped.

In the next post we will briefly look at the UN’s Rio Earth Summit where many of these ideas were firmly planted in our consciousness care of Maurice Strong. We will then return to  Sustainable Development and how it seamlessly interlocks with another domain currently being contoured away from true creativity and emancipation: SMART growth.

 


Notes

[1] p. 637; Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements By Edmund Osmancyzk, Routledge, New York, 2003 | ISBN 0415939208.
[2] ‘Austrian university confronts Nazi past’ by Wolfgang Freidl, The Lancet, Volume 356, Issue 9246, Page 1994, 9 December 2000.
[3] Report of the International Historical Commission of 8 February 1988, section on “Membership in National Socialist Organizations”, as cited for example in http://www.nationalsozialismus.at/Themen/Umgang/waldheim.htm
[4] Quoted in William Walter Kay’s article: ‘Waldheim’s Monster: United Nations’ Ecofascist Programme’ 2009. This was in turn sourced from; Waldheim; Bernhard; Rosenzweig Luc, Adama Books, New York, 1987 (p. 18)
[5] The Waldheim Report. Submitted 8 February 1988 to Federal Chancellor Dr. Franz Vranitzky (p.39).
[6] ‘Kurt Waldheim: Austrian head of the UN who as president of his country was later tainted by charges of complicity in Nazi atrocities’. The Times 15 June 2007.
[7] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting: Herzstein, Robert; Waldheim, The Missing Years; Arbor House/William Morrow; New York; 1988 (p.60 and p. 67).
[8] Bosworth, R.J.B. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Fascism. Oxford University Press. p. 431. ISBN 978-0-19-929131-1.
[9] op. cit. Walter Kay.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p.85-87)
[14] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p 79 – 80)
[15] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Hazzard, Shirley; Countenance of Truth: The United Nations and the Waldheim Case; Viking Penguin; New York; 1990( p. 91)
[16] op. cit Walter Kay
[17] Ibid.
[18] Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment. (1987) http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
[19] http://www.earthcharter.org 2009.
[20] ‘Sponsorship: green wave or greenwash?’ by Martin Wright, Green Futures, 19th July, 2012.

Dark Green III: Eco-Nazi-Aristocracy

UK-GermanFlag-

© infrakshun


The Nazis were the first radical environmentalists who, with a bit of help from Wall Street, happened to land themselves control of the State. The British monarchy and its aristocratic web of relations has continued a distinctly feudalistic version of nature conservation, hunting and ecology which has continued to the present day. It is common knowledge that a Germanic background has laid at the foundation of English royalty which has had a peculiar link to the development of ecological consciousness and its present inversion.

Jonathon Petropoulos’ Royals and the Reich shows exactly why German aristocrats were the most fascistic of the time:

270 German princes and princesses were Nazi Party members. A sampling of 312 “old aristocratic” families found 3,592 Party members. Every noble family east of the Elbe River had at least one member in the Party. A third of Nazi-aristocrats joined the Party before Hitler became Chancellor; a majority supported the Nazis, or like groups, before this date …. Royal Hohenzollern princes were high-profile Nazi campaigners during the Nazis’ struggle for power. Aristocrats occupied thousands of top government posts during the Third Reich.

King Edward VIII was a Nazi. He was definitely guilty of treason and possibly guilty of attempted regicide. Edward did not abdicate in order to marry Wallis Simpson. He was forced from the throne by PM Baldwin because Edward was heading up a Nazi fifth column in the UK.

George V, George VI, the Duke of Kent and scores of British aristocrats promoted “appeasement.” This “peace movement” was an effort to steer Britain into the Axis.

Western Europe’s aristocracy, including most German princes, survived World War II. They retained, even supplemented, their land holdings. Over the past few decades they have engineered a remarkable renaissance. [1]

And that renaissance involved inherited land rights which underpinned the maintenance of an authoritarian class system, fed by a fear of civil unrest and anti-Bolshevism. The aristocracy wanted to play a part in leading the masses out of an old world in decline, a New Order that would be fiercely protected and re-packaged under National Socialism.  Futurism, synarchy and the eco-fascism that went with it, was dear to the hearts of much of the aristocracy and Establishment classes in the 1920s. By 1917, the aristocratic families of the Windsors, Romanovs, Habsburgs, Savoys and Hohenzollerns were “the original European Union,” all of whom: “… practised endogamy [marrying within one’s own social, ethic group] to such an extent that the entire Protestant caste could name Queen Victoria and/or Denmark’s Christian IX as an ancestor.” [2]

After the tyrannical Emperor Wilhelm was removed from power in 1918, the rural life continued to be worshipped by the Aristo-Elite in the Weimar Republic harking back to the good ole’ days which led to young aristocrats shunning the Republic and turning their attention to Nazi ideology and the rise of right-wing paramilitary groups. Despite considerable changes over the years the aristocracy and upper classes held onto their wealth and power. The revolution in the Weimar Republic was a political one and did nothing to change the Elite who were entrenched in the old economic order which obviously benefited their financial status and traditions. The aristocracy and the Nazis came to rely on each other as National Socialism gained support. Throughout the 1920s and 30s: a Nazi high society mingled with: “… Aristocrats, industrialists and movie stars [who] lounged in Goring’s and Goebbels’s parlours. Few from this scene bothered to read abstruse ideological screeds like Mein Kampf.” [3]

Though the party sold itself on grassroots support from the peasantry and a party for the workers and the disenfranchised in society, in reality they used the wealth of the German nobility and mixed freely with higher classes. Even though there was Brownshirt rhetoric against nobility and much distrust, this only boiled over when Hitler’s paranoia reached epic proportions and he began a rejection and imprisonment of many German princes in the latter years of the Second World War. Meantime, monarchists were courted and entertained. In return, Hitler made promises to restore monarchist families. [4] Even when there was resistance to Nazis and their pan-Germanism from families such as the Wittelsbachs and the Habsburgs, their fascism remained rock-solid.

The association of Nazism with nobility would only feed into the mythology of a New World Germanic Order that was somehow blessed by Royal Seal and noble blood, fitting for a Divinely ordained destiny. From this financial security the Nazis promised protection thus increasing the slow gravitation by the aristocracy toward Nazism.

Author William Walter Kay provides some interesting figures:

At least 270 members of princely families joined the Nazi Party. 50 percent of princes and princesses eligible to join the Party did so. Of the 270 card-carrying Nazi princes and princesses, 80 joined before January 30, 1933. One survey of 312 “old aristocratic” families found 3,592 Nazi Party members; 962 of whom joined the Party before 1933. This is hardly an exhaustive list of aristocratic Nazis.

No one has ventured a guess as to what percentage of Germany’s 70,000 nobles were Nazi Party members; but this percentage was far higher than that for the general public. The nobility were probably the most Nazi-friendly demographically identifiable cohort. Every noble family east of the Elbe River had at least one member in the Party. [5]

The family of Hessens or the House of Hesse had been an enthusiastic supporter of the Third Reich boasting 14 party members in its three family branches. Involved in selling mercenaries and land confiscation, owning shares in the notorious I.G. Farben and pursing investments in art, jewellery, furniture, porcelain and other durables, their influence was substantial. *

Princess Margaret’s mother was the eldest daughter of Queen Victoria and her father was Kaiser Friedrich III. She married Landgrave Friedrich Karl of the Hesse-Kassel branch where she had six sons. The surviving children Prince Christoph von Hessen and Prince Philipp von Hessen are of particular note in that they embraced and perpetuated Nazism though their actions and subsequent families. When Prince Christoph married Princess Sophia of Greece and Denmark in 1930, the ring bearer at the wedding was Sophia’s nine year old brother Philip – the future Duke of Edinburgh and according to Petropoulos: “Sophia’s mother was a Battenberg, a morganatic branch of the Hesse-Darmstadts. Sophia’s three sisters, Margarita, Theodora and Cecile, each married Nazi-aristocrats. Margarita married Prince Gottfried zu Hohenlohe-Langenburg – a great-grandson of Queen Victoria. He was a Nazi Party member in contact with Nazi leaders, and an Army commander during the 1938 occupation of Austria. Nazi Party Foreign Policy Office head, Alfred Rosenberg, turned to Gottfried to solicit British royals.” [6]

Christoph-phillppe

Prince Christoph von Hessen (left) and his brother Philpp von Hessen (right)

Prince Christoph began working for Herman Göering’s intelligence agency in 1933, the Reich Air Ministry Research Office (Forschungamt or “FA”) which was an extremely powerful Third Reich agency. He rose up the ranks of the SS to be inducted into Himmler’s personal staff in 1934 and by 1939 he had become an SS Oberfuhrer. Having joined the Luftwaffe in the same year: “The Luftwaffe awarded Christoph an Iron Cross for his assistance in planning the gratuitous bombing of Rotterdam in May 1940. 1,000 civilians were killed with 78,000 left homeless.” [7] Petropoulos’ evidence also points to Christoph’s involvement in planning attacks on Buckingham Palace. He died in a plane crash in 1943 flying from Rome to Germany.

His brother Prince Philipp von Hessen was quite a different character, being more of an arts-driven socialite. He joined the Hessian Dragoons just prior to World War I but never saw combat; studied art and architecture at Darmstadt University and became an interior designer in Rome, his family funding a flamboyant lifestyle. While there, he became attached to both Count Albrecht von Bismarck and his social circle which were part of the European intelligentsia. British writer Siegfried Sassoon was one of the lengthier homosexual relationships in Philipp’s life. [8]  However, true to tradition in September 1925, he married Princess Mafalda – daughter of Italian King Vittorio III. The marriage was well attended by Royalty and the Euro-Establishment. Living in Italy they were part of the fascist Italian royal inner circle and Phillip’s position allowed him to act as conduit for relations between Italian-German aristocrats. This is explains why Mussolini – a highly popular figure at the time – was seen posing in photos of the happy couple on their wedding day. It wasn’t long before they had four children with the youngest named “Adolph” as homage to his Godfather.

Philipp’s cousin Prince August Wilhelm, was the person who officially recruited him into the Nazis. He joined the Nazi Party in 1930, while Mafalda opted for the Nazi women’s auxiliary with their two eldest already in the Hitler Youth. After having joined the SA in 1931 Hitler personally promoted Philipp to General of the SA five years later with a seat at the Prussian Staatsrat and the Reichstag. As we know, the SA was a hot-bed of homosexual favouritism so it probably greased the wheels of the Prince’s success, eventually becoming one of Hitler’s closest confidents. Philipp himself is quoted as saying: “I always had access to Hitler if I wanted it.” [9]

Royal_Standard_of_the_Grand_Duke_of_Hesse_(1903–1918).svg

Royal Standard of the Grand Duke of Hesse (1903–1918) (wikipedia)

To understand how this aristo-fascism manifested on the ground, the following passage illustrates the deep-rooted nature of Philipp’s Nazi beliefs which was no different at all to ordinary card-carrying Nazis:

Philipp supported the Third Reich’s forced sterilization of 300,000 people. In 1935 he ordered a stifling of local clerical criticism of this program. Hadamar was the site of numerous sterilizations including one of an epileptic member of Hesse family who died after the operation.

Hadamar was one of six killing centres in the T-4 program to exterminate disabled persons. This program, launched in 1939, was co-managed by the Interior Ministry and the Chancellery (located at Tiergartenstrasse 4 in Berlin, hence “T-4”). 70,000 people were killed. T-4 executioners later figured prominently in the Holocaust. T-4 was officially halted in 1941 in response to clerical denunciation, but the killing continued. 5,000 were killed at Hadamar after T-4 program officially ended. In total 10,000 were killed at Hadamar. Philipp ignored letters from distraught citizens with relatives caught up in T-4; including a letter from one of his civil servants whose son perished at Hadamar.[10]

From 1934-1939 the prince accompanied Hitler on various travels including the 1938 appeasement deal by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. He spent much of his time acting as liaison between Germany and Italy, procuring valuable pieces of looted art from wealthy citizens and Jews in Italy, Poland, Holland and France, a familiar practice among the aristocrats. By September 1943, Italy had fallen to the Allies and things were turning sour, which meant Philipp had to decide how he was going to save his skin. In order to make his options easier Hitler had him shipped off to Dachau concentration camp while his wife Mafalda was sent to Buchenwald camp where she eventually died. The Prince found himself in the Allies hands when camps were liberated by the US military.

Despite being the 53rd most wanted Nazi, Philipp was to survive and prosper as did so many other German royals who left their Nazi associations and crimes without even a prison sentence. [11]

At the Hadamar trial while Philip was declared to have “retained ultimate responsibility” for the sanatorium, and to have “played a decisive role in the killing,” he went unpunished. Three of his Hadamar co-defendants were sentenced to death.

For an attorney at his denazification trial Philipp hired Fabian von Schlabrendorff, a man with a sterling reputation as a member of the resistance who later assisted the prosecution at the Nuremberg trials.

Schlabrendorff recast Philipp as a victimized member of the resistance. Most of the 17 witnesses called were sympathetic to Philipp. The verdict, rendered December 1947, declared Philipp a Category II offender and sentenced him to two years forced labour and a 30 percent property forfeiture. As he had been incarcerated since 1945, he was released. [12] [Emphasis mine]

In 1968, Philipp succeeded as head of the entire House of Hesse, including grand ducal Hesse (Hesse and by Rhine/Hesse-Darmstadt) on account of the death of his relative Prince Louis of Hesse and by Rhine. He died in 1980 and remained friends with many fascists – including the Duke of Windsor.

While the House of Hessen was perhaps the most high profile aristo-fascists Walter William Kay highlights Jonathan Petropoulos’ research into the prevalence of other aristocrats involved with Nazism. It only represents a partial overview of members and their actions during the war, the whole picture of which may never be known.

He states:

The Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha family had 9 members in the Nazi Party; the Schaumburg-Lippes had 10; the Lippes had 18; and the Hohenlohes had 20.

The royal Hohenzollerns maintained good relations with the Nazi elite from 1929 to 1943. Their support was highly visible. In the early 1930s, as the Nazis struggled, Hohenzollerns appeared in Nazi advertisements and were seated at Nazi rallies where they could be seen by all.

Prince Auwi, the Kaiser’s fourth son, joined the Party on 1 April 1930 but his involvement clearly pre-dates that. He held Nazi membership card number 24. […]

Crown Prince Wilhelm (“Wilhelm”), long an admirer of Italian Fascism, enjoyed a successful meeting with Mussolini in 1928.

Wilhelm campaigned for the Nazis, in SA uniform, in the watershed 1932 Hitler-versus-Hindenburg election. He used his influence in 1932 to help rescind the government ban on the SA and SS. […]

Kaiser Wilhelm regularly contacted Hitler and penned letters praising him. He shared Hitler’s vision of a remilitarized Germany and he espoused anti-Semitic views. […]

Prince Friedrich Christian zu Schaumburg-Lippe worked for the Nazis for a year before joining the Party and becoming a “national speaker” in 1929. […]

[Josias, Hereditary Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont] joined the Nazi Party in 1929 and the SS in early 1930. He was close to Himmler who appointed him SS Chief of Staff and chief aide to the head of Hitler’s personal security team. Waldeck ran the SS equestrian club. He was an SS-General and a Foreign Office Councillor. He held a Reichstag seat from 1933 to 1945. To promote SS settlements in Eastern Europe Waldeck created the Bureau for Germanification of Eastern Peoples. [13]

And of course, we remember Prince Bernhard zur Lippe-Biesterfeld who was a member of the SA, SS and Nazi League of Air Sports and went on to found the Bilderberg group in the 1950s. Fascist tendencies seldom disappear but incubate in the aftermath of the chaos they create, waiting for the next batch of authoritarian and social dominators to gain ascendance. Monarchies, like their freemasonic counterparts, provide yet another hierarchical breeding ground for their manifestation.

That is not to say that this brand of ponerogenic-fascism was exclusively sourced from Germany. The British Royal family have a genetic bloodline and beliefs which were decidedly Germanic. The long history of Royalty and the Establishment and its love-affair with all things Synarchist extended beyond national boundaries. If anything, German Romanticism and National Socialism only mimicked what was already taking place in both Britain and later America, quickening the pace of ponerogenesis.

Queen_Victoria_1887

Queen Victoria,1887

When Queen Victoria married Prince Albert in 1840 it was the beginning of the House of Windsor. Albert was the son of Germany’s Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha though his real surname, Wettin had its roots in another one of the numerous dynastic German families which proliferated in the last few hundred years. By 1917, George the V had dumped Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and Wettin for the thoroughly English-sounding “Windsor” so that their Royal German heritage wouldn’t get in the way of First World War propaganda. That was one irony which might just have caused problems for the perception managers of of the day, enough to threaten the needed fodder of the British Tommy whose death toll reached over 2 million and from which weapons manufacturers and international bankers divided the spoils. [14]

On the other side of the Royal coin the surname of the Queen and Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh is Mountbatten-Windsor the origins of which are drawn from the long-winded Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg. (Which leaves you appreciating the English simplicity of “smith” or “Brown”). The young Philip was schooled at Schloss Salem, run by German-Jewish educator and philosopher Kurt Hahn. Though Hahn did his best to resist the development of Hitler youth within the school, it nevertheless became a bastion of Nazi teaching with race science becoming part of the school’s curricula. [15] Hahn went on to found Gordonstoun School in Scotland which has played a major role in rearing all the male children of Queen Elizabeth II and Philip.

Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh had four sisters all of whom were in Nazi Germany during WWII and were married either to SS-Obergruppenführers or Nazi Gauleiters. Margarita was married to the Czech-Austrian prince Gottfried von Hohenlohe-Langenburg whom we met previously, a great-grandson of England’s Queen Victoria; Theodora to Berthold, the margrave of Baden; Cecilia to Georg Donatus, grand duke of Hesse-by-Rhine, also a great-grandson of Queen Victoria; and, Sophie to Prince Christoph of Hesse. Prince Christoph, Hermann Göering’s Chief of Intelligence whom we looked at briefly, was his brother-in-law and just one of numerous relatives who fell over themselves to snatch a piece of the Nazi pie. So many in fact that Philip’s invitation list was paired down to a handful on account of the surfeit of Nazis that made up his best pals. [16] Prince Henry Duke of Brunswick, real name: Heinrich von Braunschweig for example, or the father of Princess Michael of Kent: Baron Gunther von Reibnitz, an Austrian SS Obergruppenführer. And the brother of Princess Alice, a great-aunt to the Queen, was a forthright Nazi who said that Hitler had done a “wonderful job.” [17]

In response to Jonathan Petropoulos’ The Royals and the Reich (2004) Philip had to indulge in some uncomfortable damage limitation by a televised airing of a much sanitized version of the Royals’ anti-Semitic views. He described the House of Windsor as having ‘inhibitions about the Jews’ and remarked on how there was ‘jealousy of their success.’ [18] Never before seen photographs from the book featured: “… Philip aged 16 at the 1937 funeral of his elder sister Cecile, flanked by relatives in SS and Brownshirt uniforms. One row back in the cortege in Darmstadt, Western Germany, was his uncle, Lord Mountbatten, wearing a Royal Navy Bicorn hat. Another picture shows his youngest sister, Sophia, sitting opposite Hitler at the wedding of Hermann and Emmy Göering.” In the interview, he said that the attraction of the Nazis was down to the “…great improvement in things like trains running on time and building. There was a sense of hope after the depressing chaos of the Weimar Republic.” [19]

princephilipatnazifuneral

Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh at the funeral of his elder sister Cecile in 1937. He is flanked by high ranking Nazis. The prince was a supporter of the new Nazi economics, but was his mind-set out of the same mold?

Prince Philip is representative of a belief that views humanity as a virus that must be wiped out in order that Nature can live in perfect equilibrium. Most of humanity that is, except the aristocracy and banking, corporate and occult Elite who consider themselves on level of racially and spiritual superiority far above ordinary folk. It seems that Prince Philip took his lead from Heinrich Himmler who described his victims in “language normally used for bacterial cultures. ” Nonetheless, Philip’s eco-fascist credentials were put to work for the World Wildlife Fund in 1961 holding hands with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands.

In his 1986 book If I Were an Animal, Prince Philip wrote, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.” Pruning back and uprooting the “weeds” in the population means that we are under heel of a group-mind that sees eugenics and animal husbandry of the Nazis as the best way to allow the spiritually ascended few to sit on the right hand of God. According to Philip while not claiming to have “… any special interest in natural history … as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and the need to adjust the “cull” to the size of the surplus population.” [20]

We are in no doubt as to the imperative behind Philip’s final solution where he parrots the same script of the eugenicists explaining that the “conflict between instinct and reason has reached a critical stage in man’s affairs,” which the Duke believes is: “… largely because the explosion of facts has revealed the instincts for what they are and at the same time it has undermined traditional philosophies and ideologies. The explosion of facts has effectively altered mankind’s physical and intellectual environment and when any environment changes, the process of natural selection is brutal and merciless. ‘Adapt or die’ is as true today as it was in the beginning.” [21]
Now, consider whether the next passage From Prince Philip could have been written by Hitler, Himmler, or Darré:

What has been described as the “balance of nature” is simply nature’s system of self-limitation. Fertility and breeding success create the surpluses after allowing for the replacement of the losses. Predation, climatic variation, disease, starvation–and in the case of the inappropriately named Homo sapiens, wars and terrorism–are the principal means by which population numbers are kept under some sort of control.

