Third Reich

Technocracy III: Tagged (and Bagged?)

“The lessons learned from the adoption of other technologies suggest that radio frequency identification will be more important than anyone currently imagines.”

– Mark Roberti, founder and editor of RFID Journal


RFIDChip

© infrakshun

As American infrastructure crumbles under the weight of trillions of dollars of debt accumulated from largely illegal and spurious wars abroad, automation is biting further into the human labour market. Parallel advances in data-collection, surveillance and monitoring continue to build a “soft” police state, all of which must be paid for. New ways of fleecing the populace must be found which means we will be seeing more examples of SMART applications roll-out across a broad range of societal domains.

Hot on the heels of issuing digital licence plates in California, a little black box has made an appearance that will fit neatly by the dashboard of your car. An October 2013 Los Angeles Times report: ‘A black box in your car? Some see a source of tax revenue’ Evan Halper tell us: “The devices, which track every mile a motorist drives and transmit that information to bureaucrats, are at the center of a controversial attempt in Washington and state planning offices to overhaul the outdated system for funding America’s major roads.” The idea is to extract more money out of the hapless US citizen by allowing the government to keep track of the miles they drive in order to draw up yet another tax bill.

No doubt when this is integrated into “the internet of things” then every little iota of information about where you go and what you spend your money and who you decide to see will be factored in to the bill with increases, decreases and penalties and pluses accordingly. This initiative has its blessing from libertarians and lobbying from environmental groups. The former has a SMART techtopia informing its idealism while the latter sees Agenda 21 and sustainable development as the medium by which their own complimentary ecotopia can manifest. Despite protestations from the American Civil Liberties Union, both camps are blind to the undercurrents of Pathocracy in this context.

Keen to do its part for the SMART revolution the European Union has proposed a scheme which would see cars fitted with camera systems that ‘read’ the limits displayed on road signs and automatically apply the brakes. Supposedly in a bid to cut the number of deaths in car accidents the scheme labelled ‘Intelligent Speed Adaptation’ would use GPS satellites to transmit data to automatically limit the driver’s speed along with verbal computer commands to slow down. Or, according to The Telegraph’s September 2013 report: ‘EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters,’ drivers can be given “… a warning of the speed limit, or their speed could be controlled automatically under the new measures.” [1]

RFID-TagsVariety of RFID retail tags

microchip1

The merging of SMART society and surveillance already has a formidable momentum in America. These examples are the tip of an emerging philosophy of data collection and surveillance which is making inroads into every facet of our once relatively free existence. For instance, just in case you were in any doubt that vaccinations are always a gift from God, registry systems have been set up to track your vaccination status so that you can continue to do as you’re told. Or perhaps you’ve come across the biometrics programs currently be tinkered with in US schools which will “… track students’ eye movements, monitor their conversations or even measure their smiles.” Turning the classroom into a tech-lab paradise of attentive drones is easy – and profitable. In the same month, online journal The Future Is Now ran an article entitled: ‘Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students’ Every Move.’ Sheila Dharmarajan writes: “When the student is looking up at the teacher, the teacher score goes up. If she looks down at the computer, the computer score goes up. So we’re tracking facial expressions. If she makes a smile, it might be indicative that is enthusiastic about the topic.” [2]

Ah, the simple world of binary perception …

But it isn’t only in the US. While the UK’s ID scheme has been temporarily jettisoned, other countries are pushing ahead. Journalist Katitza Rodriguez, writing for the Electronic Frontier Foundation on January 10, 2012 highlighted Argentina’s resurrected and mandatory National Registry of Persons (RENAPER) which had lain dormant from the era of military dictatorship. Facial recognition and finger-printing are part of a security-surveillance system which is about to be integrated into the Federal System of Biometric Identification (SIBIOS) used by existing police and military networks. The registration of new-born babies’ biometric information has taken place since 2012 with projections that the SIBOS database will reach over 40 million within the next two years.

In January 2012, all 1.2 billion residents of India were the lucky beneficiaries of a nationwide program overseeing the allocation of a Unique Identification Number (UID). Each number will be fixed to the biometric data of the recipient utilizing using three different modes of information detection: fingerprints, iris scans, and face recognition. The implementation of RFID (radio-frequency identification) is the next stage for India’s flourishing biometric industry.

RFID stands for “Radio Frequency Identification”. With the advent of Wi-Fi and SMART applications the platform for RFID is expanding to include SMART labels for consumer products, assest tracking, secuirity and data retrieval for business. Then we have the more invasive tagging  with computer chips implanted into physical objects, animals, livestock and human beings. The Electronic Product Code that lies within the chip can be “read” when the device emits a radio signal. The chips contain electronically stored information which can be read up to several meters away. Active tags are self-powered and have a long range, particularly useful for surveillance. Passive tags are without battery source and use a local power source, the range being variable.

Some Christians have long been frothing at the mouth at the prospect of micro-chipping and what they consider to be the proverbial “Mark of the Beast” from The Book of Revelations, without which: “no man might buy or sell save he that had the Mark.” To be fair, it does sound remarkably similar. The Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility (AIM) sees biometric identification in true technocratic form where federal, state, local governments, military and commercial applications should join together and embrace the SMART culture without a care in the world. According to AIM, the RFID-chipped “SMART cards” and the biometric revolution “are set to pervade nearly all aspects of the economy and our daily lives.”  [3]The selling pitch goes like this: The tagging of products from razor blades to underwear represents enormous benefits to consumers, protecting us against fraud and theft as well as providing cost reduction and convenience. What could be simpler? And because it is so simple and so convenient given the fast-paced nature of our modern society, doesn’t it make sense to get yourself tagged too? Efficiency, efficiency and more efficiency …

As a precursor to this we have contactless technology being pushed by companies such as Google, with the majority of mobile network companies getting in on the act because data – your data – is king. Disney’s electronic “MagicBand” illustrates why. In the summer of 2013, the Disney corporation announced the use of an electronic wristband for all visitors to its theme parks. First introduced at Disney World in Florida it can be used at rides, hotel doors, stores and allow Disney staff to greet you using your first name. Who needs a wallet when everything is done for you? The downside to this of course, is a marketing coup d’état where Disney will be able to track what you purchased, which stores you visited, which rides you enjoyed and when, at which hotel you stayed and a vast collection of data to provide valuable insights into social psychology of visitors.

So, what’s a little data between friends and theme parks? Quite a lot actually.

RFID_Wristband_braceletmickeyRFID Tracking bracelets for amusement parks, hospitals and children’s playgrounds. It’s all good clean fun kids!

