Archive for November, 2019

A Cover-Up: ThanksGiving (To Holocaust!)

November 29, 2019

Thanksgiving”, in late November, is a US family celebration where thanks are supposedly given to the Native Americans for having made possible the colonization of America [1]. At Thanksgiving, the gullible, grateful Natives would have fed the starving colonizers who thanked them by serving dinner. All was good in the best of all possible worlds. Although the French had been around North America much earlier than the English, by a full century, the Gallic thinkers had forgotten to kill everybody in the name of civilization. English colonists soon remedied this oversight.

According to the apparently frank, yet subtly manipulative in the most devious, and plutocratic serving way

From the time Europeans arrived on American shores, the frontier — the edge territory between white man’s civilization and the untamed natural world — became a shared space of vast, clashing differences that led the U.S. government to authorize over 1,500 wars, attacks and raids on Indians, the most of any country in the world against its indigenous people.

Full of Indian nations all over! The French said that was a problem… they had to trade, couldn’t colonize. The plutocratic English investors of America, though, had a FINAL solution, the same one they used in Ireland…

As the excellent Charles Blow puts it in the New York Times in”The Horrible History of Thanksgiving”: 

“And this says nothing of all the treaties brokered and then broken or all the grabbing of land removing populations, including the most famous removal of natives: the Trail of Tears. Beginning in 1831, tens of thousands of Native Americans were forced to relocate from their ancestral lands in the Southeast to lands west of the Mississippi River. Many died along the way.

I spent most of my life believing a gauzy, kindergarten version of Thanksgiving, thinking only of feasts and family, turkey and dressing.

I was blind, willfully ignorant, I suppose, to the bloodier side of the Thanksgiving story, to the more honest side of it.

But I’ve come to believe that is how America would have it if it had its druthers: We would be blissfully blind, living in a soft world bleached of hard truth. I can no longer abide that.”

Thanks Lucifer (Enlightenment Bringer), here l am… Harsh truths foremost…

Having most profitably cleared North America of its original inhabitants, English America, the USA inherited a mentality of profit at the potential cost of extermination. This goes on to this day: Obama opened the US Federal lands to fracking, and, thus, his name is holy. I never met (yet!) a US citizen revolted by Obama’s fracking. No wonder: most Americans are gas guzzlers, and crisscross their continent sized country at the slightest pretext, including at Thanksgiving, fittingly enough…

Nevermind a large part of the continent will be destroyed from it. It’s as was done to the Indians, done to the land. By comparison, the French Republic outlawed fracking… Although France would have 100 year of gas to frack…

War, war of the hardest type, annihilation war, presided to the creation of the English colony. According to the governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop, Puritan inhabitants did not settle in Connecticut because of the “3 or 4,000: warlicke Indians”.  The war-like Indians refer to the Pequots. Destroying the Pequots thus became a primordial objective. Soon the Pequot war settled this. By 1637, the Pequots were annihilated. One memorable feat of the war included the entire surprise burning of a Pequot fortified city, at night in winter, killing 1,000 or so; those who tried to flee were shot. (I have read ridiculous contemporary racist cartoons for children misrepresenting what really happened to make the English Puritans look righteous.)


French Half-Breeds led the resistance to US plutocracy in Colorado. Edmond Guerrier above, reported the Holocaust to US Congress and the US military (those institutions gave a slap on the wrist on the perpetrators; yet they classified some actions in the Colorado War as “genocide“). Others French half-breeds fought, and were executed. Such Frenchmen had lived for generations in North America, blending with the Natives… The famous “Coureurs des Bois“…

Getting to know what happened when the English imperial system colonized America is an essential moral and cognitive step… for the entire world. Because the USA became the dominant country (in large part because of the Holocaust of the original inhabitants). How this all consuming greed mentality, ready to destroy all, was generated by the initial venture capitalists who viewed North America as a profit generator is a world problem.

(Same attitude, having originated in England, holds to some extent, for Canada, where the French, not just the American aborigines, were eradicated from many areas… Also Australia, South Africa.) Indeed it is how the mental foundation of the USA was generated. In particular, the holy “Founding Fathers” logico-emotional framework.

Once as a child, I went to restrooms in Gambia (an ex-English colony). I was struck that there were toilets more male/female (for the “colored”), and some for ladies/gentlemen (for the whites). Coming from French Black Africa, that was shocking.

The usual story of Thanksgiving is that the Puritans thanked the Indians. Whatever happened later was ordained by God and Indians. Not the fault of those who gave thanks, and keep on giving thanks… That version of Thanksgiving “history” absolves the Puritans of the criminal mentality which mostly defined them. Thus what is acknowledged and remembered in the US about Thanksgiving is mostly myth. 

Here is an example, let’s come back to the quote I gave above, where reality and lie are mixed in an easily absorbed poison:

From the time Europeans arrived on American shores, the frontier — the edge territory between white man’s civilization and the untamed natural world — became a shared space of vast, clashing differences that led the U.S. government to authorize over 1,500 wars, attacks and raids on Indians, the most of any country in the world against its indigenous people.

The latter statement is true. The 1,500 wars, more than any other invader against the natives, all the Natives, of an entire continent. And they were wiped out. Actually  the USA was founded on a holocaust, full ethnic annihilation. The idiotic Nazis tried, deliberately, to follow the US model of massacring the Natives… Not realizing how much guile had been put in the Anglo-Saxon American racial annihilation. 

So the part “U.S. government to authorize over 1,500 wars, attacks and raids on Indians, the most of any country in the world against its indigenous people.” is true… 

However, the part:”From the time Europeans arrived on American shores, the frontier — the edge territory between white man’s civilization and the untamed natural world —” became a shared space of vast, clashing differences.” …contains several grievous lies. There was no “untamed natural world”: native Americans were growing corn, a man-made plant, and getting most of their calories from it, in many parts.

Massive extermination wars created English New England. Hey, the savages resisted civilization. Slavery was of great help, not just scalps. Still, in modern US lore, one is much more ready to talk about the Salem with trials, than about the Holocaust of the North American Natives. Had the French been in charge, none of this would have happened…

There was nothing “natural” about the giant empires of the Andes, the Amazon, and Mesoamerica. The hint that only “white men” were civilized is not correct: the Mesoamerican civilizations were quite advanced in many ways. It is known that Spanish priests, a century before the Anglo-Saxons landed and massacred in North America, had a hard and interesting time trying to persuade Aztec thinkers of the error of their ways.