Viewed dispassionately, it must be obvious that the world’s human population has grown to such a size that it is threatening its own habitat; and it has already succeeded in causing the extinction of large numbers of wild plant and animal species. Some have simply been killed off. Others have quietly disappeared, as their habitats have been taken over or disturbed by human activities. [22] [Emphasis mine]

Prince Philip cites: “wars and terrorism [as] the principal means by which population numbers are kept under some sort of control.” Now, given that we know that disease, general lack of public health, poverty and hunger cause the most deaths in the global population this is both factually wrong and oddly misleading. Why include terrorism as one of the principal means? Philip’s inference is that the culling of weaker and inferior element conforming to the natural homeostasis of Nature should be encouraged. False-flag terrorism and Kissinger’s Food as a Weapon comes back to haunt us in his words.

Consider too, the words of Hitler on the recognition that the “… Völkisch … separates mankind into races of superior and inferior quality” and in conforming to “… the eternal Will that dominates the universe … the victory of the better and stronger and the subordination of the inferior and weaker” is the inevitable outcome. And it is this “Will to Power” as drawn from the philosophy of Frederick Nietzsche and as a pillar of worship in Satanic lore that “…pays homage to the truth that the principle underlying all Nature’s operations is the aristocratic principle and it believes that this law holds good even down to the last individual organism.” [23]

7272088Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Phillip Duke of Edinburgh

Philip is not alone in his misanthropic sound-bites. The environmental movement is awash with the same anti-human sentiments drawn from a growing green fundamentalism. Journalist David M. Graber of the Los Angeles Times believes that: “We have become a plague upon [ourselves and upon] the Earth … Until such a time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.” [24]Or from academic Paul W. Taylor: “Given the total, absolute, and final disappearance of Homo sapiens, then, not only would the Earth’s Community of life continue to exist but in all probability its well-being would be enhanced. Our presence, in short, is not needed. And if we were to take the standpoint of that Life Community and give voice to its true interest, the ending of the human epoch on Earth would most likely be greeted with a hearty ‘Good riddance!’” [25]

King Edward VIII was touted as a hiccup in an otherwise flawless history of selfless Windsor rule. Contrary to popular belief, the Royal House of Windsor was fascist to the core, long before the Edward & Mrs Simpson pantomime. The Queen Mother and George VI’s birthday greetings to Hitler weeks before Germany invaded Poland was simply due to the uncomfortable fact for some in British intelligence that they were sympathisers to the Nazi cause and appeasement was a natural course.

Wallis Simpson Edward VII Adolf Hitler Berghof 22 October 1937Wallis Simpson Edward VII Adolf Hitler Berghof 22 October 1937

Winston Churchill was the object of loathing for the Queen Mother which was why she was kept away from giving interviews due to her supremacist views. She was a PR nightmare, counter to the sweet little old granny image so (apparently) beloved of at least the older generations of the British public. [26] Britain’s “favourite granny” was actually described as extremely racist by former aides, an avid support of the South African Apartheid, anti-Semitic and opposed to all forms of immigration. In summary, as one British journalist and presenter of BBC’s Today programme once described her: “a ghastly old bigot”.

Rather than a personal aberration the Queen Mother’s attitudes and beliefs were a caricature of not only an obvious elitism – that is the nature of aristocracy after all – but a continuing brainwashing of an underlying fascist doctrine from which the younger members of the Royal family would no doubt recoil, despite the residual effects of its presence having inevitably become part of their worldview. Aristocracy, public school and British upper class system is replete with beliefs which blur the line between conservatism and fascism.

princeharry1The Duke of Edinburgh’s grandson, Prince Harry, provided a glimpse into Royal perceptions in a series of early gaffs which confirmed the results of brought up in an aristo-military milieu. In 2005, Prince Harry was forced to publicly apologise for his fancy dress attire which he donned for friend’s “colonial and native” party. His outfit comprised of full Nazi regalia including a badge of the German Wehrmacht and a swastika armband. A few years later he was forced to issue an apology for referring to an Asian army colleague as “our little Paki friend” and joking with another that he “looks like a rag-head”, an offensive term for an Arab. [27] These may appear to be trivial points, but they provide a mirror of the British class and public schooling system and the elitist beliefs and privileges which define their existence.

Further embarrassment for the royal family in July 2015, came from a hitherto unknown film possibly from the Queen’s own archive which surfaced in tabloid Newspaper The Sun and its own youtube channel. Shot by the Queen’s father, George VI on the grounds of Balmoral, most likely between 1933 and 1934, after Hitler’s rise to power in Germany, the film depicts a veritable swarm of Nazi salutes featuring the young Princess Elizabeth with her arm raised, her mother and the Queen’s uncle Edward VIII all giving sieg heils to their hearts content. (Although nothing very shocking to most who know the roots of Royal fascism, it did serve as a nice distraction from the British government’s covert and illegal bombing of Syria as part of US-NATO alliance to oust Assad).

nazi-salute

Screen shot of group Nazi salute from “lost” home movie. “Say hello to Uncle Adolf back in Germany Children.” | See also: The Queen’s ‘Nazi Salute’ film leak triggers Royal inquiry


Royal documents which had been held in vaults at Windsor Castle were released in 2003. In the documents were details concerning Edward VIII’s relations with Hitler and the Nazis. Plans to restore Edward, the Duke of Windsor to the throne if the Nazis won the war were discussed. The documents also revealed that the Duke was: “no enemy to Germany,” and would be the: “logical director of England’s destiny after the war”. The 1936 abdication of former King Edward VIII, demoted to the Duke of Windsor had nothing to do with his relationship with Wallis Simpson but the fact they were both Hitler groupies.

By 1937 they were sharing cups of tea at his Obersalzberg retreat giving Edward a chance to practice his Nazi salute. [28]The cover-story was that British intelligence, worried at Edward’s propensity to cock up war propaganda, sent a British warship to hastily dispatched the Duke and Duchess as far away as possible, dumping them on the Bahamas, where, in Churchill’s view the least damage could be done to the war effort. By way of compensation the Duke donned the role of Governor of the Bahamas much to the bemusement of Bahamians whose country he referred to as “a third-class British colony”.

Even less likely to have endeared him to their hearts was the Duke’s authoritative statements on Étienne Dupuch, the editor of the Nassau Daily Tribune whom the duke urged us to remember was: “more than half Negro, and due to the peculiar mentality of this Race, they seem unable to rise to prominence without losing their equilibrium.” [29] Statements such as these were repeated by Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, down through the decades but Edward kept up the tradition even as late as 1970 in which he told one interviewer: “I never thought Hitler was such a bad chap.” [30]

Investigative journalist Martin Frost discovered that Prince Charles’ much loved uncle Lord Louis Mountbatten (originally Battenburg, a branch of the House of Hesse) may have played a key role as: “…one of the central figures in the 1930s Nazi-British back-channel …” In fact, until his abdication King Edward VIII had the full backing of ‘Dickie’ Mountbatten. Secret channels of communication were maintained as World War II progressed much of it between the British royal family and: “… their pro-Hitler cousins in Germany, by Lord Mountbatten, through his sister Louise, who was crown princess of pro-Nazi Sweden. Louise was Prince Philip’s aunt.” [31]

Martin Frost’s research peels back further layers of the story. Far from the Duke of Windsor cultivating chummy relations with Hitler for his desire for peace, Portuguese Secret Service files first published in the London Observer and reported in Washington Times Nov. 20, 1995, revealed that:>

… the Duke of Windsor had been in close collaboration with the Nazis in Spain and Portugal to foment a revolution in wartime Britain, that would topple the Churchill government, depose his brother King George VI, and allow him to regain the throne, with Queen Wallis [Simpson, the American divorcée, for whom he abdicated the throne] at his side. Portuguese surveillance revealed that Walter Schellenberg, head of Gestapo counterintelligence, was one point of contact in this plot. After Schellenberg met with the Spanish ambassador to Portugal, Nicolás Franco, brother of fascist Gen. Francisco Franco, Ambassador Franco told a Portuguese diplomat: “The Duke of Windsor, free from the responsibilities of the war, in disagreement with English politicians, could be the man to put at the head of the Empire. [32]

In essence, after this very brief snapshot of fascism in German and British Royal families perhaps the most important point to consider is that the British Royal family and elements of the British Empire acted as a two-way conduit for Nazi ideology and practice in Germany – not necessarily the other way around. This would lay the ground for the eco-fascism to come. Hitler’s National Socialism is a quintessentially British and aristocratic creation. As we have seen, once a Pathocracy had manifested in Germany its seeds were sown in post-war global structures and in the National Security State of the United States.

 


* The reader may also remember that House of Hesse had an illustrious history with the House of Rothschild and none other than the now iconic secret society of “Illuminati” via Illuminist Prince Karl of Hesse. Though Illuminism has since been all the rage in popular culture it was likely only a splinter group which served as a good cover for those to continue work undisturbed.


Notes

[1] From William Walter Kay’s review of Royals and the Reich by Jonathan Petroupoulos. http://www.ecofascism.com/review11.html
[2] op. cit. Walter Kay.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] p.67; Royals and the Reich: The Princes von Hessen in Nazi Germany By Jonathan Petropoulos. Published by Oxford University Press, 2009. | ISBN-10: 0199212783
[9] op. cit. Walter Kay.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Merchants of Death: A Study of the International Armaments Industry by Helmuth Carol Engelbrecht, Frank Cleary Hanighen. Published by Dodd, Mead, 1934.
[15] p.34; Evolution of Memory, Volume I: Historical Revisionism as Seen in the Words of George J. Jurgen Wittenstein. By Ruth Hanna Sachs, Excalmation! Publishers, 2011 | ISBN 0982298498.
[16] ‘German roots still a royal embarrassment’ by Richard Woods, Sunday Times 2005.
[17] Ibid.
[18] ‘Prince Philip pictured at Nazi funeral’by Andrew Levy, Daily Mail, March 2006.
[19] Ibid.
[20] p.8); Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988.
[21] HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, “Conflict Between Instinct and Reason” Fawley Foundation Lecture. Southampton University, Nov. 24, 1967.
[22] op. cit. Prince Philip (Introduction; 1988)
[23] Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Chapter 13.
[24] David M. Graber, Los Angeles Times, 22 October 1989 (in Rodes and Odell, op. cit., (p. 149)
[25] p. 115; Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics, By Paul W. Taylor Princeton University Press, 1986.
[26] ‘Queen Mum wanted peace with Hitler’ By Sophie Goodchild, Independent on Sunday, 2000.
[27] ‘Our little Paki friend’: MOD to investigate Harry after racial slurs on Asian colleague’ Daily Mail, 11 January 2009 | Ibid.
[28] Edward VIII By Frances Donaldson, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1974| ISBN 0-297-76787-9.
[29] King Edward VIII: The official biography By Philip Ziegler, New York: Alfred A. Knopf | ISBN 0-394-57730-2.
[30] Ibid. (p.67)
[31] ‘On Royal Nazis and the Scottish’ By Martin Frost 2007 |www.martinfrost.ws
[32] Ibid.

Dark Green II: Roots of Eco-Fascism

Eco-fascism: “… A totalitarian government that requires individuals to sacrifice their interests to the well-being and glory of the “land”, understood as the splendid web of life, or the organic whole of nature, including peoples and their states”

– Michael E. Zimmerman, pp. 531-532 in Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature


Before looking at how environmentalism and ecological thinking operates today in some sectors of the world, we need to jump back and take a look at some of its roots.

Ecology is an interdisciplinary branch of biology exploring the relationships between living organisms and their natural environment. Even though he was not an ecologist, biologist and philosopher Ernst Haeckel coined the word “oekologie,” in 1866 from the Greek oikos meaning “house” and logos meaning “science.”  The doctrine of Vitalism has strong ties to the evolution of ecology which states that “living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things” [1] It incorporates the idea of “the soul” and “Spirit” as well as the theory of “ether” that bound all living things together; the elusive fifth element in Hermetic philosophy. This is a very old idea that can be traced back to the philosopher/surgeon Galen of Pergamon of the second Century Turkey. Ecology of the mind, land and social systems have tended to go hand in hand with the development of holism or “holistic thinking” so popular in complementary medicine and new science. This theory posits that parts of a whole have an intimate interconnection to each other and as such, cannot exist or be understood independently of that whole. Much work has been done on the validity of this theory that sees the biological organisation of life self-organising: “… into layers of emergent whole systems that function according to non-reducible properties.” [2]

This has never been more applicable to physical and mental disease and in sharp contrast to Cartesian and reductionist theories of mind and matter.

Distinct from environmentalism (philosophy, ideology and social movement) and environmental science, ecology attempts to explain life processes and adaptations; the distribution and abundance of organisms; the movement of materials and energy through living communities and the long-term development of biodiversity in the environment. A number of disciplines come under the umbrella of ecology including: behavioural ecology; community ecology (or synecology); ecophysiology; ecopsychology; ecosystem ecology; evolutionary ecology; global ecology; population ecology; human ecology and social ecology.

monolith Sculptures Near Amsterdam, Holland | © infrakshun

Whether ecology actually is a science is still hotly debated. The fact that it appeals to the wise and benevolent as much as the ignorant and evil is probably due to its diverse mix of disciplines. Whether physiology, evolutionary biology, genetics, or ethology, any science can be made to work for an ideology even at the cost of ramming that square peg into the round hole.  When a passionate love of “pure Nature” is present all that is needed to transform that belief into a toxic time-bomb is to mix in some neo-feudalism, Marxist theory and a touch of occultism and the race is on to control the “viral” spread of humanity under the guise of healing the planet. Though Darwinism and Malthusianism had little to do with ecology, they have often sat alongside ecological thinking and the fascist/collectivist policies that slowly rose up through their ranks.

Historian Anna Bramwell’s The Fading of the Greens: Decline of Environmental Politics in the West mammoth trilogy on ecology and environmental activism shows that ecologists were constantly aligned with fascist parties, fascistic philosophy, the aristocracy and Establishment. [3]   These often anti-transcendent thinkers were both pro-rural and anti-capitalist naturalists and according to Bramwell this mine discovering Nature to learn and: “… return with the recommendation that one clings to the wheel because it is the most sensible path of action. To do so requires sweeping away past identities, past traditions and past errors.” In effect, such a personality: “… a natural protestor.” [4]

Traditionally the seeds of fascistic thinking in ecology and environmental movements began to appear in Europe after the growth of the natural sciences in the 17th and 18th centuries and in the reaction to the exploitation of the land and communities that the Industrial Revolution eventually reconfigured or swept away entirely. Britain’s artists such as William Blake raged against the machine of industry as “Dark Satanic Mills” with pioneers such as John Ruskin, William Morris, Edward Carpenter and Henry Williamson continuing the struggle. Americans too were equally aghast at the destruction and consequent  “desacralisation” of Nature with the likes of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman and Henry Thoreau offering activist wings to ecological thoughts.

This helped to give rise to the environmental movement headed by such people as Arthur Tansley who coined the term “eco-system” and Aldo Leopold who championed the cause of “land ethics” closely mirroring the Back to the Land Movement first initiated by Ruskin, though with a somewhat more scientific focus. Indeed, scientists were beginning to offer the world an ecological framework including Charles Elton’s animal ecology and food chains, along side Alexander Stuart Watt’s plant ecology. By the middle of the 20th Century, humanism and the environment were getting closer and the World State policies trumpeted by biologist Julian Huxley as head of the UN’s UNESCO agency reflected this change. Huxley’s naturalist and ethological background (the study of animals in their natural habitats) fed into his vision of humanity on a petri-dish which needed to be ordered and managed. Since the board of UNESCO saw fit to make him the Chairman, they obviously felt the same way.

In Britain, in the early part of the 20th century the growth of various environmental movements were largely in response to the economic depression which had hit farming hard after the prosperous years of the mid-19th century. The Dartington Trust founded in the 1920s to promote rural regeneration; The Garden City movement which placed a magnifying glass on town and garden design in urban areas; The Council for the Protection of Rural England and The Ramblers Association in the 1930 concentrated on town planning and the relationship to the countryside. Landowners and farmers had to cope with falling prices, lower rents and untenanted farms. Back to the Land came into its own with The English Land Colonisation Society creating 400 farming communities. Cooperatives were formed and derelict land and run-down farms were taken over; Arts and Crafts were revived and community increased. This was something undeniably anti-industry and a healthy reversal of the “filthy tide” of industrialisation which was making the British Empire the uncontested global manager.  The money came predominantly from the wealthy and those with aristocratic connections who were intent on “preserving the countryside, controlling development and shifting the population out of big cities.” [5]

According to Bramwell’s research, ecologists were mostly conservative, monarchist and staunch traditionalists of the “green and pleasant land” mythology which derived from the same traditions as the German Romantic Movement which in turn, came from immensely deep roots in German society. This revival of the land and nature began to be part of the green social movement which meant resisting the inexorable drive of the industrialists. But there was a shadow side. This “Blood and Soil” romanticism became a powerful influence not just in Britain but across all of Europe and America. Drawn from the Völkisch or “Völk” in German culture, it refers to ethnicity from the “Blood” or ancestral descent and the homeland or “Soil”. It places a vital importance on the notion of rural living and the place humans occupy in relation to Nature and their immediate environment. It was made more popular during the rise of the Nazi Third Reich by Richard Walther Darré a Nazi party member, race theorist and eugenics advocate. Yet Blood and Soil sentiment had been present in the  pagan cults embedded in the ecological fabric of Germany and thus a potential political force deep in the psyche of Germans outside the cities. (We will come back to Darré and Germany’s influence on Eco-Fascism later on).

Literature from the 1880s – 1940s was infused with folklore, countryside mythology and the almost pagan sensuality of nature. D.H. Lawrence was one of  the best examples of this new ecological vision. It was through such persons that the emerging environmental and nature activists re-learned vitalism and the “God in Nature.” His wife, Frieda von Richtofen, introduced Lawrence to an artist colony which had a: “… distinctive German brand of serious nature-worship and sun-worship”. This seems to have been a significant influence in his art and according to Bramwell: “appears to resemble the language of the proto-Nazis.” [6] Whether or not that is true, the link between English and German fascism and the art of the European intelligentsia  was very strong indeed.

19th century author and poet Ernst Moritz Arndt and journalist and novelist Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl seemed to personify the eco-fascism of the pre-war period in Germany. Arndt seemed to write beautifully and movingly about the plight of Nature under the Industrial Revolution and the importance of ecological awareness, yet he seemed to despise human beings. He was anti-French, anti-Slav, anti-Semitic and xenophobic, placing German land and people at the forefront of perfection. Riehl learned from his teacher Arndt but differed in focus. The same nationalism and anti-Semitism was present but he leaned towards an early version of environmental activism in which he advocated a fight for “the rights of wilderness.” This was to be for the well-being of the German people alone, however.

Blut und Boden / “Blood and Soil” propaganda card.

The Völkisch movement welcomed them with open arms and as humanist writer Peter Staudenmaier comments: “… it pointedly refused to locate the sources of alienation, rootlessness and environmental destruction in social structures, laying the blame instead to rationalism, cosmopolitanism, and urban civilization. The stand-in for all of these was the age-old object of peasant hatred and middle-class resentment: the Jews.” [7]

A good example of the latent fascism residing in aristocracy and the Establishment was charismatically expressed through politician Sir Oswald Ernald Mosley, 6th Baronet, of Ancoats, who founded the BUF. On 11 May 1920 he married Lady Cynthia Curzon second daughter of George Curzon, Lord Curzon of Kedleston and married his mistress in 1933 in Germany on 6 October 1936, in the Berlin home of Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels. Adolf Hitler was one of the guests.

Mosley was a distinguished orator and and one of the youngest MPs to be elected to represent his constituency of Harrow in 1918. He began as a conservative then joined the Labour Party by 1924 immediately changed his allegiance to the Independent Labour Party (ILP). Mosley and his wife Cynthia were committed Fabians right up to the start of the 1930s. [8] When Labour won the 1929 general election he was appointed to the post of Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. However, his presence in government was to be short-lived. Mosley put forward a whole scheme in the ‘Mosley Memorandum’ only to find it soundly rejected, despite the fact it preceded much of the socialist policy in the intervening years. [9]

After resigning from the cabinet in 1930 he founded the New Party which gradually warmed to fascist policies. The momentum stalled due to the General Election the following year so Mosley took the opportunity to take a tour of Mussolini’s Italy which finalised his desire to pursue overtly fascist politics back in the UK. So, the British Union of Fascists was born. His corps of black-uniformed paramilitary stewards, or “blackshirts” was constantly in the news for being involved in violent confrontations between Communist or Jewish groups which would eventually lead to the downfall of Mosley’s party. When the government passed the Public Order Act 1936 which came into into effect the following year, it marked the end for his para-military brigade.

Rather ironically, Mosley embarked on a peace campaign throughout the war and was finally interned on May 1940 along with his wife Diana Mitford and other active fascists in the grounds of Holloway prison. After the War the baron rejoined active politics and formed the Union Movement, calling for a European Super-State covering the continent of Europe (known as Europe a Nation), and later attempted to launch a National Party of Europe to this end. This time his fascism was expressed through Synarchy.

At his core, Mosley had a genuine desire to better peoples’ lives, but his powerful drive was also technocratic in that he had a precise understanding of the bureaucratic and economic machinery of his day. [10]His socialism was based on re-imagining the state towards a greater British Empire that moved into Europe and further colonised Africa as “the breadbasket for the West.”sup>[11] Thus he had a lot in common with the likes of Cecil Rhodes and his later Round Table compatriots and would be very influential for authoritarian personalities who embraced fascism in the future. Though overt environmental sympathies were missing in Mosley’s political ambitions his supporters made up for it. In fact, there have been a raft of individuals rather than groups who have both a history of environmentalist views being held by the far-right in the UK.