If you really want to take technology to the heights of efficiency in order to go about your business without a care in the world then your very heart might offer the ultimate hub for hands-free, contactless connection to the New Synthetic World. Canadian biometric company Bionym introduced us to the unnerving offer that: ”Your pulse could be your new Password.” Indeed, every number and code that you currently use to live your life could be distant memory if people such as Bionym chief executive officer Karl Martin has his way. “Pulse passwords” could be the new ultra-convenience. [4]

The heart has unique characteristics relating to size, position and physiology so those clever bods at Bionym have developed a wristband which recognises the pattern of an individual pulse. The transmission of information allows the user to carry out all the usual transactions and internet-based activities which require a password. And it also pleases those worried about security as heartbeats cannot be replicated. Furthermore, as every heartbeat is unique, should the wristband become lost or stolen, it would not function for another user. And on the market in 2014 at $100 many will see the benefits of such an appendage.

Tattoos used to be a tribal marking of religious or sacred significance. In Western culture gangs, dockers and truckers were some of the groups who took to marking themselves to tell their peers who they were and what they’d been through. Now, tattoos are big business and a fashion statement for the young. As luck would have it, electronic tattoos are now appearing from telecommunications companies like Motorola who are working on a version that contains a computer chip and an antenna. Just to give us an idea what to expect in the new future to complement these tattoos there is also: “A pill that dissolves and turns the entire body into a transmitter …” If they can be used to replace all those dozens of pesky passwords then there is money to be made and an interaction with the internet of things (IOT).

We will not need to identify ourselves because we will be integrated into the system.

As discussed previously, Mike Orcutt’s March 2013 article for MIT Technology Review explored John Roger’s work as a materials scientist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is one of those experimenting with “epidermal electronics” where applications can be printed directly onto the skin. Rogers tells us that these new devices will be very useful to the medical industry and explains: “You can use a rubber stamp to just deliver the ultrathin mesh electronics directly to the surface of the skin.” And by using “spray-on bandage” products a thin protective layer acts to “… bond the system to the skin in a ‘very robust way.’”

Smart-skin-1Back in November 2003, The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse – a non-profit, grant-supported advocacy and consultancy organisation for consumer awareness – had already produced the “Position Statement on the Use of RFID on Consumer Products.” In the study, they concluded the following:

  • Hidden placement of tags. RFID tags can be embedded into/onto objects and documents without the knowledge of the individual who obtains those items. As radio waves travel easily and silently through fabric, plastic, and other materials, it is possible to read RFID tags sewn into clothing or affixed to objects contained in purses, shopping bags, suitcases, and more.
  • Unique identifiers for all objects worldwide. The Electronic Product Code potentially enables every object on earth to have its own unique ID. The use of unique ID numbers could lead to the creation of a global item registration system in which every physical object is identified and linked to its purchaser or owner at the point of sale or transfer.
  • Massive data aggregation. RFID deployment requires the creation of massive databases containing unique tag data. These records could be linked with personal identifying data, especially as computer memory and processing capacities expand.
  • Hidden readers. Tags can be read from a distance, not restricted to line of sight, by readers that can be incorporated invisibly into nearly any environment where human beings or items congregate. RFID readers have already been experimentally embedded into floor tiles, woven into carpeting and floor mats, hidden in doorways, and seamlessly incorporated into retail shelving and counters, making it virtually impossible for a consumer to know when or if he or she was being “scanned.”
  • Individual tracking and profiling. If personal identity were linked with unique RFID tag numbers, individuals could be profiled and tracked without their knowledge or consent. For example, a tag embedded in a shoe could serve as a de facto identifier for the person wearing it. Even if item-level information remains generic, identifying items people wear or carry could associate them with, for example, particular events like political rallies. [5]

Not that these warnings have made a whole lot of difference to the momentum of such technology.

American and European governments’ expenditure of billions of taxpayer’s money on creating these new systems “for our protection” is unjustified for a multitude of reasons. One of these shows how particularly ridiculous the whole scenario really is. If someone wishes to read the biometric information from our passport, driving licence or ID card they need only to purchase a reader device and scan the information without the individual ever knowing. Of course, the government and their spooks have been extracting information in a similar fashion from so called “secure” systems of information for decades. As outsourcing of the state to private companies is becomes the norm, it is hardly likely that governments could stem the tide of information theft should they even want to.

In February 2007, the electronics corporation Hitachi proudly revealed the development and successful testing of the world’s smallest and thinnest class of “non-contact RFID Powder IC (integrated circuit) Chip.” It measures just 0.05 x 0.05 millimetres, which is about the size of a pin-head or less. We read on their website in a Research & Development report that their aim is: “… to embed the chip in thin paper, a practice that is already in general use,” informing us that: “These technologies are expected to be seen in a wider range of applications.” [6]

In 2015 this became a reality. The chips have a 128-bit ROM for storing a unique 38 digit number and can indeed be worked into any product at all. Since these chips are “already in use” it begs the question: what other applications are they thinking about? The military surveillance uses are well ahead of the consumer game. As one writer on the chips mused: “… suppose you participated in some sort of protest or other organized activity. If police agencies sprinkled these tags around, every individual could be tracked and later identified at leisure, with powerful enough tag scanners.” [7]

This echoes trans-national corporation IBM and their business relationship with Nazi Germany’s Third Reich in the 1930s and their subsequent collaboration during World War II. Investigative journalist and author Edwin Black explained how IBM’s technology helped facilitate Nazi genocide against Jews and other undesirables through the creation and tabulation of punch cards based upon national census data. Aside from administrative and logistical support, IBM machines were used in concentration camps. Many prisoners had their details passed through the Labour Assignment Office and assigned a characteristic five-digit IBM Hollerith machine number, 44673. This five-digit number in the punch card system was designed to track prisoners in the camps, most notably the slave labour camp at Auschwitz. The number was the precursor to the numerical tattoo stamped upon the arm of an individual and deemed more cost-effective and efficient.

ibmachineIBM Hollerith Card Processing Machine used by the Nazis circa 1940s

There is no doubt that the targeted identification of Jews and other racial groupings for: “… asset confiscation, ghettoisation, deportation, and ultimately extermination” took place in a way that is logistically and insanely ambitious. The Nazis were able to kill as many as they did with the help of IBM’s pioneering computer work which required: “… generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany—and later throughout Europe—[to be cross-indexed] a task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.” [8] That’s where IBM came in. And its legacy for number crunching computation has remained, the profits of its participation in the logistical side of the holocaust having kept it afloat for all these years.

So, what has IBM been up to recently?

Harking back to their darker history, the corporation has finished patenting their “Identification and Tracking of Persons Using RFID-Tagged Items in Store Environments.” Security and Privacy analyst Katherine Albrecht, founder of the consumer pressure group CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) writes about RFID’s potential for surveillance: “… where networked RFID readers called ‘person tracking units’ would be incorporated virtually everywhere people go – in “shopping malls, airports, train stations, bus stations, elevators, trains, airplanes, restrooms, sports arenas, libraries, theaters, museums, to closely monitor people’s movements.”