It’s true that the Conquistadors misbehaved against many of the empires and states they met… even seeing the rogue 1529-30 campaign of Nuño Beltrán de Guzmán attacking a state, west of the Aztecs which had nothing abusive about it and had carefully avoided any confrontation with  the Europeans…. However that was highly controversial in Spain at the time (16th Century), and the main perpetrator, Guzmán, was arrested in 1536 and spent the rest of his long life trying to justify his attack… And that attack was no holocaust: although lake Chapala (80 kilometers long) is the largest lake in Mexico, is lays in very productive region with a very nice climate (at 1500 meters). Although colonized by the Spanish, the local Nahuatl population remained primarily Amerindian through the next several centuries. 


1508: When the French Government of Louis XII Became Fully Aware of the Riches of North America: 

The French, arrived much earlier than the Anglo-Saxons in North America: in 1534 for Cartier in Canada, and even earlier, in 1508-1527, with various French explorers starting Thomas Aubert’s ship called La Pensée, for Verrazano… who went back for more on a French ship commandeered by the French government of Francois I. The French explorers discovered Nouvelle Angouleme, aka New Amsterdam, aka New York… 

As Aubert official report put it: American regions “pouvaient fournir de riches pelleteries, que les mers voisines abondaient en morue et que la pêche de ce poisson serait un élément inépuisable de richesse par les bénéfices qu’elle procurerait.” (American territories could provide wealthy fur industries, surrounding seas were crowded with cod, providing inexhaustible wealth.) 

Although tempted by the wealth of America, the early French explorers of New England, Canada and the Eastern Seaboard HOWEVER reported to French society and government that the Natives told them that trading with them was great, but that they were NOT WELCOME to settle and colonize. 

Now, at the time, France was the super power, with the highest civilizational level, the biggest, best army, and several times the population of England, long the other super power. France had an ongoing military conflict with England, which believed, due to dynastic considerations, that it owned France, and France was also engaged in war with expansionist, fascist, crusading, vengeful Spain, which had been busy expelling the French from Southern Italy and Mediterranean islands, which the French had reconquered from the Muslim invaders… three centuries earlier. Ironically enough, both England and Spain owed their existence to France. In any case, had France unleashed her power in conquering North America, she would have made short work of it. Why didn’t she? 

Yes, why didn’t France conquer all of North America? It was not out of military weakness: France was the world top military power. The war between France and Spain would end up, after two centuries, with the crushing victory of France (and part of it was the “80 year war” which created the Netherlands). It was very simple: France didn’t conquer North America the hard way, the Natives were willing to tolerate trading counters, but not much more than that. The French could have landed with canons (after all it’s with that French invention, the field gun, that the French had ended the “100 year war”, two centuries earlier)… Cortez’s way. 

In consequence of this situation, the reluctance of the Natives to be colonized that the civilized French established a trading, civilizing model which eschewed massacres.  When Champlain showed up exactly at the same spot as the Pilgrims of the Mayflower, in 1600, and went on to explore the entire region, he reported that there were too many Natives already installed to enable settlement of the French.


So, contrarily to what US mythology traditionally claims, it’s not true that as soon as Europeans started to arrive, so did the massacres, and Holocausts. This is a pathetic lie to justify the Anglo-Saxon massacring colonization model (still in power today)

The English colony was founded in a military-capitalist venture founded by the “West Country men”. Those plutocrats had made a fortune by over-exploiting Ireland. The governor there had alleys lined with Irish skulls, to instill the proper attitude in various guests.

Slavery had been made unlawful in 655 CE by Queen Bathilde of the Franks (truly an empress). In 1066 CE, the Franks outlawed slavery in England. Yet, the Anglo-Saxons colonists reintroduced slavery in 1619 CE. Shortly after, after the holocaust of the Pequot war, New England cities paid for Indian scalps.   

The Anglo-Saxon colonies soon made a fortune by growing tobacco, thanks to armies of slaves (sometimes more than 90% of some states were just slaves). 

The violence and brutality of the Anglo-Saxon colonizing model enabled it to beat the French and the Spanish (who were much friendlier to the Natives, and bred with them). All of this was justified by the Bible…which is a text which justifies, makes holy, colonizing the promised land after killing all the Natives: that’s how “God” orders it to be… If one obeys Him well….

Such is the paradox. The very evil of the “West Country Men” invading and holocausting colonization insured iits success. The French became victims of the all too advanced “mission civilisatrice” they abided by. Just an example: resistance to the US human right abuse in Colorado was led by five French half-breeds. They were all hanged (I searched the Internet in vain for that story I was familiar with, when I lived in Colorado, decades ago; another example of how the Internet buries reality to make it serve the established order).


Morality 1: Thanksgiving as usually represented is a manipulation of the grossest order… but it works. Talk to US children (as I do) and they will tell you the Indians happily fed the “Pilgrims”. Those “Pilgrims” have got to have been really nice. Not that said “Pilgrims”, morally justified by a strict reading of the Bible, stole a continent from its occupants… by killing them all [2]. Worse: US children have internalized the greed, profit, at the cost of the basest morality, fully. Watch the children (including my own daughter, nota bene) go around threatening “tricks” if they are not given “treats” at Halloween… And if you are skeptical, well, you are anti-American, anti-children inhuman, you will be “cancelled”. And then children are fully formed by the likes of “Frozen” were a self obsessed queen engineers (unwittingly, of course, it’s always… “unwittingly”) a climate catastrophe… [3].


Morality 2: There is a flaw such as being too much civilized, when one wants to advance… civilization, at some point, it has to get dirty. Amusingly, the Anglo-Saxons, when they got down to it, pulverized Hitler loving German cities: they applied to Germans the way that had been so fruitful for conquering North America. The Nazis were not eliminated with negotiations, but extermination. Nothing else could have worked.[4]

The colonization model of the French in North America, or elsewhere around the world failed, because it was too gentle.

