France Parented the USA: So Why Forget? Because The Child Played (And Plays) Vicious Games, Partly Reflected In How It Neglected Its Parent.

Tremendous efforts are vested by the elite to tweak the mentality of those they subjugate. No detail is spared. Details impact emotional logic, and can fabricate fake minds, apt at serving only the masters who set them up. And that starts by instilling a perverse, twisted sense of history.

Even the names of aircraft carriers can be tweaked, perverting the sense of history and even of democracy: once named after the major battles which made the USA (Lexington, Yorktown, Saratoga, Bunker Hill, Belleau Woods), now they are named after unelected celebrities (Ford) or undistinguished president (there is a “Reagan” carrier, but no “Nixon”, or “Carter” carrier… The idea being Reagan is vastly superior to Carter or Nixon… although history will judge otherwise… and no carrier should be named after them. JFK, an authentic Navy war hero, who died a martyr, avoided nuclear war, send Earth to the Moon, is another matter, he deserved a carrier…)

Why do the French get downplayed in their importance in the American Revolutionary War?

One French army, commanded by Washington, plus two French armies, commanded by Lafayette and Rochambeau, and the French fleet, commanded by De Grasse, converged on Yorktown, and, after heavy bombardment by French siege guns commanded by De Barras, forced the surrender of the British army.

The irony is that the French themselves learned, and learn, history from the real supreme victors of 1945, the USA, or more precisely, what the USA mostly means, US plutocrats, their media, universities, businesses, with their CIA, Deep State and another 16 “intelligence” agencies in tow.

If one were a French intellectual in the 1950s, and one wanted a lucrative career, one had to sing the praises of the US, or the USSR, or both (Sartre and De Beauvoir did both, after earlier collaborating with the Nazi authorities). Significant details such as the French declaring war (and attacking) Hitler in 1939, while Hitler was allied to the USSR (which provided Hitler with all sorts of goodies, including crucial oil), had to be forgotten.

So had to be forgotten, the troubling double game of the USA at the inception of both WW1 and WW2. The machinations the USA and its moral persons and agents engaged in, favoring fascism and working against the French Republic, should have been seen as particularly outrageous, especially in light of how the USA came to be. Indeed, the French monarchy of Louis XVI was the main agent of creation of the US Republic, and deliberately so. Most probably, without France, the USA would never have come to be. Hence the USA is the baby France brought to this world, and the refusal of the USA to do anything in May-June 1940 to prevent the fall of France is ignominious. If the USA had given an ultimatum to Hitler, his generals would have made a coup.

German generals had asked precisely for such an aggressive attitude, on the part of the USA, as early as 1937, to get rid of the Nazis; after a clear declaration, on the part of the USA, that the USA would side with France against Nazism, the generals had all the excuse they needed for a coup… instead the plotting German generals got denounced by the USA and the UK… to Hitler himself; hence in 1940, German generals could only feel that the USA, or the powers which mattered in the USA, those which controlled public opinion, were in agreement with the Nazi invasion of France! They didn’t guess they were the victim of another bait and switch, just as in WW1…

Had the USA sent such an ultimatum, requiring the immediate German evacuation of France, German generals could have said the Nazis imperilled Germany, as it was obvious to all Germans they couldn’t win the grand coalition of France-Britain-USA. Thus a loud and clear US intervention in 1940 would have brought quick German surrender… Instead, when Hitler declared war to the USA, December 11, 1941, all of Germany, and, in particular the German army, was so deeply committed to Nazi racial and other criminality, that they couldn’t back out…

Even by late June 1940, France was far from defeated: the French air force was poised to gain air supremacy (after enormous Luftwaffe losses and exhaustion), and the French army and fleet could lock up the Mediterranean, and pursue the war from southern France, Corsica and especially North Africa (which the Germans demonstrated later they couldn’t cross seriously, just because of the small islands of Malta, which stayed unconquered).

The Canadians intervened: they landed in Brittany in June 1940, but their divisions were promptly beaten back. A US intervention, the US had aircraft carriers, would have persuaded the French Assembly to keep on firing on the Germans (who had already suffered enormous losses).

The US Deep State attitude during WW2, driven by the French hating plutocrat Roosevelt, anxious to gain control of all European empires, was to destroy as much of France as they could get away with. Hence the attempted grabbing of New Caledonia, the bombing and annihilation of French ports (the Germans had no more boats), and the plan to occupy France as if it were Nazi Germany (that failed because the USA depended upon the one million men French army in 1944, and most US generals were sympathetic to the French cause, and even admired some of their French colleagues, for example “Hannibal” Juin, victor of Monte Cassino, and who could have finished the war in weeks, had he been given free rein…)

However, after the war, the CIA is known to have had at least 50 top French influencers in the media on its payroll… And the real influence was probably much greater. Top French intellectuals did as they were paid for: they rewrote all of French history in a negative light, starting with Vercingetorix and Caesar. Grossly underestimating the French crucial role if the American Revolution was part of it.

The French and US Constitutions of 1789 were proclaimed only three weeks apart. That’s no coincidence: France and the USA actually had a common revolution, and probably its main character was not the American Founding Fathers as much as the tragic figure of Louis XVI, who did in America what he was afraid to do in France (although he feebly tried there, persistently, but all too weakly).

If enough US citizens had known the history of the USA and of the ideals they embraced, better, in 1939, they would have supported the French Republic against the Nazis, the USSR and Imperial Japan, and Fascist Italy … As Great Britain (a monarchy!) reluctantly did, in the last few months. History would have turned out differently: no Auschwitz, etc. But US citizens didn’t know France gave birth to the USA, as much as she did (and twice, as France also gave birth to Britain in 1066 CE, complete with outlawing of slavery there…)

Those who don’t learn history are condemned to make it worse, today. more than ever…

The greatest and final battle of the American war of independence was at Yorktown: one US army, two French armies, and the French fleet, cornered the British army, and forced its surrender. After inflicting grievous losses on the Japanese carriers, the US aircraft carrier Yorktown was sunk at the Midway battle, a tremendous US victory on attacking Japan.

There is no more US carrier named “Yorktown” in the present US fleet. But the most modern US nuclear carrier is named “Ford”. “Ford”, although US president, was never elected to that office, nor to the office of Vice-President, which he was honored with before. One would guess that democrats and republicans want to forget how one guy can get to the highest offices of the land… without election. But, no, now we have an aircraft carrier to celebrate this strange accession. Strange in a democratic republic, that is…. So, say the history people learn, forget how the USA came to be, through a revolution co-engineered with France, in a republican, democratic spirit, but instead, celebrate now an unelected US president: a telling difference between yesterday’s hopes and ideals, and today’s decadence into plutocracy!

The excellent movie “Gladiator” presents a nice alternative history of Rome. It could have happened that way, indeed. The Republic could have been re-established because of a courageous general. But it wasn’t. Why? The probability that the Republic would come back was low. We the People of Rome expected dictatorship. At some point all minds have become too perverted by fake history, inappropriate mentality! Mental inertia is in command, all the way down to the direst oblivion…

Indeed, Roman fascism and plutocracy soon fell into more of the same, adding hysterical militarism, then apocalyptic, beyond idiotic Christianism, followed by the weird alliance of the wealthiest, with the most religious and barbarian chieftains.

Should we want to avoid the new Dark Ages we often seem to be cruise towards, we need to see history as it really was, not according to manipulative agendas. Yes, France gave birth to the USA at the battle of Yorktown, and yes, the USA betrayed the French (and the Poles, and the Brits, and the Jews, and all the other victims of Nazism) in 1939-1940. That’s real history, not to be confused with fake hysteria.

Patrice Ayme

Why Plutocrats Hate France: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity Don’t Tolerate Slavery, Domination, Subjugation and Greed. So Let Insults Fly:

People, especially in the USA, love to consider France a nation of cowards, although France has been the most-at-war nation in the world, for at least two millennia. Cowards don’t fight: consider the US in 1939, 1940. Compare with France, suffering more than 100,000 soldiers killed in three weeks.

Or consider the French army, vastly outnumbered, counter-attacking the invading Germans on August 22, 1914. 27,000 French soldiers died there in one single day, derailing the German overall offensive. The worst happened that day at the Belgium village of Rossignol. In a vengeance against the French offensive spirit, the Germans rounded Belgian civilians, left them without food for days; 108 villagers were trucked out, and killed (as one of many German warm-ups for the Holocausts of WW2, during August 1914, an illustration of the inertia of mentalities).

Differently from China, which spent more than four centuries under foreign occupation, in the last millennium alone, France has never been durably occupied by a foreign power (one of the worst case being the Nazis in 1940-44).

For example, the Muslims may have got to Poitiers, the Avars may have got to Aquitaine, and the Viking to Paris, but, in the end, the Franks annihilated them for the first two, and swallowed the latter. (Muslims occupied parts of France for decades, though… But ultimately Muslim armies, not individuals, were kicked out… that individuals were kept, as genetic studies show, indicates that fraternity and tolerance have a long history in France.)

People, especially in the USA, consider France a nation of cowards, not just because people repeat like parrots what the media told them is true, even if it is absurdly false. The media are owned, held, and managed by the world’s wealthiest people. So are the world’s wealthiest universities, wealthy because the wealthiest people made them so, in exchange for feeling and thinking correctly.

People, especially in the USA, consider France a nation of cowards, because it also enables Americans to detour the conversation away from the fact that the French republic declared war to Hitler September 3, 1939, whereas the USA never found the guts to declare war TO Hitler. Instead, Hitler declared war to the USA, December 11, 1941. How courageous is that on the part of Hitler? Very. And on the part of the USA? Very cowardly.  But telling.

It tells that way back, in 1939, 1940, 1941, the US was clearly more in love with Nazism, murder, racism and lies than with the French Republic, diversity and civilization.