You can already see the acclimatisation taking place with i-phone apps scanning capabilities in billboard ads in bus shelters and shopping malls. When RFID tag scanners are located in the required locations, they scan the RIFID tags on a person. Albrecht continues: “As that person moves around the store, different RFID tag scanners located throughout the store can pick up radio signals from the RFID tags carried on that person and the movement of that person is tracked based on these detections … The person tracking unit may keep records of different locations where the person has visited, as well as the visitation times.” What is more, if personal data does not register on the tag, no problem, IBM tells us: “the personal information will be obtained when the person uses his or her credit card, bank card, shopper card or the like.” [9] Which means a person’s unique RFID number and his or her identity will merge into the overall techno-identity of our SMART society.

Although slower than the technocrats would like, the implantation of RFID’s in the global population is making progress. Alongside marketing tattoos a much vaunted fashion statement, another method of gradualism was to implant pets and farmyard animals as part of an agribusiness efficiency and as a prelude to human implantation.

In January 2007 Business Week reported on the Federal mandated National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and their desire to digitally tag “… 40 million farm animals to enable regulators to track and respond quickly to disease, bioterrorism, and other calamities.” The report rightly highlights the fears of the more informed which it summarises thusly: “You test it on the animals first, demonstrating the viability of the radio frequency identification devices (RFIDs) to monitor each and every animal’s movements and health history from birth to death, and then move on to people.”  The report mentions the ambitions of one Scott Silverman who runs a: “… company that sells the rice-size people chips, which are the only ones with Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approval, for implantation in an individual’s right biceps. They carry an identity marker that would be linked to medical records. His goal is to create ‘the first RFID company for people.’” [10] More from Mr. Silverman presently.

cow1© infrakshun

Things have progressed since 2007 and we can now see implementation of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and RFID chips in a fusion of agribusiness and SMART technology called by French technocrats as “SMART Agrimatics”. A paper hot of the press at the time of writing is about as innovative as you are going to get on the subject of agribusiness and technocracy. The culmination of a pilot project research, it involves the application and use of RFID tags for “ruminants” (cows, sheep and goats to you and me) the studies of which were conducted between 2005 and 2010. This includes discussions on the relevant use of RFID; use of RFID for feeding automates on farm; use of RFID for performances control; use of RFID for animal trade; use of RFID for slaughter chain and supervision for RFID devices.

The paper reads like a machine mind designing for another machine mind, except there are – inconveniently it seems – sentient beings involved. For the farmer scratching his head as to whether he is a human being raising animals or an engineer maintaining “automated consumption units” and keen to make the leap to SMART-Agrimatics, then obviously this dossier would be invaluable for setting his mind straight – one way or another.

With “ear-tag and detection cell” and “fixed readers integrated in the environment” agri-business and GM technology are well placed to maximize their efficiency ratios. Once all cattle have been tagged logged and every aspect of their cellular structure analysed then the collection and transfer of said data can be uploaded to the national database “… the weight linked to the official animal identification number from RFID reading.” [11] Driven by economic incentives and inventory control, larger farms all over Europe and the US are signing on to RFID.

Now, how would that play out for humans?

If we were learn from automated factory farming and now SMART-Agrimatics, the key term here, once again, is efficiency.

How does one maximize the efficiency in automated methods of keeping an awakening population asleep to a minority of psychopaths?  The technocratic, sensual and pharmaceutical amusements of Huxley’s Brave New World should give you some idea. The following picture from the above report might easily apply to the “sheep” in the human population who believe in the authoritarian structures they have grown up with. Wolves come in many disguises.

clip_image002.gif“The Future Sheeple?”

Over in the UK, after a series of well reported dangerous dog attacks new legislation has gone ahead that forces dog owners to pay between £20 – £30 to have a RFID chip injected under the skin of their pooch while still a puppy. As one animal welfare spokesman mentioned: “It’s not so much the dogs that should be targeted, but the owners who train them to be vicious.” (A metaphor for psychopaths and their societies perhaps?) Implantation of RFIDs has predominantly taken place within security firms, the military and various dance clubs in European countries whose clientele find it convenient to speed their entry. These are the voluntary lab-rats.

The Verichip Corporation and their various subsidiaries has been one of the leaders in RFID technology with their flagship product the Verichip ™ manufactured by Digital Angel. PositiveID, a developer of medical technologies for diabetes management, clinical diagnostics and bio-threat detection is the company that uses its patented VeriPay system where the chip can be used like a credit card to authorise financial transactions. It is currently being used by the Baja Beach Club in Spain to the delight of many happy party goers.

PositiveID-logo

The Verichip was initially foreseen as a device for retrieving medical records, having received FDA approval for medical use in 2004. But the vision was never designed to stop there. The size of a grain of rice it is easily implanted just under the skin in the arm or hand so that the device can monitor human biometric functions and transmit the data with GPS technology. Thousands of Mexicans have since been implanted, from law enforcement workers to ordinary citizens. The latter are doing so in increasing numbers due to a 317 per cent rise in kidnappings, 20 per cent of which has involved corrupt police officers. Many US companies are dubious that the chips actually work in combination with GPS devices but payments of up $2000 are being handed over nonetheless. One slight wrinkle in the chip means that confirmation of identity can only be confirmed when the body has been found. [12]

Currently in talks with the Pentagon to implant Verichip into all 1.4 million US soldiers, PositiveID has also been delighted to receive bulk orders from the Israeli military not wishing to be left out of technocratic party. Marc Poulshock, PositiveID’s Vice President of Business Development, said: “We believe there are many important applications for the VeriChip and our associated intellectual property including next-generation identification and bio-sensing capabilities. Our partner is looking to help healthcare organizations, militaries including the IDF, and governments with their disaster preparedness and emergency response needs.” [13]

VeriCorp insists that the Verichip is very difficult to steal despite two hackers showing just how easy it really was to steal a person’s identity via the RFID. Annalee Newitz and Jonathan Westhues gave a special demonstration at the HOPE Number Six conference in New York City in July 2008. Newitz had the VeriChip RFID implanted in her right arm. Westhues then proceeded to clone the chip by reading Newitz’s arm with an RFID reader, scanning it with a homemade antenna connected to his laptop which recorded the signal from the chip. Finally, he used the same RFID reader to obtain the signal from his laptop, which then gave Newitz’s “unique” ID. Verichip had no comment to make other than they had been too busy to look at their evidence.

That hasn’t prevented the idea that new-borns should be protected from nefarious activities of the public. Ronald Kane, Vice President of CUBIC Corp., a major manufacturer of implantable chips, while discussing the profit margins on RFID tags enthusiastically stated: “If we had our way, we’d implant a chip behind everyone’s ear in the maternity ward.” [14]

According to RFID News Student ID cards equipped with RFID chips are becoming more common sight on schools and college campuses. Education officials are “… adopting RFID technology to track everything from student attendance to valuable assets.” [15]It is part of a wide-ranging rollout of SMART technology including Iris recognition software and cameras which monitor the emotional states of students, both of which have caused considerable controversy, not least at the idea of turning schools into virtual prisons.