Just an example: French women who wanted to go to Canada in the Seventeenth Century were only allowed to do so, if they were Catholics in very good moral standing (prostitutes not welcome). By comparison, English justice sent the homeless to America, as “endured servants” (slaves). England had plenty of homeless, as the plutocrats owned most of the country… whereas French peasants owned their land (however modest), so France suffered less homelessness than England. Something similar happened in Tasmania, Algeria. In New Caledonia, more than 50% of the population is aboriginal: compare to Australia, or Tasmania next door. Had the Tasmanian natives received the French more kindly (instead of ambushing nude French sailors)… Their descendants would still be around today. [5]

Want civilization? Prepare to win the war. Whatever the war, it’s coming. Moral righteousness won’t prevent it. This is what the history of Thanksgiving shows. Doing it the English way was too criminal, doing it the French way, not criminal enough. Only survival is perfect.

Patrice Ayme



[1] The 1619 arrival of 38 English settlers in Charles City County, Virginia, concluded with a religious celebration as dictated by the group’s charter from the London Company, which specifically required “that the day of our ships arrival at the place assigned … in the land of Virginia shall be yearly and perpetually kept holy as a day of thanksgiving to Almighty God.” The 1621 Plymouth feast and thanksgiving was prompted by a good harvest, which the Pilgrims celebrated with Native Americans, who helped them get through the previous winter by giving them food in that time of scarcity.


[2] Yes, the aborigines didn’t died just from genocide. There was also disease; however, not just distribution of smallpox blankets… Virulent Eurasiatic contagious disease struck the hardest was at point of first landing, most civilized Mesoamerica: by 1600 CE, 95% of the aborigine Aztecs were dead, mostly from disease. Yet, if one goes to Mexico now, individuals with mixed European-Aboriginal genetics are thick on the ground. Bolivia is more than 90% descendants of the population pre-Conquista… In the USA, aborigines’ genetics was mostly extinguished… and Pocahontas-Elizabeth Warren gave an unwitting proof of this…) 


[3] I was condemned to watch Frozen II, the first movie during which the whole theater laughed several times when I saw nothing funny whatsoever, and, another first, I fell asleep (the movies was busy rectifying the lack of PC of the first “Frozen”, in a thoroughly pathetic way, getting the opposite effect). Fortunately, the power then blew up in the entire theater complex, 4,000 people got evacuated and Lucifer was saved from having to suffer any longer that insufferable obscurity…  


[4] The French were the first to bomb Berlin in WWII, showing some Gallic ferocity… But the Brits (under PM Chamberlain) had prepared gigantic fleets of long range bombers (which the Nazis didn’t have neither technically. nor industrially; when Hitler travelled to Finland on a long range “Condor”, the plane caught fire on landing… At a time when the Brits had long been launching entire armadas of night bombers, including over Berlin…)


[5] What of New Zealand? Aren’t there Natives there? Well the British governor there, Fitzroy (of the eponymous mountain), bent over backwards to save the Natives, enabling them to deal directly with the English settlers, and allowing for Maori law, judgment from Maori chefs… The British Plutos back in London were furious, and recalled Fitzroy after a decade (Fitzroy, depressed, later slit his own throat)

“Bleak” Climate Catastrophe Better Than Non CO2-Wall Street Energy (Says Pluto!)

November 27, 2019

‘Bleak’ U.N. Report Finds World Heading to Climate Catastrophes

What the United Nations doesn’t say is that the fossil fuel plutocracy is entangled with the banking and investing (“Wall Street”) plutocracy: they hold the world, and they love their fossil fuel, CO2 machine, because it intrinsically concentrate power in a few hands.

Four years after countries struck a well-advertised deal in Paris to rein in greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to avert the worst effects of global heating, humanity is headed toward those very same climate catastrophes, according to a United Nations report issued 11/26/2019, with China and the United States, the two biggest polluters, having expanded their carbon footprints last year.

The summary findings are bleak,” the report said: countries have failed to halt the rise of greenhouse gas emissions even after repeated warnings from scientists. The result, the authors added, is that “deeper and faster cuts are now required.

Fat chance. Obviously, nuclear war is a more palatable option, according to most SUV drivers and jet-setting tourists…

The hellish energy system we use presently is used because the plutocrats in power get more power that way. And because We The Sheeple addicted to Pluto media, doesn’t know that another way was feasible, even 30 years ago.

Because CO2 Was Not Enough, We Added Mercury:

Next to San Francisco, coastal mountain lions can have lethal levels of mercury in their blood. How? Mercury rises, in a bio-absorbable form, in the coastal upwelling, and is condensed by the fog. This mercury is dropped in the ocean from smoke of coal generation, a world away. 

The rise in CO2 is brutal, most of it goes into the oceans, where it turns into carbonic acid, which kills plankton. As LIPs, Large Igneous Provinces, can do, massive CO2 production can kill oceans, collapsing food chains, worldwide, and killing oxygen production. Then, in combination with rising temperatures, massive oxydation all over (for example of permafrost and other half decomposed biomass ready to burn in tropical area), the oxygen content of the atmosphere could actually collapse. This is probably how the enormous mass extinction between Permian and Trias proceeded (form the eruption of the Siberian Traps).

We are engineering such an extinction now. When taking all the other man-made greenhouse gases in consideration, as we must, we are not far from 500 ppm of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gases, a level not seen in dozens of millions of years. We are rising the CO2 at such a rate, that planetary heating is lagging, giving us a fake sense of non-emergency.


The Road Not Taken Nuclear and H2:

Seas will rise by 20 meters, guaranteed. It could happen in decades.  This can be mitigated only by massive deployment of new safe nuclear and hydrogen (and its derivatives: ammonia, methanol) for massive green energy storage, transportation [1].  

Contrarily to what fake pseudo-ecologists have led us to believe, nuclear energy can be made perfectly safe: most reactors still deployed use 1950s technology made to maximize plutonium production. Plutonium free nuclear energy (for example from Thorium) is feasible, and could have been long massively deployed, if the effort to do so had been accomplished [2].

4,000 fourth generation, or Thorium nuclear reactors could produce all of the world’s electricity, and plenty enough “green” hydrogen to operate hydrogen trains, hydrogen ships, etc.


Wealthy Countries Exporting Fossil Fuels Are Criminal. Why No Thorium?