The lack of involvement of the USA in the early years of the war against Hitler is a strategy of infamy, carefully, and deliberately engaged into.  The aim was world supremacy. Worse: US plutocracy financed, encouraged, baited, and enabled Nazism, before the final switch which provided the American magnates with world rule. (Thanks to dozens of millions of Europeans killed fighting the Nazis, one way, or another…)

Elite Nazi Troops cross the Meuse under French fire, May 13, 1940. Three Panzer divisions plus the elite Panzer-Grenadier Division Grossdeutschland attacked one single Reserve B French division, in a bend of the river. The B French Reserve division was not backed up by the 2nd British Armored division as it was supposed to be. Moreover, the single French B division was pounded by thousands of planes, in the greatest aerial bombardment ever seen. The attackers went through only thanks to Kamikaze attacks, engineers blowing themselves up against French blockhouses… The attack sliced behind French and British lines, cutting in particular fuel to the French Third Heavy Armored division just north… which, if fueled, would have cut off the Nazi army like a hot knife in butter…

France is actually the mother country of not just the USA. For the USA, billions were secretly spent by the doomed French king Louis XVI to vanquish the British, and he established a republic in North America (in spite of warning by his advisers not to establish a republic!). For years, 90% or more of the bullets of the American army were made in France (among other things). In the end, at Yorktown, two converging French armies helping the US army (one headed by Lafayette), and the blockading French fleet, forced the surrender of the British army, ending the American war of independence.

France was the mother country of the USA in still another sense: the Duke of Normandy led a large French army and conquered England in 1066 CE. The 20% slaves found in Britain were immediately freed, as per French law (slavery had been outlawed in France, by a ruling queen, four centuries earlier). William proceeded with in-depth reforms promoting the English Parliament. The French barons, who were not vassals of the Duchy of Normandy, thus not forced to obey him, then forced the Magna Carta onto the king, followed by further, durable, powers for Parliament as the Count of Toulouse tried to be elected king of England. England was another France, a France freed of an all too absolute king.

The Franks had earlier united and created Germany, as a nation, and also the German language and not just the Carolingian minuscule, as they imposed their rule all over Europe. Thereafter the Franks proceeded to free Rome and, 2 centuries later, southern Italy and Sicily from the savage Muslim invaders, whom they had also thrown out of northern Spain…

France has been the West’s most prominent military power since before the Franks put the Huns to flight at Orleans (they were thereafter decisively defeated in Champagne). Julian the “Apostate” was proclaimed “Augustus” (supreme Roman emperor) in Paris in 360 CE. Julian, who had attended Athenian schools, was a top philosopher, not just an amazing general; he saw clearly the danger of Christianism. Thus the anti-clerical and rebellious French mentality is from way back. (Julian died in combat in Mesopotamia in 363 CE; a bit like France in May 1940 a military event not supposed to happen did happen; however Rome didn’t recover, whereas France was soon reborn… thanks in part to her network of affiliated powers she had parented over the centuries…)

Julian’s anticlerical election in Paris was no accident: at least four Franks became Roman commander-in-chiefs , at the time, and fought against theocracy and its allies, the Goths: Richomer, Arbogast, etc… however, at the Battle of the Cold River, in 394 CE, the Occidental Roman army, mostly Frankish, headed by a Frank, was defeated, partly thanks to hurricane force winds blowing the wrong way: another example of a military defeat which was not supposed to happen. That defeat had a very durable effect. It brought thousands of years of theocracy by that slave religion sustaining plutocracy, “Catholic Orthodoxy”.

Thus the fanatical Christians and the Goths won, for 110 years, seizing Rome (410 CE) and destroying the Roman state. But in the end, the Franks defeated them both under Roman Frankish Consul and King Clovis (Battle of Vouillé, 507 CE, where the hyper soldier Clovis himself killed the Gothic king Alaric)…

The rebellious, liberty loving French mentality resulted in:”Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”… All what plutocrats hate. Remember the plutocrats? They hold the media, the politicians, the “economists”, and the most prestigious universities… So plutocrats hate France, and can’t stop to heap villainous notion onto her.

In truth, France is the rebellious and military core of European creativity, and has been thus, ever since Julius Caesar intervened in the “Gallia Comida” (Long Haired Gaul). Raging against France is, at least partially, raging against rebellion, fraternity, liberty, equality, the very essence of a free humanity, all what plutocracy hates…  Infant mortality in France is a small fraction of that in the USA. That costs plutocracy a lot.

Right, the French Republic was defeated in six weeks in May-June 1940. But that Battle of France was the deadliest on the Western front for the whole war. More than 50,000 elite Nazis died. Hundreds of thousands of civilians and combatants died. Two years later, a French army, in Thermopylae style, prevented Rommel’s Afrika Korps and the Italian Army to encircle the defeated and retreating British army in Libya, at Bir Hakeim: so the French military eclipse was short-lived (by then the USA has still not engaged Nazi Germany in battle).

Right, France had declared war to Hitler in 1939: respect. While the US plutocrats were helping Hitler in all ways: infamy.

The elite, vast, and well-armed French armies and the professional British force got pierced from behind May 10–15, mostly because they had not been at serious war for 21 years, whereas the Nazis had trained by conquering Spain. The second-in-command of the french army told his superior the Germans may just do what they did. Gamelin, the C in C, just didn’t believe the Germans could be that smart, and that fast, and that invisible prior to action. War in Spain would have enlightened him.

Moreover, among other problems, French and British air crews were rusted, for the first few days; to boot, the Brits didn’t engage all their air force; somewhat related, the British Second Armored division was late arriving just where the Nazis broke through… Just where the inspector of the British army, the Prince of Wales, had informed his personal friend Adolf Hitler he should breakthrough… At Sedan…

So why didn’t France intervene in Spain as the Spanish Republic had requested her to do? And get the little military action the French army needed to refresh itself? Because the French leader, the Jew and Socialist Leon Blum, got intimidated by French hater F.D. Roosevelt, and his Anglo-Saxon plutocratic cohorts who absolutely didn’t want France to defeat Germany in 1936. And so on. US and Anglo-Saxon plutocrats loved doing business with Hitler, and some, like IBM, did business, crucial business, business which, had it been absent, the Great Reich would have collapsed without, throughout the war, all the way to May 8, 1945.

One can’t understand the travails of France in the Twentieth Century without understanding in-depth the machinations of US plutocracy to defeat what it hates in France. And this is a warning for the future, as, arguably, US plutocrats are mightier than ever… And indeed, an ex-banker, a collaborator of US plutocracy (he overviewed the gift of the French Alstom to its US competitor GE) is now in power in France, playing Thatcher-Reagan. Sure enough, Macron, as French president, while part of the global plutocracy, has been busy accusing France of “crimes against humanity“.

Patrice Ayme

Note 1: the preceding was expanded from an answer to Quora:
Why do some people consider France as a nation of cowards without any army?

Yes, indeed, why are so many people so stupid? To better control and enslave them….Oh, BTW, France has the world’s third nuclear force, with 600 nuclear ICBM warheads for nuclear subs, plus nuclear attack subs, plus supersonic nuclear strike capability, and her army is arguably, in some ways, more active than the US Army itself… The French deterrent is also independent of the US, which the much weaker British deterrent is not…)

Note 2: Macron has been busy excoriating French “colonial” past… when much of the French population (including yours truly) has a colonial past (all colored types have it, and that’s a majority if not of the country, certainly of the French soccer team, as the whole planet, even Obama, knows…) Moreover “colonial” troops fought superbly in WWI and WW2 against the real racists and criminals… Germans and Senegalese, even in WWI, made no prisoners. The Senegalese, part of this “colonial” army Macron and those who accuse France of cowardice, in the end, won.

Illegal Immigration: The New African Slave Trade. Luxembourg Thieving Plutocracy Kills Italy!

LUXEMBOURG’S Admits Having An EXCREMENT PROBLEM. Solution: KICK LUXEMBOURG OUT OF THE EU! (For thievery, genocide!)

“I heard some colleagues say that one needs immigration because the European population is aging.” Salvini, Italy’s Interior Minister declared. He then explained that he has a vision of the matter which is “completely different”, a vision according to which one must first help Italians “to have children as a few years ago”. Salvini then evoked an African youth which “replaces” European youth… before zeroing onto the case of Luxembourg:

“Perhaps in Luxembourg there is this need to replace European youth by African youth, but we in Italy, we feel the need to help our children to make other children”, he declared.

And Salvini then broke the camel of giant European hypocrisy, by going one truth too far: ”And not to have new slaves to replace the children we don’t make anymore. I prefer to help Italians found families.”

The Luxembourg foreign minister Jean Asselborn (Luxembourg has a foreign minister, whereas Catalogne, which is 15 times greater in population, doesn’t) then exploded, in French, cutting into Salvini’s speech time. Asselborn claimed that Luxembourg had helped Italy, more than half a century ago, by allowing Italians to work there (and send money back to Italy). Actually, many Italians of two generations ago, helped building up modern Luxembourg, and their ephemeral presence was legal.

Ignoring those basic facts, which made his interruption grotesque, the irate Luxembourg potentate concluded:”THEREFORE SHIT!” (He used the words ”Alors merde”; I made an exact translation). Like a furious chimp, he pursued by throwing a few objects around, the way chimps do when they are furious. Salvini calmly commented on the lack of “good education” of the Luxembourg chimp, and, undeterred, proceeded to describe all sorts of trafficking the EU tolerates.

According to the Luxembourg foreign minister’s moral imperative, if Harvey Weinstein thought his grandparents “helped” somebody, 50 years ago, by employing them, he has now the right not just to rape them, but also to kill their next generation, by making a healthy life impossible. The very rage of Luxembourg shows the master exploiters of Europe are perfectly aware they are losing ground. This is serious stuff: they are traitors, they should be tried, and send to the slammer. One can see they are starting to guess they are in deep trouble…

The fertility rate has been high in the UK, because of the massive immigration (much of it, illegal). The original English population is stuck at 40 millions… since the 1930s! Spain’s population has been growing tremendously, in spite of a catastrophic lack of fertility, thanks, once again, to ultra massive (legal) immigration. Nordic countries have boosted their population by importing Muslim immigrants, on the order of 10% of the population. Indications are that the Nordic Natives are getting fed-up (see last Sunday’s elections in Sweden). Germany has imported millions of Muslims, to foster population growth. Italy has officially 700,000 known and documented illegal immigrants (more than 1% of the population). Italy’s fertility rate is just as catastrophic as Germany’s. France was OK, but recent governments of traitors have taken anti-natality measures… After the 2008 crisis, Portugal lost more than 10% of its population…

Illegal immigrants to Italy get 37 Euros a day. In France, they get even more. But millions of French and Italian citizens live on a small fraction of this, even after government “help”. One can see the illegals getting fancy haircuts (yes, Africans getting fancy haircuts), speaking on large brand new smartphones (which many millions of French and Italians can’t afford!)… As they amble around, having to work not.      