A similar efficiency-ratio mentality is being employed in business training software offered by online technology company Mindflash. FocusAssist is a new feature designed for i-Pad which tracks the user’s eye movements via the tablet’s on-board camera. When you’ve looked away for several seconds the course is paused. This apparently forces you to pay attention so that you can finish the assignment. One wonders how long it will be before computers are teaching children and adopting a similar attention mechanism.

The contradictions and double-speak that are on display from the Verichip advocates is quite a show. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave a 2002 ruling that that: “VeriChip is not a regulated device with regard to its security, financial, personal identification/safety applications … VeriChip’s healthcare information applications are subject to regulation by the FDA in the United States.’ As author and journalist Uri Dowbenko mentions: “It’s OK if the VeriChip tracks your credit report history, but not OK if it’s used to inform doctors you’re diabetic? This will undoubtedly be used as an argument to justify the VeriChip as a so-called ‘medical device’ in the future.” [16]

verichipmicrochip / verichip ™

The stages which the RFID tags have followed have moved through: pets = cattle = criminals = military = business workers towards the longer more drawn out process of finally chipping the mass population. Biometric passports, national ID cards and then gracefully having your palm over the supermarket scanner will make things so easy! So easy in fact, that perception management will tell you the next logical step in this New World of SMART design is to be “SMART” yourself and integrate your body into the system, and then you will be “free.” Notwithstanding the potency of such an illusion, there is another problem. Verichip and other companies love to tell us about the medical and community benefits of tagging which include the monitoring of heart troubles, children safety, pet protection and the like, what of the health issues related to RFID tags?

In 2007 the Verichip Corporation and other related companies were dealt a severe blow to their credibility when Katherine Albrecht’s CASPIAN consumer pressure group released a 48-page paper entitled “Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006”. Based on a dense review of academic research on the subject, the causal link between implanted radio-frequency (RFID) microchip transponders and cancer in laboratory rodents and dogs could not be clearer. Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre in New York, said: “There’s no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members.” Given the preliminary animal data it looks to me that there is definitely cause for concern.” [17]

CEO and Chairman of Verichip Corporation Scott R. Silverman played his part in a disinformation campaign launched by RFID companies in response to the findings. Silverman is quoted in a Time article as saying that in the “… second study, conducted in France in 2006, two years after VeriChip’s FDA application was approved, found that while 4 per cent of the 1,260 mice in the study developed tumors, none of them were malignant.” [18]The truth is a little different. The tumours were indeed malignant sarcomas and most of the animals in question died prematurely as a result of the microchip-associated tumours. Destron Fearing, makers of the HomeAgain pet implant came in a close second when they ignored a finding of fibrosarcoma – a highly lethal cancer – as “benign” in a recent report. Katherine Albrecht stated: “Either VeriChip and the makers of HomeAgain actually don’t understand the difference between a benign fibroma and a malignant fibrosarcoma, or they’re deliberately lying to the public. Either way, it’s clear they can’t be trusted. We hope our new report will set the record straight.” [19]

Despite this, Silverman was correct in that overall, the incidences of cancer in dogs after over 10 million injections is relatively small, which means that this scare is not enough to put off either the medical establishment, security companies and the potential benefits to consumers in a variety of social situations.

russo-nick-rockefellerAaron Russo (left) and Nicholas Rockefeller

“The goal is to get everyone in this world chipped with this RFID chip and have all money and information be on these chips. And if anyone wants to protest what we do or violate what we want, we just turn off their chip.”

From Russo’s film: America: Freedom to Fascism


The above quote is lifted from the late Hollywood producer and film-maker Aaron Russo’s now classic America: Freedom to Fascism (2006) in which he details a conversation he had with also now deceased California Attorney Nicholas Rockefeller. Russo, who was frequently around the elite and their antics and was rather bemused by their beliefs asked Rockefeller:  “… what’s the point of all this,” …“you have all the money in the world you need, you have all the power you need, what’s the point, what’s the end goal?” The answer was the above quote. Does it sound too hackneyed and outrageous? Watch the film to discover more of Russo’s discoveries. Made almost ten years ago, one realises what a warning this film truly was. (Don’t you just love those Rockefellers?)

This brings us back to the National Security State; the various World State advocates that would like to see the global population “culled” and the war on terror tool that has allowed a technocratic Police State infrastructure to rise up virtually unopposed. When SMART, surveillance society arrives on the back of a few more mini-911-type scenarios, there may come a stage where, if you want to eat, you must acquire a chip. It’s a logical step that once mass acceptance of RFID tagging has gradually taken place anyone that is deemed a “terrorist”, “subversive” or merely suspiciously expressing a “radical” opinion on Facebook can be easily tracked and controlled. (See Police State Amerika I: Facebook Thought Police). The next step from targeting dissidents is the expansion of powers to include a wide range of groups or organisations that come under the vague and nebulous definitions of terrorism. Everything that doesn’t fit into that SMART design will be well … switched off.

Technocracy is essential to the smooth running of the Elite-collectivist model and as we have seen so far in this series, the younger generations are the primary targets for social engineering. With a sizable marketing drive underway headed by the Verichip slogan: “Get chipped,” RFID tags are being marketed as chic and trendy, cool and desirable. If the recent surge in tattoos is anything to go by, the microchip might be the next fashion statement for those too young (or programmed) to have awareness of the implications.

Despite loud mutterings of discontent in the US and the European Union the advances in SMART tech will not be going away. Ideologically driven technology and enormous amounts of money to be made will mean that regulations are unlikely to be enforced. The health hazards of mobile phone use and GMOs are well known but we still use them because society itself is being redesigned to make life unlivable without them. It seems we are no longer human beings but living bar-codes programmed to proffer feedback loops of data in a vast auto-matrix of supply and demand. It should come as no surprise that corporations and their governments are seeking ways to extract more profits from the New Technological Order that is rising up from the shopping mall.

 


