Comments for Some of Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Comment on PLUTOCRACY: NEW WORLD ORDER by Government Defines Profit | Some of Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Government Defines Profit | Some of Patrice Ayme's Thoughts — Fri, 24 May 2013 23:58:25 +0000

[…] Western world insisting upon guidance by the headless chicken of the free market? Simply because plutocracy is the new world order, and that’s best insured by restricting access to money to the very richest. Austerity is not […]

Comment on Strikes Against Civilization by Patrice Ayme

Patrice Ayme — Thu, 23 May 2013 19:59:22 +0000

J from New York: Of course it does. See Mali. What needs to be done is to search, research, and destroy the contrary ideolgy, then identify its source, and funding: Saudi Arabia. Then deliver an ultimatum. If said ultimatum is not respected, attack in a conventional war. Voila!
PA

Comment on Strikes Against Civilization by J from New York

J from New York — Thu, 23 May 2013 19:54:53 +0000

“It is very simple: drones should be used only on battlefields.”
Please define battlefield. The “old” definition doesn’t really apply anymore.

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by CS

CS — Wed, 22 May 2013 20:30:49 +0000

Hi Patrice

A first read leaves me very interested and I will have to take time to read again more slowly.

The first rule in avoiding fascism is for the elected governments not to lie to the people, as they of course repeatedly do. Successive British governments have lied to the people about the real intent of Brussels to create a European superstate, hence the extreme disgust with the EU in Britain as people wake up to what is happening.

French and German governments – and all the rest, but they don’t count for much – LIED to the people about the euro, which all reputable economists said COULD NOT WORK.

Holland lied to the people about “ending austerity”, or if he didn’t lie he was stupid.

When democratic governments lie then people start wondering what is the point of democracy and why not have a “strong man” to run things, especially when they are impoverished.

France is on the way to ruination at the moment, and it is not going to be pretty; it usually isn’t in France.

http://nemoinsula.wordpress.com/2013/04/28/jaccuse/

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by Patrice Ayme

Patrice Ayme — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:10:43 +0000

Dominique: Another point, from the Treaty of 843 CE Verdun, was that the French king was supposed to be “emperor in his own kingdom“. Besides, they all talked French. So the primacy of Paris would have gone on undisturbed, and that was the argument of the majority of the French.

First ferocious invaders of Eire, after the Vikings, were the Scot, BTW, not the English, Before that, Eire raided England (see saint patricius’ story)….

As I said in a comment, the reason the rebels prevailed is that they got lucky at Patay, and soon brought forward superior tech, unseen before (field guns!)

BTW, within 3 minutes search on my site, I found:
http://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/the-fiscal-military-anglo-saxon-model/
That mentions the West Country Men. But there are much more essays doing so.

Besides, even some Anglo-Saxons were monsters (the Pitts were the pits, etc.), so was it with Saint Louis, Louis XIV, NapoleonI…
PA

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by Patrice Ayme

Patrice Ayme — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:05:21 +0000

Dear Dominique: Well, I understand what you say, but you are referring IMHO to the England that arose with the “West Country Men“. I wrote long essays about them and their hyper abusive, exploitative, “extractive” mentality. I’m sure one can search my site and find long indignant essays about them, and how they implied the present plutocratic mentality. The WCM are the ones who attacked Ireland, and that was around 1600, two centuries later. Then mentalities kept moving (the Dutch conquered England, in the completely mislabelled “Glorious Revolution”).

The French were on both sides in the XIVth and XVth centuries. It was widely evaluated, at the time, that the French side would take over (Paris was 3 times London, “France” 3 times “England”). Fact is it was a French civil war, quite a bit like the USA Secession War.

True, bad mentalities arose later, but quite a bit because of the state of perpetual war that rose all around Europe, as a consequence of the triumph of tribal superstitious hysteria a la Jehanne d’Arc.

If Francia and Britannia had been reunited further under Henry VI, the resulting superpower may have been able to reunify Frankish Europe (something Louis XI partially did).

I’m travelling through Europe, and then across the globe, so my replies shall be sparse in the next 40 hours…
PA

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by Dominique Deux

Dominique Deux — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:27:17 +0000

Assuming you are right about the unitary mindset of most French and English luminaries (which is at odds with the fact that war went on after Joan’s execution, and a very real entity called France put considerable effort into doing precisely what she had vowed to do, despite many more invasion attempts) – you still deliberately shirk the issue of the nature of the Greater United Kingdom which would have ensued from the proposed peace.

Henry may have been French, but his country was not. What would have become of France is a matter of speculation, of course. But we have rather robust examples which should give pause to eulogists of the Greater United Kingdom. England’s record as de facto owner of the United Kingdom is nothing to be proud about: religious discrimination, land grabbing, murderous repression, a medieval class system and widespread, systematic economic looting appalled even the clearer-thinking English.

Joan of Arc may have been a fanatic, a front and and a pawn, but without the impetus she gave to the (then) losing side, IMHO France would have become a kind of Ireland. Thanks but no thanks. Our own Ancien Régime was only marginally better, but at least we could get rid of it.

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by Patrice Ayme

Patrice Ayme — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:00:45 +0000

Thanks Paul!
Whatever my critiques of “Jehanne”, she had an excellent adventure! She was extremely gutsy, and that is how she was caught; she fought a rear guard action, as a matter of principle and honor, although her white panache was perfectly recognizable, and she knew the enemy would try to seize her. (After the extermination of the long bow archers at Patay, especially!).

She was no doubt a tease, in more ways than one, and very smart, somebody spicy to interact with.
PA

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by de Foucaud Paul

de Foucaud Paul — Mon, 20 May 2013 11:57:14 +0000

Patrice,
if you have some time to spend to at Chinon ; you will see there a part of Joan Arc d’aventures.
You are wellcome.
Paul.

Comment on Joan of Arc Roasted Too Late? by Patrice Ayme

Patrice Ayme — Sun, 19 May 2013 07:38:32 +0000

Dear bowtiejack: excellent quote! My esteem for JFK, already very high, has climbed further. I heap contempt on lots of (most) USA presidents, but I do admire that son of a plutocrat, JFK. I had no doubt that, had JFK lived, things would have been VERY different. For example, he had just taken spectacular action in Vietnam (getting rid of the Diems, 2-3 weeks before he got himself assassinated). A difference, fundamental: JFK was an authentic war hero (OK, so is George Bush senior...) Myths get a life of their own. Segolene Royal, ex-presidential finalist (2007, defeated by Sarko with 47%) was telling how much she esteemed Jeanne D'Arc. Nothing specific whatsoever, though. The commons esteem Joan of Arc, because it's estimable to esteem Joan of Arc. Of unsupportable esteem much stupidity is made. A lie repeated one million times as if it were the truth, becomes the truth, in the popular imagination. Superstition is just word for:"lack of observation". The unexamined elites profit from it, hence the rich future you envision... The fly in the ointment is that the means of destruction at our disposal are such, and the crisis too, that a great age of war may be coming. Wars are won modulo great observations, thus are no friends to superstition... PA