Thus we are talking ethnocide there: make the life of a population, in this case the Italian Native population, so impossible, it can’t reproduce anymore (a problem zoos have learned to correct, by making their animals happy; the European animals are so unhappy, however, they can’t have children anymore…)

Nothing plutocrats don’t love there. Genocide was always the ultimate weapon of plutocracy in mature form. Plutocrats love ethnocides, especially of the population they rose from, because that population knows where they came from, and how. Thus Roman plutocrats did all they could to weaken Italy (hence preventing a return to the Republic… That only started to squeak back in as Charlemagne endowed Venice with freedom… Four centuries later, several republics followed in italy…)

Salvini wondered if Luxembourg couldn’t find a “more normal person”:

Matteo Salvini

✔@matteosalvinimi

Paragona i nostri nonni emigrati ai clandestini che sbarcano oggi, vuole più immigrati in Europa e conclude urlando: “Merda”.

Ma in Lussemburgo, paradiso fiscale che non può dare lezioni all’Italia, non hanno nessuno di più normale che faccia il Ministro???

(Translation: He [Luxembourg’s Minister] compares our emigrated grandparents to the (clandestine) illegals who disembark today, he wants more immigrants in Europe and concludes by howlering: “Shit”.
But how come in Luxembourg, a tax haven that cannot give lessons to Italy, they have nobody more normal which could be Minister??? #Asselborn)

Salvini underestimates how difficult it is to find someone not satanic in charge in a plutocracy like Luxembourg. The ex-PM of Luxembourg, now head of the EU Commission, is a notorious drunkard. The powers that be in Europe, love that (because his drunkenness will prevent him to become dangerous to them!)

Both Mr Salvini (from the “League” supposedly right-wing) and Luigi Di Maio, his partner in the government (from the Movement Five Stars, supposedly left-wing), on Thursday rebuked a petulant European commissioner for likening populist leaders in Europe to “little Mussolinis”.

Pierre Moscovici, the EU’s economics affairs commissioner, an ex-Economy and Finance (“Socialist“) minister for France, compared the current economic climate with the rise of Fascism and Nazism in the 1930s and said that while Europe was not menaced by a new Hitler, there were plenty of “little Mussolinis”.

The remark drew a furious response from Mr Salvini, who has always insisted the League has nothing to do with fascism or anti-Semitism, accused the French politician of insulting Italy and said he should “wash his mouth out”.

My take on it? Luxembourg is a filthy tax haven, destroying the European all classes which are not hyper wealthy: tax avoidance is Luxembourg one and only industry, and its main clients are the biggest tax avoiders in the world (GAFA and the likes of whom owns The Economist, and other media).

What to do? Italy is a large country. However the four large European countries are undermined by tax thieves, and plutocratic friendly policies… to the point that their population is collapsing (except for those which cheat with massive immigration, like Great Britain, hence Brexit, a reaction to that massive illegal immigration from a furious UK population). The tax thieves should be kicked out of the EU, now that their ring leader, the EU has committed apoptosis (=suicide). I personally know small European Plutos who avoid taxes, using the Isle of Man to do so (I am thrilled to see what they will invent after Brexit…)

Luxembourg should be kicked out of the European Union (with Ireland and the Netherlands, all for making their economies around tax evasion from the rest of the EU).

And Salvini is right, and I have said so myself in the past: to let young, illegal Africans come to Europe, through traders, is a new form of slave importation (and it is deliberate, as it is meant to replace lack of European babies!) Enough is enough. Time to dismantle plutocratic Europe, let’s start with Luxembourg: a little warm-up.

Some will suggest I am over-aggressive. Filippo Grandi, the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees, on Friday warned populist politicians across Europe not to “create space” for racism by using aggressive language. “The language of politicians must not create space for racist attitudes,” Mr Grandi told a press conference in Rome. In July the French Constitutional Court decided there was a “principle of fraternity“: illegals had to be helped (except to actually cross the border). But racists accusing others of racism is probably older than civilization. Adolf Hitler started his career defending (“German”) minorities, while stridently accusing others of racism. One attacks best when one is felt to be morally superior. Actual physical aggression is preceded by acquiring the perception of high moral ground.

Europe, as it is, is not sustainable (actually its population is supposed to collapse, according to the EU itself… among other problems). So it has to change drastically… the alternative being death, and that, indeed is ultimately extreme. Holding back descriptions of what actually is happening in Europe is forcing countries such as Italy, to disappear (fertility rate: less than 1.4 child per woman, who can’t have children from lack of jobs, while illegal migrants swim in money). Disappearing a country surely is the most extreme form of racism!

Compassion is great. However, it can be lethally misleading if fed with erroneous data.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note 1: I talked to professional immigrant smuggler for an hour. A loquacious Italian citizen, black as charcoal, originally from Ivory Coast, she told me in superb French that the illegal immigrants actually don’t see the 37 Euros per day “given” to them. Instead the money goes to “humanitarian” organizations, which confiscate the money. She viewed those “humanitarians” as crooks. We had an excellent, friendly conversation (no doubt in part from my African culture, in which I am at home… Contrarily to what some may too easily feel, I am not anti-immigration (having being an immigrant myself all my life!)… And I am not anti-African. I am against treating European Natives so badly they have more reproduction problems than pandas in zoos… By the way she was actually in the process of smuggling several African Natives (from several African nations, all young men), leading them across the towering mountains of the French border…

***

Note 2: French version of the gist of this essay: Le Luxembourg est un sale paradis fiscal détruisant l’Europe avec ses pourris ultra-riches évitant les impôts: la est sa seule “industrie”. On devrait éjecter le Luxembourg tout de suite de l’Union Européenne. L’immigration de jeunes Africains est en effet une nouvelle traite des esclaves. Il est temps de démolir l’Europe des ploutocrates.

Here is the French version of Salvini: “J’ai entendu certains collègues dire qu’on a besoin de l’immigration parce que la population européenne est en train de vieillir.”Il explique ensuite qu’il a une vision des choses “complètement différente” dans laquelle il faut d’abord aider les Italiens à “faire des enfants comme il y a quelques années”. Il  évoque ensuite une jeunesse africaine qui “remplace” la jeunesse européenne, avant de citer le cas luxembourgeois. “Peut-être qu’au Luxembourg il y a ce besoin, mais nous en Italie, nous ressentons le besoin d’aider nos enfants à faire d’autres enfants” déclare-t-il ainsi. Et d’ajouter la goutte qui fait déborder le vase: “Et non pas d’avoir de nouveaux esclaves pour remplacer les enfants que nous ne faisons plus.”

Prediction: The Arctic Will Melt Suddenly

So far, the Arctic sea ice has melted at a pace which is best fitted with lines. 10.4% per decade, more exactly. It sounds reasonable, in first approximation, to suppose that will keep on that way. However, most changes start, in first approximation, linearly, before fitting higher power curves.

In the case of Arctic sea ice, a number of mechanisms seem possible to go from linear to nonlinear.  For example, the more sea ice melts, the warmer the sea gets, the harder it is to form sea ice. Such a self-feeding mechanism is an exponential.

However, we, humanity just found a huge new mechanism to potentially melt all ice, and it is operative. It is even of our own making! As with the Fall of Rome, one cause leads to others, which then can feed back on the first.

The discovery?

A blob of warm water, 50 meters below the surface of the Arctic ocean. Why does not come to the surface, if it is warmer than the water above it? Because it is abnormally salty, thus denser.

How was it created? The Chukchi Sea has become ice-free much too much of the year. It is just north of the Bering Strait, and lies on top of the flooded Beringia land bridge between Eurasia and North America. So it is shallow: average depth, 71 meters only, and warms up well. The Chukchi Sea warms up so much it becomes salty, and that salty water sneaks north below cold upper waters (it is blocked from going south by the Strait.

The redder, the more heat content in the Chukchi sea… When the Arctic Ocean starts to churn, the sea ice will all melt…Study lead author Professor Mary-Louise Timmermans, of Yale University (yes, a woman) said: We document a striking ocean warming in one of the main basins of the interior Arctic Ocean, the Canadian Basin… the upper ocean in the Canadian Basin has seen a two-fold increase in heat content over the past 30 years.

The researchers traced the source to waters hundreds of miles to the south, where reduced sea ice has left the surface ocean more exposed to summer solar warming.

Professor Timmermans added: This means the effects of sea-ice loss are not limited to the ice-free regions themselves, but also lead to increased heat accumulation in the interior of the Arctic Ocean that can have climate effects well beyond the summer season.

 

What next? A strong storm, an Arctic hurricane (they happen!)  could push cold waters out, and that would force the warm water up. I would venture to say that this is exactly what happened in August 2012 (generating thereafter the smallest Arctic sea ice ever recorded, by a long shot).

The same will happen again in the future, on a grander scale.

And all the Arctic sea ice could melt, thus warming the Arctic ocean enough to melt all ice, and that in turn, could warm up the ocean enough that summer to prevent the return of the ice thereafter…

It goes without saying that, after the Arctic ocean is ice-free, trillions of tons of methane hydrates laying inside the shallow sea floor will fiercely erupt, freeing trillions of tons of methane. It has happened in the past, and can be violent enough for tsunamis. It is actually already started, albeit on a small-scale, relative to what it could become. Methane is a greenhouse gas with more than 25 times the warming power of CO2 (the “forcing” effectiveness to be a bit more technical). Thus our effort to engineer a man-made Jurassic climate will make great strides. Maybe we will see class 5 hurricane strike Canada?

Fun springs eternal!

Let’s re-engineer a few dinosaurs and pterosaurs, once Canada’s Arctic archipelago is covered with forests, as we are at it…

Patrice Ayme

    

 

From the “Deep State” to the “Steady State”: Anti-Trump Derangement Reaches New Lows…

The New York Times published an anonymous essay claiming to be authored by a “senior administration official”, to the effect that Trump is a flaky child, and the country is saved by “resistance” inside the Trump administration by the “steady state”. Trump is not just immature, but: 

“The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision-making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.”

“Free markets”? What is “free” about Chinese market domination? 375 billion dollars of deficit in 1917! … With the US alone. Adding the European deficit, one gets more than half a trillion dollars in deficit. So many good jobs, and know-how lost! … And the consequences are major, even ecologically: France, for example, has no recent development of solar PhotoVoltaic, the cheapest unsubsidized energy in 2018. Why no French PV? Because, argue the French higher-ups, the solar panels are made in China, and purchasing them would aggravate the already catastrophic French trade deficit! 