Notes

[1] ‘EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters’ By Claire Carter, The Telegraph, Sep 2013.
[2] ‘Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students’ Every Move’ By Sheila Dharmarajan, The Future Is Now,September 17, 2013.
[3] aimglobal.org
[4] http://www.privacyrights.org/
[5] ‘Seen At 11: Getting Personal – Your Pulse Could Be Your New Password’ Pin Numbers, Credit Cards, And Passwords Could Soon Be A Thing Of The Past, CBS News, September 16, 2013.
[6]‘Operation of World’s Smallest Class Noncontact RFID Powder IC Chip Successfully Tested’ hitachi.com 2008/2009 Research & Development paper: http://www.hitachi.com/rev/archive/2008/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2008/07/24/r2008_technology_rd.pdf
[7] ‘RFID ‘Powder’ – World’s Smallest RFID Tag’ by Bill Christensen, technovelgy.com February 14, 2007.
[8] IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation. By Edwin Black, Second paperback edition. Washington, DC: Dialog Press, 2009; (introduction).
[9] ‘How RFID Tags Could Be Used to Track Unsuspecting People’ by Katherine Albrecht, Scientific American, August 21, 2008.
[10] Animal Tags for People? by David E. Gumpert, Business Week, January 11, 2007.
[11] ‘Conclusions from the French pilot projects for the use of RFID for ruminants’ by the Institut de l’élevage-France Louise Marguin, Marion Dang. June 14, 2012. | http://www.smartagrimatics.eu/Portals/66/Smartpercent20AgriMaticspercent205_3_RFID_Paris_2012-MD.pdf
[12] ‘Thousands of Mexicans Implanting Tracking Devices- But experts say they are not likely to work’By Evann Gastaldo, newser.com, Aug 22, 2011.
[13] ‘positiveID Corporation Receives VeriChip Order for Use With Israeli Military’ MarketWatch, October 11, 2011.
[12] ‘The IBM 2020 Neural Implant’ The Phoenix Project, Dr. Al Overholt, quoting from The California Sun, by Herb Dorsey, Feb. 1997.
[14] ‘Schools add RFID tagging to student IDs’ RFID News / CR80 News June 18 2012.
[15] ‘VeriChip: RFID Microchip Implants for Humans’ by Uri Dowbenko, conspiracyplanet.com
[16] ‘Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006’ by Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D. November 19, 2007.
[17] ‘Are Microchip Tags Safe?’ By Siobhan Morrissey Time Magazine, http://www.time.com, Oct. 18, 2007.
[18] ‘CASPIAN Releases Microchip Cancer Report’ antichips.com November 19 2007.
[19] op.cit Albrecht

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 I

 By M.K. Styllinski

“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.”

Anthony C. Sutton, Wall St. And the Bolshevik Revolution (1974)


The David Rockefellers of this world have a long history of managing the hoi-polloi of ordinary folk like you and I who consider “auto-determination” a human right rather than a quaint historical footnote. Once we understand that such a perception of smug superiority is not a passing whim but an indelible stamp of elite-thinking that holds normal humanity in absolute contempt, then we will begin to understand that such people seek to bend the world to a singular reality without majority consent. And because they have been practicing this art of modern manipulation for at least 150 years, with access to cutting-edge resources from psychology to technology, history to economics – they have become exceedingly good at it.

So what is the objective of this Plan? We’ll look at a few of the main building blocks of Pathocratic rule such as the relationship between capitalism and collectivism, the role of a peculiar vision of science including eugenics; food as a weapon and advocates of depopulation. Once again, various ideologies, institutions, criminal cartels and political and social movements will be used as tools to achieve those ends. Certain themes can be discerned that will be obvious to everyone, the methods and the effects of which have been briefly discussed in previous posts.

We might call the broad brush changes that have helped to take over the world of normal people as the “4Cs” which can be viewed as both chronological and non-linear in nature whereby each gives rise to the other in an ascending spiral.

These are:

1. Commercialisation through deregulated capitalism

2. Consolidation through cartel corporatism and financial warfare

3. Centralisation through the transfer of power from local to global

4. Control and its maintenance once achieved.

Extreme commercialisation has affected every aspect of our lives from the quality of food we eat to the type of education our children receive. We are no longer people but “consumers.” The commoditisation of life and the short-term gains it offers relies on economic disparities, debt enslavement and perpetual war to keep the illusion of choice and economic growth in place. However, most of us are firmly trapped in this economic and materialist model that offers nothing more than a serious reduction in the quality of life for most on the planet. While it is true that capitalism has been the model for the rise of the West and as a result of the present increase in prosperity being enjoyed by Asia, the ecological, social and spiritual consequences of this economic paradigm have been disastrous. Yet nothing is allowed to challenge the concept of this version of cartel-capitalism which still determines the economic machinery of global economics. A widespread acceptance of models that would drastically improve the lives of millions is purposely avoided to maintain the status quo. Not only do alternative modes of commerce and more localised, community-based economies exist they are eminently workable.

wallpaper-127321-horz_thumb.jpg© infrakshun

Viable alternatives are shackled by a mix of conscious and unconscious conditioning and the beliefs that rise up out of such insecurity. In the face of change at the local level which may be derived from models which go counter to the dominant systems of the 4Cs operating at national and global levels, it is extraordinarily difficult to implement and sustain alternative methodologies no matter how practical or sensible they may be. Opting out of this entrenched system is now no longer possible for most, economically and psychologically as we are completely inside the concept of market demand.

The rise of cartel-capitalism is a gargantuan pathology based on the exact same personality traits of the psychopath. When populations have to fight their way out of poverty and squalor only to be given the chance to inflict the same economic footprint of their eventual capitalist success on others, we see that this system is designed to erode responsibility, increase unsustainability and create a cycle of perpetual boom and bust; where the haves and have nots dance in an eternal cycle of resource competition. All of which, is inevitably and perhaps literally – soul-destroying.
<
“Globalisation,” “globalism” and “World State” mean the 4Cs. Your personal life and personal goals are unimportant to the planners unless those goals are consistent with the sociological, economic and “religious” goals of their global vision. To be useful to the Pathocrats you must be like a number in an algorithm, to be herded and managed into units of consumption. Is this the real goal of commercialisation: to dehumanize and devalue so that humanity become the products that they covet, so that psychopaths can roam free and increase their numbers finally eclipsing normal humanity completely?

Consolidation has been taking place at an ever faster rate since the Industrial Revolution and represents the move towards greater and greater centralisation. Corporate mergers trans-national entities, mass privatisation, monolithic agribusiness and media empires are all products of this phase of consolidation. In the manipulated economic crisis of 2008 (which is still continuing) JP Morgan, Citibank and Goldman Sacs were among the top mega-companies to make a killing in the wake of the crisis after having used billions of dollars of tax payers’ money given to them by the governments. Trillions were sunk into a “bailout” black-hole to keep the international banking system and its corporate partners afloat while the global economy began its final push towards even greater centralisation. What amounted to a form of financial warfare saw the asset spoils going to the bigger companies who bought up the bankrupted losers thereby consolidating their new positions. What’s more, societies of ordinary people were duped into paying for these “bail-outs” with “austerity measures”. How many of the elite do you think were effected by this imposition? Billions were wiped off social welfare, hikes in taxes, food prices and oil were imposed all of which maintained the financial system that bit longer so that they could extract more dividends and cream off what is left of the old crony capitalism before the final meltdown. In combination with the West’s proxy wars, Homelessness, repossessions, mass unemployment and an immigration exodus were the result.

Meanwhile, the rich are getting richer. The 1 percent of the wealthiest have made more profit from this global recession than ever before. The only ones pulling in the purse-strings are the middle and working classes. Ordinary people are being asked to “tighten their belts” work harder for less pay in the West so that the iniquitous banking model can be allowed to consolidate and centralise their operations still further. This translates into business as usual for countries like Africa which continue to be despoiled and invaded by Western corporations looking for the next consolidated “hit” backed by the same Banks who have been pleading governments to help them “survive.”