Countries such as Norway and Canada or the USA, which geared their economies towards fossil fuel exports, while they could do something else, should be condemned, ostracized, vilified, etc. Them and their accomplice citizenry. (That Arabia or Indonesia, or Venezuela export oil is one thing: they have no choice to be part of the world economy; they should be encouraged to convert to green energy). Norway has actually gigantic reserves of Thorium, orders of magnitude above its fossil fuel reserves; it’s also one of the world’s wealthiest countries, per capita. The UN should order Norway to finance Thorium reactor research….  

In a further act of fossil fuel-Wall Street friendly malice, US presidential Sanders has dropped a fossil fuel tax from his government program. No time, he says. Well, that’s stupid, not to say venal. Fossil fuels have giant subsidies and kill of the order of ten million people a year (according to the WHO). A carbon tax would implicitly contain a no-subsidy provision… 

In this disaster, many noisy ecologists and scientists are actually working against their official position. For example, they would view my discourse as panicky. But I am the reasonable one, and they are the ignorant trying desperately to please the authorities while only mildly disagreeing with them (but for a few exceptions).


Land To Go Under, Oxygen To Falter… What could go wrong?

Surely, they say, we won’t run out of oxygen. Hey, it never happened before. Well, that’s not true: it did happen before, but there were no monkeys around. Surely, they say, seas won’t go up twenty meters. But it did happen before, and not so long ago. In the Jurassic, seas were 70 meters higher.

More than three million years ago, in the mid-Pliocene era, before the apparition of the genus Homo, the planet’s mean surface temperature was between 2°C and 3.5°C higher than pre-industrial levels while the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration was about 400 parts per million [3] – a figure we have already surpassed as greenhouse gas emissions continue rising.

New methods of analysing marine geological sediments to construct a global sea-level record have brought ominous news in 2019: the West Antarctic ice shield melted around 450K BP… under an “atmospheric forcing” milder than what we are already experiencing now (it was around 400 ppm CO2). And the rain of ominous news is getting worse. 

A study by recent PhD, Dr Georgia Grant from New Zealand, confirms that one third of Antarctica’s ice sheets melted during the Pliocene era (she has advisers older than her). Thus seas rose up to 25 metres above today’s level. The era experienced sea level fluctuations between 5 and 25 meters above the present, with an average of 13 metres.

My own opinion, long published, is that the two giant basins of East Antarctica Wilkes and Aurora, may also collapse soon. The scenario is clear: the mouths of said basins is at polar circle latitude. Once warm water sneaks below,collapse could be a matter of decades, even years; By themselves, they would rise seas by more than 15 meters… All real estate less than 30 meter high should be sold. Of course, few serious people would believe this… because they are uninformed fools, and they bleat: didn’t happen before…

Yes, it did: go watch the Jurassic. Maybe in a theater near you, oh simple minds… The Jurassic was the Jurassic because of high seas, high CO2, high temperatures. There may have been a little glacier up high somewhere on the high mountains in Antarctica.

Antarctica Friis Hills. Yes, Antarctica will melt. Completely. Soon. Brace for impact. Present mathematical predictions pertaining to the human impact on climate are purely linear. Reality is generally linear only in first approximation; reality in full tends to be nonlinear (yes, I use the same meta argument in the foundations of Quantum Physics)

Ninety (90) percent of the heat from global warming to date has gone into the ocean, and much of it into the Southern Ocean which bathes the Antarctic ice sheet. Said sheet has been protected by a curtain of freezing cold water. Soon it will fray. At least one third of Antarctica’s ice sheet, and perhaps as much as half—equivalent to up to 20 metres sea-level rise—sits below sea-level and is vulnerable to widespread and catastrophic collapse from ocean heating. Consider the map in: 

… and look carefully how much of Antarctica is underwater. Much of it, it turns out is already covered with lakes (below the ice!)

Much of Antarctica melted in the past when atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were 400 ppm… And, as I said above, we are not at 400 ppm… We are already at 500 ppm. 

(OK, right, I am exaggerating, we will reach 466 ppm, all greenhouse gases forcing in 2020… Extrapolating slightly from:

As I said, long ago, more than a decade ago, a rise of two degrees Centigrade is too much, because it will trigger massive polar melting:


I have explained the problem in detail… it is a nonlinear story.

Some will scoff. They have linear minds, and live to please the establishment. Typically they live in universities to please The Man, Pluto.

OK, right now, hundreds of people have been shot in Iran, secretly, and 200 have been hanged, even more secretly (I just talked to an Iranian friend who escaped Iran… yesterday. Nov 25, 2019…). Ah, and also 13 French soldiers died in desiccating Mali, yesterday: the French Republic is fighting the savage Islamists, rendered mad by the greenhouse, in places I used to know. Two helicopters apparently collided, during combat…  

When the greenhouse heating has become a daily catastrophe juggernaut, expect more of the same lethal fighting of man against man, and, if we are not careful, with nukes. Even Trump has to get used to the idea: all well considered, after all, the US is also back fighting in Syria (where the French are also engaged in combat against the Islamists…).

As the rats destroy their cage, as humans destroy their planet, they will fight each other. 

Patrice Ayme



[1] Thorium reactors were made to work inside labs in the 1960s. To deploy them in a massive energy production program would have required a much less great effort than the Manhattan project (first, because we know they can be made). It’s a question of knowing what sorts of pipes to use, etc: tech details… Thorium produces little and not long lasting nuclear waste.


[2] Once we have enormous thermonuclear reactors, to mechanically extract the CO2 from the atmosphere, we will be able to stabilize the heating of the planet to a Jurassic state, by lowering the CO2 ppm. 


[3] The lowering of temperatures is associated to the rise of Homo. We don’t know if that’s causal, but a reasoning is easily done: lowering temps opened giant parts of the Earth to the sort of savannah park favorable to humans (by opposition to tropical forests)… In particular in Eurasia, augmenting enormously the niche favorable to the social killer ape.

The War Against The Female (Nipple)

November 26, 2019

Why do the Silicon valley monopolists censor the female nipple? Ah, I forgot they own us, and do whatever they want. According to an idiotically naive New York Times: Will Instagram Ever ‘Free the Nipple’?

For years, artists have put pressure on Facebook and Instagram to treat female and male nipples equally, but such a change may be too radical for Silicon Valley.”