Chinese market domination is enabled by governmentalism:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/synthesis-found-governmentalism/

Governmentalism works: all serious civilizations have known this. The Greek city states, especially Athens, practiced governmentalism extensively. So did its enemy, the Achaemenid empire. Rome practiced governmentalism, even more so. Western Europe also did, led by the Merovingians, Carolingians, the French monarchy, and the Anglo-Normand state.

Governmentalism was practiced for so long, it spawned a trade subsidiary: mercantilism.

So why doesn’t the West practiced it as much as it used to?

The trade imbalance and de-industrialization of the West is not an happenstance, but a plot: Chinese market domination is enabled by collusion with global plutocracy.

As I have explained many times, the scheme was inaugurated when the Roman Republic degenerated: the Roman plutocracy became strong from not paying taxes, and weakening the core of the empire, Italy, which had given birth to it. Now we are repeating it, on a planetary scale.

***

So will sneer that Trump is no anti-plutocrat, but that he is not of them himself. Right. However, in disagreement with most other plutocrats (and no, it has nothing to do with Putin: Trump is on the record with his positions since 1970… If anything Trump influenced Putin first, not vice versa!)

Several ideas Trump promotes are lethal to the existing plutocratic establishment (anti-”free” trade, anti massive immigration, anti deindustrialization, denouncing the vested, biased opinion of most media, etc.) The more Trump pushes those iconoclastic ideas, the more the plutocratic establishment is hurt, because it rests on them. Soon, at this rate, lethally hurt… For example “trade”, like “art” are viewed as absolute goods by all old fashion parties be they “left” or “right”. Never mind that they are tax eschewing. No attention is paid by the media that those augment the plutocratization exponentially. And why would the plutocratically owned media undermine beliefs which enables it to exist? Instead the “liberal” establishment insists that having a Supreme Court justice who won’t fancy abortion at 8 months, for no good reason, undermines democracy.  Brandish red herrings, and thrive!

***

Although Trump has helped civilization to sink lower than ever, this is not the worse problem. The worst is that his opposition is worse.I replied to the anonymous editorial. Here is my comment below. It apparently baffled the New York Times (charitable interpretation!), which started by NOT publishing my ideas (the NYT published another 10,000 comments on the anonymous ed in the meantime)! Thus the readership was kept safe from subservience.

***

One has to look beyond Trump. One has to look beyond the present “administration”. One has to look beyond the present political system, that so-called “representative democracy”. One has to look at reality: “representative democracy” puts too much power in too few hands. This cannot end up well, because the physical power is increasing while the brain power (the few hands in power) is not.

Thus, “Representative democracy” has to be contained. Notice that “representative democracy” is a contradiction in adjecto. Demos kratia means people power. It does mean the few ruling, that’s oligarchy. Oligarchy is what we have, but we call it democracy. And when, as is the case, just one man has power, that is tyranny (rule of the one). Thermonuclear tyranny. We came very close to all-out thermonuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. If the two leaders had been a tiny bit more crazy…

At some point just one Russian officer, in a particular submarine by chance, prevented the firing of thermonuclear torpedoes against an US aircraft carrier.

Giving too much power to a few men was long tried: contrarily to repute, kings were often elected (such as the founders of the Merovingians and the Capetians). It is the principle of kinship, too much power for one man, which was at fault.

To contain the exaggerated power of a few men, one has to go back to DIRECT democracy, as Athens (and Rome to some extent) practiced, enabling them to advance civilization. In the Internet age, We The People can vote directly in plebiscites. This is done in Switzerland,  very successfully, albeit partly, in California. They both balance the usual representative system with the direct voting system.  

***

I was disappointed that the NYT didn’t publish my comment, and sneered that it was naturally more interested to exhibit Trump Derangement Syndrome symptoms, rather than addressing the deep issues at hand. Then I did something I didn’t do for a while: I sent a protesting comment. Here it is:

***

I sent a comment to the NYT which was cogent: the problem isn’t so much Trump inasmuch that there is too much power in too few hands, but my comment doesn’t seem to have been published (I got no notice to this effect!) The solution to too much power in too few hands is more direct democracy, not just changing one man, and vest another with the same powers. Why doesn’t the NYT believe that the entire principle of representing one country by one all-powerful man is not at fault, and not relevant to the problem at hand?

***

What happened? Ten hours later, the NYT published my protesting comment! … Another 39 minutes after that, a full day after submission, the NYT published my initial comment… A rare case where protesting worked.

***

One can see that great care is bestowed to determine which ideas We The People is exposed to… 

Obviously plutocrats hope that, or at least, hold that, if civilization collapse, they will make out like the bandits they are. This is what happened, indeed, when the Roman state collapsed: the aristocracy survived by making alliances with the invading barbarians. Thus the relative status of the wealthiest improved while everybody else suffered or died… History repeats itself. However, history repeats itself less than ever. Where it used to whisper, it now roars, where it used to crawl, it now rushes, and where it uses to advise, it now lies.

Ideas drive civilization. Sometimes they drive it into the ground. The “fittest” civilizations survived. But, now we have just one world civilization. Just as there is no planet B, there is no civilization B. That’s it. There is no alternative. Only the best ideas, better ideas can save it, by helping it to morph into a sustainable form.

One will not get there by preventing We The People to be exposed to more sophisticated ideas. Because better ideas will be more sophisticated.

Patrice Ayme

Up In Smoke: EVIL OF BANALITY, Not Just Banality Of Evil!

Slash And Burn Planet: What Could Go Wrong?

Satellite pictures show that the planet is burning. Is that evil? Yes: when the biosphere goes up in flames, the end is near, just ask dinosaurs in a theater near you. Is that banal? No: it never happened before.

Yet, philosopher Hannah Arendt is most famous for describing evil with her concept of the “banality of evil”. She rolled out her banal notion in connection with Nazi mass criminal Eichmann. Arendt’s banality has been intensely criticized. She retorted that she wanted to make sure the devils of Nazism would not be admired. That’s banal too, and shouldn’t be the point.

Arendt’s grudge, that evil shouldn’t bring fame, is, by itself, an entire logical system implicating the notion of divinity. It’s vast, yet it’s one fundament of evil. However, precisely because it’s a pillar of evil, it makes Arendt’s attempt to belittle Nazis’ celebrity status, by claiming their evil was most banal, futile: evil, personified long ago,  achieved so much fame that Buddhism introduced Mara as their own version. Personalizing evil was known earlier as Angra Mainyu, and, a thousand years later, well before the Bible, as Hades, Pluto, etc.

Arendt admitted she was not really motivated by truth, but by what she viewed as the higher mission of belittling Nazism. This is of course troubling. Philosophers of ethics, and psychology, should know that (the philosophy known as the religion of) Hinduism  identified evil with untruth… No need for endowing evil with a personality! (In the matter of evil as untruth, Hinduism was probably inspired by the earlier Zoroastrianism; although Angra Manyu, later Hariman, personalized evil too, just to make sure…).

***

In truth, there is nothing banal about maximal evil. Horrendously evil acts accomplished by intelligent persons, are a metaphysical assertion: my belief in me, they say through their acts, or my god (me again!) is so great, that I can do the worst, and call it good. Self-satisfaction ensues, and that’s the ultimate. The song of the ultimately narcissist.

***

So what of these fires? Much of the American Pacific Northwest had the world’s worst pollution, during much of summer 2018. Some fires will have lasted many months. The devastation is unprecedented. I predicted as much, and more: the places I know which are ready to burn, have not burned yet. Consult the suitably dramatic personal observations last winter solstice:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2018/01/10/climate-catastrophe-california-forests-dying-giant-fires-coming-in-2018/

CalFire, the Californian state fire department, observes that large trees are desiccated, ready to burn, all over the state.

August 2018. Human Activity Covers Planet with huge smoke clouds (in red and orange), from CO2 induced warming, hence burning, or slash & burn agriculture in Africa… Blue clouds: salt; white clouds: dust… even the massive forest fire near Berlin is visible…https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/smoke-from-siberian-fires-reaches-canada

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/fires-overwhelming-british-columbia-smoke-choking-the-skies

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/agricultural-fires-seem-to-engulf-central-africa

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2018/ongoing-fires-in-sweden-quelled-by-weekend-rains-finally

***

***

So is it banal to observe that the planet is burning, or banal not to observe it? In any case, not to do anything about it is evil. Most will say that they can’t do a thing to prevent it. Well, no. Remember the Nazis. Who were the Nazis? Most Germans, actually. They went along, they collaborated with the Nazis, and the first thing they did was NOT to observe what was going on. It was banal for Germans, while enjoying Nazism, NOT to observe reality.

Actually, Hannah Arendt observes as much. She (implicitly) deduces that the judges of Eichmann should have said as much: the Nazi ideology was the normalcy of Germany, Eichmann was culprit of being extremely normal, all too normal. Mass murderer Eichmann was no freak: instead, he should have been executed as an official scapegoat, in lieu of, or as an extreme version of the ordinary German collaborating with the Nazi state.

And that collaboration consisted, first of all, by not seeing what was going on.

Yes I know that some will see in this an anti-Trump allusion; yet, clearly, the US Deep State is the major culprit of much evil, on a scale that makes Trump, so far, insignificant.   

As Margaret Kimberley @freedomrideblog put it:

“McCain, Bush, and Obama all killed thousands of people. Trump has a much smaller body count but he is the one being vilified today. (Of course he has at least 2 more years so he can catch up.) And no I’m not a Trump supporter.”

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a cover-up to dissimulate much greater horrors: in particular that globalization which is mostly a world plutocratitization, or new ways, such as Obama droning children personally, as executor-of-the-innocent-in-chief. Or Obama, Bernanke and their European homologues directing thousands of billions of dollars towards the wealthiest institutions in the world, apparently to reward them for causing a worldwide financial crisis…

The real Nazi-like phenomenon in the USA has been the incapacity to see what the US Deep State did, or didn’t do. And the same critique can be extended to Europe: Europeans have not even seen that Nazism itself was an instrument, and partly, a creation of the US Deep State. Eichmann learned that the hard way, when the Brits and Menachem Begin refused to further the negotiations for exchanging a million Jews against 10,000 trucks (“Forget the damned trucks!” would Begin later interject…) The mood, of ignoring the holocaust of the Jews, came from Washington…

One sees best, with simplicity: had the USA wanted to stop Nazism, at any point, it would have been enough to expose the Nazi crimes for all the (German) population to see, and warn that any civilian, officer or soldier thus implicated would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Because the USA didn’t try, was careful NOT to try, to stop Nazism by making a threatening scandal, as the German generals had asked as early as 1937, one is led to observe that the US Deep State wanted Nazism around.