Oswald-Mosley-image

Sir Oswald Mosely and Diana circa 1936

Jorian Jenks was a farmer, environmentalist and political activist, serving as Mosley’s agricultural advisor in the BUF. He was “one of the most dominant figures in the development of the organic movement” [12]and yet another of the fascists who found themselves detained by the government in 1940, this time at Walton Prison and released a year later. It was after the war that Jenks moved “…  from politics to ‘meta-politics’ evolving a more spiritual ‘spiritual ecologism’ which would address the cause of national disintegration and replenish the bond between man and soil.” [13]

Niece of Lord Arthur Balfour of the Balfour declaration fame, and English farmer and organic farming pioneer, the visionary Lady Eve Balfour and her Soil Association provided Jenks with an outlet to pursue the science and practice of organic farming. He served as editorial secretary and published the association’s journal Mother Earth through which his eco-fascist views could be heard much to the delight (or consternation) of those reading the material. He stated: “An anti-modernist philosophy embracing land reform the paramountcy of agriculture; the subordination of mechanisation to organicism; the localisation of economies and the cultivation of the consciousness of the ties of blood and soil.” Jenks saw the Soil Association policy as “pure Aryan”… “though they don’t make a point of it.” [14]

Despite Jenk’s clear fascism his contribution to agricultural policy and the scientific experiments exploring the differences between organic and non-organic foods were extremely influential, as were his warnings on the dangers of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. He found his way to the Soil Association via Kinship in Husbandry which he had joined in 1942. This group had been founded by Rolf Gardiner with support from H. J. Massingham and Lord Lymington. It was essentially a platform for eco-fascist principles which had bubbled up into the Soil Association to the extent that Gardiner became co-founder; such was his passion for the future of organic farming. He was also an avid English folk dancer, naturist  and active in far right politics. Gardiner’s passion for English folk dancing helped to revive the Morris dance which was inflicted on Germany and the emerging Hitler Youth of the time. Despite the homoerotic overtones he insisted this was a thoroughly masculine and virile ritual of pagan nature worship. (The latter was part of the Third Reich’s inspirations, though it remains to be seen if they were impressed by the Morris dancing…)

dh-lawrence[1]

D.H. Lawrence

A one-time Kibbo Kift member as a Cambridge University student Gardiner had also greatly admired D.H. Lawrence  whom he visited in 1928 while in Switzerland. Their teacher-student relationship blossomed into a long lasting friendship that was based on:

“… a shared faith in the organic which was by no means confined to their descriptions of the landscape or nature. By seeking organic solutions to the problems of contemporary life – emphasising the important of ‘natural’ hierarchies, for instance, or the ‘rootedness’ of culture in the native soil, or the ties that bind language, culture and racial destiny – Lawrence and Gardiner found themselves drawing from the same wellspring which nourished Völkisch and fascist movements. Indeed in 1953, Bertrand Russell famously wrote that Lawrence’s views led straight to Auschwitz.”  [15]

Although highly ironic coming from Mr. Russell who was hoisted on the same humanist-Fabian pole, the above passage sums up perfectly the problem of the naturalists and those sensitive to the destruction of Nature who may in some instances also harbour authoritarian traits: they inevitably gravitated towards the rich history of the Völkisch and the New Order proposed by National Socialism. It was both a product of the times and a trigger which seemed to draw out the latent fascism waiting to leak from otherwise natural and healthy principles.

Writer, naturalist and farmer Henry Williamson who wrote Tarka the Otter (1927) and many other classics, supported the BUF and was greatly impressed after visiting the National Socialist Congress in 1935. (We don’t know what he thought of Gardiner’s Morris dancing, however). His growing fascist views, led him to be detained during World War II, like Mosley, under the Defence Regulation 18B. He contributed to the Anglo-German Review for whom “… the Anglo-German sympathizers of the period were united by a common interest in nature and ecology.” [16] The same Germanic sun-worshipping and pagan revivalism was found in his writings most particularly where the ancient light of the sun represented the real meaning of his own existence by illuminating his ancestral past and revealing the truth of redemption through Nature.” [17]

Like many artists of post-World War I his experiences of death and horror culminating in the Christmas truce of 1918 helped him to see Germans and the Nature worship embedded in their culture as a new light for the world. He had been seduced by the seemingly vibrant economic and cultural renaissance best symbolised by the Hitler youth with “faces that looked to be breathing extra oxygen; people free from mental fear.” Williamson was certain that National Socialism was the answer and echoed D. H Lawrence’s obsession with “blood and soil” believing that they represented: “… a race that moves on the poles of mystic, sensual delight. Every gesture is a gesture from the blood, every expression a symbolic utterance … Everything is of the blood, of the senses.” [18]

He seemed to remain a fan despite the failure of the Nazi ideal by protesting against the unjust nature of the Nuremburg trials. Although these were indeed a showpiece to cover up the fact that many of the Nazis Elite were absorbed into the American National Security State, it nevertheless showed that his sympathies remained strong. It is this paradoxical eco-fascist romanticism as sweet as syrup yet cast in molten metal that often remains impervious to any change. Just as the seeds of psychopathy have long been exposed to the right Anglo-American conditions for various strains to multiply like fungi on an otherwise healthy tree, this ecological inversion has continued from its romantic pre-war passion to much more subtle expressions. Similar to eugenics, it has insinuated itself into the fabric of society with respectable sounding names, sacred philosophies and philanthropic causes. But it is essentially the same ponerisation, yearning to control human beings, now under the cover of Gaia. [19]

That is not to say that all environmentalism has at its root latent fascism, only that we need to be aware of this inversion – roots can grow in a variety of soils given the right conditions.

In 1970, the first issue of The Ecologist magazine appeared in the UK, with genuinely fascinating and productive articles. Nevertheless, its underlying theme of “humans as virus” and ecological parasites was common throughout and a direct link back to fascistic beliefs, albeit largely unconscious.  The magazine’s founder, the late Edward Goldsmith, displayed the same beliefs as Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh, in that humanity was a disease which had to be halted. Like so many who seemed to have authoritarian tendencies he displayed a frequent wish to control and micro-manage the lives of others. Government, in Goldsmith view should mimic his own patriarchal leanings and become a “schoolmaster” to “an ever more demanding and self-indulgent electorate.” In other words, we all needed to be horse-whipped into submission so that we may break free from our wicked ways. Indeed, Goldsmith went further, suggesting  that: “… radical change in our way of looking at man’s relationship with his environment, … must involve taking measures that in many cases are contrary to our accepted values. Thus, to control population we may have to interfere with ‘personal liberty’, while to reduce economic expansion we are forced to curb ‘the march of ‘progress.’” [20]

It is hear that we come to the crux of the problem with such thinking since it perfectly aligns with elite beliefs that demand populations are suppressed and managed in much the same way as Nature has been through the centuries.  The dividing line between co-creating with the planet and bending it to our will is blurred. The wild sanctity and purity of the biosphere is set against the population who are despoilers and viri – a disease to cut out so that Nature may reign once more. The problem is clear. Such binary thinking can very easily mixed up with good intentions leading catastrophic results as we have seen time and time again. The only disease is that of ponerological strains within humanity whose job it is to subvert and invert.  Ideologies born from socio-economic distress and spiritual vacuity are blended in the minds of authoritarians and their followers and grafted onto passions and beliefs which would have otherwise remained connected to a benign and rejuvenating force.

2013-05-27 17.21.56

© infrakshun

Germany also had a pronounced tradition of controlling Nature. For over 250 years it had radically drained mash and fenlands, exploited vast tracts of Bavarian moorland, managed rivers and built dams in high valleys. The impact of hydrological dams after the 1750s was enormous, changing the face of the German landscape. Where once there was fear of the vast tracts of wilderness, for some they became the new source of romanticism, especially when they began to disappear. This was paradoxical and as historian David Blackbourne asks: “Why did the pace of moorland drainage and colonization increase after the First World War? Because Germans began to see themselves after the Treaty of Versailles as a ‘people without space,’ a Völkohne Raum, so that every cultivated acre counted.” [21]

The Conquest of the Europe meant the conquest of nature which seemed to run counter to the ecological ethos that Nazism promoted. Historians Groninga and Joachim Wolscheke-Bulmanha wrote in an article in Planning Perspectives journal of 1987: “… to explain the destruction of the countryside and environmental damage, without questioning the German people’s bond to nature, could only be done by not analysing environmental damage in a societal context and by refusing to understand them as an expression of conflicting social interests. Had this been done, it would have led to criticism of National Socialism itself since that was not immune to such forces.” [22]

Though it was not to be.

At the same time technocratic and authoritarian, in order for Nature to be returned to the romantic myth of Germanic perfection the space had be created for the German people as guardians and worshippers of Nature so that the former Edenic state could return. Once cleansed of “weeds” and the uniformity of human design the superiority of the Aryan race could stand at the head of a New World Order which would necessarily mean harmony between land and people, inseparable in the National Socialist mind.

The man who had most power in the Reich second to Hitler was probably SS Field Marshall Heinrich Himmler who epitomised classic eco-fascist ideology when he mused:

“The peasant of our racial stock has always carefully endeavoured to increase the natural powers of the soil, plants, and animals, and to preserve the balance of the whole of nature. For him, respect for divine creation is the measure of all culture. If, therefore, the new Lebensräume (living spaces) are to become a homeland for our settlers, the planned arrangement of the landscape to keep it close to nature is a decisive prerequisite. It is one of the bases for fortifying the German Völk.” [23]

The adaptation of biological concepts to social systems tied up with romantic verbiage led to the strategic importance of environmental resources. This was the official policy of Lebensräume or “Living space”. Expansionist politics would mean that the Balkans would be chosen as the provider and coincide with the extermination of the Slavic races, which they deemed inferior. As Hitler stated: “Every healthy Völk sees the right to expansion of its living space as something natural.” [24]

Land, conquest and ethnic cleansing became inextricably linked with a spiritual mission.

By the time Ernst Haeckel had invented the term “ecology” there was the appearance at least, of a “… scientifically based ecological holism with Völkisch social views,” which consisted of a potent mixture of “… nineteenth century cultural prejudices, romantic obsessions with purity [and] anti-Enlightenment sentiment,” fused with “aggressive nationalism, mystically charged racism, and environmentalist predilections.” [25]Haeckel was also responsible for merging Social Darwinism and ecology into his own philosophy of “Monism” which provided an outlet and scientific cover for his belief in Nordic racial superiority. The Third Reich’s obsession with the occult was in large part due to the Germanic nature worship and which had given rise to revivalism and green politics in the intelligentsia. This was reflected in Haeckel’s decision to join the Thule Gesellschaft or Thule Society founded by Bavarian occultist and freemason Baron Rudolf von Sebottendorff an instrumental in the formation of the Nazi Party. [26] The Society was the organisation that sponsored the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP), later reorganized by Adolf Hitler into the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP or Nazi Party).

The Youth movement of the Weimar Republic or the Wandervögel (‘wandering free spirits’) was a fusion of almost every type of transcendent, occult and folklore ideology that was available. Reason and rational discourse were rejected. It was effectively a nature cult elevating peasantry to mythical status joined with the authoritarian impetus of the State which was needed to show people the way. Peter Staudenmaier believes this heralded an important: “… shift from nature worship to Führer worship,” where National Socialism’s adoption of environmentalist themes of nationalism and sacred naturalism “… was a crucial factor in its rise to popularity and state of power.” [27]

The foundation of these beliefs was made concrete through two levels of ecological support within the core of the Third Reich. These were at the ministerial and planning and administrative levels, evidence of which can be found in the archives of the Reich. Agrarian romanticism and anti-urbanism was dominant and central in Nazi ideology so that most of the leading members were ecologically aware or had some overlapping naturist belief. 60 percent of the membership rolls of several Naturschutz (nature protection) organizations during the Weimar era had joined the National Socialist Party in 1939. [28]

Gleichklang Alfred Bernert‘Gleichklang’ by Alfred Bernert

Hitler as a vegetarian and an animal lover was a believer in the Völk and the value of Nature but he was also a pragmatic strategist. However, three other notable players close to Hitler represented various shades of dark green belief within the Third Reich.  His deputy, Rudolf Hess, was an enthusiastic fervent devotee of naturism, anthroposophy and homeopathy. Working for Hesse were leading ecologists who produced draft reports on the necessity for “organic, ecologically sound land use and planning.” Hess’s top land planning officer called soil: “… the foundation of the formation of the community”.[29]

Hermann Göering was a nature conservationist, animal husbandrist and the Reich’s Chief Huntsman. He favoured the forest over the rights of the farmers and their fields. He organised many International Hunting Exhibitions for the wealthy. Hitler once referred to these groups as “the green Freemasonry”. As Air Force commander he discontinued the use of animals to test weapons and used people instead. [30]

Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler had a degree in agriculture, was a farmer, an occultist and neo-pagan. Power over the concentration camps, death squads and the liquidation of the Jews and other minorities lay at his door. And he, like Hitler, valued animals over people, being responsible for the Third Reich’s anti-vivisection legislation which was the first law of its kind. While Hitler soared into the mysticism of the Völk, Himmler’s beliefs veered towards theosophy, anthroposophy, astrology, Wicca, herbalism, organicism, astrology and homeopathy. He was the first true New Age Nazi with power at his hands, his interests of which inspired him to follow in Blavatsky’s footsteps by sending an SS team to Tibet in 1938 led by zoologist Ernst Schäfer, officially to conduct anthropological experiments, unofficially to open a dialogue between Tibetan Monks of Agharti which were following the “Black arts.” [31] (See: The Light Bringer)

With the infiltration of the Agriculture Ministry and National Food Estate by the SS under Himmler’s say so. When East Europe would be conquered and ethnically cleansed of undesirables a new race of farmers would be deposited on the land and given free farms, provided they passed the eugenics check list set up by the newly created Racial Office was created within the SS. [32]

Therefore three main green beliefs were personified within the Reich: The Aristocratic-freemasonic eco-conservativism of Göering; the folklore, anthroposophy and organicism of Hesse and the occult-neo-pagan beliefs of Himmler.

By 1937 Poland was under Himmler’s settlement program using state funds and seized land while Race and Settlement officers were busy searching for “… farms that could be farmed organically”. After all, it was only SS farmers who could understand “…the superiority of organic farming methods as opposed to artificial fertilisers”. And Chemical fertilizers were criminalised under Himmler’s land planning laws. [33] The SS-owned Institute for the Study of Medicinal and Alimentary Plants, (ISMAP) was an SS owned research organisation where German scientists, physicians, botanists, and chemists conducted research into medicinal properties of plants and many other agrarian experiments. An experimental farm called “Plantage” was based in the surrounding fields of the Dachau death camp and was the brainchild of Himmler but operated by ISMAP.

Marcus J. Smith, a US military doctor who was assigned to Dachau after it was liberated, was told by the former inmates that:

“… many ambitious projects were undertaken, such as the production of artificial pepper, the evaluation of seasoning mixtures, the extraction of Vitamin C from gladioli and other flowers, the potentiation of plant growth by hormone-enriched manure, and of most importance to Germany, the development of synthetic fertilizer. As a profitable side-line, garlic, malva, and other medicinal plants, and vegetable seeds, were cultivated by the prisoners and then sold; the profits went to the SS.” [34]

Other experimental farms were set up at Auschwitz concentration camp and Mauthausen concentration camps in Austria where experiments were conducted by the SS on different kinds of diets including “famine experiments” on Russian POWs. [35]

In 1935, Himmler, founded the Nazi think-tank Ahnenerbe to “study society for Intellectual Ancient History.” The goal was to find confirmation of the myths and philosophies relating to the Aryan race and Nordic populations from an anthropological and cultural perspective. With Himmler’s fascination with the Catharism, Norse mythology and the Knights Templars it led him to expend time and money attempting to uncover many of the alleged secrets behind the legends of the Holy Grail. Indeed, many voyages to a variety of destinations across the globe were carried out and funded by the SS. Among a handful of founding members included SS-Obergruppenführer Richard Walther Darré, Reich Minister of Food and Agriculture, animal breeder and one of the leading promoters of Nazi “blood and soil” ideology.

As a young man Darré was another Völkisch acolyte who joined the Artaman League, the same back-to-the-land movement of which Himmler was a member. This eventually led him to concoct the theory that the future of the Nordic race was deeply connected to soil and which subsequently led to “Blut and Boden” or the “Blood and Soil” meme. According to Nazi ideology, while the relationship to the environment over time becomes embedded in the consciousness of the dweller and vice versa, Germans, due to their Nordic ancestry had a peculiar, almost mystical connection to the land. German soil was sacred, in direct opposition to the “wandering Jew.” Nordicism or “Nordic Theory” claims that a Nordic race, within the greater Caucasian race constituted a master race, and it is this ethnic purity that Darré believed could be found once again.

330px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_119-2179,_Walter_Richard_Darré

Richard Walther Darré, Reich Reichsminister of Food. “The unity of blood and soil must be restored” (photo: wikipedia)

“The unity of blood and soil must be restored” was a phrase that resonated throughout the Gothic halls of the Reich and came from Darré’s 1930 book called Neuadel aus Blut und Boden (A New Nobility Based On Blood And Soil) describing a systemic eugenics program partnered with careful environmental awareness which would clear up the problem of racial impurity and return Germany to its glorious ancient past. With a keen interest and training in farming, animal husbandry and breeding Darré merely adapted his knowledge into the human world and injected it with the usual racist ideology. Geo-political conquest was justified through: “The concept of Blood and Soil [which] gives us the moral right to take back as much land in the East as is necessary to establish a harmony between the body of our Völk and the geopolitical space.” [36]

He was also a fan of the theosophical offshoot of Anthroposophy established by Rudolf Steiner despite National Socialist ideologues being hostile to the movement. Unfortunately for Darré, anthroposophy considered “Blood, Race and Folk” as primitive instincts that must be overcome. [37] Clearly, this short-coming was not enough to quash his enthusiasm for anthroposophical principles with its emphasis on Nature, art, medicine and biodynamic agriculture all based on the theory that there is an unseen spiritual world comprising a variety of “subtle realms.” As bio-dynamic farming involved a holistic view of organic agriculture the rejection of chemical fertilisers and insecticides and by extension, the trappings of industrial capitalism it was tailor-made to elevate the mythical status of the German peasant and therefore be absorbed into Nazi ideology. Racial health and ecological sustainability would be assured. Darré even “… commissioned a top anthroposophist to start a bio-dynamic farm at Marienhole. [East Germany] The farm’s journal, Demeter, had the motto: “Health through Natural Living – Harmony between Blood, Soil and Cosmos.” [38]

The anthroposophist in question, Dr. Edhart Bartsch and his biodynamic farm was run by the research group “The Imperial Association for Biodynamic Agriculture” and was closely followed by Darré and another anthroposophical convert Rudolf Hess both of whom had substantial success in pioneering bio-dynamic principles and products. However, as anthroposophy was not following Nazi principles it was all wound up by 1941. [39] The large-scale organic farming methods and ecologically sound farming practices which Darré pioneered are still in evidence in Germany and much of Europe today.

It seems eco-fascism in Nazi ideology, while no means embraced by all, (Goebbels, Boorman, Speer) was nevertheless crucial in the implementation of Nazi designs. By using potent myths and archetypes of Nature and race which had particular appeal in the German psyche these acted as part of the moral imperative to save not just the German nation but the world. It became a mystical dogma of the most virulent kind hijacked by psychopaths happy to use any and all ideologies to manifest Pathocracy. On the one hand, you had uniforms and jackboots, on the other, a symbolic return to green wellies and haystacks. Manly blond, blue-eyed Supermen working in the fields in manly union; the conservation of nature and animal husbandry on the one hand and on the other: the systematic destruction of land and people if they did not conform. It was a mass psychosis predicated on preference for ideals which have very little to do with objective reality. These are the same influences at work today the only difference being that they are more subtle and sophisticated in their manifestations.

The ideological marriage between National Socialism, nature conservation, ecology and green issues is a cast iron one. Fascism goes hand in hand with green issues and as such we need to be more prudent when those issues become politicised by any one organisation or grouping. The Nazis were a huge, technicolor warning to that end.