Too radical? You mean too close to the roots, such as humanity freed from billionaire criminals, telling it how to dress? What’s obscene, what’s not? Like their immense wealth, the huge power they exert on us, directly or through their attack dogs, those politicos in their employ, is not obscene, but what was evolved over billions of years is?

Gabrielle d’Estrées, Henry IV’s mistress makes nipple comparison… 1594…New York Times about Instagram censorship: “It’s a cat-and-mouse game that the cat usually wins, since the cat has access to artificial intelligence and 15,000 people working around the world to review posts and look for banned material.

Facebook (which own Instagram) has entire rooms full of censors, around the world. Dozens of thousands of them. They banned (some of) my posts on Warren in a crafty way: I or my friends, could see them… but not the public…

Charles VII was the (illegal) king of France propped up by Joan of Arc, the pupett of the Queen of the Four Kingdoms (long unofficial story, by yours truly…)

Jean Juvénal des Ursins, the archbishop of Reims, counseled the king Charles VII to correct such fashions as “front openings through which one sees the teats, nipples, and breasts of women” (ouvertures de par devant, par lesquelles on voit les tetins, tettes et seing des femmes).

Silicon Valley tycoons are, clearly, in future, if not existing, law, criminals. The EU condemned some to pay fines: they scoff, while politicians lick their boots. 

The Holy Obama was in Silicon Valley last week, ten million Californians kissed the ground, so honored they were by his presence: some individuals paid $350,000 to be with the president. This sort of bribe is not for free. 

A monopolist is a criminal. A spy is a criminal, especially when it’s for money.  preventing inventors to benefit and develop their inventions is another type of crime, which, moreover, threatens civilization by strangling the invention flow civilization depends upon to survive the ravages it itself causes, and the unavoidable ecological devastation which fuels it. 

Worst of all, SV tycoons regulate art, thoughts and emotions according to their whims. Several of the most famous ones are not even college educated. Yet, they are received in presidential palaces. The tycoons are just greed educated, and they want humanity to justify the greed which fostered them. That’s why they block you if you show a painting commanditated by a Pope in the Middle Age, on the ground that it is obscene. 

The abuse they indulge in were fostered by the naivety that incited us to allow them to develop the criminal niches they fester in, and try to control the world from. 

What do criminals do to cover their tracks? Well, they just scream louder, using their media and political control, and accuse the innocent and upright to be themselves criminals. A traditional way to do that is prudery, criminalizing what is natural. Another way is to enforce sexism, itself a crime against nature, and then criminalize it. This is what the war against the female nipple accomplishes   

Konrad von Vechta; German, The Flogging of St. Barbara; 1420

When I see the uneducated faces of those brutes, going from president to palace, to still another president or legislator, to order us what to think, and what to feel, I experience revulsion. It is high time to rise the general educational level so that all feel the same.

Zuck sucks with his sexism. Why doesn’t he get arrested? Apple paid no, or not enough. taxes, forever: why didn’t anybody get arrested? Because the politicians are on the take? Why don’t they get arrested too? Isn’t $350,000 to see a mighty guy, a bribe? OK, it went to a particular party you say? Stalin’s Communist Party? Oh, no, in the USA they make with two now, two aspects of the same… Actually $55 billion Bloomberg, a financial media conspirator was both “Republican” and “Democrat”….

Sexism is another particularism imposed on us, just so we can be made hospitable to generalized racism. And racism is there to teach us to believe without proper thinking, marching brainlessly with the hating crowd, serving the army of the Man, the Plutocrat, Pluto, Hades, the Enemy (=”Satan”).

Patrice Ayme


Si Vis Pacem, Para Scientiam: Science For War, War For Science

November 24, 2019

Si Vis Pacem, Para Scientiam? If you want peace, prepare for science? The original Latin proverb is: Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum. If you want peace, prepare war. Cute, but not enough. My proverb is more to the point.

At first the original Roman proverb, want peace, prepare war, sounds pretty deep, in the philosophy of military science, and so did I feel, for decades…

However, in the end the Romans were defeated. They didn’t get defeated once, or a few times, and then ultimately won the wars… As the Franks/French did so many times. No, the Romans, starting under Marcus Aurelius, started to lose… and lose, and lose, didn’t not recover very well, and finally, two centuries later, by 406 CE, four years before the fall of Rome to the Goths, the empire was riddled with armed German nations [1].  

So the proverb was nearly right, thus still wrong, a near-miss, the equivalent of the big splash the Bismarck succeeded to land next to one of the two British battleships assaulting it, drenching the command deck of its enemy… but failing to score. The British did score, though, and, within minutes, the Bismarck had lost the ability to aim its fire, becoming just a big fat target for the Brits.

By 406 CE, the Roman empire was also a big fat target for the Barbarians. To try to defeat the Goths later, the Romans had to muster an army mostly made of Huns at Toulouse. The Goths still won and killed the Roman general. That defeat of  Litorius was in 439 CE. In 451 CE, after being chased and harassed by a Frankish army, a coalition of Franks, Goths and Romans (under the plausibly double dealing generalissimo Aetius) defeated the Huns spectacularly.

Clearly the Romans were fighting a lot, prepared or not, and prepared to this mess, they were not. Something deeper had gone very wrong. Actually Aetius was assassinated later in palace intrigue.   

Because they only prepared for war, the Romans lost to the other guys, because the other guys had also prepared for war; the Parthians, then the Sassanids, and finally, worse of all, the Arabs. The Romans should have prepared for (more) science.