None of this is about improving the lot of humanity. It is about maintaining pure, legitimized greed which is then mandated by law. We are so irrevocably enmeshed in the system of the 4Cs that any attempts to jump ship at the national or individual level, creates insurmountable problems. The Establishment must convince its populations that their way is the only way and like good little school children you must obey Teacher. According to the “elected” authorities, we cannot and must not attempt to be the architects of the school itself.

The United States has been the defining inspiration for the capitalist model for over a hundred years. While it has been the source of all that is best in humanity, the country has declined since the Kennedy brothers assassinations and sharply after the September 11th Attacks on the Twin Towers. This deep-seated tendency to authoritarianism has given the American people a perverse rendering of history and an almost indelible stamp of para-moral rectitude. As we have seen, even more shocking is the realization that the form of government that dominates today is National Socialism which was of course, the socio-political ideology of choice for the Nazis. It was Benito Mussolini who suggested that fascism, was corporatism or as author and journalist Jim Marrs points out: “… in countries such as Italy and Germany before World War II the State took over the corporations. In the United States today, the corporations have taken over the State, but the end result is the same.” [1] We may not have the jackboots and swastikas but the suits and ties and thought police work just as well.

In a nut-shell, elite psychopaths can choose to employ past and the present, “traditional” and “progressive” according to their needs. (See below).

Inverted Totalitarianism / Huxleyian

Classical Totalitarianism / Orwellian

State domination of economy and business

Corporate domination of State and economy

Active political mobilisation of the populace

Political apathy and ignorance

Open rejection of democracy

Mask of Democracy

Classical and Inverted Totalitarianism

The ponerisation of the United States of America is what we have likened to a “soft” or inverted totalitarianism. It is because this descent is not obvious that it becomes more dangerous, lying as it does behind infotainment, corporatism and ponerised cultural “norms.” Political philosopher Sheldon Wolin refers to just such an inversion taking place but with distinct differences compared to more classical forms of totalitarianism as seen under Nazi Germany and the Stalinist Soviet Union. [2]  Whereas in the Nazi Third Reich’s dictatorship it exercised State power over the economy and its players, with inverted totalitarianism, it is the corporate model which dominates the State. Similarly, where the Nazis were masters of propaganda aimed at mobilising the power of the people the reversal of totalitarian dynamics serves to put the people to sleep under a mass inversion. Here, it is the recurrent theme of sensation, pleasure and ignorance which keeps people in a state of servitude through an official culture founded on narcissism and the consequent open door to a range of mental and emotional addictions.

Finally, whereas democracy is openly rejected under classical forms of totalitarianism, the inverted model hides behind a mask of democracy where democratic principles exist only on paper, soon to be dispensed with altogether with the right “crisis.” This is perhaps the most important distinction between the past and the present. Pathocracy uses an inversion of known totalitarian principles so that it perfectly adapts to both the emerging culture of the Information Age whilst adhering to more Orwellian methods of the past.


 “The rules of big business: Get a monopoly; let society work for you. So long as we see all international revolutionaries and all international capitalists as implacable enemies of one another, then we miss a crucial point….a partnership between international monopoly capitalism and international revolutionary socialism is for their mutual benefit.”

Frederick C. Howe, Confessions of a Monopolist (1906)


The Corporatist-Collectivist Chess board

A key ingredient in the capitalist-collectivist hybrid that currently infects societies today is the rise of Marxism, the important Hegelian tool of choice for Elite objectives.

Preceding World War I, Marxist theory was all the rage but the Zionist / Wall St. funded Communist revolution didn’t quite work out as planned in terms of mass appeal because workers could see that it wasn’t a panacea – it simply couldn’t deliver, and most certainly not in the West. Which is why cultural Marxism and its Fabian agents took gradualism to its heart in order to reshape the mass mind of the West toward Marxist principles by stealth while encouraging corporatism to grow alongside it. In fact, the European Union was founded on exactly the same principles that gave rise to both the U.S.S.R and the Nazi Third Reich. Indeed, the latter was instrumental in the visionary ideas that saw the development of the European Union as we have come to recognise it now. It is no surprise that Germany is its most powerful leader since the back-up plan of the Nazis was precisely this: if they could not win the war logistically and strategically then dominance would come in the future via economic power.

(For more on this see The EU: The Truth about the Fourth Reich How Adolf Hitler Won the Second World War By Daniel J. Beddowes and Flavio Cipollini).

It was this root that the same Synarchist-Fascist impulse was to create the European formation of the Gladio terrorist networks which sprung up in the 1950s and 60s and that saw American conservatives effect massive Cold War witch-hunts against a so-called Communist conspiracy. Their hunches were far more accurate than we realise if somewhat simplistic and to which huge derision was drawn from the liberal left. But they were wrong overall – they did not understand the hybrid of extremes which were attempting to join.

So, what form has this “socialism” in the West actually taken? Simply put, collectivism is the opposite of individualism, where group thought, philosophy, action and principle overrides the needs of the individual. The term can be divided into horizontal collectivism and vertical collectivism. The former is collective decision-making among largely equal individuals, and is therefore based on decentralisation, while the latter is drawn from hierarchical power structures and socio-cultural conformity, and is based on centralisation. [3] While such a drive to group endeavour can bring out the positive aspects of our interdependence and our shared experiences across the planet, the kind of collectivism we will explore is an overreaching form that employs both vertical and distorted horizontal forms into one vast entity – its expression having been ponerised by emerging strains of psychopathy. The onset of ponerogenesis will manifest by whatever channels deemed suitable in order to achieve Pathocracy. Remember that none of these ideologies are evil in themselves, but used in a pathocratic context, they become tools of destruction.

The war between collectivism and individualism continues to rage in the West, while in the Middle East, Asia and Africa a blend of Anglo-American influences amid certain theocracies combine Church and State, compelling citizens to accept a particular religious doctrine set against radical secularism – a fine breeding ground for numerous civil wars. We are all immersed in an array of belief systems from Conservatism to Liberalism, Communism, Neo-Conservatism and Zionism and on and on so that division is the keynote for Establishment leverage. To that end, money is the denominator in all things which goes way beyond simplistic ideas of trickle down. The state-shadowed Communism and corporate capitalism are blood brothers. As the late German historian and philosopher Oswald Spengler remarked in his Decline of the West (1991) “There is no proletarian, not even a Communist, movement, that has not operated in the interests of money, in the direction indicated by money, and for the time being permitted by money–and that without the idealists among its leaders having the slightest suspicion of the fact.”