Once you had a confluence of Social Darwinism, politics, a green culture and occult ideology which busily distorted an otherwise healthy attention to nature then it is inevitable that it would continue to be used as a pretext for many other directives for social control. “The Natural Order” would be synonymous with a “New World Order” where “scientific technique” of race-biology would force man into their “natural” roles. Or, in the words of the National Socialist Teachers Association: “National Socialism is politically applied biology.”  [40]

 


Notes

[1] Vitalism. In E. Craig (Ed.), William Bechtel and Robert C. Richardson, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1998 | http://www.mechanism.ucsd.edu/teaching/philbio/vitalism.htm
[2] Liu, J.; Dietz, Thomas; Carpenter, Stephen R.; Folke, Carl; Alberti, Marina; Redman, Charles L.; Schneider, Stephen H.; Ostrom, Elinor et al. (2009). “Coupled human and natural systems”. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 36.
[3] Blood and Soil, Richard Walter Darre and Hitler’s ‘Green Party’, Published by Kensall Press, Buckinghamshire, 1985 | Ecology in the 20th Century, A History, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1989 | The Fading of the Greens, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1994 | All by Anna Bramwell.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘Fascist Ecology: The ‘Green Wing’ of the Nazi Party and its Historical Antecedents’ By Peter Staudenmaier taken from Eco-Fascism: Lessons from the German Experience. By Janet Beihl and Peter Staudenmaier. 1995. Published by AK Press. | ISBN 1-873176 73 2. | http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp001630/peter.html
[8] Mosley’s name can be seen in a list of Fabians from Fabian News and Fabian Society Annual Report 1929–31.
[9] p.44; Mosley By Nigel Jones, Published by Lite & Times Haus Publishing, 2004 | ISBN-10: 1904341098
[10] Sir Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists by Robert Edwards, Published by League Enterprises, 2002. (introduction) | http://www.oswaldmosley.net/rome-revisited-1933.php
[11] p.64; Very Deeply Dyed in Black: Sir Oswald Mosley by Graham Macklin, Published by I.B.Tauris, 2007. | ISBN-10: 1845112849
[12] R. More-Collyer, ‘Towards “Mother Earth”: Jorian Jenks, Organicism, the Right and the British Union of Fascists’, Journal of Contemporary History, 2004, (p.39)
[13] op. cit. Macklin (p.64)
[14] Ibid. (p.65)
[15] p.6; Rolf Gardiner: Folk, Nature and Culture in In Interwar Britain by Matthew Jefferies, Mike Tyldesley2011 | ISBN-10: 1409412040
[16] op. cit. Bramwell, Ecology, (p. 173-4)
[17] ‘Henry Williamson: Nature’s Visionary’ by Mark Deavin, National Vanguard Magazine, Number 117 March-April 1997.
[18] Ibid.
[19] “The Gaia theory was developed in the late 1960’s by Dr. James Lovelock, a British Scientist and inventor, shortly after his work with NASA in determining that there was probably no life on Mars. The theory gained an early supporter in Lynn Margulis, a microbiologist at the University of Massachusetts. […] “The Gaia Theory posits that the organic and inorganic components of Planet Earth have evolved together as a single living, self-regulating system. It suggests that this living system has automatically controlled global temperature, atmospheric content, ocean salinity, and other factors, that maintains its own habitability. In a phrase, “life maintains conditions suitable for its own survival.” In this respect, the living system of Earth can be thought of analogous to the workings of any individual organism that regulates body temperature, blood salinity, etc. So, for instance, even though the luminosity of the sun – the Earth’s heat source – has increased by about 30 percent since life began almost four billion years ago, the living system has reacted as a whole to maintain temperatures at levels suitable for life.”- http://www.gaiatheory.org/synopsis.htm
[20] ‘Living with Nature’ by Edward Goldsmith, The Ecologist July 1, 1970 (www.edwardgoldsmith.org/)
[21] p.5; The Conquest Of Nature: Water, Landscape, and the Making of Modern Germany, by David Blackbourn, Published by Pimlico, 2007 | ISBN-10: 0712667261
[22] ‘Politics, planning and the protection of nature: Political abuse of early ecological ideas in Germany, 1933–45’ by Gert Gröninga & Joachim Wolschke‐Bulmahna Planning Perspectives Volume 2, Issue 2, 1987.
[23] Peter Staudenmaier Quoting from Heinz Haushofer, Ideengeschichte der Agrarwirtschaft und Agrarpolitik im deutschen Sprachgebiet, Band II, München, 1958, (p. 266).
[24] Hitler Speech, Völkischer Beobachter, 11 November 1931.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
[27] op.cit; Staudenmaier.
[28] p.107;The Environmental Movement in Germany: Prophets and Pioneers, 1871–1971 by Raymond H. Dominick III Indiana University Press, 1992.
[29] op.cit. Bramwell; Ecology (p. 197-8)
[30] pp 182-190; Goring, a Biography, by David Irving. Published William Morrow and Co., New York, 1989.
[31] Himmler’s Crusade: The True Story of the 1938 Nazi Expedition into Tibet.by Christopher Hale, London: Transworld Publishers | ISBN 0-593-04952-7.
[32] op. cit. Bramwell, Blood and Soil (p. 132-8)
[33] op. cit. Bramwell, Ecology, (p. 202-4) | 0p. cit. Bramwell, Blood and Soil (p.132-38)
[34] ‘Work in the Dachau camp’ http://www.scrapbookpages.com
[35] ‘Using Science For The Greater Evil,’ Newsweek, Dec 1, 2003.
[36] op. cit. Janet Biehl, Peter Staudenmaier (p.19).
[37] Report of the SD-Hauptamtes Berlin: “Anthroposophy”, May 1936, BAD Z/B I 90.
[38] op. cit. Bramwell, Blood, (p. 203).
[39] http://www.demeter.net/ | “Biodynamic Agriculture: The Journey from Koberwitz to the World, 1924-1938”, By John Paul, Journal of Organic Systems, 2011, 6(1):27-41.
[40] Hans Schemm, Founder and Head of the National Socialist Teachers Association from Ernst Haeckel’s The History of Creation. 2 vols. (New York: D. Appleton, 1876), vol. I, p. 11.

World State Policies VI: Eugenics Reborn

“In America, this battle to wipe out whole ethnic groups was fought not by armies with guns nor by hate sects at the margins. Rather, this pernicious white-gloved war was prosecuted by esteemed professors, elite universities, wealthy industrialists and government officials colluding in a racist, pseudoscientific movement called eugenics. The purpose: create a superior Nordic race.”

– Edwin Black, “War against the Weak”


Eugenics_congress_logo

“Eugenics is the self-direction of human evolution”: Logo from the Second International Eugenics Conference, 1921.


In June 2012 the world’s first (officially) genetically modified humans were created. The disclosure came after a series of experiments that resulted in 30 healthy babies being born, two of which were tested and found to contain genes from three “parents.” The Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Science of St Barnabas in New Jersey carried out an experimental program over a three year period. Fifteen of the children were born to women who had problems conceiving. It was reported that: “Extra genes from a female donor were inserted into their eggs before they were fertilised in an attempt to enable them to conceive. Genetic fingerprint tests on two one-year- old children confirm that they have inherited DNA from three adults –two women and one man.” [1]

Eugenics, from the Greek eugenēs meaning “well-born” and from eu- + -genēs meaning “born,” is the applied science and/or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population. [2]This includes the discouragement of reproduction by those considered to have genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by those who are believed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

Later known as Social Darwinism, the origins of this pseudo-science began through interpretations of Mendelian inheritance, and the theories of Frederick August Weismann, a 19th century German evolutionary biologist. It was viewed as a science in the late 19th and early 20th century and extremely popular with the scientific and cultural Elite, including the aristocracy. Two of Charles Darwin’s friends who enthusiastically embraced eugenics, were Thomas Huxley, president of the Royal Society, and Darwin’s cousin, the polymath Francis Galton who was the first to coin the phrase “eugenics” in 1883. He went on to found the Eugenics Movement, which was fervently embraced in the United States and later Germany.

Despite the revulsion that eugenics conjures in our minds today it had widespread acceptance across America and was legally practiced in many states. It was only when the seal of approval was given by the Nazi Third Reich and the subsequent revelations of the holocaust that academia began to distance themselves from the field – at least, officially. The social applications of Nazi eugenics were no different to the American model which had been set in place by decades of population control advocacy. Nonetheless, science would prove it to be strong on belief but very weak on fact which also allowed it to seemingly fade into obscurity.

hux-galtThomas Henry Huxley (left) and Francis Galton (right)

The early 20th century was rife with social problems all of which played on the fears of the Establishment and their latent designs to isolate and enhance their inherited status. Galton’s eugenics became a disturbing expression of racist ideology that comprehensively infected the intelligentsia. The intent, according to author Edwin Black, was to: “… populate the Earth with vastly more of their own socio-economic and biological kind — and less or none of everyone else.” Spearheaded by a cross-section of industrialists and academics a mass purging of what were deemed: “so-called defective family trees” were targeted and subjected to: “… lifelong segregation and sterilization programs to kill their bloodlines. The grand plan was to literally wipe away the reproductive capability of those deemed weak and inferior — the so-called unfit. The eugenicists hoped to neutralize the viability of 10 percent of the population at a sweep, until none were left except themselves.” [3] [4]

The notions of race and observable physical features as criteria for degenerate or superior traits and therefore definitive indicators of mental and emotional capacity, are inherently flawed. Knowledge gleaned from human genome sequence variation research shows that differences between human groups are more to do with the fluctuation, adaptation and merging of genetic variation and genetic drift than with anything remotely as simplistic as the science of race and “racial hygiene.” Heritable changes in gene activity which are not caused by the DNA sequence is the relatively new field of epigenetics, a science which has shown just how complex the journey of inherited truly is, where changes can occur in an isolated individual or over a several generations with our environment playing a key role. As Professor Betsy Hartmann of Hampshire College, Massachusetts observes: “One of the great ironies of the present moment in the U.S. is the resurgence of race-based biological and genetic determinism at a time when scientific research is exploding myths about the biological basis of race. For example, research has shown that genetic variation within a group is much greater than variation among ‘races’ and that geographic proximity is a much better marker for genetic similarity than skin color.” [5]

“New-Genics”

That is not to say that certain predispositions, strengths or weaknesses cannot occur in different families or races just as certain talents and skills seem to arise. The complexity of influence as to why Ethiopia and Somalia produce world-class long distance runners and Russia the greatest chess players cannot be reduced down to simplistic notions such as purifying the genetic bloodline. Nevertheless, eugenics naturally appeals to authoritarian personalities that operate through a binary interpretation of reality, often encompassing a romantic idealism of society and nature. A strong tradition exists between the two, whether it is the German Volk taken on and subverted by the Nazis or some within the Deep Ecology movement that see biodiversity, population reduction and immigration as inseparable to the survival of the human species. The wish to keep Nature and race pure combined with the merging of external threats seems to become more attractive when economic stability is threatened. The fear of difference is heightened, where scapegoats can offer a vessel to which the shallow and stupid can pour in their innumerable insecurities.

Immigration has sub-connection to the ideas of eugenics and imperialism in that its creation is directly linked to the mind-set that sees certain races and peoples as inferior. Indeed, in the case of certain Jewish sects like Chabad Lubavitch or the white nationalism of the WASP Establishment, supremacy is a natural disposition. Though regulated immigration may be a logical and necessary step, since much of the present mess has been produced by Western neo-imperialsm, there is also a camouflaged bigotry hitching a ride on a resurgence of nationalism. Some of these protests against immigrants are drawn from xenophobic fear, often drawn from an uneasy fusion of nationalism which harbours confused assumptions about the despoliation of the gene pool as well as a chosen ignorance of what leads to mass immigration. Cultural and ecological purity can reinforce each other increasing underlying prejudice based on spurious science.

Similarly, even though the causes of homosexuality have generally been accepted to stem from environmental and hormonal changes in the foetus and infant life, this hasn’t stopped some gay scientists from trying to locate a “gay gene” in an attempt to afford a stronger legal foundation for gay rights based on the illogicality of a sexual orientation that is biologically predetermined. Eugenics author Nancy Ordover believes that not only is such gay gene-searching scientifically flawed it creates a backlash that reinforces the legitimacy of eugenics within more conservative anti-immigration practices and theories of collective intelligence. She quotes George Mosse describing racism as a “scavenger ideology” “… that posits the differences between race and peoples as immutable.” Ordover sees eugenics in the same light: “… exploiting and reinforcing anxieties over race, gender, sexuality and class and bringing them into service of nationalism, white supremacy and heterosexism – not for the first time, but under a new phraseology.” [6]

Though not all calls for curbs on immigration can be linked to such thinking by any means. For instance, there are compelling studies to suggest that multiculturalism and diversity is not always what its cracked up to be due, in part, to the unnatural socio-economic policies enforced upon foreign populations. (See: The Diversity Illusion from a UK perspective). Conversely, there are many groups who use it as a means to inject their ill-informed beliefs regarding race and culture. What results is a Gordian knot of confused thinking which is gaining ground. If immigration is questioned the reflex from the more conservative or republican voters is to cheer accordingly, while those on the left will leap to the defence of those pushing for an open gates policy on immigration as a matter of principle which is neither practical or sensible. A medium must be found between the two poles which is the last thing the eugenicist mind would like, since the vast majority of humanity is surplus to requirements and any culling of the excess population is desirable whether for ecological and/ or genetic reasons. It is the Elite psychopaths vs. ordinary people that define the real issues at stake and being a genetic minority, a more fertile ground for the propagation of their genetic dominance is an underlying objective.

United_States_eugenics_advocacy_poster

U.S. eugenics poster advocating for the removal of genetic “defectives” such as the insane, “feeble-minded” and criminals, and supporting the selective breeding of “high-grade” individuals, c. 1926

450px-Wir_stehen_nicht_allein

Wir stehen nicht allein: “We do not stand alone”. Nazi propaganda poster from 1936, supporting Nazi Germany’s 1933 Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (their compulsory sterilization law). The couple is in front of a map of Germany, surrounded by the flags of nations, including the United States, which had enacted (to the left) or were considering (bottom and to the right) similar legislation. (wikipedia)

Eugenics and anti-immigration started off as strong partners and still are in the minds of the Establishment, though perhaps for different reasons for the average man in the street who has good reason to view present immigration quotas as wildly unrealistic. The Immigration Restriction League was an American organisation that was the first to officially align itself to eugenics in 1894. A product of an initiative by Founded in Harvard University graduates, their principles included the prohibition of “inferior” races from entering America and interfering with what they saw as a racial purity of an American Anglo-Saxon racial stock. This meant that sexual relationships with those whom they considered less evolved (using strictly Dawinist purview) and those whom were therefore “uncivilised” was deemed a great threat to the white American race. By the turn of the 19th Century America was set to embrace eugenics with a passion.

Many socialists and members of the American Progressive Movement jumped aboard the eugenics train relieved to find a seemingly scientific basis for their romantic (though fascistic) ideo logy. For some, there was a slight hitch with this initial enthusiasm when they realised the Nazi Third Reich was riding along with them in the same carriage. It was 1930’s America and its sterilization program that would inspire Hitler to take this experimentation further, with the help of US industrialists. Later as we have seen, US intelligence would mop up the mess and incorporate the Nazi intelligentsia into what would become the National Security State. American eugenicist Madison Grant coined the term “Nordic race” as a generic racial stock descriptor for the pinnacle of eugenic advancement and later appropriated as yet another Teutonic ideal by the Reich. During the 1920s–30s, this blonde, blue-eyed, Nordic ideal gained ground and the German Society for Racial Hygiene was founded in 1905. Public health became integrated with eugenic principles leading to the implementation of selective breeding and compulsory sterilization.

Edwin Black, author of War and Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race (2003) provides clear evidence that American corporate philanthropy elevated this pseudo-science to a degree that allowed the institutionalisation of race politics to become national policy. The Harriman railroad fortune, our friends at the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institution – in combination with systematic academic fraud – were all enthusiastically involved. This led to the imposition of eugenics legislation in 27 states, mandated as lawful and constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The notion of “race and blood” became popularised by Stanford University President David Starr Jordan in his 1902 treatise Blood of a Nation in which he claimed that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood. Inspired by Starr Jordan and many others rising up to push forward the eugenics agenda two years later a laboratory was created at Cold Spring Harbour on Long Island. The Carnegie Institution was busy creating a vast stockpile of index cards on ordinary Americans while floating ideas as to how they could instigate methods by which they could remove “… families bloodlines and whole peoples.” Legislatures, social services and associations became hot-beds of pressure from eugenics advocates. Meanwhile, over in New York many charities and organisations such as the New York Bureau of Industries and Immigration was busy rooting out Italian, Jewish and other immigrants across many states in various cities with a view to deportation, confinement or forced sterilisation. All of this was paid for by the Harriman Railroad fortune company.

1280px-SOU_1929_14_Betänkande_med_förslag_till_steriliseringslag_s_57_Laughlin

A map from a Swedish royal commission report displays the U.S. states that had implemented sterilization legislation by 1929. (wikipedia)

Black discovered that the families identified: “so-called defective family trees and subject[ed] them to legislated segregation and sterilization programs,” along with the sporadic practice of “doctor-organized euthanasia”. [7] This was inflicted on predominantly “… poor people, brown-haired white people, African-Americans, immigrants, Indians, Eastern Europeans, the infirm and really anyone classified outside the superior genetic lines drawn up by American raceologists.” Black alerts us to the little known fact that “60,000 Americans were coercively sterilized – legally and extra-legally” with the tacit support of America’s most progressive figures.[8]

By the end of the 1920s eugenics was entrenched in the Establishment and seen as the answer to the perceived immigration and social deterioration of Anglo-Saxon “pure stock”. Even the US Supreme Court took on the eugenics cause. 1927 was the year when Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind … Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” [9]Black’s research confirmed that: “This decision opened the floodgates for thousands to be coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holmes’ words in their own defense.” Such statements were to play a crucial part in the thought processes of Adolf Hitler for whom the world of eugenics had been thoroughly digested prior to the completion of Mein Kampf in 1924.

He wrote:

“There is today one state in which at least a weak beginning toward a better conception is noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the American Union, in which an effort is made to consult reason at least partially. By refusing immigration on principle to elements in poor health, by simply excluding certain races from naturalization, it professes in slow beginnings a view which is peculiar to the folkish state concept. The folkish state divides its inhabitants into three classes: citizens, subjects, and foreigners.” [10]

This brings us back to a form of National Socialism which, as mentioned previously seems to dominate the fabric of politics in the United States and Europe – minus the regalia. Rather than Germany being the cause of such ponerology it was in fact, within the United States that eugenics was allowed to run free to later emerge as Nazi fuelled mind control experiments under Dr. Ewan McGregor and the CIA. Germany was not only supported by US corporations but by a distinctly American class of eugenicists later supporting the Third Reich and their allopathic medical paradigm involving drugs, surgery and radiation.

The Warburg family’s German chemical company I.G. Farben had extremely close ties to Rockefeller’s Standard Oil. So much so that one could almost see them as one financial entity operating wholly in the Nazi interest. It was for this reason that the business continued throughout the war despite Roosevelt’s legal attempts to try and stop the stop the Standard-I.G. Farben cartel from supplying, assisting and profiting from the enemy war machine. I.G. Farben would expand its operations during the war using slave labour from concentration camps to extract gasoline from coal. No prosecutions were ever brought to bear against any of the participants.

While John D. Rockefeller’s vast wealth was used to promote psychiatric genetics in the US, medical teaching was comprehensively reorganized in Germany via the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics and Human Heredity, based in Munich. Chosen by the family to act as Chief Executive for these institutions Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rudin took on the role with assistants Dr. Franz J. Kallmann, Otmar Verschuer and the soon to be notorious Dr. Josef Mengele.

201px-IG_Farben_Logo_001.svg

I.G. Farbenindustrie AG | Created December 25, 1925-1952 (liquidation started) 31 October 2012 (liquidation accomplished) (wikipedia)

Rudin had long been interested in racial hygiene and Social Darwinism from his brother-in-law Alfred Ploetz. By 1932 Rudin had secured his position as head of the International Eugenics Movement with the seal of approval from British Eugenicists. A year later, Rudin’s career had taken a stratospheric leap forward upon his appointment by Hitler and the Task Force of Heredity Experts formed by SS Chief Heinrich Himmler. It was in July of that year that the sterilization law came into being thanks to Rockefeller funding and the existing American model of race laws.

In 1936, the half-Jewish Dr. Franz Kallmann immigrated to the United States increasingly worried for his safety. Once there, he established the Medical Genetics Department of the New York State Psychiatric Institute. Like so many often German-Jewish, Nazi psychiatrists, psychologists and scientists, the seeds of German and American Nazism became mixed and implanted in the pre-war political framework, which would only increase by the end of the 1940s.

Meanwhile, during 1943 Dr. Joseph Mengele’s responsibility had increased having been made medical officer of Auschwitz-Birkenau’s “Gypsy (Romani) camp,” where I.G. Farben had recently built its huge coal to gasoline factory with easy access to camp inmates. Otmar Verschuer, now director of Rockefeller’s Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin, managed to secure funds from the German Research Council for Mengele to conduct experiments on prison camp inmates. Research on twins was and always is a key component of genetic research. Mengele’s victims had a high quota of twins amongst them who were subjected to some of the most systematic horror ever devised in the name of science. The doctor would scan the new prisoner arrivals with other SS physicians where it was determined who would be retained for work, possible experimentation or who would be killed. “He would wade through the incoming prisoners shouting Zwillinge heraus! (Twins out!),Zwillinge heraustreten! (Twins step forward!) with – according to an assistant he recruited – “such a face that I would think he’s mad”.[11]

Mengele’s experiments are renowned for their sadistic brutality. Survivors tell of his apparent kindness towards children offering them chocolate and befriending them with soothing words and fatherly smiles, yet: “He would also kill them without hesitation, sometimes administering injections to the children or shooting them himself, and would dissect them immediately afterwards. On one evening alone he killed 14 twins.” [12] “Once Mengele’s assistant rounded up 14 pairs of Roma twins during the night. Mengele placed them on his polished marble dissection table and put them to sleep. He then injected chloroform into their hearts, killing them instantly. Mengele then began dissecting and meticulously noting each piece of the twins’ bodies.” [13]

Freie_Universitaet_Berlin_-_Otto-Suhr-Institut_-_Gebaeude_Ihnestrasse_22_-_einst_KWI-Institut

Former Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Racial Hygiene, at the Free University of Berlin, as it is today.

There were experimental blood transfusions, removal of organs and limbs, sometimes without anaesthetic; women were sterilized; injections into eyes were carried out to see if eye colour could be manipulated; men were castrated; shock treatment was carried out and vivisection on pregnant women. Thousands were murdered and “scientific data” sent to Verschuer and the Rockefeller group at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute. In truth, science played no part in Mengele’s butchery only the opportunity of a sadistic psychopath to indulge his bloodlust, a microcosm of so many within the Reich itself. And what is more, Rockefeller funding helped to make it all possible.

Dr. Franz Kallmann became director of the Rockefeller’s American Eugenics Society (AES) in 1952 and from 1954 to 1965, and assisted in the creation the American Society of Human Genetics which would later lead to the “Human Genome Project.” Dr. Otmar Verschuer was also a member of the AES until his death in 1969 having successfully made the transition from Nazi eugenicist to genetic researcher after the war, as did so many of his colleagues.