Learning that the Nazis were preparing to further exterminate part of the Alsatian population, French general Leclerc warned that:

“The German army doesn’t obey anymore, when dealing with civilian populations, to the laws of war. Villages are systematically burned, inhabitants shot to death, or deported… I warn officially the German Command that I will, step by step, proceed to make formal observations, and that I find out, every time, the name of the officers who are responsible. Whatever the number of weeks, or months during which Germany will succeed to extend the war, she will have to surrender. I will employ all my influence so that justice will be done.”

(Général Leclerc to Général Feuchtinger.)

Result: the Germans and their Nazis (was there a difference?) stopped their exactions, their mass criminality, in Alsace.

What was the main point there, the basis of it all? Leclerc observed reality.

The planet is burning, let’s observe reality. When Angela Merkel pushed, and pushes, to burn lignite (the worst coal), she is a mass criminal. When Obama pushed for fracking (“bridge fuel” he called it!), and to export coal to China, he was a mass criminal (yes, Trump is trying to extend that… but coal is condemned, even China doesn’t want it anymore; the real problem is fracking…). And Trudeau in Canada is just a fake: the oil from bituminous sands are the worst. And Trudeau doesn’t have the excuses of the Third World countries with nothing but fossil fuels to export: Canada is wealthy… Yes, I know, some will say they didn’t see a fire coming to their neighborhood yet. However the disruption caused by a gathering nefarious climate change can’t be underestimated, and is already happening (see the African refugee crisis, the war in Syria, etc.)

So just look before you even think, but honestly… Now, to see what others don’t want to see, requires to ban banality. Thus expunging the evil of banality needs to become one of the moral commandments to obey. Should we fancy civilization to survive longer than expected.

Nietzsche promoted the Eternal Return of the Same, something which, strictly speaking, never happened. Instead, the universe is a force that goes. The closest thing to an eternal return, is the return of human creativity… Easily spontaneously spawning, as long as we ban banality!

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Here is part of the French original of Leclerc’s warning, which stopped the Nazis dead in their mass murdering tracks. The Western “democracies” had ten years before that to express a similarly strongly worded warning to the Nazis and their obsequious servants, but they didn’t:

Facing the Vor Vogensen Stellung (1re ligne de défense), before dashing through Alsace with the giant Second Armored French Division, Leclerc a connaissance d’exactions allemandes. Il adresse une lettre de mise en garde au Kampfkommandant de Baccarat :

« L’armée allemande n’obéit plus, vis-à-vis des populations civiles, aux lois de la guerre. Des villages sont systématiquement brûlés, les habitants fusillés ou déportés… L’ordre de déportation de la population de Baccarat et de celle de Raon-l’Étape vient d’être donné… J’avertis officiellement le commandement allemand que je vais faire, au fur et à mesure, des constats et que je relève, chaque fois, les noms des officiers responsables. Quel que soit le nombre de semaines, de mois pendant lesquels l’Allemagne réussira encore à prolonger la guerre, elle devra bientôt s’incliner. J’emploierai tout mon poids à ce que justice soit faite. »

— Général Leclerc au Général Feuchtinger  

Leclerc’s maneuver was not banal. Had he been banal, he would have done nothing, like all other Allied generals before him, and thus, he would have partaken in evil…

Colonization and All That: All Over, And Not the Worst!

The first indication that people are evil-minded is when they too readily, and too frantically, diabolize others… And diabolizing colonists falls in that category. Fall, as we will see, particularly deeply.

The human species is a colonizing species. Colonization has many potential dimensions. For example, it can be ideological: Indonesia was colonized that way from India (Buddhism), later from Arabia (Islam), and then from the Dutch. (Arguably since, by the CIA and its ilk.)

Yet, French president Macron, anxious to please North African dictatorships, recently called “colonization” a crime against humanity… a real barbarity“. Problem: over last 3,000 years most of Earth got mostly occupied by colonizers: all the Americas, Oceania, most of Africa, nearly of Europe, Japan, Indonesia, arguably most of China, etc.

Afghanistan was colonized by Achaemenid Persians, Greeks, Buddhists, Hindus, Mongols, Islamists, Moghols, Persians again, etc. Can we say Brits, Soviets and US/UN colonized Afghanistan? Not really the correct semantics! A return to correct human ethology is no colonization!

***

Politics Is Practical Philosophy, Yet, Philosophy:

Long ago, the tyrant of Syracuse got the top literary prize in Athens. It is traditional for philosophers to despise politics. Yet, most worthy philosophers were deeply entangled with politics, when not with politicians themselves: I know of no exceptions. But I want to generalize that: I would claim that, shockingly enough, most worthy politicians were philosophers. Whether they claimed to be so or not, is besides the point. Most influential politicians implemented new philosophies, not to say religions (Muhammad). Sometimes the new philosophy was implemented most spectacularly: think of Czar Peter the Great not just torturing to death “Old Believers”, and forcefully modernizing Russia into the West European model… under the penalty of death.

Some have objected there is no philosophy in, say, Julius Caesar’s writings. Well, there was enough for him to be the leader of the “Populares”. Caesar, a “populist“! And so on. Out of the top 30 leaders of Rome, all of them led philosophically. Even when Agrippina, the mother of Nero, imposed herself as Rome’s leader, to a macho Senate, she was doing a philosophical work, and opening the way to Augusta Galla Placidia, and several Frankish queens, the most important of who would outlaw slavery in 658 CE.

Eliminating slavery was also an eminent philosophical work. Interestingly, Saint Bathilde’s order was not preceded by the establishment of an entire anti-slavery philosophy by some eminent philosopher. Christianism pretty much ignored slavery as a problem, and the then just established Islam, took it for granted. The first eminent philosopher to condemn slavery was Bathilde herself… Yes, Bathilde, herself the top politician, the top ruler of her time in Europe, the Merovingian queen and ex-slave herself!

All the Americas Are Colonial. So Is Europe, Invaded by the Celto-Germans (among others). So is China, which has been pretty much colonized by the Han…

Although the West of China was colonized by Indo-Europeans who brought a lot of technology, (and killed the men, keeping the women for breeding, as modern genetics reveal).

***

All Politicians, Including Macron, Trump, Are Philosophers, Whether They Know It, or Not:

It’s not just Voltaire, Adam Smith, Rousseau, De Sade, Goethe, Herder, Hegel, Ricardo, Marx, Proudhon, Nietzsche who can be viewed as having forged much of today’s contemporary debate. When Earl Grey delivered a let’s-declare-war-to-Germany discourse in Parliament, August 2, 1914, a certain idea of what civilization was and entailed was loudly defended. Philosopher Bertrand Russell disagreed so deeply he was thrown in prison for his pro-Kaiser, pro-German plutocracy stance. Earl Grey was philosophically right, Russell was wrong.

And of course, Kant, Hitler were “philosophers”, in the sense that hundreds of millions Europeans thought they would “guide” them towards better worlds. Thanks to idiotic, self-contradictory, most inferior, extremely lethal ideologies. But philosophy is relative, like time itself.

Indeed, both wisdom (sophia) and love (philo) are relative. The wisdom of a slug is not that of a sea otter (their time perceptions are not the same, to start with). Hitler’s idea of wisdom was mostly demented (it could only hurt what he claimed to defend), and his idea of love was akin to the self-love of a suicidal maniac (Hitler engaged in a war he was sure to lose, in spite of a miraculous victory in a battle against France… a victory which made it all the more certain that he would lose the war).

China is a linguistic patchwork which reveals a tormented colonial past. The imperialism of Mandarin is quickly burying all this.

Much of Africa was colonized, by Peuls, Arabs, Bantus. All of North Africa was invaded by the Arabs, and the Arabic language was imposed to the Latin, Berber and Coptic speaking populations. When the French invaded Algeria in 1830s (in part to fight piracy and Ottomans alike), they used as an argument that they, as heirs of Rome, were coming back, with a modern version of Latin, the old language of civilization there… It’s a fact that Arabic was imposed on non-genetically Arabic population: a successful colonization, linguistically, religiously, and socially…   

African colonization by Europeans in the late Nineteenth Century was driven by the subtle argument that, to stop slavery in Africa, Europe had to take control. That may sound outrageous, but it is a fact that European powers were successful in stopping slavery in Africa (with some exceptions, like Mauretania). Also the argument is so good, it has been reused by the European Union and the United Nations themselves since: the idea was that some parts of Africa needed to be put under tutelage. A few decades ago, it meant the full power of UN embargoes was used to destroy racist regime (in Rhodesia, South Africa). More recently aid to say the Republic of Congo was given, but only protected by accounting from UN, and, or EU. The chief of Sudan was accused of crimes against Humanity by the International Court of Justice (a UN agency based in La Hague). The lightning military interventions of France in CAR, Ivory Coast, and Mali were all approved by the UN.

My own dad, a senior geologist, was employed by the UN in Cameroon, and Kenya to check that UN financed geological prospecting was done correctly.

Much of this doesn’t have to do with “colonization”, but with correct administration, and what has long been called the “mission civilisatrice”… which Caesar himself indulged in Gaul, when, among other things, he forcefully replaced the Helvetii where they came from (Helvetia).

***

Horrendous Colonizations:

There are plenty of abominable “colonizations”. Except they are not really “colonizations”. Some are outright exterminations which the Mongols instrumentalized, to encourage awe and obedience, all over. Real colonizations should involve colonists, Roman style (the Romans gave both the word and the semantics). For example, the exploitation of Congo by king Leopold of Belgium hardly deserves the label of “colonization”. The invasion of Mesoamerica by the Spaniards was a colonization, and it incorporated abominable ways, and outright aggressions the aim of which was to destroy civilizational diversity.

An example is the colonization of the Tarascan state (west, and enemy of the Aztecs). This was gratuitous, and highly controversial in Spain. The main Spanish perpetrator lived a long life, and always refused to recognize his crime, which was deliberate (conquistador in chief Cortez had agreed with a modus vivendi with Tarascan). Basically he held that Christian/Spanish civilization couldn’t allow a competing model to survive.