Greek fire was a sort of napalm spewed from metallic machines which could spew enormous fire at great range, from 15 meters to up to 450 meters when loaded on catapults. In the first battle which saved Constantinople, more than 2,000 Arab ships were destroyed, and only seven (7) survived! There was a repeat of that latter. Then the Arabs launched the plan of taking Constantinople from behind (as the Turks would o, seven centuries later!). So the Arabs conquered North Africa, Spain… Only to see three successive invasions of Francia crushed to smithereens, causing the fall of Umayyad Caliphate in Damascus… Greek fire was used to destroy the Arab fleet in the Gulf of Saint Tropez in the Tenth Century, while a Frankish army was pressing inland on the Muslim redoubt at la Garde Freinet. The Arabs never figured out how it worked… And we still don’t know, actually, so well guarded was the secret. In comparison, how to make nuclear bombs is no secret…

Greek Fire had saved the Oriental empire. It was then superseded by black powder. French engineers (more exactly the Bureau brothers) were able to make field guns, guns which could be wheeled into a moving battlefield, with which twenty years after roasting Joan of Arc, the “100” Year War was won…

To make sure one will win, one doesn’t just need overwhelming force [2]. One needs overwhelming smarts. Heraclius, the Roman emperor who defeated the Sassanids, was one of humanity’s greatest generals, achieving an incredible Blitzkrieg. However, Heraclius had fallen ill and was unable to personally lead his armies to resist the Arab conquests of Syria and Roman Paelestina in 634 (he was sick in Alexandria). An incredibly stupid tactical engagement of the vastly superior Roman army, in a place that put it at a heavy disadvantage, using impatient, foolhardy tactics, led to its defeat by the much smaller (40,000) Arab army. The Arabs then did something no one expected: they killed all males in age of bearing arms. (So here we are!)

But the really deep question is: why had it become a fair fight between Romans and Barbarians? How come Barbarians had achieved military technological equality? In short: because Rome had become a stupid dictatorship. Excuse the pleonasm: all dictatorships are stupid, my dear Marx! 

What keeps the peace nowadays? Some erroneously believe that’s because we are all so civilized. They look at the plutocrats who feed them to say such inanities, and they love themselves for being so smart.  A casual look at leading politicians show that this is not the case: civilization is not improving, just Machiavellianism (as happened in Late Rome). 

Peace is kept, because the three leading military powers of the West have no interest to wage war; they already have what they want, profit from the status quo… And the leading Western military powers have had, recently, huge military technological superiority (now quickly fading, though…) 


Fourth Spy Unearthed in U.S. Atomic Bomb Project
His Soviet code name was Godsend, and he came to Los Alamos from a family of secret agents.”

The New York Times just ran an article exposing still one more spy at the heart of the Manhattan project, the nuclear bomb. A spy no one knew existed before, a physicist who was spying with the apparent help of his brothers. When the spies fled to the USSR in the early fifties, the FBI kept it secret (to keep the existence of its own informants secret). 

In any case, the Manhattan project leaked a lot; there were a lot of “Communists” at the time among intellectuals (“Communist” meant, in practice, at the time, infeodated to the fascist Stalin…) Carried over, the ebullient PM Churchill wanted to imprison indefinitively the top French atomic scientists… because they knew so much [3] 

The Manhattan project’s ancestor was launched in France in January 1938, thanks to the discovery by Nobel Irene Curie of the nuclear chain reaction with U235. [6]

Differently from the French, German scientists didn’t know a bomb was possible. French scientists and their plans fled to Britain, part of the materials was sheltered underground with the Crown Jewels, then the entire project transferred to Canada and the US. 

Secrecy in military matters is crucial: had the Nazis known in 1938 what the French knew, they would have developed a nuclear bomb. A better way to slow down neutrons was found (boron); then Plutonium created in reactors, the implosion pit invented with neutron triggers, etc. Lots of crucial details.

Too much Western (military) tech flows to the regime of dictator Xi, through armies of dual use spies, and Chinese investment in universities related startups.

Military superiority of (representative pseudo-) democracy, is a war the West can’t lose against blatant dictatorships. Rome, initially equipped with Gallic (!) weaponry, lost military superiority to Parthians, Sassanids, Goths. Yet, 

Constantinople was saved by Gregian fire (700 CE). Ever since Franks and their successors kept military technological superiority; that’s how the West (“democracy”) won!

Science for war, war for science. It has been going for millions of years. Progress doesn’t come cheap. It first have to fight those who want none. For a whole bunch of reasons. From the prosaic, to the most petty [4]. Those in power find progress hard, because, by definition, it means a move forward (forward (pro)-walk (gradi)), Any move is a threat to the establishment [5].

Science, and the scientific method, are as old as the genus Homo (and certainly older). How many today could go naked in the bush, and survive? Not many, because they don’t know much, starting with making and feeding fire… War rewards smarts, and reciprocally. Is it mean, is it hopeless? No, it just is. Science is about what is, and war about creating more of what is [7].

Progress is not innocuous: it’s a war, war against the unknown, war against the certainties of the past, and an understanding moving forward. In any case, it messes minds up, and many don’t like that… Especially when someone else starts the mess [8]. Well, they will still be pushed out of the way…

Ultimately, the giant walls of Constantinople fell to the giant guns of the Muslim invader. And a civilization fell. Did the famed (and imaginary) “Muslim science” (Islamophiles love to promote) succeed that feat? No. The engineers who made those guns were Hungarians. The assault troops who stormed Constantinople were “Janaissaries” Islamized slaves who had been captured as the Christian boys they were… and then brainwashed, imprinted, indoctrinated, and made offers they couldn’t refuse (everything they want, or impalement).

Dictatorships don’t play nice. Later printing was enough to earn the death penalty in Turkey, and that lasted centuries (in France too, but only if unauthorized, and it didn’t last; thanks Francois I for that). Right now the West’s technology is leaking to Xi, a dictator (he says it himself…) OK, maybe he is a “friend” of Trump, but that is still no excuse, let alone a guarantee, and the West should meditate the preceding…

Patrice Ayme



[1] Ironically, in the Seventh Century, after a horrendous war, the Romans, launching themselves south from Armenia, destroyed the Sassanids. However, this is just after this that the crafty Muhammad attacked… an exhausted Roman army, and a devastated Sassanid army and schizoid, civil war government. So, weirdly, Roman triumph was quickly followed by the destruction and occupation of ⅔ of the empire… 


[2] Overwhelming force failed during the Battle of France of 1940: all together, it looked as if France and Britain couldn’t be defeated. And actually the French Foreign Legion had put to flight, after two combined air-sea landings, elite Nazi divisions to flight in Norway. At the famous Midway battle. A small US fleet sank a more than twice bigger, in aircraft carriers alone Japanese fleet (and the Japs had a whole battleship fleet on top of that).