The drive for eugenics research, while perhaps not harbouring the extremes of psychopathic savagery witnessed during the War is nonetheless alive and well under the auspices of many foundations and organisations like the Rockefeller’s American Eugenics Society (closely affiliated to the Population Council) which changed its name in 1972 to: “Society for the Study of Social Biology” and then again in 2012 to: “Society of Biodemography and Social Biology (SBSB) in a bid to distance itself from its Social Darwinist past.

In 1968 the leader of the AES Frederick Osborn wrote: “Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under another name than eugenics.” Thus, the movement as a whole has been trying to disassociate themselves from the events of history ever since but their perception regarding “racial hygiene” remains exactly the same. [14]

 


Notes

[1] ‘World’s first GM babies born’ The Daily Mail, June 27, 2012.
[2] Eugenics: Unified Medical Language System (Psychological Index Terms) National Library of Medicine, 26 Sep. 2010.
[3] ‘Eugenics and the Nazis: The California Connection’ by Edwin Black, The San Francisco Chronicle, 2003.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘Everyday Eugenics’ By Betsy Hartmann, ZSpace September 22, 2006.
[6] p.207; American Eugenics Race, Queer Anatomy, and the Science of Nationalism By Nancy Ordover, Published by Univ Of Minnesota Press; 1 edition, 2003.
[7] ‘We Must Keep Eugenics Away From Genetics’ By Edwin Black, newsday.com, October 15, 2003.
[8] op. cit. Black.
[9] 274 U.S. 200, at 207, Justia.com U.S. Supreme Court Center.
[10] p.361; Mein Kampf By Adolph Hitler 1925 / Elite Minds, Incorporated; original official NSDAP english translation edition 1940 edition (14 April 2009).
[11] ‘What Made This Man? Mengele’ The New York Times. July 21, 1985.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Bülow, Louis. ‘Josef Mengele, Angel of Death’ | http://www.auschwitz.dk/Mengele.htm
[14] http://www.usc.edu/dept/gero/sssb/|‘Everyday Eugenics’ By Betsy Hartmann Zmag, 2006.

 


For a more esoteric overview of depopulation and eugenics see: Mark Passio – The Unholy Feminine – Neo-Feminism & The Satanic Epi-Eugenics Agenda

Save

World State Policies II: Fabianism: “With Fate Conspire”

“To play those millions of minds, to watch them slowly respond to an unseen stimulus, to guide their aspirations without their knowledge – all this whether in high capacities or in humble, is a big and endless game of chess, of ever extraordinary excitement.”

— Sidney Webb, founder of the Fabian Society.”


clip_image002Italy’s Antonio Gramsci, was one of the greatest Marxist intellectuals who played a large part in mainstreaming an Illuminist strategy for destroying Christianity and re-shaping Western culture. Since the communist revolution was only partly successful for a variety of vested interests, Leninist methods were ditched in favour of cultural Marxism that would initiate change from within, gradually and inexorably as a “long march through the institutions.” No domain of society would remain untouched. The jostling for New World Order advocates had become fused with ceremonial psychopathy allowing Illuminist inspired philosophies to reincarnate into political theory across Liberal, Conservative and Zionist ideologies, the latter grouping making up most of the progenitors of Marxist theory.

By the end of World War I the Hungarian Bolshevik Georg Lukacs had introduced the concept of “cultural terrorism” which further embedded the strategy within the minds of academia and the Elite. For Lukacs – like the industrialists who came after him – knowledge of psychology and sexual mores were integral part of social engineering towards a Marxist philosophy. Traditional perceptions of sexuality and the sacred were there to be fragmented and distorted – shattered into fragments in order to be remade towards specific aims. This would be taken on by later groups such as the Fabian Society and the massive social engineering programs of the Rockefellers and affiliated organisations.  The three streams of Establishment ideology were moving in the same direction but frequent in-fighting between factions meant that capitalist-collectivist thinking went through a variety of upheavals as it sought to find the ultimate tool for the mass mind and elite dominance.

By the 1920s, after a broadly unsuccessful attempt to change his native country Lukacs had gained a following in Germany which, with industrialist assistance, led to the creation of The Institute for Social Research based at Frankfurt University. This centre of Marxist theory later became simply The Frankfurt School a hugely influential think-tank which would become the social engineering hub for the Western mind. By the 1930s, Cultural Marxism had become a substantial force behind the scenes with psychology forming the basis of new advances in political theory. Intellectuals Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer were key in the development of culture as a primary force in shaping the trajectory of social perception. It was to be even more important than the emphasis on economic disparity which was so crucial to the theory of Marx. For Horkheimer, the proletariat was not the focus of future revolutions but culture as a whole. To make it work, the hybridisation of concepts was essential.

The psychoanalysis of Freud and cultural Marxism would fuse so that the concept of sexual repression and Pavlovian conditioning would eventually make the population pliable and compliant in the face of World State policies. It was to lay the foundation of a method of critical theory where social science and government institutions would be imbued with the bias of cultural Marxism inside a corporatist framework. Education meant adopting the correct attitude rather than universal morality or values. Oppression and victimhood – so much a part of the Zionist cause – was the precursor to so many “progressive” theories which value conformity, group consciousness and homogeneity at the expense of individualism and freedom. Zionism and cultural Marxism went hand in hand. As Jewish immigration to the United States gained momentum throughout the 20th century, media and entertainment were the natural focus of Jewish intellectuals since it was a double whammy of both political and cultural infiltration.

By the 1950s and 1960s the marriage of Zionism, cultural Marxism, advances in psychology and the left-over of seeds of a Nazi-imbued psychopathy were re-established with the support of the Anglo-American, liberal Establishment. It would be the crucible of change that would alter the social landscape of the US in ways unimaginable. While on the one hand eugenics was very much a part of Elite beliefs, the collective and group consciousness was promoted, so too the idea of a One World Order. Mixed in to re-shape sexuality were change agents such as Alfred Kinsey and the sexual revolution, all manner of New Age distortions and streams of the counter-culture subverted and contoured towards the same psychological conditioning. With the merging of psychoanalysis and cultural Marxism sexual perversity became normalised and instinctual drives went beyond the healing of repression to become the pinnacle of the pyramid to which all healing would aspire. Rather than “Free Love” it was free sex and liberation without limitation as an end in itself where traditional institutions and wisdom were thrown out in favour of bland mediocrity. It was indeed a Brave New World of sensation where humanism and later transhumanism and their vision of technocracy would develop the Marxist ideas into a sensate machine for the masses, the torch of Illuminism acting as a red herring and cover for core members of global occultism. The seeds of psychopathy that lay behind it never died.

Developed by the Russian revolutionary leader Vladimir Lenin, an ideology was born from political and socialist economic theories, developed from his own interpretations of Marxist theory. He advocated taking power directly as a prelude to socialism. It was a “now or never” principle where the claiming of that power was of overriding importance; the details could follow later. The term “Leninism” was popularized in the early 1920s to denote a “vanguard-party revolution”. It is most clearly seen in a quote from the final paragraph of The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx: “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only through the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions.” [1]

By 1905 Lenin and his Bolshevik revolution was overseeing a return of power to the proletariat and the destruction of anything that stood in its way. The bourgeoisie had reason to be afraid. An example of Leninist group-think would be Neo-Conservatism and Revisionist Zionism. [2] Individuals such as Henry Kissinger, George W. Bush, Newt Gingrich, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld represent this line of authoritarianism. For Leninist collectivists, the wolf is openly on show. Though they would never dream of describing themselves as Leninist, it is the principle at work here.

On the other side of the coin was The Fabian Society founded in 1884 by, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, along with English writer Edward R. Pease who also became a trustee for the famous socialist creation of the London School of Economics, also founded by the Webbs. Financing magically arrived from the Rothschilds as well other international bankers including Lord Haldane who summed up the purpose of the society succinctly: “Our object is to make this institution a place to raise and train the bureaucracy of the future Socialist State.” [3]A cross-fertilisation of humanism, theosophy, and Communism took place. Lord George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells and Arnold Toynbee were some of the earliest members who shared their open views regarding how to shape the world on the anvil of their particular brand of socialist principles. Round table members if not directly part of the society would have been fully aware of the group as it evolved alongside at roughly the same time. More modern versions of Fabians – by nature if not always by membership – are Zbigniew Brzezinski, Gordon Brown, David Rockefeller, Robert Fuller, George Monbiot, Barack Obama and Maurice Strong.

The Fabian Society is the Anglo-American branch of cultural Marxism. Comprised of an elite group of intellectuals from the middle and upper classes a semi-secret society was formed for the express purpose of creating a socialist order without using the Marxist-Leninist methods of revolution but by facilitation and gradation – the gentle approach, much like the action of water eroding rock. They would do this by infiltrating government, education, media, law and commerce, with sophisticated propaganda playing a decisive role in their indoctrinations. The violence and direct confrontation of the Leninists was avoided, unless absolutely necessary. Established governments and institutions were targeted by the Fabians for a dose of social engineering to give qualitatively better and more enduring results. Drawing attention to the term “socialism” was considered counter-productive. Humanitarian principles such as welfare, medical care, workers rights, women’s rights, foreign aid and multiculturalism would serve their objectives without resorting to overt conflict and more importantly, the collectivist vision behind these ostensibly benign moves would never be seen for what it was, and thus easy to proceed without interference. Their hope was that their methods would spread throughout society by a form of direct and indirect educative osmosis which would then become the norm.

The late author Eustace Mullins described a social historian’s observations concerning the “rats” rather than the “wolves” of social engineering and what he considered to be the major development in the late nineteenth century: “… perhaps equivalent to the discovery of the wheel.” He was referring to the time when: “…charitable foundations and world Communism became important movements” and their new discovery: “… was the concept developed by the rats, who after all have rather highly developed intelligences, that they could trap people by baiting traps with little bits of cheese. The history of mankind since then has been the rats catching humans in their traps. Socialism – indeed any government program – is simply the rat baiting the trap with a smidgen of cheese and catching himself a human.” [4]

By 1900 the Fabian Society joined with the trade union movement which later became the political arm of the Labour Party which would eventually implement the framework of the welfare state (and some would say the normalisation of dependency and government responsibility). As a result, the Fabian Society still has a strong influence on government policy. After all, many Labour Party politicians have been Fabians including several Prime Ministers: Ramsay MacDonald MP, Clement Attlee PM, Tony Benn MP, Anthony Crosland PM, Richard Crossman MP, Harold Wilson PM, Tony Blair PM, and Gordon Brown PM.

The symbol of their elected method of gradualism is the turtle and the official shield of the Fabian Society shows an image of a wolf in sheep’s clothing symbolising the gradual shaping of society by manipulation. While Leninism is a Wolf taking what it wants directly, the Fabian ploy is by deception over longer periods of time, but a still a Wolf preying on the sheep, though it is doubtful stalwart Fabians would see it that way.

Allowing the easing of “social tension” is useful by employing socialist principles whilst maintaining the overarching capitalist system. The power inherent within the seeming dichotomy of National Socialism comprising the corporate state and Fabians’ welfare state is seen in a report from 1982 by Alan Pifer, then president of the Carnegie Corporation whom we shall turn to presently. Pifer stated there would be: “… A mounting possibility of severe social unrest, and the consequent development among the upper classes and the business community of sufficient fear for the survival of our capitalist economic system to bring about an abrupt change of course. Just as we built the general welfare state … and expanded it in the 1960s as a safety valve for the easing of social tension, so will we do it again in the 1980s. Any other path is too risky.” [5]

Nationalisation of land and government institutions, protectionism and resistance to free-trade are some of the beliefs of Fabianism. According to member George Bernard Shaw, the Society saw the enormous power of the environment as key to progressive change over time. He passionately drove this point home when he said: “We can change it; we must change it; there is absolutely no other sense in life than the task of changing it. What is the use of writing plays, what is the use of writing anything, if there is not a will which finally moulds chaos itself into a race of gods.” [6]  In their reality, we might have an inkling who will be sitting on the clouds of Olympus when these “gods” in waiting have finished offering the cure to such Hegelian chaos. To this end, Bernard Shaw designed an intriguing stained glass window for the Fabian Society. The window was installed at the Fabian Society’s headquarters but was removed in 1978 for reasons unknown. It came to light again during a sale at Sotheby’s in 2005 having been purchased by the Webb Memorial Trust and was later loaned to the London School of Economics. It depicts two men – possibly Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw – with large hammers pounding a globe of the world which rests on an anvil. Ten individuals kneel reverentially below while a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing displayed on a shield hovers above the world. There is also an inscription above the globe which reads: “Remould it nearer to the heart’s desire.”

This line is from Persian poet and mystic Omar Khayyam:

 “Dear love, couldst thou and I with fate conspire

To grasp this sorry scheme of things entire,

Would we not shatter it to bits,

And then remold it nearer to the heart’s desire!”

Why is the Earth placed on an anvil? To reshape and transform it into something closer to the Fabian desires. First, the earth and its people must be “shattered to bits” via methods of the Wolf that is hidden behind sheep’s’ clothing and which dominates the earthly sphere. And certainly, the best way to shatter and re-order it into a collectivist’s vision is through the fire of war and the gradualism of “social reform.”

Perhaps one of the most famous proponents of this kind of was Fabian Socialist H.G. Wells in his The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution (1928) where the seemingly laudable aims of socialism are merely used as a backdoor for something quite different. Wells, like so many of his colleagues formed the rival camp of “scientific technique” as the antidote to the Neo-Platonists of the American and German occult-romanticism of the 19th century. It was they who believed in a singularly ecological form of social order. After all, Cecil Rhodes was inspired by a form of Germanic romanticism and English eco-fascism, poetically expressed by John Ruskin to form his secret society of the Round Table. Ruskin felt that faith in science led to serious errors, Wells, however, embraced scientific rationalism which will serve the idea: “… of a planned world-state … one to which all our thought and knowledge is tending … It is appearing partially and experimentally at a thousand points … its coming is likely to happen quickly.” [7]

And where have we heard such a reference to “a thousand points” and “a New World Order”? From none other than George Bush Sr. and his State of the Union address of 1991 entitled: “envisioning a thousand points of Light” in which he declares: “What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea—a new world order…” [8] The elder statesman  then proceeded to soar into unbelievable rhetoric of which Obama and Blair would have been proud. This is particularly nauseating as the speech was at the beginning of the 1991 Gulf War, the toppling of Saddam Hussein and the carnage that followed.

What Bush was really signalling to his fellow brethren was a strategic phase in the establishment of a new reality, where the merging of cartel-capitalism with World State collectivism will transcend nation boarders and simplistic notions of left-right paradigms. H.G. Wells explains the nature of the “Open Conspiracy” where its political world:

“… must weaken, efface, incorporate and supersede existing governments … The Open Conspiracy is the natural inheritor of socialist and communist enthusiasms; it may be in control of Moscow before it is in control of New York … The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed… It will be a world religion.” [9]

FabianWindow_Large

fabian-socialist-wolf-in-sheep-clothingThis stained-glass window designed by George Bernard Shaw is on display at the London School of Economics (LSE), which was founded by Sydney and Beatrice Webb. Sidney Webb and Shaw are depicted striking the Earth with hammers echoing a quote from Omar Khayyam: “REMOULD IT NEARER TO THE HEART’S DESIRE.”  A wolf in sheep’s clothing can be seen as the Fabian crest hovering above the globe, indicating its preference for gradualism (and deception). Once again, the end justifies the means, which echos both Neo-conservatism and Crowleyian occult principles. The only difference now is that we have it in a “socialist” context. Another Fabian symbol denoting the same is the tortoise. Lenin’s well-intentioned but “Useful Idiots” are lined up at the bottom worshipping at the altar of socialism which is meant to help those crushed under the flat foot of the State. Sadly, Fabian-socialists appear to offer equally damaging.


We are beginning to see at this stage its startling relationship to Illuminism and the replication of themes and principles which occur throughout literature, politics and social science. Implicit in such belief systems is society elevated to the position far above individual, community and the hope of natural networks that may operate as self-organised units, without the need of the State. By following the centralisation of government as the authority figure, society becomes so ill and pathologised that what the majority of well-intentioned capitalists and socialists appear to not understand is that Fabian manipulations on the anvil of their romantic but dangerous desires is just a tool for psychopathic ascendency. Forcing change by placing populations on an anvil of any ideology won’t work – not least if it is overshadowed by deception.

As author and journalist G. Edward Griffin observed:

If your goal is to bring about change, contentment is not what you want. You want discontentment. That’s why Marx called religion the opiate of the masses. Religion encourages contentment and dulls the anger and passion needed for revolutionary change. … Wells said that collectivism should become the new opiate, that it should become the vision for better things in the next world. He said the new order must be built on the concept that individuals are nothing compared to the long continuum of society, and that only by serving society do we become connected to eternity. [10]

Build a seductive vision appealing to every human being’s limitless belief in the romance of greener pastures and you have an instant magnetic node to attract your faithful. Philanthropy and Communism were mighty pillars in their armoury of mass control for the Rothschilds and Rockefellers alike. Rather than any altruistic or ideological reasons for their support, knowledge of how these movements served to broker power was vital to the 4Cs.

The long-lived patriarch of the 19th century John D. Rockefeller who presided over Standard Oil and the rise of corporate influence over American society viewed Communism as just another chance to make mountains of dosh. It was the ultimate monopoly made manifest, where financing both sides of any conflict could only mean a self-perpetuating and eternal source of monetary extraction sourced from State oppression. Ever greater forms of monopoly were the driving force of Rockefeller’s power and remains so for the minds who have taken on his vision. China, as exactly the communist-capitalist hybrid currently staking its claim across the world is seen as the perfect template for a neo-feudal World State. This is why John D. Rockefeller’s grandson David Rockefeller as a “china Traveller” in 1973 would sing the praises of the Maoist regime despite the despot having murdered over 40 million of his own people. The Dewy-eyed David waxed lyrical about how “impressed” he was about the “sense of national harmony” and: “… Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution it has obviously succeeded … in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive … The enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose …The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.” [11]

It is this form of Communism that is so attractive to the globalist mind. It serves as the perfect model: a totalitarian Elite sitting astride a top-down capitalist system of highly centralised resource management. This love of Communism was in part, entirely misplaced by the McCarthyism of the 1950s as somehow the spectre of cold war infiltration. While the persecution of certain members of Congress, and members within the media and entertainment world was inexcusable, there was, ironically, some justification for the “red menace” but a complete misunderstanding of the true cause.

Author Anthony C. Sutton reminds us that collectivism is indeed a creature of necessity in both belief systems:

It may be observed that both the extreme right and the extreme left of the conventional political spectrum are absolutely collectivist. The national socialist (for example, the fascist) and the international socialist (for example, the Communist) both recommend totalitarian politico-economic systems based on naked, unfettered political power and individual coercion. Both systems require monopoly control of society. An alternative concept of political ideas and politico-economic systems would be that of ranking the degree of individual freedom versus the degree of centralized political control. Under such an ordering the corporate welfare state and socialism are at the same end of the spectrum. Hence we see that attempts at monopoly control of society can have different labels while owning common features.

There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists – to their mutual benefit. This alliance has gone unobserved largely because academic historians have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus locked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing. There are two clues: monopoly capitalists are the bitter enemies of laissez-faire entrepreneurs; and, given the weaknesses of socialist central planning, the totalitarian socialist state is a perfect captive market for monopoly capitalists, if an alliance can be made with the socialist powerbrokers. Suppose – and it is only hypothesis at this point – that American monopoly capitalists were able to reduce a planned socialist Russia to the status of a captive technical colony? Would not this be the logical twentieth-century internationalist extension of the Morgan railroad monopolies and the Rockefeller petroleum trust of the late nineteenth century?  [12]

In order to usher in suitable conditions for their New International Order, certain programs were to be implemented in those very tax-exempt organisations and institutions so that Americans would eventually accept the creation of a world government. This is why the principle of collectivism via Communism, internationalism, globalisation and group endeavour has been promoted by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, the Carnegie Endowment Centre for National Peace and the Lucis Trust. Even by 1913, there was concern by many in the US government of the day that industrialists and their philanthropic creed were not all they appeared to be. The rapid ascendency of the corporation has been achieved by the ruthless application of the 4Cs. The philanthropic foundation, though offering many altruistic peoples a platform for good deeds is still birthed from a perception that is not remotely interested in furthering the social emancipation of ordinary people. Foundations have taken advantage of the naturally growing altruism present in the normal population having expanded from a mere 21 to more than 50,000 by 1990. [13] This has been commensurate with the take-over of government by corporations and most importantly, educational policy which historically has always been the target. Such was the concern at the evolution of these strange corporate entities and their focus on education of the nation that the 662nd Congress created a commission to investigate the role of these new foundations. After one year of testimony their conclusion was definitive:

“The domination of men in whose hands the final control of a large part of American industry rests is not limited to their employees, but is being rapidly extended to control the education and social services of the nation. […] The giant foundation exercises enormous power through direct use of its funds, free of any statutory entanglements so they can be directed precisely to the levers of a situation; this power, however, is substantially increased by building collateral alliances which insulate it from criticism and scrutiny.” [14]

Yet these conclusions were to highlight the apathy and fecklessness of Congressional power, not least the relative ease to which they submitted to bribes by the Elite in return for legislative support.