Roman colonizations involved instead retired legionaries invited to exploit agriculturally some land distributed by the Roman state (such land was aplenty after war). That was somewhat more civilizing and pacific. There were bloody revolts against Roman colonists, but rarely (the most famous being that led by Boudicca in Britain).

***

Semantics Can Make No Prisoners:

The foremost reason to write against the wholesale condemnation of “colonialism” is that it’s deeply unintelligent, as it makes no distinction, and choses the easy way out of condemning all of humanity (as Buddha initially did, before he realized the gross errors of his early fanaticism). Condemning “colonialism” is also deeply hypocritical: it implicitly pretends that those who do the condemning aren’t at all like those they condemn. But of course they are: tribal chief at 39 years of age of armed forces capable of killing 50 million people in half an hour, Macron exists, but shouldn’t… While they pretend to be better than what they condemn, “colonialism”, Macron and his ilk are actually worse than anything humanity conceived before.

Right, it’s not exactly the fault of the top politicians: somebody needs to tell them, that their Politically Correct spewing is now viewed for what it is: not very smart. Somebody they will hear. More sophisticated ideologies need to spread (but they won’t come from official philosophers, salaried where they are, because they support the establishment). It’s not enough to go cackle around against “colonialism”.  It’s actually counter-indicated…

There is as much colonialism as they are colonialism, and colonies. An example is that the Portuguese, Spanish, French, Dutch, English and Russian colonies in the Americas differed deeply, in the philosophies which guided them. It is a fact that the English colonialism was the most exterminationist.

Patrice Ayme

 

NOTHING IS MORE INHUMAN THAN IDIOCY

NOTHING TO FEAR MORE THAN IDIOCY

What characterizes the human species above all others? More intelligence! To be more intelligent is to be more human. Thus, to be more stupid is to be more inhuman. This basic observation about human nature ought to be the foundation of any worthy humanism. Humanization? More intelligence! Dehumanization? More stupidity!

Ah, “dehumanization”. The buzz word of August 2018. Internet monopolies have recently enacted policies to reduce what they call “dehumanization” (whereas, in truth, they were its main enablers, for many years). In practice, Internet monopolies eradicated some posts and, or, posters who engaged in blatant, outrageous, hurtful lies. Boldly, the New York Times wandered “Inside Twitter’s Struggle Over What Gets Banned”: The enormity of what some Twitter executives consider “dehumanizing” is striking. Twitter executives ponder ”whether tweets that disparaged immigrants could be considered dehumanizing. One executive insisted that it was important for Twitter to enable debate about immigration policy.” Thanks Twitter to enable debate about concepts!

Dehumanization is a great problem over the Internet, indeed… And it starts with having oligarchs in charge of deciding what allowable debate, or even presentation, consists of. Facebook censors some most famous paintings of the Renaissance: they hurt its dearth of culture, basic indecency, and overwhelming stupidity.

Once one realizes that stupidity is most dehumanizing, priorities should change. Of course immigration should be debated, and of course *some*, yes, some, immigrants should be disparaged (for example those who immigrate just to kill people of their host countries: there were several cases in France alone, in the last five years, totalling hundreds of victims. For example the Paris November attacks, or the Nice truck driver massacrer, a Tunisian on a residency permit, who killed more than 80 on July 14th…).

***

If intelligence is what characterizes our species most, why has it been so neglected by leading ideologies? Because of whom they were meant to serve!  

Leading ideologies promote stupidity, not just because the dim witted, and those who have mental pretense (like professional intellectuals) without the brainpower, are afraid of the notion of relative intelligence (which, one must admit, is fraught with the greatest subtleties and difficulties).

The fundamental reason why intelligence was not viewed as the foundation of humanism has been that, ever since the Macedonian tyrant Antipater, executor of the will of Aristotle (!) destroyed Athenian democracy, dictators, naturally enough, have prefered to reward and promote stupid philosophies and religions justifying their evil ways (Kant, Herder, Rousseau, Marx were examples; modern examples are all the philosophers absurdly claiming the Absurd to be the foundation).

One of the royal roads to stupidity, thus inhumanism, is to claim that there is no evil. Indeed evil is smart: evil hides in the details, or in plain obscurity (the proverbial “Dark Side”, 4,000 years old. So one needs smarts to detect evil, and, furthermore, smarts fight evil. (See Note 1 On Internet Companies)

A little, yet tragic tale will illustrate this very well.

***

Nothing To Fear More Than Overwhelming Politically Correct Idiocy

Sob story in the New York Times about the delicious US cyclists who went all around the world, constantly posting their adventures, and their faces, on “social networks”. And they advertized how great, handsome, and PC they were, because they extolled how everybody is good, and the only bad ones were those insinuating that not everybody is good, not everybody is beautiful (by the same token all US corporations and “foundations” are good, beautiful, and not evil whatsoever, as evil doesn’t exist).

The “cyclists” of doom, beaming with positivity. We are the world, we are the success, we are the good, look at us, world, just like the world, that world we rule, we gentle and beautiful. Plus or minus a few dozens of millions of determined killers out there… And the evil empire we work for. Mr. Austin was working for the Department of Housing and Urban Development when he decided to make the trip. The country where this picture is taken from crawls with millions of fanatical Muslim Fundamentalists determined to kill “disbelievers”. Obama says that’s beautiful (but then droned them in Yemen, Pakistan). I say it’s not smart to say this is all about goodness…

A mutual admiration society, throughout “social networks”… which can be very profitable for those who partake in them professionally: brainless, ignorant, thus splendid and familiar “Youtubers” can make fortunes, spilling all over the world their inanities. All for the best in the best of possible worlds, led by the best humanity which ever was (some of the major Internet monopolies are now taking affirmative action against authors who claim this is not the best of possible worlds, and censoring loud and clear; yours truly was censored and banned from many Internet places and search engines, more than a decade ago; when I said so, even leftists told me I was hallucinating). How wonderful, great, kind, awesome, well-meaning humanity is. Let’s quote the New York Times about that self-admiration society in “A Dream Ended on a Mountain Road: The Cyclists and the ISIS Militants”:

“Still, by the time they reached that bend in the road in Tajikistan just over a week ago, they had embraced the notion that the world was overwhelmingly good, the dozens of annotated photographs and the thousands of words they left behind show.

“You read the papers and you’re led to believe that the world is a big, scary place,” Mr. Austin wrote. “People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted. People are bad. People are evil.

“I don’t buy it. Evil is a make-believe concept we’ve invented to deal with the complexities of fellow humans holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own … By and large, humans are kind. Self-interested sometimes, myopic sometimes, but kind. Generous and wonderful and kind… No greater revelation has come from our journey than this,” [Mr. Austin] wrote.” .

The (relatively) wealthy cyclists from the disant imperial superpower joined with other cyclists.

“Days turned to weeks, and then into months. Their bodies began to break. An ear infection landed Ms. Geoghegan in the emergency room in France. They both contracted pinkeye. They shouldered on through upset stomachs and sore throats.

It was winter by the time they reached Europe last December. Torrential rain soaked through their waterproof gloves. “Utterly hopeless, wet and cold,” they posted from Spain.”

At that point, they were saved by generous French and, or Spanish inhabitants, who dried them, sheltered them, and let them live with them until recovered. The amazing thing is that Mr. Austin was exposed to wanton acts of cruelty on the part of other human beings. Still, he persisted in broadcasting his “no evil” theory of humanity… Was he so deeply inculcated by Google, which pretended, for a decade, that its credo was “Don’t be evil”? (At least Google admitted the possibility of evil…)

The will to claim there is no evil, even after having been exposed to plenty of it, means that one is not authentic. Authenticity enables to reach deeper truth more easily. Truth is not just pretty, and a higher calling. Truth saves. And for those who refuse the truth, in the worst cases, death awaits, which could have been otherwise avoided. New York Times:

“But in the course of their travels, their blog posts also noted flashes of cruelty.

On one mountain pass, a group of men blocked their path and tried to shove the couple off their bikes.

And just 50 yards from the Spanish border in bumper-to-bumper traffic, Mr. Austin signaled to a driver that he wanted to cut into his lane. The driver let him enter and then — slowly and deliberately — began to run him over, trapping Mr. Austin’s bike between the advancing car and the vehicle ahead of them.

Still, by the time they reached that bend in the road in Tajikistan just over a week ago, they had embraced the notion that the world was overwhelmingly good, the dozens of annotated photographs and the thousands of words they left behind show.”

***

What happened in that bend of road is that those who self-promote through naivety to the point of hypocrisy met those who apply the lethal, vengeful, deliberately anti-Western ideology of Islam literally. Deliberately anti-Western? Muhammad himself said so. His followers followed the irate “men in black” Christian monks of the Fourth and Fifth century. Let’s not forget that, when Imperial Rome was at its peak, women bathed in what would be called 2,000 years later, bikinis.

***

…What your “friends” call goodness, your enemies call evil:

New York Times:

…”over a week ago,came Day 369, when the couple was biking in formation with a group of other tourists on a panoramic stretch of road in southwestern Tajikistan. It was there, on July 29, that a carload of men who are believed to have recorded a video pledging allegiance to the Islamic State spotted them.

A grainy cellphone clip recorded by a driver shows what happened next: The men’s Daewoo sedan passes the cyclists and then makes a sharp U-turn. It doubles back, and aims directly for the bikers, ramming into them and lurching over their fallen forms. In all, four people were killed: Mr. Austin, Ms. Geoghegan and cyclists from Switzerland and the Netherlands.

Two days later, the Islamic State released a video showing five men it identified as the attackers, sitting before the ISIS flag. They face the camera and make a vow: to kill “disbelievers.”

It was a worldview as diametrically opposed as imaginable to the one Mr. Austin and Ms. Geoghegan were trying to live by. Throughout their travels, the couple wrote a blog together and shared Instagram postsabout the openheartedness they wanted to embody and the acts of kindness reciprocated by strangers.”

Mr. Austin and his pseudo-benevolent, pseudo-benign ilk, those holier-than thou types who insist that there is no evil, except in our presumably evil and obdurately perverse, all too critical minds, have human nature between blindfolds.

The world is a big, scary place, indeed. Some people are not to be trusted. Some people are bad. Some people are evil.