[3] Irene Curie and company were indeed dedicated Communists… until at the world intellectual Communist Congress in 1953 the Soviet delegate called Sartre a “dactylographic hyena”… The French delegation, headed by Irene, stormed out…


[4] A friend of mine a research Quantum Computing pure mathematician with chair and all the bells and whistles, medals and paid CO2 travelling, sent me a cartoon of Scott Aaronson, a revered figure of Quantum Computing software. The idea, apparently was to make fun of the ideas I proposed on Quantum and Brain. I am used to being made fun in that domain (50 years and counting)… And I sort of count Penrose among my students, so I am used to scoff.

However, why are paid intellectuals so motivated to be offensive to others, even at the price of being idiotic? It’s the old monkey coming out. They are looking for prestige, and want to pull rank. It’s not enough that they are paid to think. It’s even actually, a secret flaw: in spite of all the honors, isn’t it what prostitute do? Money for posing?

Oh, and the cartoon shows Aaronson either doesn’t know Quantum Physics at undergraduate level, or doesn’t hesitate to mislead the public about it… Just to claim he has the awe and mystery, with his Quantum computing algorithm, and others have not. Hopefully more on this later… Got me to think about the axioms of Quantum Physics…


[5] This is why the establishment hates Trump so much; because he moves things, and ask why is it the son of Biden gets diamonds from a Chinese plutocrat? And the like. Amusingly, when Macron started to tax tech giants at 3% revenue (as yours truly had begged for for more than a decade…), Trump went all enraged… But apparently Macron was able to talk him out of reprisals against France… Trump, a pure product of the financial establishment and its entanglement with subsidized construction, has been so vilified over the years, that he turned into an enemy of the establishment, where it hurts. The opposite can happen, the most famous case being Perikles… who ended up passing anti-immigrant laws who hurt Athens and himself, and were completely contradictory to the start of his political career… Also, he destroyed Athens in the guise of saving it… Powerful men turn into rogue rockets at the drop of a pin. That’s why we should organize the world to do without them…


[6] Maybe because I pointed out the origin of the Manhattan project in France, the New York Times censored my comment in the article linked above. But that was so true the nuclear business with Norway was probably a factor in Hitler’s invasion. In any case, when Norway fell to the Nazis, so full of spies Norway was, that the flight carrying, supposedly, heavy water to France was intercepted by the Luftwaffe. However, French agents had secretly transferred the heavy water into another plane on the airfield, and the heavy water escaped the Nazis…  Long live the new York Times and its Uber Alles view of history!


[7] Civilization, as it is, was created by war (in particular, the USA, in its extravagant beauty). The PC establishment doesn’t want to be reminded of that, because it’s sponsored by the plutocratic establishment, which itself, would prefer to see everybody asleep, far from any rebellious passion…


[8] I have seen individuals who make a show to project equanimity, gravitas get all enraged… when I proposed to change something to the US Constitution… It’s funny how something so small spiritually can engage minds: Homo takes thinking seriously, even fatally… That’s actually a strength of the species as it provides an environment in which mental progress can thrive…






November 22, 2019


Abstract: Brain modularity makes consciousness mandatory to enable motor neural command. Consciousness thus has to act as one, but nonlocally. The analogy with the Quantum Effect, how the whole gets to the point, is absolute. Thus it is compelling to suggest both physical phenomena are actually one.


It is known that the human mind consists of many specialized units designed by the process of natural selection. For example, there are auditory, visual, equilibrium, fear, language systems (Broca area, Wernicke area)… There is for example a system to detect motion (to spot predators, dangers and prey). Balance is processed in the cerebellum, short term memory in the hippocampus, etc.

While these modules often work together seamlessly, they don’t always, resulting in impossibly contradictory beliefs, or, more fundamentally contrary desires (or watch what happen when patients have Parkinson). A little sound in the bush can mean delicious prey, dangerous snake, or a calmly waiting leopard (the latter happened to me in Africa, for real. Twice.) The possibilities are connected to wildly different e-motions: move to grab, move to flee. Thus several contradictory systems can get pre-activated (amygdalia for fear, hunting systems).  

The modular view of the mind evolved, starting in the Nineteenth Century with the discovery of various localizations in the brain (some even overdid it, and confused brain and shape of the skull).

That the brain is made of brains is not a new discovery. But I claim the consequence is mandatory consciousness. That’s new.

A contemporary author makes moralistic conclusions from the observed modularity. Modularity would cause “vacillations between patience and impulsiveness, violations of our supposed moral principles, and overinflated views of ourselves”. 

Modularity suggests to the same author that there is no “I”, no “self”. Instead, he insists that each of us is a contentious and debating “we”—a collection of discrete, interacting systems whose constant exchanges shape our interactions with one another and our experience of the world. This sort of revelation is not new: it’s already found in Freud, following the French neurology professor of Freud, Jean-martin Charcot, and Nietzsche… And originally Sade, or even Socrates and his famous “demons”. 

Verily, while brain modularity is known to be true, that doesn’t imply there is no “I”. Just the opposite. Come to think of it.

Consciousness exists, just to fabricate that “I”. To fabricate an executive agent, the “I”. The “I” engages the neuromotor system, and, or the hierarchy of modules within. One authority to decide is necessary, so the “I” is necessary.

So what is this consciousness made of, how does it work? Many of the brightest minds have considered the question. I, in turn, question what they questioned, and the little they knew. 

Descartes, contrarily to what Demasio assumed, was no fool, and more penetrating a mind that Demasio… three centuries earlier. Descartes’ observations on the nature of mathematical reasoning were so deep, I was really surprised (as I thought only yours truly was capable of them, being a mix of the bold, the deep and the obvious).

Descartes, of course, had no idea of Quantum Mechanics. QM was hard to produce: Planck was amazing that way, and then came a flurry of geniuses: Einstein, Bohr, Bose, De Broglie, Heisenberg, Dirac, Pauli… (Among others.)