An interview conducted with Norman Dodd in 1982 by writer and film-maker G. Edward Griffin, provides an interesting confirmation of the above. From his work as staff director of the Reece Committee a Congressional Special Committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations named after Congressman Carroll Reece, Dodd was tasked with investigating “un-American” activities rumoured to be circulating in large tax-exempt foundations and other institutions within America. This had been prompted by certain editorials and opinion pieces within newspapers and foundation newsletters perceived to have been unduly supportive of communist ideology. Dodd under the Reece Committee defined “un-American” as: “… a determination to effect changes in the country by unconstitutional means. …any effort in that direction which did not avail itself of the procedures which were authorized by the Constitution could be justifiably called un-American.” [15]

Before his appointment to the Reece Committee Dodd worked in banking and financial consultancy through the 1929 depression up to his appointment by the Reece Committee in 1953. His interest in seeking methods by which he could contribute to: “… the educational world to … teach the subject of economics realistically and move it away from the support of various speculative activities that characterize our country.” [16] His networking with individuals who thought the banking system was not working in the US and his obvious capacity as both a member of the stock exchange and international financial advisor brought him into contact with those at higher levels of commerce. One of these was Rowan Gaither, President of the Ford Foundation. After meeting Gaither in New York for what he assumed would be an informal and friendly welcome the CEO revealed something to Dodd that almost caused him to “fall off his chair”. An extract from the transcript follows, (or you can watch the full interview here).

“Mr. Dodd, we’ve asked you to come up here today because we thought that possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves?” Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on voluntarily and said:

“Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here have had experience either with the OSS during the war or the European Economic Administration after the war. We’ve had experience operating under directives, and these directives emanate and did emanate from the White House. Now, we still operate under just such directives. Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?”

I said, “Mr. Gaither, I’d like very much to know,” whereupon he made this statement to me: “Mr. Dodd, we are here operate in response to similar directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.” […]

“Well, Mr. Gaither I can now answer your first question. You’ve forced the Congress of the United States to spend $150,000 to find out what you’ve just told me.” I said: “Of course, legally, you’re entitled to make grants for this purpose, but I don’t think you’re entitled to withhold that information from the people of the country to whom you’re indebted for your tax exemption, so why don’t you tell the people of the country what you just told me?” And his answer was, “We would not think of doing any such thing.” So then I said, “Well, Mr. Gaither, obviously you’ve forced the Congress to spend this money in order to find out what you’ve just told me.” [17]

After that experience it’s understandable that Dodd found himself accepting a post on the Reece Committee.

In 1954, Norman Dodd had been able to study the minutes of meetings from a twenty year period which he found implicated the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and other organisations in an intentional manipulation of the United States into World War I and explicit control of US education in order to subvert and distort history towards a collectivist ideology. Though this is one man’s testimony and much like the Kay Griggs interviews open to criticism, they are compelling for their sense of authenticity and factual confirmation. Dodd had nothing to gain from his claims and indeed the details merely confirm the beliefs and actions of the protagonists in question which derive from many other sources.

The Carnegie Endowment for international Peace, (now an international peace and foreign-policy think-tank based in Washington, D.C.) began its operations in 1908 and officially in 1910 with a $10 million gift by its founder, industrialist and J.D. Rockefeller buddy Andrew Carnegie, giving his trustees “… the widest discretion as to the measures and policy they shall from time to time adopt” in carrying out the purpose of the fund. [18]According to the minutes of this meeting the discussion revolved around the question as to whether there was a more effective means than war to change the lives of an entire populace. They concluded that there was not. In the following year the second question asked in the meeting was how could they involve the United States in a war? They decided that the control of the State Department was necessary to achieve such an aim and for that to be successful the channels of diplomacy would also have to be controlled.

During World War I another meeting took place where they decided to send a telegram to President Woodrow Wilson advising him not to end participation in the war too quickly. By the time the war had ended in 1918 their focus had shifted to how best they could mould American society towards their objectives, deciding that education with specific attention to American history must be reshaped and reformed. That was when the Rockefeller Foundation came aboard, presumably with great enthusiasm. Domestic operations would be handled by the Foundation while educational concerns at the international level would be handled by the Carnegie Endowment.

After being turned down by many academics when asked if they would “alter the manner in which they present their subject” they finally adopted the tactic of creating their own group of historians for this express purpose. The Guggenheim Foundation was found to be amenable to their designs and agreed to grant them fellowships on the Carnegie Endowment board’s say so. Eventually, twenty potential teachers of American history were sent to London, effectively told what was expected of them: securing posts that were fitting for the doctorates they had been generously granted. These twenty historians ultimately became the core grouping within the American Historical Association. Dodd states further that by the end of the 1920s:

“… the Endowment grants to the American Historical Association four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) for a study of our history in a manner which points to what this country look forward to, in the future. That culminates in a seven-volume study, the last volume of which is, of course, in essence, a summary of the contents of the other six. The essence of the last volume is this: the future of this country belongs to collectivism, administered with characteristic American efficiency.” [19]

The minutes were transcribed by Dodd’s colleague Kathryn Casey onto dictatone files. These might reside, according to Dodd, somewhere in the US House of Representatives or Congress.

Norman Dodd succeeded in making his mark against the true “un-American” activities existing in the United States at the time. The second Congressional investigation of foundation tampering with schools and American social life ran into vociferous criticisms from corporate and political quarters which caused its disbandment soon after. Nevertheless, the committee offered their findings from an almost one-thousand page report which stated:

The power of the individual large foundation is enormous. Its various forms of patronage carry with them elements of thought control. It exerts immense influence on educator, educational processes, and educational institutions. It is capable of invisible coercion. It can materially predetermine the development of social and political concepts, academic opinion, thought leadership, public opinion.

The power to influence national policy is amplified tremendously when foundations act in concert. There is such a concentration of foundation power in the United States, operating in education and the social sciences, with a gigantic aggregate of capital and income. This Interlock has some of the characteristics of an intellectual cartel. It operates in part through certain intermediary organizations supported by the foundations. It has ramifications in almost every phase of education.

It has come to exercise very extensive practical control over social science and education. A system has arisen which gives enormous power to a relatively small group of individuals, having at their virtual command huge sums in public trust funds.

The power of the large foundations and the Interlock has so influenced press, radio, television, and even government that it has become extremely difficult for objective criticism of anything the Interlock approves to get into news channels—without having first been ridiculed, slanted and discredited.

Research in the social sciences plays a key part in the evolution of our society. Such research is now almost wholly in the control of professional employees of the large foundations. Even the great sums allotted by federal government to social science research have come into the virtual control of this professional group.

Foundations have promoted a great excess of empirical research as contrasted with theoretical research, promoting an irresponsible “fact-finding mania” leading all too frequently to “scientism” or fake science.

Associated with the excessive support of empirical method, the concentration of foundation power has tended to promote “moral relativity” to the detriment of our basic moral, religious, and governmental principles. It has tended to promote the concept of “social engineering,” that foundation-approved “social scientists” alone are capable of guiding us into better ways of living, substituting synthetic principles for fundamental principles of action.

These foundations and their intermediaries engage extensively in political activity, not in the form of direct support of candidates or parties, but in the conscious promotion of carefully calculated political concepts.

The impact of foundation money upon education has been very heavy, tending to promote uniformity in approach and method, tending to induce the educator to become an agent for social change and a propagandist for the development of our society in the direction of some form of collectivism. In the international field, foundations and the Interlock, together with certain intermediary organizations, have exercised a strong effect upon foreign policy and upon public education in things international. This has been accomplished by vast propaganda, by supplying executives and advisors to government, and by controlling research through the power of the purse. The net result has been to promote “internationalism” in a particular sense—a form directed toward “world government” and a derogation of American nationalism. [Emphasis mine] [20]

The early days of American education are soaked in corporatist-collectivist group-think and One World indoctrination which has only become more entrenched and sophisticated in its camouflage. There were constant warnings about this pathogenic infection throughout the 20th century but the strength of the funding and corruption both in Congress and in the education system itself was too strong.  It is important to take note that though this appears to be a “communist plot”, collectivism alongside corporatism are products of the genesis of evil, known in ponerological terms as “ponerogenesis.” Psychopaths are merely using the most convenient tool s to achieve their ends, a fact which has been reiterated throughout this blog so that the reader does not fall into a waiting belief-trap. An example of this can be seen in the scapegoating of the public regarding child molestation and paedophilia and the witch-hunts that followed. The climate of fear and persecution was also famously present at the McCarthy hearings. These are both examples of seriously flawed attempts to address pathocratic influence and the latter’s successful methods at countering it.

It seems the most effective way of ensuring pathocratic dominance through the application of collectivism is by co-opting education of the masses. As we have seen in the testimony of Norman Dodd this is exactly where they have focused their intentions most effectively. Fabianism is synonymous with social engineering and it is the Rockefeller Foundation that took up the gauntlet of not only helping to contour human sexuality and psychology but to target schoolchildren and therefore subsequent generations of adults in the ways of vertical collectivism alongside the principles of the 4Cs.  We also see why there were so many Fabians within Alice Bailey’s Theosophical branch of occultism which promoted the memes of group consciousness and a New World Religion sourced from the United Nations. Same ideology different societal domain. You a method of psycho-spiritual manipulation for every conceivable preference. (Obviously we cannot forget that this hugely benefits the theocratic aims of Zionism whose agents work across the whole 3EM to varying degrees. Cultural Marxism and collectivism are the most useful examples to Zionist and authoritarian Jewish leaders since it fuses seamlessly with anti-Semitism propaganda).

clip_image008

The late Norman Dodd, former Congressional Investigator during an interview by G. Edward Griffin.

To fulfil their these objectives J.D. Rockefeller’s and Frederick T. Gates’ General Education Board founded in 1902 was given the task to redesign American education in way that could not be accomplished by the Carnegie Endowment or Guggenheim members alone. When combined with other Rockefeller social engineering projects, the sheer ambition and scope of their mission cannot be understated, nor the consequences of their obvious success. When you read the mission statements and objectives of The General Education Board several themes become evident all aligning themselves towards the very principles we have been exploring. Such thinking is in plain sight, with alternative possibilities entirely absent. The themes on show are actually the antithesis of good schooling. Dressed up in euphemisms for the common good we have a clear doctrine for creating an ideological system – “system” being the operative word. The intention to encourage and implement:

1.An agenda to minimize learning and understanding in favour of a specific collectivist belief.

2. The reduction of intelligence in favour of endless specialization.

3.A default emphasis on class distinction.

4. To erode and finally eliminate schooling traditions, customs and academic excellence that may lie outside of The General Education Board’s objectives.

5. The reduction of parental influence.

6. Clear indications of eugenic undercurrents, group think, homogeneity and conformity with the loss of individuality and originality.

7. The politicisation of education.

Through the 1920s and 1930s the rolling clouds of collectivism, corporatism and eugenics were beginning to form over education in America and to a lesser degree in Europe. Rockefeller agent Professor John Dewey from the Colombia Teachers College had his Progressive Education Association set up by 1920 which was to spread the Humanist philosophy and eugenics-based doctrine over educational policy. He co-authored the Humanist Manifesto in 1933 which called for a synthesizing of all religions and “a socialized and cooperative economic order.”Co-signer C.F. Potter stated in 1930: “Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism, and every American public school is a school of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?” [21]

By 1947, that pivotal year for collectivist social models, the PEA would become the American Education Fellowship where Dewey renewed his call for the: “… establishment of a genuine world order, an order in which national sovereignty is subordinate to world authority …” Another Colombia professor Harold Rugg supported Deweys’ statements and society’s need to mould the child’s mind via a new scientific imperative where “a new public mind is to be created.” This was to be achieved:

“… by creating tens of millions of individual minds and welding them into a new social mind. Old stereotypes must be broken up and ‘new climates of opinion’ formed in the neighborhoods of America. Through the schools of the world we shall disseminate a new conception of government—one that will embrace all the activities of men, one that will postulate the need of scientific control…in the interest of all people.” [22]

Rugg’s vision was among many who saw a scientific elite ready to: “… create swiftly a compact body of minority opinion for the scientific reconstruction of our social order.” His fervour no doubt impressed the Rockefeller Foundation, enough to fund his prolific texts via the Lincoln School and the National Education Authority, both bastions of a social science that would later be known as Social Darwinism (eugenics).

And it is this “scientific control” that we will turn to next.

 


Notes

[1] The Communist Manifesto (Das Kommunistische Manifest) commissioned by the Communist League originally titled Manifesto of the Communist Party (German: Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei) and published in 1848 by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. It laid out the League’s purposes and program.
[2] Francis Fukyama once a Neo-Conservative supporter stated that Neo-Conservative s “…believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States. Neoconservatism, as both a political symbol and a body of thought, has evolved into something I can no longer support.” Fukuyama, F. ‘After Neo Conservatism.’ New York Times Magazine. February 19, 2006.
[3] See Eric D. Butler, The Fabian Socialist Contribution to the Communist Advance, (Melbourne: Australian League of Rights, 1964), pp. 19, 20.
[4] op. cit. Mullins (p.191)
[5] op. cit. Taylor Gatto.
[6] ‘George Bernard Shaw’. SpartacusEducational. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jshaw.htm
[7] p.243; Ecology in the 20th Centur:, A History, By Anna Bramwell, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1989. | ISBN 0300045212
[8] George H. W. Bush’s State of the Union Address, ‘Envisioning One Thousand Points of Light’ Given on Tuesday, January 29, 1991. Infoplease.com
[9] The Open Conspiracy by H. G. Wells, 1928 The revised and expanded version arrived in 1933.
[10] ‘Secret Organizations and Hidden Agendas’ The Future Is Calling (Part Two) 2003 – 2011 by G. Edward Griffin Revised 2011 July 18. http://www.freedomforceinternational.org
[11] ‘From a China Traveler’ By David Rockefeller, The New York Times August 10, 1973.
[12] Wall Street and The Bolshevik Revolution By Antony C. Sutton, 1974. See also online version here: http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html
[13] p.9; Private Funds, Public Purpose: Philanthropic Foundations in International Perspectives
edited by Helmut K. Anheier, Stefan Toepler, Published by Klewer Academic / Plenum Publishers, | ISBN 0306-45947-7
[14] The Underground History of American Education: An Intimate Investigation into the Problem of Modern Schooling By John Taylor Gatto, New York: Oxford Village Press, 2001 |Online edition. Chapter 12: ‘The Daughters of the Barons of Runnemede.’
[15] ‘The Hidden Agenda: interview with Norman Dodd’ By G. Edward Griffin 1982. http://www.realityzone.com
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements by Edmund Jan Osmanczyk and Anthony MangoLondon: Routledge, 2004.
[19] op. cit. Griffin.
[20] ‘The Reece Committee Hearings Before the Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organisations – House of Representatives, 83rd Congress, Second Session on H. Resolution 217’ 1954.
[21] Humanist Manifesto, written in 1933 primarily by Raymond Bragg and published with 34 signers. Refers to humanism as a religious movement meant to replace previous, deity-based systems. Cosmology, human nature, biological and cultural evolution, epistemology, ethics, religion, self-fulfillment, and the quest for freedom and social justice. This latter, stated in article fourteen, proved to be the most controversial, even among humanists, in its opposition to ‘acquisitive and profit-motivated society’ and its call for an egalitarian world community based on voluntary mutual cooperation. The document’s release was reported by the mainstream media on May 1, simultaneous with its publication in the May/June 1933 issue of the New Humanist” (Wikipedia)
[22] The Great Technology: social chaos and the public mind by Harold Rugg, 1933.

Satan’s Little Helpers VIII: Weimar, Magick and “Cherry Marines”

By M.K. Styllinski

occultbadges

Authentic US military badges with occult-themed insignias (See more here )


A recent article from Wayne Madsen reminded us of a child pornography ring in the 1980s that extended from Oregon to the San Francisco Bay area over to Chicago and Washington, DC. This involved many officers of the U.S. Navy and yet another breach in a sub-network which the author believes was covered up by one John Lehman, then Secretary of the Navy who engaged in similar cover-ups, sexual misdemeanours and crimes. Madsen has since had to vacate his U.S. home due to death threats.[1]

profile-LRH_thumb.jpg

L. Ron Hubbard

The Navy has an odd history of pathogenic infiltration. The advances from MK-ULTRA experimentation permeated the U.S. military and in particular, Naval Intelligence. A former Navy Officer with serious mental problems which lent themselves to the creation of Scientology was L. Ron Hubbard and his rocket scientist friend, Jack Parsons. These men may have helped to subvert still further the military rituals of Navy personnel. Both were involved in Aleister Crowley’s Black Magick society Ordo Templis Orientis (OTO) which was attracting many converts from government, military and corporate sectors of society. (Now it seems the organisation has new recruits from the social network generation which, until recently, included Peaches Geldolf. How’s that for marketing? )

Hubbard was said to have been drafted in by the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) to break up a satanic cult that was spreading among top scientists with Parsons as the focus of the activity. It seems highly dubious that Hubbard was given the job of foiling such a ring should that even have been possible. Perhaps this had been the initial operation but whether during or after his assignment he played a vital role in either the creation of, or expansion of said cult rather than its disbandment. With the inspiration of Crowley’s integration of various sets of Magick, Hubbard and Parsons were engaging in their own Magickal studies by 1946, including an extended set of Sex Magick rituals called the “Babylon Working,” intended to summon a goddess or “moonchild.” [2]  Parsons continued to immerse himself in Crowleyian rituals believing he was the Anti-Christ only to die in a suspicious accident a year later. Meantime, Hubbard was about to write Dianetics which swiftly became the basis of Scientology, itself rooted in Black Magick as a consequence of Hubbard’s fascination with The Book of Law and Thelmic rituals.

After Crowley’s unceremonious death in 1947, the role of “the Beast” was wide open. According to Ron De Wolf, Hubbard’s son, his father took it upon himself to fully embrace Satanism, not as a form of worship but to understand that he himself was one with Satan. This realisation came from:

“… the creation of what they call embryo implants—of getting a demonic spirit to inhabit the body of a foetus. This would arrive care of Black-Magic rituals, including the use of hypnosis, drugs, and other destructive practices. One of the important things was to destroy the evidence if you failed at this Immaculate Conception. That’s how my father became obsessed with abortions.” [3]

An axe to grind? or was there truth to his son’s accusations?

Regardless, it seems Hubbard, Parsons and other participants were happily riding high on the infusion of narcotics and magickal practices that were busy doing the rounds on the intelligences circuits. Hubbard is unlikely to have found his brain-washing techniques from anywhere else. He used the workings of occult rituals and nuggets of mind control secrets going on at the time to launch his career from a failed science-fiction writer to a global multi-million dollar icon, creating the hugely successful religion of Scientology. [4]

Kay_Griggs__Colonels_Wife_TellAll_Interview_14__151525_thumb.jpgThe U.S. Navy’s role in sexpionage and ritual abuse was explored by Kay Griggs in 1998 with a 8-hour interview conducted by Pastor Rick Strawcutter in 1998. Kay had married Colonel George Griggs in the early 80s. Her husband was a Marine Corps Chief of Staff and head of NATO’s Psychological Operations, which over time, had given her an intimate knowledge of the true nature of “leadership training, drug-running and weapons sales, and the secret worldwide camps that train professional assassins.”  Her story further supports the increasing evidence that blackmail, sex rings and mind programming rituals are endemic within the military-intelligence world. It also allows us not only to understand why the military is obsessed with sex as a means of control, just like their Israeli counterparts, but why there is such a resounding silence on the cover-up of 9/11 when truth inevitably seeps out through the cracks of official culture. Blackmail and sex are the fail-safe modes of secrecy. The more extreme the sexual deviancy, the more certain is the guarantee of silence.

kaygriggsvideos

Or visit: Disclose.tvKay Griggs – Colonel’s Wife Tell-All Interview.1/4

Kay Griggs delivers a highly believable account based on her own observations, the people she met within these social circles and from her husband’s behaviour, but most importantly, from the extensive writings in his diary. While her Christian belief only occasionally veers towards proselytizing, her account is a sincere and honest one; enriching our understanding of how the U.S. Army and Navy intelligence networks operate behind the scenes.

When she begun to receive death threats due to this first-hand knowledge and her unique insights into this military cartel, she decided to go public in 1996. Sarah McClendon, former senior member of the White House press corps, and Army Intelligence veteran, took her in and gave her valuable advice as to what her next move should be. McClendon was the perfect ally offering her the needed psychological tools to survive the coming months and years. After Griggs had failed to get the media to take on her story and after McClendon advised Griggs to go public, this led to the now well-known video interviews with Pastor Strawcutter on his 500 watt pirate FM station at 99.3 in Lenawee County, Virginia. The interviews were released in 2000 as a 2hr edited video and a later an extended 8 hour version. Since that time, Kay Griggs has been living in her Virginia home giving occasional talks for interested parties.

In the interview, Griggs talks about key military officials who were rather worried about her husband Colonel George Griggs and his diary which is still in her possession. Brigadier General James R. Joy (ret.) General Charles C. Krulak, General Al Gray Cook (ret.) General James L. Jones, General Charles E. Wilhelm and General Carl Steiner are all implicated in secret black ops, one of which led to the highly suspect killings of civilians in the Waco massacre * and the 1983 bombing of a Beirut barracks in which 241 marines died and 80 seriously wounded. According to Griggs, both examples employed media manipulation and PSYOPS to cover the fact these were false flag operations. General Al Gray, USMC, 29th Commandant of the Marine Corps, is an alleged enthusiastic participant in gay orgies within the military and at the time of writing, is still actively engaged in PSYOPS operations overseas and nationally. Many other high-ranking officials have participated in these ritual-sex initiation rites.

The video also supports the evidence that organised blackmail is not just a MOSSAD speciality but a way of life within the U.S. military special operations units. Linked to this are the University fraternities which, like several authors she confirms are recruitment centres for intelligence officers. Princeton University has a fraternity called “Cap and Gown” while Yale University has the not so secret society “Skull and Bones” both of which list a ‘who’s who’ of the rich and famous. Senator John Kerry, George Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. were all “Bonesmen.”