While many globalists officially discard Stalinism they embrace collectivism and Marxist ideology quite happily. It is collectivism which is ideally suited to the more Huxleyian or inverted form of totalitarianism. If we take a look at the sprawling mess of the European Union we see the same hybrid of totalitarianism at work, this time from a mix of both the Liberal Establishment and European Synarchy. Former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky warned in a speech that the European Union: “… represents a continuation of the totalitarian vision he had fought against in Russia … The former Soviet president Mikhail S. Gorbachev put it more succinctly when he told the official Russian news agency, Ria Novosti, last week that ‘It is all about influence and domination in Europe.’ ” [4]

Bukovsky is no reactionary. After the Soviets expelled him to the West in 1976 he has offered unique insights into the nature of the Soviet Communist Party drawn from direct experience of the regime. He was the one of the first to expose the use of psychiatric imprisonment against political prisoners in the former USSR and according to journalist Belgian Paul Belien: “… spent a total of twelve years (1964-1976), from his 22nd to his 34th year, in Soviet jails, labour camps and psychiatric institutions.” [5] In 1992 he was invited by the Russian government to serve as an expert at a trial to ascertain whether or not the Communist Party had been a criminal institution, Bukovsky was permitted access to a great many classified documents from secret Soviet archives. Only a handful of people have seen this information. What he managed to scan for his own records has become an intriguing confirmation of the pathology shaping the beliefs of collectivism as a tool for Pathocracy.

The Russian dissident takes up the story:

“In 1992 I had unprecedented access to Politburo Central Committee secret documents which have been classified, and still are even now, for 30 years. These documents show very clearly that the whole idea of turning the European common market into a federal state was agreed between the left-wing parties of Europe and Moscow as a joint project which [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev in 1988-89 called our common European home.

“The idea was very simple. It first came up in 1985-86, when the Italian Communists visited Gorbachev, followed by the German Social-Democrats. They all complained that the changes in the world … were threatening to wipe out the achievement (as they called it) of generations of Socialists and Social-Democrats – threatening to reverse it completely. Therefore the only way to withstand this onslaught of wild capitalism (as they called it) was to try to introduce the same socialist goals in all countries at once. Prior to that, the left-wing parties and the Soviet Union had opposed European integration…. From 1985 onwards they completely changed their view. The Soviets came to a conclusion and to an agreement with the left-wing parties that if they worked together they could hijack the whole European project and turn it upside down. Instead of an open market they would turn it into a federal state.” [6]

Many of these documents are freely available on a variety of websites on the internet. Interestingly, we see the same power brokers such as the Trilateral Commission and the Rockefellers in the thick of it:

“In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank…

“…the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist…. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.

“It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similarly, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all.” [7]

Vladimir Bukovsky’s point is crucial. Rather than revealing a communist conspiracy a totalitarian structure was carefully nurtured and organised by proponents of socialist and capitalist ideologies, the bridge between the two being Pathocratic objectives camouflaged by tailored belief systems:

“When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan … an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

“If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version … It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB…. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity?

“They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. … Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes….

“The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness. I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology

Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality. France passed the same law of hate speech concerning gays. Britain is passing hate speech laws concerning race relations and now religious speech …. What you observe, taken into perspective, is a systematic introduction of ideology which could later be enforced with oppressive measures. Apparently that is the whole purpose of Europol ….

“It looks like we are living in a period of rapid, systematic and very consistent dismantlement of democracy. Look at this Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. It makes ministers into legislators who can introduce new laws without bothering to tell Parliament or anyone. … This can make a dictatorship out of your country in no time.

“Major political parties have been completely taken in by the new EU project….. They have become very corrupt. Who is going to defend our freedoms?… The most likely outcome is that there will be an economic collapse in Europe, which in due time is bound to happen with this growth of expenses and taxes. The inability to create a competitive environment, the over regulation of the economy, the bureaucratisation, it is going to lead to economic collapse. Particularly the introduction of the euro was a crazy idea….

“Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? … In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union…. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads…. We are losing and we are wasting time.” [8] [Emphasis mine]

So far, with the likely collapse of the euro at some point in the near future and widespread economic hardship in Europe, the above analysis from 2006 has proved quite correct. Bukovsky is no politically motivated dissident on a mission of vengeance against modern Russia, a entirely different animal of the Soviet past. He sees the totalitarian structures, ideologies, plans in much the same way that Łobaczewski sees inevitable expansion of ponerogenic influences to which such bureaucracies are wide open. It is not a coincidence that the Soviet Union’s elimination of nationhood in favour of “Unions” and “blocs” is the same goal of the Anglo-American Liberal Establishment. On this point Bukovsky further observed:

“The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people ‘Europeans’, whatever that means.

“According to Communist doctrine as well as to many forms of Socialist thinking, the… national state, is supposed to wither away. In Russia, however, the opposite happened. Instead of withering away the Soviet state became a very powerful state, but the nationalities were obliterated….” [9]

Bukovsky  is convinced that the European Union “cannot be democratized” due to its latent totalitarian structure. So, why are we now so polarised between the myths of socialism and capitalism not seeing the how the web of neo-liberal economics offers the building blocks for a global power structure?

wallpaperstock-net

In fact, the idea of eliminating national boundaries and nation states was proposed from all sectors of the Establishment coloured with their respective ideologies. It is a matter of historical record but you won’t find it on most educational curricula. After the Second World War in that frenzied opportunity to build their edifices of future control, there were many voices suggesting blueprints for the elimination of nation states and the formation of vast federal Unions built on top of the NATO military alliance. A European Union did come out of it, even though the original Atlantic Union – as a precursor to an eventual Global Union – didn’t see the light of day – at least in that incarnation. But the Cold War wasn’t just about reflexive paranoia. Underneath Anglo-American and European elites was a persistent wish to see nation states disappear so that a capitalist-collectivist vision could manifest globally.

Journalist Matt Stoller’s article published in salon.com September 20th 2013, placed the Establishment in the spotlight by revisiting history amid the Edward Snowden revelations of NSA surveillance and the attempted invasion of Syria. “The Elites’ strange plot to take over the world” described just one of the influences from those steeped in Cold War paranoia, this time from journalist, Clarence Streit who contributed to the ideologues who were buzzing the honey-pot of the mass mind and waiting to shape it into the required form. Since it was broken it was highly suggestible and easily managed. Now was the time to erect the institutions of future authority.

Streit wrote a book called Union Now (1939) which, according to Stoller:

“… had a galvanizing effect on the anti-fascist youth of the time, a sort of cross between Thomas Friedman’s ‘The World Is Flat’ and Naomi Klein’s ‘The Shock Doctrine.’ Streit served in World War I in an intelligence unit, and saw up close the negotiations for the Treaty of Versailles. He then became a New York Times journalist assigned to cover the League of Nations which led him to the conclusion that the only way to prevent American isolationism and European fascism was for political and economic integration of the major ‘freedom-loving’ peoples, which he described as America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and most of Western Europe. The Five Eyes surveillance architecture was created just a few years later, as was the international monetary regime concocted at Bretton Woods.”

Streit was yet another example of individuals having suffered the effects of war and basted in intelligence training and its tools of PR propaganda. He was present at the gathering together of a large number of social dominators at two of the most important meetings of the 20th Century: Versailles and The Paris Peace Conference which led to the League of Nations organisation and the impetus to reshape the geo-political fortunes of the world. Though Streit’s pitch was to fight totalitarianism wherever “civilised society” found it, ironically perhaps, it was used as a plan for precisely the same, by political and diplomatic leaders of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, many of whom went on to craft the multilateral institutions and international policies of the Cold War and the push for an Atlantic Union. Though many of these leaders were well-intentioned in their wish to head off a Communist take-over as they saw it, there were others who were equally cognizant of the need for the first phase in a Global Union /World State to expand the principles of world government which would eventually incorporate the Soviet Russia and Maoist China.