“I don’t buy it.” said the one who got assassinated, in a revealing semantic slip: the assassinated victim speaks as if he believed everything was for sale, even ideas… Maybe he believed indeed all was a question of buying and selling. That is exactly the sort of mercantile mentality, the mentality that everything is for sale, that everything can be bought, many of those who are angry against the established order want to destroy (thus the appeal of Islamism). (Some will pontificate that “I buy it”is just a way of expressing oneself, that it means nothing, that it does nothing. Yes it does: it infeodates, emotionally speaking, the realm of ideas to the realm of buy and sell, Wall Street.)

Evil is not a make-believe concept we’ve invented to “deal” with the “complexities of fellow humans holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own”…

Evil is not a question of making “deals”, as the naive smashed victim believed, in another semantic slip into emotional mercantilism. There are values and perspectives that are incompatible: an example is literal Islam, as found in Qur’an and Hadith… which is deeply incompatible with human ethology! Human ethology makes female and male humans quite similar. Islam says females are a fraction of men, at least judicially. The most common, wealthiest, most powerful versions of Islam says females are to be covered up. So it’s Islam against humanity, and only extreme violence can hope to succeed in this hopeless struggle. Hopeless: because how could humanity defeat itself?

Any ideology incompatible with humanity as deeply as Islam is, can be depicted as evil, as it generates a war with humanity: Nazism is another example. So are nearly all existing superstitious religions, for example Islam’s forerunner, Christianity… simply because they are war or slave religions which view women as warrior producing machines…

***

Evil is not just hidden in ideologies, more or less. Evil also has a neurological side, with its own rewards and its own inertia:

Hormones and neurohormones leading to destruction, cruelty, sadism, viciousness, fighting, do exist. Some will scoff, because, in their colossal ignorance and lack of the most basic imagination, they don’t realize humanity stand on the corpses of hundreds of millions of lions. Among other beasts vanquished, and prime among them, other human beings. Beasts and men alike learned their lesson: they were deliberately hunted.

Indeed after all these lions had been disposed of, it remained to dispose of those who disposed of the lions (and the tigers, and the panthers, and the saber tooth cats, and all sorts of man eating bears, etc.). War hormones are made to take command, and kill. War hormones can take command of an individual, or, much more dangerously, a crowd (some forms of lethal viciousness such as anti-Judaism have persisted for 17 centuries). By and large, humans are kind, deep down inside. However, not all the time, and not everybody. How many lunatics with a finger on a nuclear holocaust does it take to ruin the planet? Answer: just one. So the question of the evil of the one is paramount.

***

Stupidity is the main enabler of oppression, subjugation, thus evil (ideological, or physical):

Consider for example the banking system: money (for “everybody”) is created by lending to the wealthiest. Unacceptable in democracy, but accepted, because most people don’t know! Stupidity rules! (How the banking system works is not something taught as very important to MBAs…)

With the power we have today, a few self-interested plutocrats can own most of everything, and thus can have most of the power. And how many myopic leaders can we take? Even if the majority is kind, generous, and wonderful, it takes just one, or a few myopic ones, to kill us all.

No greater revelation came out of the naive victims’ sacrifices  than this: one gets killed only once, and, nowadays, thanks to cars, SUVs, rockets, the atom, one lunatic can kill a village, a city, even a country.

Human beings can be all the kindness they want to project. I am sure the five Islamist murderers can be kind, generous, wonderful… in particular circumstances which suits them. But they also believed in a murderous ideology. Murderous ideologies have to be killed, and were always killed. This is generosity, kindness, and wonderfulness at their best. By killing murderous ideologies humanity progresses and civilization reconciles itself with necessary technological advances, reconciling our new found powers and what our ethos needs to be to enable the genus homo to survive.

That intelligence is central to humanity has long been obvious: after all, the name of the species is Homo SAPIENS (Swede Carl von Linné in 1758). Sapere comes in part from to taste, to perceive, being wise, all things pretty much synonymous with intelligence.

We live in strangely mentally degenerating times (take the notion that fearing Islam is racist, as if fearing Christianity, something most intellectuals were affected by, for 17 centuries, was racist… Or, more basically consider the (“snowflake“) notion that debate itself is something one should fear). Actually it’s not so strange: the degeneracy is symbiotic with plutocracy itself: it originates with it, and also makes it possible.

Small superficial thinkers play the same role in the army of plutocracy as light skirmishers played in ancient armies. They are also the junction between the most common masses and the sophisticated intellectuals from the top universities, experts of the collaboration with the established order.

Nietzsche attacked Christianity as a “slave religion”. Most superstitious religions are slave religions: that’s why they have been invented. They all rest on the sentiment that the common person is culprit, a sinner, because that person didn’t believe in the goodness of the powers that be, which, lo and behold, pretty much identify with the oppressors.

The world cyclists, everybody-is-good, everybody-is-beautiful reflected this, as they denied that there were bad ideologies, or bad people. Instead, they brandished as culprit the attitude of suspicion, and what underlays it, simple objectivity.

They paid the price. A sad story. Let’s make it a worthy lesson.

So would we, as individuals, or as humanity, if we didn’t stay sharp and suspicious. Critique, intelligence, a propensity to detect evil, are no way to sell one’s products, but they are the way to stay alive. And they are also the foundations of morality. Anything short of that is effective nihilism.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note 1: Don’t be evil, we have the monopoly of that. Internet companies ask their subscribers and victims to sign long contracts in subtle legalese; that’s intrinsically evil: next thing you know all and any of your activities will be transmitted to various centers of powers, including para-governmental banks.

***

Note 2: New philosophers and philosophies coming out of them have to be smarter, logically or emotionally, than what came before. For example, Kant could be very smart. However, on most important subjects, racism and slavery, he was most dumb. His position would have necessitated to prove that enslaved races were inferior, objectively. Worse among towering German philosophers: Marx was an outright racist against Africans (and Jews, although he was one of them… one feels tempted to say: because he was one of them…)

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2018/05/06/marx-as-vituperating-racist-proto-nazi/

One see here that the followers of Kant and Marx, among them the Nazis (who said so themselves! Even Hitler!), have been self-selecting for dumbness (because they believe strongly, on a most important subjects, and all the “proofs” they have, are insults…)

***

Note 3: The rise of anti-PC psycho-philosophers such as Jordan Peterson (“12 rules”…) exploit the dumbness of the pseudo-left, by pointing out, implicitly, that it is more human to be smart.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/why-the-left-is-so-afraid-of-jordan-peterson/567110/

***

Note 4: I was banned from sites in the past, for unknown reason, including the NYT, which has recently reinstated me… The only site which banned me, around a decade ago, the “European Tribune”, for an explicit cause, explained to me that some of its members viewed me as a crazy conspiracy theorist, as I pretended that there were relationships between US plutocrats and Nazism, or between some well-known bankers and Nazism. The proof of my madness was that, according to them, Internet searches seem to show only me had such weird ideas… 

 

 

 

 

Cool: Species Nearly Destroyed All Life Before

Earth. The Dark Side. Homo. It has become standard to point out that the genus Homo may destroy life, or, our species, or, at least, civilization itself. This is related to the “Fermi Paradox” (“Where is everybody?” asked Enrico Fermi around 1950…) The idea was that civilizations self-destruct, hence no civilization is visible in the galaxy. To which I retorted that we overestimate the likelihood of advanced life in the galaxy, for a galactic sized number of reasons:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/40-billion-earths-yes-no/

One argument I rolled out is that life was nearly extinguished on Earth by life itself: consider “Snowball Earth”. This weapon of mass life extinction was generated by the advancement of life itself. Let me quote myself:

“Primitive bacterial life is probably frequent. However advanced life (animals) is probably very rare, as many are the potential catastrophes. And one needs billions of years to go from primitive life to animals.

After life forms making oxygen on Earth appeared, the atmosphere went from reducing (full of strong greenhouse methane) to oxidizing (full of oxygen). As methane mostly disappeared, so did the greenhouse. Earth froze, all the way down to the equator:

When Snowball Earth Nearly Killed Life

Yet volcanoes kept on belching CO2 through the ice. That CO2 built up above the ice, caused a strong greenhouse, and the ice melted. Life had survived. Mighty volcanism has saved the Earth, just in time.

That “snowball Earth” catastrophe repeated a few times before the Earth oxygen based system became stable. Catastrophe had been engaged, several times, but the disappearance of oxygen creating life forms had been avoided, just barely.”

Intense chemical weathering by massive acid rain is the likely cause of the end of a period known as the Marinoan glaciation, which happened form 650 to 635 million years ago, according to a paper published in the journal PNAS. This was the last occurence when nearly all of the Earth’s land and seas were frozen over, known as snowball Earth, with glaciers as thick as 2km. Other times, on the right, Earth had no ice at the poles… Present day civilization can survive a warm Earth (right)… Not a Snowball. However, to get from what we have now to no ice, in a geological blink, means ultimate war…

What does this mean philosophically?

Most philosophical systems in the traditional sense don’t consider the truism that, to get creation, one needs destruction, and the more creation, the more destruction. Why? That sounds childish, thus unwise. But children encounter the primeval. Philosophy extended to religion revels in destruction. Actually the Deus/God/Allah destroys the entire universe to establish Heavens.

The universe is a brutal place: not only do planets get flung into space, stars explode, but even entire galaxies get destroyed. The universe is also a happening.

In the greater scheme of things, a war where, say, seven billion people got killed would be nothing special: that was the world population in 1803, when the imbecile Napoleon, having mightily endeavored to reestablish slavery, losing an army in the process, sold a third of the present day US to the USA for 11 million dollars.

In the movie Terminator, Artificial Intelligence takes over, causes a nuclear holocaust, and tries to extinguish humanity. It is more likely though that more and more formidable wars would accompany a Hot Earth scenario… which is what we are going towards, quickly. As I have argued in the past, 2C Is Too Much! Under 2C of global warming, a chain reaction of tipping point would unleash itself, and self-accelerate:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/2-c-is-too-much/

Now the idea is hitting the mainstream, nine years later. See: “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene” in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. There, scientists argue that there is a threshold temperature above which natural feedback systems that currently keep the Earth at a nice temperature (around 15 C, global) will unravel. At that point, a chain reaction of climate events will thrust the planet into a “hothouse” state. Though the scientists don’t know exactly what this threshold is, they said it could be as little as 2 degrees C (4 degrees F) of warming above preindustrial levels. We are above that half-way point…

As they put it in scientese: “We explore the risk that self-reinforcing feedbacks could push the Earth System toward a planetary threshold that, if crossed, could prevent stabilization of the climate at intermediate temperature rises and cause continued warming on a “Hothouse Earth” pathway even as human emissions are reduced. Crossing the threshold would lead to a much higher global average temperature than any interglacial in the past 1.2 million years and to sea levels significantly higher than at any time in the Holocene. We examine the evidence that such a threshold might exist and where it might be. If the threshold is crossed, the resulting trajectory would likely cause serious disruptions to ecosystems, society, and economies. Collective human action is required to steer the Earth System away from a potential threshold and stabilize it in a habitable interglacial-like state. Such action entails stewardship of the entire Earth System—biosphere, climate, and societies—and could include decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values.”