Griggs recounts her husband’s history as a member of the “Cap and Gown” where unusual sex acts were part of initiatory rituals designed to recruit and control participants. “Dining in,” “shell back,” the “Tail hook” and “cherry marines” are not just military terms but code names for group sex activities which are part and parcel of a homosexual induction. Young men are allegedly stripped, violated, humiliated and raped. Although the alleged orgies in question are predominantly homosexual, there were also bi-sexual orgies. General Al Gray, General Jim Joy, and General Sheehan were initiated “cherry marines,” and given the task of indoctrinating new recruits for a wide range of useful purposes.

While part of a standard formula for blackmail and mind control, this also serves as a means for rapid advancement through the ranks if you play the game. It has a high cost however – you become shadow government property and prone to emotional overload as the heavy weight of a suppressed conscience returns. The layers of programming designed to dehumanise don’t always strip the individual of their soul and they become the walking dead, unable to escape their fragmented mind. Consequently, many law enforcement and military personnel go off “pop” for precisely these reasons. It would seem that if you begin to question too much, the Army and Navy have facilities for using psychiatry as a means to detain those who become too vocal or manage to free themselves from programming. Eastern State Mental Hospital in Williamsburgh is one such place that is alleged to have a high quota of Army Intelligence personnel who have not played ball. Sectioning is a convenient method of removing troublesome men who ask too many questions. [5]

Wayne Madsen’s claim of a high level “X-file” secrecy standing for paedophilia and homosexual blackmail protocols within the US Navy and Marine Corp is given further support from Griggs. It is improbable that Grigg’s husband would have shared titbits of information regarding these bizarre rituals if they didn’t have a high percentage of authenticity. The revelations over the years of serial paedophilia networks in the world at large are an obvious reality so it is hardly illogical to assume that even worse takes place far from prying eyes.

Nazi philosophy, weapons technology and the sciences were not the only things to be injected into the United States psyche from Operation PAPERCLIP. Another strain which may have come through this conduit was known as “The Pink Triangle,” an infestation of occult driven sexual deviants which included rapists, criminals and paedophiles. The individuals were tagged with a pink triangle before being sent to concentration camps during War time Germany. Homosexual men and women were tragically included in this persecution, something which is seldom remembered. However, the key issue here is sexual psychopathy regardless of orientation. According to Griggs and others, thousands of these pink triangle candidates, were brought over to the States and distributed within the ranks of certain shadow government projects.

2011.04-PinkTriangle-300x177_thumb.jpg“The Pink Triangle”

Griggs’ testimony is not the only source that suggests gay sex dominates much of the ritual initiation process within the Navy SEALS and Marine Corp. Despite the Nazi Party’s opposition to homosexuality and persecution of gay men, homosexuality may have been partially institutionalised within the Nazi Elite in Germany at the time and focused within the SS guard. Obviously, this does not preclude the murder of thousands of homosexuals. The formula of scapegoating a minority in order to maintain the functioning of an Elite that harbours the same sexual orientation continues to this day. Whether we refer to paedophiles or homosexuals being compromised to take the heat of Establishment figures, or Zionists who routinely sacrifice Jews and gentiles alike to maintain the long term strategy of their plans, the same sexpionage continues its sordid path.

The Weimar Republic during the 1920s – as with much of Establishment circles within Europe in general – was host to a rising “cabaret” culture amongst artists, writers and the Elite which included a sub-culture of transvestites bi-sexual, and gay men and women. As is ever the case, decadence gives rise to greater extremes and the underworld is not long to follow. Brothels, pornographers and prostitutes were multiplying in Berlin as one of the most sexually liberal cities at the time. Gay culture was thriving. Yet the dark underbelly of these seemingly liberal values was also present. Exploration of sexual identity and freedom wasn’t the issue in pre-war Weimar as with other pre-pathocratic Empires, rather, it was the red flag of sexual deviance and debauchery that was a marker of a pathological indulgence to which the Nazi Elite happily encouraged.


 tumblr_m66uhfEaaB1r6y3vao1_500

The Salon I, Otto Dix 1921.

“The Nachtlokals (private nightspots) in particular teemed with non-German speaking thrill-seekers. For the newest clientele, humiliation and sexual degradation served as an equal attractant as the old Naked Dance revue itself. In one Lokal favored by Dutch vacationers, businessmen and their wives tossed foreign coins to any female German in attendance willing to strip completely nude. Outside the tourist hotels and downtown pensions, knowing gigolos and pretty boys, dolled up in rouge and mascara like wax mannequins, displayed their androgynous wares. The the merry-making Ausländer, Berlin was conducting a clearance sale on human flesh. Sex was everywhere and obtainable on the cheap. The Kaiser’s Germany, in the minds of many, was finally repaying its war debts.”  – Mel Gordon, Voluptuous Panic: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin.  (courtesy of Metal on Metal)


The degeneration of the New Society in the Weimar Republic is quite apparent with the rise in bohemian art which became darker and darker from the period after World War I, culminating in the Nazi Pathocracy of the Third Reich. Sexual depravity, murder and the general denigration of women even led to a new art form of snuff painting where the female form was mutilated or an act of  murder was graphically depicted as a form of sadistic celebration. Otto Dix and George Grosz were two of the most enthusiastic proponents of sexual murder or “Lustmord” in German.  In a disturbing book about the Weimar Republic’s burgeoning avant garde and sexual “liberation”: Lustmord: Sexual Murder in Weimar Germany”, author Maria Tatar states:

“… often viewed as the birthplace of a transgressive avant-garde modernism, where representations of female sexual mutilation abound…. Tatar show that male artists openly identified with real-life sexual murderers–George Grosz posed as Jack the Ripper in a photograph where his model and future wife was the target of his knife–but she also reveals the ways in which victims were disavowed and erased.” [6]

This “aestheticized violence” was funded by a “transgressive energy” which seeped into the socio-political life of the German Elite. There appeared to be a simmering undercurrent of pathology surfacing in the collective unconscious of the Republic. Certain of these shadows were about to manifest as National Socialism.

OttoDixLustmord

Otto Dix “Lustmord” (1922)

DixMordGRA

Carl Hofer “Lustmord” (1923)

Freud’s nemesis and sexologist Wilhelm Reich among others, affirmed that many top Nazi leaders and Germanic fascism during the 1930s was in fact “a male state organized on a homosexual basis.” [7]  It is also interesting to note that while many homosexuals were sent to concentration camps there is a possibility that this was more a case of it being after the fact, rather than a conscious policy of persecution. Hitler’s own perceptions and treatment of women displayed distaste and confusion, if not contempt. Even if Mein Kampf revealed copious evidence for his hatred of Jews, Arabs, Communists and Eastern peoples there was not one word for those with a homosexual orientation. You could hardly say that this was due to a cultural sensitivity.

Hitler filled key positions with known or suspected homosexuals. His most trusted companions General Ernst Roehm was a gay man, as was Rudolf Hess. He was also a paedophile and transvestite in his spare time, similar to his colleague Herman Goering who was a drag queen when the fancy took him. Roehm, Hitler’s one-time protégé, eventually commanded the Nazi Storm Troopers more commonly known as the SA (an acronym for Sturmabteilung) and had larger-than-life sexual appetite, often frequenting Turkish bars and gay clubs across Germany. He made it his personal quest to procure Roehm’s close knit coterie of strategists Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst’s partner Captain Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf, all of whom were homosexual.

It is safe to say that bi/homosexuality or some brand of sexual perversion were useful for advancing one’s career in the Third Reich. According to The Pink Swastika by authors Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams:

Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non- qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuhrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. “Karl Ernst is not yet 35,” writes Gallo, “he commands 250,000 men…he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official.” [8]

This strange brand of nepotism was a hallmark of the SA. By 1933 the elite grouping had grown far larger than the German army, yet the Vikingkorps (Officers’ Corps) remained almost exclusively homosexual. “Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops,” writes historian H.R. Knickerbocker, “…had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuhrer or Obergruppenfuhrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement”. [9]

In point of fact, when perusing Nazi Reich propaganda and folk lore in praise of the muscle-bulging, blonde, blue-eyed, Aryan archetype, it is replete with distinctly homo-erotic undertones. This has been passed down into gay erotica via the likes of Tom Findland with his kitsch renderings of black leather-clad beef-cakes donning Luftwaffe caps, high-top boots and whips. The Nazi overtones has also found its way into many a sado-masochist gathering in contemporary society where whips, PVC, black masks and various forms of mock torture tools of domination and submission form more than an echo of the SS and Nazi regalia.

Cabaret Dancer 1-horz

German Cabaret dancer circa 1930 (left) Contemporary S &M fashion (right)

87908613_7da0978810_z-horz

Tom Findland’s art 1963

Elite insider Professor Carrol Quigley in his book Tragedy and Hope, describes Captain Roehm and his cult of homosexual Storm Troopers as having staged the burning of the Reichstag, and used intimidation tactics to scare people into supporting Hitler and his Nazi party. A plot was hatched to burn the Reichstag building and blame the Communists, the historical veracity of which is now beyond dispute.

Quigley states:

“Most of the plotters were homosexuals and were able to persuade a degenerate moron from Holland named Van der Lubbe to go with them. After the building was set on fire, Van der Lubbe was left wandering about in it and was arrested…[…] Most of the plotters were homosexual [and that] ….most of the Nazis who were in on the plot were murdered during the ‘blood purge’ of June 30, 1934.” [10]

Kazimiers Moczarski a Polish journalist and anti-communist activist while in prison, conducted interviews with two German SS-men, SS-Sturmbannführer of BdS Krakau Gustaw Schielke and Nazi war criminal SS-Brigadeführer Jürgen Stroop who reported on the continued presence of homosexuals in the Nazi hierarchy, despite their persecution in Germany society:

“A policeman well acquainted with Germany’s homosexual element [spoke up and said they] kept files on all known and potential pederasts. He remarked that very few homosexuals in the NSDAP were as “indelicately” treated as was Roehm …”So maybe a few of the fags in the party did get knocked off. There were plenty of others who made out just fine. They remained active party members…..got promotions… [and were] protected by the top NSDAP brass.” [11]

SS Women were present in concentration camps and security staffing at an administrative capacity but there were no female SS officers.

The peculiar degeneration of Germany at the time does not mean to indicate homosexuality as somehow partly culpable, but why it may have formed part of the Elite’s predispositions. It seems Nazi Germany’s chaos lent itself to a vast panoply of pathological “deviancy,” where channelling psychopathy from on high was characterised by the fascism and occult leanings of the time. [12]  Equating homosexuality with Nazism and psychopathy is obviously not the intention here, nor is it to be associated with a bigoted right-wing agenda that wishes to bury the very idea of homosexuality. Yet there remains a truth that this sexual orientation may well have formed a part of occult initiation in the context of ceremonial sexual psychopathy of Heinrich Himmler’s SS and elements within the Gestapo. This in turn had implications for sexual psychopathy as a whole and according to the process of ponerisation. [13]

On this subject, author Peter Levenda offers his take:

Hitler…took a very broad-minded view of sex. Indeed, he said to have known about SA Leader Ernst Roehm’s homosexuality for years and tolerated it…a rather astounding generosity for that man in that time and place. In fact, a great many SA men were homosexuals, which should give the nervous nellies in the Pentagon pause: for the Brownshirts – the dreaded Storm Troopers; the brawling two fisted beer hall fighters; the drunken angry mob of volunteer militiamen who defeated Communism in Germany and who propelled Hitler to power – were the epitome of military machismo…and Roehm, their leader and queen was the ultimate fighting man. [14]

Although it is an established fact the Storm-troopers and many members of the Nazi military were homosexual and/or bi-sexual it is also true of those who seeded ideas into Hitler’s mind, most notably occultists Jorg Lanz Von Liebenfels and Guido von List. Lanz was a former Cistercian monk who had been excommunicated for homosexuality. After being expelled from the monastery, Lanz formed the occultic order Ordo Novi Templi or The Order of the New Temple (ONT). The ONT was an offshoot of the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Eastern Temple) which practiced tantric sex rituals. Surrounding the Greek-Hellenic, Aryan, blond-haired, blue-eyed youth worship in German high society at the time was the Germen Ordnunq (Order) and the Thule Gesellschaft (Thule Society) infused by German folklore and Madam Blavatsky’s Theosophy. Hitler was introduced to the Thule Society by his occult mentor Deitrich Eckhart and went on to gain control of the German Workers Party on August 8, 1921. With General Roehm’s charismatic assistance he changed the party into the German National party, then Socialist Workers Party and ultimately to become the Nazi Party.

If the Nazi Elite that was funnelled into post war America was predominantly a pathogenic infection of psychopaths and sexual deviants, it is the whole package of Satanic perception which included, by default, a certain entropic way of life. Since there are paedophile and child rape networks operating in the States at the public level, are there also occult rituals framed around a Satanic belief system that employs Sex Magick and abuse at the apex of Establishment power?  **

220px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_102-15282A,_Ernst_Röhm

                            Ernst Roehm

Kay Griggs believes that all those in special operations are bi-sexual due to the nature of the pyramid. If you want to rise to the top then it seems that one has to start at the bottom … so to speak. Sex is the key and blackmail ensures that once there you cannot open any other doors except those that are assigned to you. It is then that a literal “conspiracy of silence” becomes more understandable; in the context of chronic sexual abuse, it requires low maintenance. If those who rebel and reject the reality of such a Faustian bargain, then threats and murder are two methods by which high ranking military officials are kept in line. Emotionally weak boys, who have low self-esteem, often from a poverty-stricken background, where mental disorders are common place, are systematically groomed for top government positions. Obviously these teenagers are easy to indoctrinate with promises of careers paved with gold which might lead to wealth and status. Meantime they become Manchurian candidates and/or part of units engaged in black operations. Based on mind control literature so far, it seems that there is a Germanic-Jewish demographic which has been most associated with such programming.

Though CIA mind control and sexual politics seems to have seeped that bit further into the Navy than other military departments, Griggs makes the assertion that the CIA is further down the ladder of influence in covert operations than we may think, this is also supported by Walter Bowart’s Operation Mind Control where it is said that the NSA is at the top of the “black arts” pyramid. Griggs posits another grouping of criminals working within the government and military that she refers to as “The Joint.” Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) based in Casteau, Belgium is the primary base for illicit weapons sales, narcotics and money laundering, with the army running the whole show. NATO brass may act as its protector, while in return, The Joint, based in New York, ensures the funding channels are continually open. (This brings us full circle back to the infamous region of the Dutroux case).

She then makes the link to Naples, Italy, where it is alleged that the U.S. Navy practices paedophilia and group sex as a part of the methods of initiation for future blackmail, just as it did in war-time Italy with the help of Catholic priests. It was Italian mothers of procured children who were raped in these havens that banded together to stop such activities. As the media of the time would not listen, they sought out the wives of these soldiers and officers and alerted them to the actions of their husbands and eventually brought down the German government at the end of the war.

Let us remember that the constant theme of procuring children for sexual abuse and to train them to be mercenaries, agents and assassins appears right across the history of Naval and Army intelligence. Setting up despots across the world to do European and US bidding is nothing new. Griggs confirms Dave McGowan and others’ hypotheses that many of the dictators of the past, including Pol-Pot and Mao Tse Tung and many others were “turned” via Catholic priests in the pay of mind control programming and placed in strategic geo-political situations favourable to US and Israeli interests. They are taken out when no longer useful. If we cast an eye over a handful of dictators from the recent past we can see that that has clearly been the case and is a standard geostrategic formula alongside terror tactics and the balkanzation of a targeted country. (Think Saddam Hussein, Nicolae Ceausescu, Idi Amin, Ayatollah Khomeini etc.)

From the brutal expression of Nazism there lies a “higher” expression of occult endeavour, though no less dangerous. The foot-soldiers of ceremonial psychopathy have their initiates who dispense the wisdom from on high in order to entrap the intelligentsia, having made a career of their mental acuity and hubris. Rather than being the exclusive province of the military, a sixty year old occult club has members from Christianity, academia, governmental agencies and NGOs across the globe with centres of influence in virtually every nation in Europe and the Americas.

One of those clubs is the Lucis Trust and its various affiliations operating through the United Nations and a multitude of associated organisations. From the military-occult branch of Anglo-American Establishment we have the theosophist, freemasonic and socialist beliefs expressing themselves as a the New World Religion in waiting, care of the Light Bringer – Lucifer himself.

We will take a closer look at the Lucis Trust in the next post.

 


* On April 19, 1993, in Waco, TX, Leader of the Branch Davidian David Koresh and his followers came under attack from the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the FBI. Despite the Federal authorities not obtaining a search warrant they decided to take the centre by force. According to the documentary, Waco: Rules of Engagement, and several accounts by surviving members, Federal agents acted recklessly and with intent to murder Davidian members finally setting the centre on fire and allowing more than Seventy-six men, women and children, including the sect leader, David Koresh, to die in the fire. Prior to the massacre an almost two month onslaught of PSYOPS was carried out with loud speakers which played sounds of rabbits being slaughtered, the sound of a dentist’s drill, and clips from talk shows about how David Koresh is much hated, played 24 hours a day along with flashing bright lights. For further details see the documentary film: WACO: Rules of Engagement (1997) http://www.waco93.com/
** It is noteworthy that Aleister Crowley and other occultists were firmly of the belief that young male children could be used as psychic portals via sexual activity during occult rituals. Bi-sexuality and sexual techniques of an infinite variety were part and parcel of satanic rituals. The pathogenic undercurrents gave rise to this dark inversion as a tool for the invocation of demonic influences and the initial power that comes with it. However, as is always the case with short-cut enlightenment based around intellect and material desires – it came at a price.

Notes

[1] ‘Gannongate threatens to expose a huge GOP pedophile and male prostitution ring’By Wayne Madsen, Online Journal, February 2005.
[2] L. Ron Hubbard – Messiah? Or Madman? Understanding Scientology by Margery Wakefield published in 1991 by the Coalition of Concerned Citizens (PO Box 290402, Tampa, Florida 33687), a now-defunct organization founded by Margery Wakefield.
[3]
Penthouse Interview With Ron De Wolf, L. Ron Hubbard Jr. – L. Ron Hubbard Jr. Penthouse, June 1983 | See also: Sinister Forces – A grimoire of American Political, Witchcraft By Peter Levenda (2006)].
[4] The Church of Scientology has attracted a huge number of critics as well as many Hollywood celebrities, the most vocal of which is the actor Tom Cruise. Accusations of corruption, intimidation, brainwashing, exploitation and cult-like activities have all been levelled at the organisation. They have also gained a reputation for aggressively pursuing their detractors with mafia-style intensity as many critics have discovered. With a founder like Hubbard it is small wonder that there are problems.
[5] The nature of psychiatry means that it can be easily used as a medical control for dissidents and whistleblowers. (United States District Court, District Of Connecticut: Elizabeth A. Marczeski v. Susan B. Handy, Sara Steere, Patrick K. Fox, M.D., Bruce Knox, Pramodini Desphande, M.D., Mark Puglisi, Vincent Franco And Garrell Mullaney http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/090904.HBF.Marczeski.pdf) Pre-trail detainees are a convenient way to ensure that those with legitimate concerns are kept out of the way of public scrutiny. Moreover, if they were not already fighting mental instability from the continual pressure and stress of initial circumstances then being locked up in a hospital for the criminally insane with a prescribed regime of drugs is enough to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. After all, “medication” can be a euphemism for an overwhelming injection of toxic substances and “quiet rooms” a place for solitary confinement.The issue of civil liberties is of the utmost importance in the US today as the constitution becomes irrevocably eroded. Someone may be involuntarily detained for psychiatric examination for a period of time (usually 24 to 72 hours depending on the state). Yet if a government official deems the individual a danger, at his opinion and in the opinion of hand-picked psychiatrists (with the required political bias) then a subject can be detained indefinitely. A judge has the power to detain, section or commit an individual based on his opinion.
As in the story of Sandra in “The Rule of Law” series illustrated, many judges are just as open to corruption as any other law and justice official. Involuntary commitment is commonly viewed as inherently unconstitutional. Though with little of the constitution left, it is logical that it is becoming wide open to politicisation and thus a perfect tool of a Pathocracy.
Many of us are aware of the Soviet Union, some Eastern European countries and presently China, using Political (and ponerized) Psychiatry to lock up dissidents and religious persons in psychiatric institutions. How many of us know that the US is gradually doing the same thing to its own people? Psychiatric Fascism is nothing new. (On June 22, 1999, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Olmstead v. L.C., against unnecessary confinement of people with disabilities, including the mentally ill, in institutions. However, in the United States, 42 States have now passed legislation allowing court-ordered involuntary treatment of outpatients with psychiatric drugs. The United States Secret Service still obtains involuntary psychiatric hospitalizations of those it believes to be a danger to protectees, without any claim that these “dangerous” individuals are “mentally ill.” As the USSS incorporates the Department of Home Security, claims of “terrorist” or “sexual abuser” can be politicised and used as a means to incarcerate and detain persons indefinitely, whatever so called constitutional amendments are applied.) Pretrail detainees linked to the “war on terrorism” and other such bogus forms of propaganda have been rising significantly, most of whom have nothing to do with any form of genuine terrorism. (“Hundreds of detainees continued to be held without charge or trial at the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Thousands of people were detained during US military and security operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and routinely denied access to their families and lawyers.”- Amnesty International report on US 2005).
Detention has historically been associated with widespread abuses, from physical mistreatment to denial of detainees’ basic procedural guarantees. If we remember the ponerization via the medicalization of the law and justice system which is unequivocally fused with crime networks then we must be very worried indeed concerning the rights of dissidents and whistleblowers everywhere. The Pretrail detention system was already in a state of “crisis” some ten years previously even before the dangerous reflex of the “War on terror.” (‘The Pretrail Detention Crisis – The Causes and the Cure.’ By Douglas J. Klein, Journal of Urban and Contemporary law Vol. 52 /281. Washington University 1997.)
Abuses of detainees are still rolling in as the Pathocracy spreads its “pathogens.” Being presumed innocent until proven guilty seems to be a sadly quaint notion. Certainly, many are non-abductions and not necessarily slavery related. Nevertheless, as related in Chapter 17, the numbering of missing people in the United States continues to rise with statistics vague on root causes. The Federal government estimates over 2,300 Americans are missing everyday and around 900,000 persons per year. No wonder trafficking and slavery networks can run their businesses with relative ease.
[6] Tatar, Maria Lustmord: Sexual Murder in Weimar Germany (1997)
[7] pp.123-127; The Mass Psychology of Fascism by Wilhelm Reich, Published by Penguin, 1970.
[8] Lively. Scott; Abrams, Kevin, The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party . Published Founders Publishing Corp. (1995) | ISBN-10: 0964760908.
[9]
[10] op. cit. Quigley (p.437)
[11] pp.38-39; Rozmowy z katem (Conversations with an Executioner) by Kazimiers Moczarski, published by Prentice-hall, Inc. 1977.
[12] The following quotation from Jose Landowsky’s banned Red Symphony written between 1936-1938. The conversation between a government Stalinist and his assassin explains the psychological “predisposition” at the time of Nazi Germany’s pathocratic rule and the Communist knowledge of its use for blackmail. The background to the dialogue is connected to a German officer of the Armed Forces High Command or the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) who is forced to become double agent for Russia when found by the Cheka Secret Police (GPU) having sexual relations with his lover called “Fritz.”
p.291: “In the war, in our war, we take advantage of the virtues and moral of the adversary… In your case, doctor, it’s the parental love. We turn those bourgeois principles into efficient weapons. But the bourgeoisie does not only possess virtues; it has also vices […] It is rare to find a person, especially if he belongs to certain families or occupies a high position, not having any flaws or vices. The thing is to find out what it is, to prove it and to use it against the person. Where death threats fail, a ‘chantage’ exerted with art, always wins. […] A man then goes back to his country. He will have to shut up or praise, according to each case. If he’s a politician he will have to serve us. If he’s a member of the military or a diplomat, he will have to betray. […] If the weapon we use was well known, then nobody would be surprised any more of all the very many unexpected treasons that are done in our favour.
[…] they must go on as if nothing had happened. […] Sabotaging, softening things out and changing the opinion of the sectors that are the most opposed to us. “It is an inexplicable and unexplained fact that we have big sympathies in the hierarchy of the German military and even inside the Nazi party. […] If in Versailles the factor of resentment and despair played a role, this intimate chaos inside every German also had a big part to play. Yes, those have been factors, but those who played with these factors were men, if we can actually call them men, whose degeneration put them in our hands.” (Landowsky, 1950) A German who is forced to become double agent for Russia from the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht or German Armed Forces High Command (OKW) and his gay lover.
[13] The homo-eroticism inherent in much of gay S&M, black leather regalia comes down the generations with a decidedly strong homage to the SS jackboot and Nazi Chic. What is culturally significant is why the allusions and use of Nazi fashion in this particular form of sexual expression? It is noteworthy that much of the S&M ethos can be traced back to gay male leather culture, in turn stemming from the biker culture which formalized itself out of the group of men who were soldiers returning home after World War II.
[14] op. cit. Levenda, (p.129)