The 1970s were full of resolutions and hearings designed to make the Atlantic Union and nation states a thing of the past but firmly under the yoke of an Anglo-American trajectory. Federalism would be the socio-economic and political framework by which countries would be redesigned. Indeed, in 1971, a House Concurrent Resolution 163 was proposed: “… to create an ‘Atlantic Union Delegation,’ a committee of 18 ‘eminent citizens’ to join with other NATO country delegations and negotiate a plan to unite. According to the sub-Committee chairman Donald Fraser, it was to be an: “international convention to explore the possibility of agreement on a declaration to transform the present Atlantic alliance into a federal union, set a timetable for transition to this goal and to prescribe democratic institutions under which the goal would be achieved.”

It was no coincidence that the Establishment presidents and European leaders were on board and ambitious to change society. The mass of politicians were fairly clueless about the underlying psychopathy which was piggybacking such ideological drives for Union. The Two World Wars, the Cold War the Great Depression of 1929 and the rise of corporatism proved that nations were already suffering from exploitation driven by rapacious greed. Manipulation and distortion of otherwise sound principles was becoming the norm. Thus it offered a logical basis upon which the concept of political union, could be rationalised and extended. Though many politicians rightly saw the Depression as a result of failed monetary policies at the domestic level, which it was, they were not able to also see that for the bankers and the industrial powers of the time it was one of the effects of the 4C’s coming home to roost and a significant bonanza which would offer future opportunities to tweak the system in their favour.Though it drastically affected the common man and the fabric of society it only allowed the super-rich families of the day to regroup and start the process all over again.

Leaders assumed that calling for greater union would automatically mean greater economic certainty and stability. Yet, they failed to see that the economic crashes and poverty that were induced were part of a system of boom and bust; a debt-based framework by which a fiat currency could be made to work for the tiniest percentage of the population by exploiting the majority. Union would merely extend the 4C’s and its exploitation through gradual deregulation further afield and limiting self-sufficiency, autonomy and economic independence in a box. The objective was a Global Union of the 4C’s which had nothing to do with a socio-economic equilibrium. This was purposefully or naively lost on persons like Streit.

The same ill-informed romanticism of economic parity fuelled their dreams of an Atlantic Union which was to be grafted onto the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. The ‘Structural Adjustment Team’ of the IMF, the World Bank, The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, or GATT and the The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) were all partly inspired by the ideal of an Atlantic Union. The latter organisation was used as a tool by a Anglo-American Conservative-Synarchist drive to establish a European Super-state which could eventually form part of that Union.

Throughout the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s the Cold War provided the incentive and rationale for closer integration and a trans-Atlantic Union to freeze out Communist aspirations. Traditionally, the far right hated the idea on principle, as it was indicative of a socialist coup under cover of liberty and welfare, when in fact it was just another tool for eroding national sovereignty. In the future, the disappearance of the Nation State might arrive as a natural consequence of a family of societies whose psycho-spiritual maturity has come of age, but sadly this is not the reality. We are governed by very different persons whose objectives are clearly not focused on emancipation.

As Stoller mentions, though their intentions were faulty there was an important irony here:

“… as liberals gently chuckle at right-wing paranoia about what they perceive as an imagined plot to create a world government, it is the conservatives who have a more accurate read on history. There was a serious plan to get rid of American sovereignty in favor of a globalist movement, and the various institutions the right wing hates — the IMF, the World Bank, the U.N. — were seen as stepping stones to it. Where the right wing was wrong is in thinking that this plot for a global government was also a communist plot; it wasn’t, it was motivated by anti-communism. The proponents of the Atlantic Union in fact thought that this was the only way to defeat the USSR.”

Though Streit believed that an Atlantic Union would decrease the threat of dictatorship he had not seen that the seeds of an inverted totalitarianism lay within the very antidote he and so many others were proposing and which was doing the job of the Pathocrats so admirably. Federalism under such individuals could only lead one way.

(Thankfully, Vladimir Putin has comprehensively tackled the Russian Oligarchs and apparently outside the one world government ideology. He and his advisors appear to be the only people to whom we can rely upon to halt this reckless Anglo-American-Zionist hegemony. Putin is not perfect by any means, but he is all we have. Russia may yet be the Big Bear of Salvation having gone through decades of ponerisation and come out the other side.)

By the 1980s however, the push for Unions had become more complex and nuanced. The 3EM had clear lines of demarcation when it came to how it envisaged its capitalist-collective hybrid. Nationalist terrorism had a resurgence under the Conservatives and Synarchists while Anglo-American liberalism roared ahead with the Atlantic Unionists, even straddling American Zionism who favoured any kind of integration while extending its own separatism to further its interests. None of these concerns have disappeared. On the contrary, they have adapted and kept pace with the ebb and flow of domestic and foreign policy. Deregulation of the Reagan, Carter and Clinton years ensured that the Federal Reserve and the corporate-banking oligarchical influence dominated through their many varied social engineering interests, which could now take on new vigour.

The quest for global governance, a global economic infrastructure, a “global consciousness” and global ecology” under these terms has infiltrated all societal domains. The double-think ruse of international integration does not mean a furthering of human values but an increase in the 4C’s which leads to further economic slavery, and an unnatural homogenisation since it derives from poverty, mass unemployment, mass immigration and a boom and bust of national destabilisation. World government and the globalisation of an Official Culture of psychopathy already exists but is yet to be formalised and publically acknowledged in an open framework of apparent necessity.

As we have seen, the promise of an Atlantic and Americas Union has been comprehensively dismantled thanks largely to the late Hugo Chavez and other Latin American leaders. We must also not forget the recent BRICS partnership which will surely act as a welcome alternative to the US dollar reserve currency. However, a Global Union is still trying to be born, a gestation that is drawn from the presence of a military-intelligence and surveillance apparatus, where the global economy of the 4C’s is as ubiquitous and damaging as it ever was.  This is not something the pathocratic mind will relinquish any time soon.


Notes

[1] Jim Marrs, quoted in the documentary “In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood, and Bioterrorism Produced by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz 16:04 Jim Marrs – Corporate control of the state. Socialism and Fascism to benefit corporations. “National Socialism” (fascism is corporatism).
[2] Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, By Sheldon Wolin, 2008.
[3] Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement Singelis, By T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Gelfand, M. J. 1995. | http://www.ccr.sagepub.com/content/29/3/240.abstract
[4] ‘Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship’ by Paul Belien, Brussels Journal, February 27, 2006.
[5]  Ibid.
[6]  Ibid.
[7]  Ibid.
[8]  Ibid.
[9]  Ibid.

Save

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.