People are deeply unaware, they believe that the planet’s climate is more stable than it really is. The episodes of Snowball Earth show that this is not the case. This erroneous feeling of ecological stability is the main source of the indifference which brings the destruction of the planetary climate.

The apocalypse, in the greater scheme of things, is not apocalyptic. After all, an apocalypse, etymologically speaking, is just an uncovering… And this is precisely this normalcy of the abnormal, which will make go so smooth…

Patrice Ayme

 

France Won WW2, Yet Lost It On The Internet, Thus Insanity Progresses

The market capitalization of an US company, Apple Inc., reached one trillion dollars today (August 3, 2018). It’s the first company in the world to reach such high valuation. In part, because Apple pays taxes not commensurate with its profits (Ireland, a state, which bemoaned Hitler death, officially, has a lot to do with that). Once I talked to a Silicon Valley executive who told me that Apple, Facebook, Google, etc. should pay no taxes in a country like France, because France was Hitler’s ally. How did we get there? This essay, one of many, wants to throw a light on those devious ways. Far from being innocuous, they are at the psychological-socio-economic root of what made evil such as Nazism possible.

***

Civilizational Madness Lurks On The Internet:

How we behave is related to how we think, manage our emotions, and so on. Somebody with impulse eating and drinking, has what one should call a deficiency in frontal lobes development… and it can apparently be imaged. It does matter: we don’t want impulsive legislators around the world enabling their impulsive leaders to impulsively extinguish humanity… as. Potentially already happened. It happened because insanity has not been studied as it deserves. Watch “stoic” philosophers admiring Seneca, tutor of Nero, an ultra racist plutocrat. Right, Seneca talked seductively… But so did Hitler. One has to learn to look beyond appearances, and detect the madness.

The Internet enables the most ludicrous minds to broadly advertise their insane logic. Some are thrill seekers, some want not to feel alone anymore, and share the madness, some are Messiahs… And many are paid (as when I state we need a hydrogen economy to go hand in hand with photovoltaics, and get 100 scathing remarks in ten minutes on Twitter).

Insanity itself seduces: after all, it’s different, and perhaps the deepest, specifically more developed  instinct in humans is curiosity. What triggers curiosity is what is unusual. There are many ways to seduce with insanity. One of them is ask insane question, as if one were motivated by curiosity, when in truth the question itself is a lie. Here is an example for sheer lunacy found on Quora:

Could France have defeated Germany in WW 2? How?

The author of the question concluded that France had it all, all it needed to win, including mightiest army, weapons, courageous soldiers… All except the will to fight another war (this is disproven by the fact the French army suffered 9,000 casualties a day during the 46 days after May 9, 1940). My answer to this completely insane, fake news, “leading” question, “Could France have defeated…” (leading into delirium that is):

Another alternate reality question: the French Republic declared war to Germany September 3, 1939. Germany capitulated, without conditions, on May 7 1945 in Reims, France, and again May 8, 1945, in Berlin. Hostilities stopped May 9, 1945.

Four victors in Berlin, May 1945, from left to right: generals Montgomery (UK), Eisenhower (US), Joukov (USSR), De Lattre de Tassigny (France)

Thus, France actually defeated Germany in WW2. It is curious that people can be so ignorant, that they don’t know this fact, the grossest outline of history. Some will say:’Oh but France got defeated in a battle’… Well, it was not the first time France lost a battle and went on to win a war.

France and Britain scored a many victories in 1939 and 1940, notably a major win after their second landing in Nazi invaded Norway. That offensive in Norway, had it proceeded as intended after said victory, was to cut Hitler’s crucial ally Sweden in two, cutting Hitler’s iron road, with catastrophic consequences for Hitler.

Indeed, France and Britain suffered a huge defeat during the Battle of France which lasted from May 10 1940 until a ceasefire, June 23 1940. This “Battle of France” was the deadliest battle on the Western front: more than 200,000 died (Belgian and French civilians and soldiers of all sides, all together). The dead included more than 50,000 Nazi (“German”) troops. Some will smirk and say:’Oh, the French killed 50,000 Germans in May-June 1940, so what?’ So this: those dead “Germans” were actually elite troops, the most trained, dedicated, ultra-fanaticized. They were sorely missed a year later, when Hitler attacked Stalin.

US fanatics, and quite often liars in (mental) absentia, further smirk that the US freed France in 1944. The exact notion is: the US helped to free France in 1944. So did others. More than half of the troops on D Day were NOT US. OK, there were only 400 French elite commandos… because the French hating plutocrat FD Roosevelt refused to let the French command know about D Day. But the French resistance was told, and played a crucial role (mobilizing 17 German divisions in south central France… Plus four elite Nazi divisions occupied at reconquering the liberated Vercors… killing 5,000 French civilians in the process.

D Day was a close run thing, for the first four weeks. Had the Nazis been able to bring to bear a few elite divisions in, the Allies would have been thrown back in the sea. Disinformation played a crucial role: Hitler was made to believe Patton would cross over the Pas De Calais. Allied air superiority was fundamental. But so was the French resistance, by sabotaging all trains, and endangering all German night moves.

So the French Republic was definitively at war in 1944. It had been at war earlier, in 1943, when general Juin broke decisively the Hitler Line (renamed before it got broken), in the mountains, south of Rome (which had stalled the Allies for many months). Juin told the high command he could be in Austria in a matter of weeks, if given more divisions. The Americans, instead, removed divisions from him, preferring the stalemate of Anzio.

In 1942, the French army of general Koenig blocked the Afrika Korps and the Italian armor, preventing them to encircle the British (“8th”) army, the only British army between England and India. So the French were also at war with Nazi Germany in 1942. And crucially: the Bir Hakeim battle was the best opportunity the Nazis and Italian fascists had to defeat the Brits, kill the Jews, get the oil. The result was, indirectly, the desperate Nazi attempt on Stalingrad…

So when were the French not at war in WW2? Say, in 1941 (when actually French forces were at war: attacked in Dakar by the British, the French army defended itself successfully, and De Gaulle contemplated suicide…). Guess what? The US plutocrats were fully allied with Hitler in 1941.

The French Republic won WW1, and WW2. Now Germany, mimicking France, is trying to be a republic (and would be a better one if it stopped exploiting southern Europe and holding hypocritical discourse on the European Union, refugees, ecology and Russia…)

The victory of French civilization was total: military, diplomatic, philosophical, even emotional… The erroneous, fatal, abysmal deviation of German ideology into a spirit following the tribalist Herder, and strictly opposed to Goethe, was totally smashed. American plutocratic propaganda to the contrary is not futile, though. In truth, it works, and it is extremely dangerous: civilization is at stake when US propagandists claim that Nazism actually won… They are claiming they won. Maybe they did, but they shouldn’t, and we can still make it so.

Take the four generals above. In other pictures, they all stand at attention and give a military salute together. However I couldn’t publish those pictures: they have been all stolen by entities called Alamy and Getty (Getty was a famous plutocrat). As far as I can tell, this is just Anglo-Saxon thievery, an opinion shared by Wikipedia (Anglo-Saxon media has gone in overdrive accusing “Russia” of malfeasance; it may be time, for balance, to use the same severity on the other side). Thieves grab public domain pictures, and, with the complicity of US search engines, make it so that they capture the Internet for profit… Just as Anglo-Saxon corporations, by launching and supporting Hitler (sometimes to the bitter end, see IBM), made it possible to steal the world, and now own it…

So of course the US won World War Two, and everybody else lost, to a more or less greater extent. In France, the wealthy CIA put 50 of the top French influencers on its payroll (so things have not really changed, they just got worse). I also view “French Theory” as a tool for plutocracy, something which has led us to the likes of Merkel ruling Europe into oblivion. Merkel: no logic there, as long as she can export cars using her bankrupt banks, and burn lignite in the guise of condemning nuclear power. Guess what? Today Fukushima beach was open to children: initially it was supposed to be closed for all humans 40 years (after several nuclear reactors riddled with grotesque safety violations exploded, consecutive to having been hit by a 30 meter wave…). What does that mean: Merkel’s overreaction is the result of a cognitive-ethical failure: she doesn’t mind cooking the planet, because that’s not “cool” to worry about that… But getting in one million improperly vetted Muslims, that’s “cool” (even if they threaten to go use their English in the UK, and thus help cause Brexit…)

Nowadays, we need the spirit of France on September 3, 1939: if you see evil, you attack. The US never attacked Hitler: it’s Hitler who declared war to the USA, December 11, 1941, 4 days after its ally Japan attacked at Pearl Harbor (which had attacked France in September 1940, as part of its war against China…). The US didn’t intend to go to war in 1942:  the many US businessmen making a fortune in Germany (as they had 25 years earlier) didn’t want war.

All these moral failures are never commented upon. Yet they are rife in today’s global world order. Why do they increase? Because of the increasing self-promoting ignorance of Internet fiends. The more outrageous there, the more “interesting” one is found to be, and the more one can get a nice income and position. How low can civilization go? How many lies does it take to sink all rationality?

Patrice Ayme

Oh, by the way, war games were conducted on what happened for five days after May 10, 1940, and the Battle of France of 1940, have been run many times. They always end the same way: with a French victory. In reality the Brits and France were defeated, because of a succession, and combination of very unlikely events. War games show that France and Britain should have won. If just one Spitfire pilot had been taken seriously, or the French had not sent their fast deployment armored reserve of seven divisions into the Netherlands, or a Nazi plane with plans has not crashed, etc…

http://www.lefigaro.fr/histoire/archives/2015/05/07/26010-20150507ARTFIG00304-rene-bondoux-raconte-la-signature-de-capitulation-allemande-le-8-mai-1945.php