 


Save

See also: Nazi Occult and Mind Control

Trump Hysteria, Left Hypocrisy and the Four Drivers of the Deep-State / Overworld Part III

The Z Factor XIII: Holocaustomania?

“The Maxim that those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it applies to those Jews who refuse to come to terms with the Jewish past: they have become its slaves and are repeating it in Zionist and Israeli policies. The State of Israel now fulfils towards the oppressed peasants of many countries – not only in the Middle East but also far beyond it – a role not unlike that of the Jews in pre-1795 Poland: that of a bailiff to the imperial oppressor.”

Israel Shahak, The Causes of Hostility Towards Jews: An Historical Overview


For seeking the truth about any controversial subject we must surely have the freedom to question everything without fear of reprisal from cherished beliefs. Otherwise, ignorance and chaos multiply instead of courageous soul-searching which promotes knowledge and awareness for all. However, getting past those beliefs so often wired in by trauma and political expediency is a huge challenge indeed…

Contrary to accusations of anti-Semitism and the label of “holocaust denier” Historian Mark Weber disputes both of these labels acknowledging the catastrophe that was visited upon Jews by Hitler. He does not deny that the holocaust took place, rather he questions the evidence of an official extermination program which admittedly has little documented evidence and when set against an historical predisposition for propaganda that has traditionally paid dividends, demands a rigorous investigation. While questions should always be asked about the beliefs and predispositions of revisionists, the vast majority do not deny the Holocaust or harbour admiration for the Nazi Third Reich, but place the onus on rigorous research which must have a place in holocaust studies without the reflex accusations of “anti-Semite!”. The facts, after all, should speak for themselves.

Professor Norman G. Finkelstein illustrated deep awareness on this matter when he commented on David Irving, historian and Holocaust revisionist: “Irving, notorious as an admirer of Hitler and sympathiser with German National Socialism, has nevertheless made an ‘indispensable’ contribution to our knowledge of World War II.” [1]

One of the most shocking and tragic events of the 20th Century was the holocaust perpetrated by Germany’s Nazi Third Reich from 1933–1945. Up to six million Jews were said to have been murdered by the regime. It was a powerful mythological event in Jewish consciousness which has continued to play a part in defining their identity as a “chosen people”. Yet, it is also true that there were Soviet prisoners of war, homosexuals, Romani gypsies, Slavic, Polish and Soviet civilians that were intentionally murdered by the Nazi regime with estimates reaching ten to eleven million. This is quite apart from millions of lives lost during the War as a whole. Therefore, it begs the question: why has this been eclipsed in favour of a strictly Jewish and Zionist historical narrative?

The birth of Israel in 1948 led to the joining at the hip of the nation State and holocaust victims – a loss and a legendary gain. Many commentators draw our attention to the fact that as a matter of historic record, the Zionists were more than happy to sacrifice millions of Jews as long as the creation of Israel could be guaranteed. (That part of history doesn’t generally get taught in History classes yet gives ample opportunity to make a distinction between the ordinary Jew and the extremism of Revisionist Zionism). In the intervening post war years, shock and grief still held sway and the Jewish battle lines to create the mantle of “sole sufferers” would develop over the following decades. As Professor of History at Indiana University, Edward T. Lilenthal observed: “what came to be known as the Holocaust was often indistinguishable, in the immediate post-war years, from the millions of non-combatant casualties due to terror bombings of civilian populations, epidemic illness, or starvation. It was considered by most as simply part of the horror of war.” The holocaust was barely talked about and remained a marginal topic of interest in part due to a “war-weary American public” and the understandable wishes of those who witnessed the concentration camp horrors to put it all behind them. [2]

The fusing of the holocaust and the modern state of Israel served to nourish a new and negative Jewish identity, of the martyr grafted onto an already potent ancestral legacy of fear, anger, guilt and revenge; where Jewish tribalism would once more become clearly defined. At the same time, holocaust survivors were uncomfortable in Israel since they were reminders of the depths of Nazi evil as well as the possible shame and guilt that settled upon Jewish consciousness when faced with accusations of no resistance, thus conforming to the stereotypes of passive Jews. Much of Israel did not extend sympathy to holocaust survivors, the results of which are still felt to this day. [3] By the time the victory of the1967 Arab war had been achieved a new Jewish confidence and historical identity was born anew but the industry of victimhood and its myth-making machine would continue apace at the political level.

One of Hitler’s avowed aims was to turn Eastern Europe into part of greater Germany as Slavs and Poles were seen as ethnically inferior and deemed eminently expendable for the Nazi New World Order. The issue of collaboration has had a distinctly Jewish precedent in World War II unlike many other non-Jewish prisoners of war.[4] It was not an isolated dynamic but a common phenomenon which makes the pernicious attacks from Zionists that Christians, ethnic Poles and the allies did not do enough to save Jews somewhat diluted. Polish people were treated by the Nazis as equally deserving of annihilation with up to 2.8 million ethnic, non-Jewish poles perishing throughout World War II. [5] It seems many Jewish people still harbour a hostile perception of Poles and Slavs as somehow competing for the trophy of who suffered more. Their plight has largely been forgotten as Mark Weber notes:

“… there are no American memorials, ‘study centers,’ or annual observances for the victims of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, even though it is well established that Stalin’s victims vastly outnumber Hitler’s … The Holocaust has become both a flourishing business and even a kind of new religion for many Jews.

While we are endlessly told that the Germans murdered six million European Jews during the Second World War… the public is kept largely ignorant of the conflict’s non-Jewish victims. If you ask an average, reasonably educated American: ‘How many European Jews were killed by the Nazis during World War II?’ the almost automatic answer is, of course, six million. But if you ask that same person: How many Americans lost their lives in the Second World War, or, for that matter, how many British, or Chinese, or Germans, died, the response is usually an admission of ignorance.” [6]

Israel Shahak in a letter to an editor explains how reality regarding Jewish involvement in the Second World War has been systematically ignored and obscured by myth. As a survivor of both the Warsaw ghetto in Poland and then in Bergen-Belsen, he offers: “an immediate example of the total ignorance of daily life during the Holocaust: In the Warsaw ghetto, even during the period of the first massive extermination (June to October 1943), one saw almost no German soldiers.”

Shahak continues:

Nearly all the work of administration, and later the work of transporting hundreds of thousands of Jews to their deaths, was carried out by Jewish collaborators.

Before the outbreak of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising (the planning of which only started after the extermination of the majority of Jews in Warsaw), the Jewish underground killed, with perfect justification, every Jewish collaborator they could find. If they had not done so the Uprising could never have started.

The majority of the population of the Ghetto hated the collaborators far more than the German Nazis. Every Jewish child was taught, and this saved the lives of some them “if you enter a square from which there are three exits, one guarded by a German SS man, one by an Ukrainian and one by a Jewish policeman, then you should first try to pass the German, and then maybe the Ukrainian, but never the Jew”. […]

It is clear that such events were not exclusive to the Jews, the entire Nazi success in easy and continued rule over millions of people stemmed from the subtle and diabolical use of collaborators, who did most of the dirty work for them. But does anybody now know about this?

This, and not what is ‘instilled’ was the reality. […]

Therefore, if we knew a little of the truth about the Holocaust, we would at least understand (with or without agreeing) why the Palestinians are now eliminating their collaborators. That is the only means they have if they wish to continue to struggle against our limb-breaking regime. [7]

There are revisionist historians who have some interesting, if not compelling arguments regarding the statistics, numbers and logistical evidence concerning the methods of extermination that call into question a number of previously consensual conclusions. Even the existence of gas chambers and their quota of alleged deaths has been questioned not just by those whose pro-Hitler bias and right wing credentials are obvious, but by those simply interested in uncovering the truth. Professor Norman Cohn in his historical account of the Jewish Holocaust, Warrant for Genocide noted: “Only about a third of the civilians killed by the Nazis and their accomplices were Jews … Other peoples were marked out for decimation, subjugation, and enslavement, and the civilian losses of some of these [countries] amounted to 11 per cent to 12 per cent of the total population.”  Other respected Jewish scholars have arrived at similar figures. [8]

This does not mean that mass extermination took place but exaggeration, distortion and even habitual deception on this issue determines the outcome of how well the mythology of victimhood stays alive.[9] This does not help anyone – least of all Jewish people.

But it does prove useful for Zionists.

More and more Jewish and non-Jewish academics are beginning to see that the Holocaust has become a lucrative industry of the most cynical kind where private mourning and genuine loss has been coerced towards a public spectacle of exploitation. How are we to challenge this distortion when our cultures are saturated in a exclusively Jewish rendering of World War II and the holocaust? As James Young so eloquently phrased it: “Instead of learning about the Holocaust through the large lens of Jewish history, many Jews and non-Jews in America now learn the whole of Jewish history through the lens of the Holocaust.”[10]


“There is  no way a non-Jew could say what I did in “The Holocaust Industry” without being labeled a holocaust denier. I am labeled a holocaust denier too.” – Norman G. Finkelstein


Finkelstein_holocaust_industry_coverProfessor Norman G. Finkelstein’s 2000 bestseller The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering bravely addresses this very fact. Unsurprisingly, it created a firestorm of controversy on its publication which, along with his other books on Zionism and Israeli policy, led to the loss of his job at Hunter College and the denial of his tenure at Depaul University in 2007. In 2008, the Israeli government deported Finkelstein and banned him from entering the Jewish state for ten years. [11]

The professor remains a thorn in the side of Jewish extremism due to his impeachable credentials. Though his parents survived the Warsaw Ghetto and the Nazi concentration camps, every other member of his family on both sides was exterminated by the Nazis. When his book was published in 2000 The Guardian with uncharacteristic boldness ran two lengthy extracts from the introduction.

Finkelstein opined that:

… too many public and private resources have been invested in memorialising the Nazi genocide. Most of the output is worthless, a tribute not to Jewish suffering but to Jewish aggrandisement. The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world’s most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a ‘victim’ state, and the most successful ethnic group in the US has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable dividends accrue from this specious victimhood – in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified.

The time is long past to open our hearts to the rest of humanity’s sufferings. This was the main lesson my mother imparted. I never once heard her say: ‘Do not compare.’ My mother always compared. In the face of the sufferings of African-Americans, Vietnamese and Palestinians, my mother’s credo always was: ‘We are all holocaust victims.’” [12]

Finkelstein outlines a number of disturbing patterns in the exploitation of suffering, one of which is the pattern of corruption and embezzlement of Holocaust victims’ financial reparations. One particular chapter of his book which caused international outrage (mostly from those who stood to lose from being exposed) was the documentation of the holocaust industry’s blackmail of European governments for supposed holocaust victims. Threats and intimidation of holocaust victims by Jewish organisations were reported, who then proceeded to purloin the “Holocaust compensation” monies. [13]

A typical example of the kind of mass programming regarding Jewish victimhood was in evidence from a video recording of a lecture given by Finkelstein in 2010 at the University of Waterloo where he was taken to task by his “offensive” remarks. The video can be viewed here and a transcript of this instructive exchange follows:

STUDENT: During your speech you made a lot of references to Jewish people as well as certain people in the audience, not Jewish people in general, but especially in the audience – to Nazis. [Begins to cry] That is extremely offensive to certain people who are German and also extremely offensive who actually suffered under Nazi war…

FINKELSTEIN: I don’t respect that any more, I really don’t. I don’t like and I don’t respect the crocodile tears … (interruptions)… the crocodile tears … (clapping and cries from audience) … listen sir, allow me to finish … I don’t like to play to a foreign audience the Holocaust card but since now I feel compelled to – my late father was in Auschwitz, my late mother … please shut-up (applause)… My late father was in Auschwitz my late mother was in Mgdonevice concentration camp – every single member of my family on both sides were exterminated, both my parents were in the Warsaw Ghetto. They taught me and my two siblings that I will not be silenced by Israel over their crimes against Palestinians. I consider nothing more despicable than to use their suffering and their martyrdom to try to justify the torture, the brutalization and the demolition of homes committed against the Palestinians. I refuse any more to be intimidated, to be browbeaten by the tears. If you had any heart in you, you would be crying for the Palestinians. [14]

Over 65 million people died in World War II and it is said, up to six million Jews were killed by the Nazis, a number which is still disputed.  Whether 10,000, 500,000, one million or three million – it’s an obscenity, the results of psychopaths allowed to cluster into groups and hijack the population. The point to remember is that although the persecution of the Jews by the Third Reich is a fact of history yet so too, is the appropriation of victims and the suffering of non-Jews implying that “Gentiles” deaths are somehow less significant. What about the Stalinist and Maoist, genocides that far outnumber any Jewish Holocaust deaths? Where are the multi-million dollar monuments to all those people who died?

More disturbingly, the parallels of Nazi racial supremacy and Jewish supremacy are exactly the same – both see themselves as redeemers of the world tragically mirroring each other’s fundamentalist worldview and both have proved themselves to be adept in mass propaganda by setting themselves apart from others; elevating their race and destiny to romantic, metaphysical and fascistic dimensions while asserting unassailable claims of divine rights. The root mind-set in Zionist, Jewish Fundamentalism and Nazi ideology follow the same authoritarian and racist dynamic and the consequences that stem from these psychological extremes. Could there even be the slightest possibility that there may be something in Zionism, Judaism and the direction of the Jewish race that predisposes them to acts of persecution?

The French Zionist Bernard Lazare was also exploring these questions way back in 1894 before the Nazi persecutions and the modern mythologising that has been so pervasive in the 20th century.

He candidly observed:

Wherever the Jews settled [in their Diaspora] one observes the development of anti-Semitism, or rather anti-Judaism … If this hostility, this repugnance had been shown towards the Jews at one time or in one country only, it would be easy to account for the local cause of this sentiment. But this race has been the object of hatred with all nations amidst whom it settled. Inasmuch as the enemies of Jews belonged to diverse races, as they dwelled far apart from one another, were ruled by different laws and governed by opposite principles; as they had not the same customs and differed in spirit from one another, so that they could not possibly judge alike of any subject, it must needs be that the general causes of anti-Semitism have always resided in [the people of] Israel itself, and not in those who antagonized it. [15]

If that is even partially true, expressed by a Zionist, no less, liberating insights for the Jewish collective destiny could perhaps be achieved from a psychotherapeutically-based exploration of the Jewish psyche in this context. Many Jewish academics are doing precisely this, but nowhere near enough. This would naturally enrich not just Jewish and Israeli society but indirectly, the lives of us all. Untold tragedy and its victims could be truly honoured through re-enchantment and integrative self-empowerment rather than self-deception and cynical manipulation.

I think we may have a while to wait for that one.

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Great Taboo Broken’ by Haim. Breseeth, Reflections on the Israeli Reception of Schindler’s List -From Spielberg’s Holocaust: Critical Perspectives on Schindler’s List edited by Yoshefa Loshitsky.Indiana University Press, 1997 | ’40 percent of Holocaust survivors in Israel live below poverty line’, Haaretz, December 29, 2005.
[2] p.5; Preserving Memory: The Struggle to Create America’s Holocaust Museum By Edward T Linenthal. Published by Colombia University Press, 2001 | ISBN-10: 0231124074.
[3] op. cit. Piotrowski.
[4]AFP/Expatica, Polish experts lower nation’s WWII death toll, expatica.com, 30 August 2009.
[5] ‘Debating the Undebatable: The Weber-Shermer Clash Exchanging Views on the Holocaust’ The Journal of Historical Review, Jan-Feb. 1996 (Vol. 16, No. 1), pages 23-34.
[6] ‘The business of death’ By Norman Finkelstein The Guardian, 12 July 2000.
[7] ‘Falsification of the Holocaust’ by Prof. Israel Shahak, published on 19 May 1989 in Kol Ha’ir, Jerusalem.
[8] p.15; Warrant for Genocide: The Myth of the Jewish World-Conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion by Norman Cohn, Published by Harper and Rowe, 1966.
[9] ‘Wiesenthal Re-Confirms: ‘No Extermination Camps on German Soil’’ Institute of Historical Review: “…official claims of extermination and gassing at camps in Germany proper persisted until August 1960, when Dr. Martin Broszat of Germany’s semi-official Institute for Contemporary History acknowledged in a letter published in the Hamburg weekly Die Zeit that such allegations were not true. In doing so, Broszat implicitly also conceded that the “evidence” presented at Nuremberg and elsewhere for extermination and gassings in those camps is bogus.Here is a translation of the complete text of Broszat’s letter: “Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed. The gas chamber in Dachau was never entirely finished or put “into operation.” Hundreds of thousands of prisoners who perished in Dachau and other concentration camps in the Old Reich [that is, Germany in its borders of 1937] were victims, above all, of the catastrophic hygienic and provisioning conditions: according to official SS statistics, during the twelve months from July 1942 through June 1943 alone, 110,812 persons died of disease and hunger in all of the concentration camps of the Reich. The mass extermination of the Jews by gassing began in 1941-1942 and occurred exclusively in a few facilities selected and equipped with appropriate technical installations, above all in the occupied Polish territory (but at no place in the Old Reich): in Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Sobibor on the Bug [river], in Treblinka, Chelmno and Belzec.
It is at those places, but not in Bergen-Belsen, Dachau or Buchenwald, where the mass extermination facilities, spoken of in your article [in an earlier issue of Die Zeit], were built and disguised as shower baths or disinfection rooms. This necessary differentiation does not, of course, change anything regarding the criminal character of the facility that was the concentration camp. However, it may perhaps help eliminate the annoying confusion that arises from the fact that some ineducable people make use of a few arguments that, while correct, are polemically torn from the context, and that, rushing to respond to them are other people who, although they have the correct overall view, rely upon false or mistaken information. – Dr. M. Broszat, Institute for Contemporary History, Munich.
[10] p. 307; The U. S. Holocaust Memorial Museum: Memory and the Politics of Identity by James Young.
[11] ‘US academic deported and banned for criticising Israel’ by Toni O’Loughlin, The Guardian, 26 May 2008.
[12] op. cit. Finkelstein, Guardian article 2000.
[13] p.79; The Holocaust industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering by Norman G. Finkelstein, second edition, published by Verso Books. 2003 | ISBN: 185-984-488-X.
[14] ‘Responding to Zionist Propaganda: Dr. Norman Finkelstein on Holocaust exploitation at the University of Waterloo’ 2010.wwwpalestineremembered.com.
[15] Anti-Semitism, Its History and Causes by Bernard Lazare, Britons Publishing Co., London, 1967.