Francis Crick came up with what he grandiloquently called “the astonishing hypothesis”. It posits that “a person’s mental activities are entirely due to the behavior of nerve cells, glial cells, and the atoms, ions, and molecules that make them up and influence them.” Crick claims that scientific study of the brain during the 20th century led to acceptance of consciousness, free will, and the human soul as subjects for scientific investigation. Of course none of this is new, except for the detailed machinery: Descartes proposed the soul was in the Pituitary gland, and asserted animals (hence, implicitly, humans) were machines… 

Meanwhile the notion of machines has now been completely changed in something nonlocal and quirky, thanks to Quantum Mechanics, which has blown up laboratory reality into something… cosmic. Thus Crick and all others miss one point: the brain is not a classical machine, it’s a Quantum one. How do I know this? In the simplest way: the universe is Quantum, not classical. Quantum is complex, first of all, because it’s nonlocal. That means reality is entangled at a distance: that’s the entire challenge of the Quantum computer. Recently a baby Quantum computer entangled ten photons: that was viewed as a great success. In a brain, at least trillions of trillions of particles get entangled, each microsecond…

Guess what? To treat all these brain modules as one, to bring them to cooperate, one conductor, consciousness too, has to be nonlocal. 

Right, a sort of classical non locality in the brain is not just imaginable, but a fact: why else all those long connections (axons) throughout the brain? But the brain is involved in zillions of zillions of Quantum processes every microsecond (zillions is a tech term meaning more than any known number; just kidding but not really). 

Some will say QM is not room temperature, not long range at room temperature, etc. But they don’t know anything, they just talk like they know they are supposed to. In truth, High Temperature Superconductivity is a fact… And NOT explained. The only thing clear is that long range, non local Quantum effects are involved (the efficiency is 100%). If, out of a trillion Quantum processes in the brain in one microsecond, one such processes delocalize enough to cover the brain, that’s enough to create a plausible Quantum substrate for Quantum epistemology.


Don’t sneer that Quantum effects would be too small, involve too few particles. A few Quantum particles (“Lichtquanten” of Einstein) can have a big effect: when a probe passing Pluto at an infernal clip shot photons towards Earth, very few of these were received. Actually, Voyager I, launched decades ago, and now out of the heliosphere is an even better example [1]. We get just one photon from Voyager every few seconds, but that’s enough.

Quantum Mechanics computes by being all over simultaneously. The brain does the same, because being all over the place, in all localities simultaneously, enables contextual computing. Consciousness then tries to put some order, to result in action items.


The exact same thing happens in Quantum Mechanics: the fabrication of order in Quantum Mechanics is from singularization (also known as “collapse of the wave packet” which happens after “decoherence”, a distinction of no difference…)… Which is equivalent to CONSCIOUSLY firing a particular module in the brain by connecting to the action neurology (the neuromotor cortex and sub-systems such as the intestine, with its 35,000 neurons…). 


In conclusion, that the brain was made of modules was already obvious to Descartes, and amply confirmed by 1900 CE. What is new is that now we have a candidate to use as a  medium for consciousness: what underlays Quantum Physics itself, with its nonlocal, and non-measurable nature.

Philosophically, the Brain and the Quantum exist to steer globally according to local conditions [2]. The Quantum is the solution to the same problem the Brain has: how to steer the general, from local conditions.

Suggesting that consciousness is a Quantum phenomenon from the preceding is not foolhardy. There is a precedent. After Maxwell found that electromagnetic waves were going at the speed of light, he suggested to identify both. The situation here is not as clear, and we don’t have a few equations and one speed. Instead we have the need for brain nonlocality, from brain modularity. Right, it is classically achieved with axons. But it is tempting to suggest the feeling of existence is achieved through the Quantum.

Patrice Ayme



[1] Passing Jupiter Voyager I sent photons towards an antenna which received around 700 of them per second. Now it’s roughly 20 billion kilometers away, 40 times further, so the same antenna would receive only 700/(40^2) ~ one photon every two seconds. We still can get a correct information flow from that. Point is we don’t need to many event to picture a higher signal.


[2] This is the famous two-slit experiment. What is local (a slit) is having a global effect (the global interference pattern). Similarly a Brain has to take into account what is found locally to establish a general, adaptable model of reality 

Say: WEAT, Wealth Economic Activation Tax. Rather Than: “Wealth Tax”.

November 18, 2019

Applauded in US, Reviled in China:

To justify the mass deportation of maybe as much as a million Chinese (Muslim) Uighurs, the Beijing authorities observed:  “Did they commit a crime? No… It is just that their thinking has been infected by unhealthy thoughts… Freedom is only possible when this ‘virus’ in their thinking is eradicated and they are in good health.

Well, in the West, it is unnecessary to hold such a discourse: the submissives don’t even know the names of their masters… basically the media owners, all wealthy beyond belief. (By the way, the link above is to the New York Times. The real hero is the high level insider in China who leaked the documents. Amusingly, the greatest leaker has been Edward Snowden, who revealed US spy agencies spied on all US citizens with the complicity, conscious or not, of the tech monopolies. Snowden is reviled by the US establishment, the Chinese leaker has already obtained sainthood…)


Plutocrats are not just greedy: they want to put us in chains, because they like us to suffer: 

(This is the little point Rousseau overlooked, earning the scorn of De Sade.) To put us in chains, plutocrats confiscate much of the capital of the economy. (Not just because they want ever more capital, as Marx erroneously believed, but because they are… sadistic). To counteract the evil designs of those addicts of the Dark Side (however unconscious they claim to be), I advocate WEAT. 

In the last few weeks, the conspiracy against Warren has born fruit: she is not first in the polls, even in Iowa, the first state to vote, where Mr. Buttsomegig, apparently one of those pseudo-democrat from the school of pseudo-progress, is now leading. As I explained long ago, the impeachment targets Warren, not Trump. (Nobody seems to understand this.)

Hyper wealth reduces access to property, economy, and democracy for most people. Even health care gets confiscated: plutocrats organize health care as a source of profit. Patients who pay less, get less. I just ordered glasses. I have very high astigmatism. There were ten levels of quality of the lenses, the prices varied from one to five. The lowest level guaranteed a very reduced field of view. The most expensive, made by French Essilor, used special lenses, recut by computer driven laser. Not everybody can afford $500 lenses. If not, much less good vision, with consequences on driving, walking, etc. 

The failure of Obamacare, Reaganism for health care, shows up in the graph of life expectancy. Obama is the life expectancy inflection curve guy…

Obamacare acknowledged the necessity of organizing society around plutocratic profit (a Reagan moral imperative). Thus it compensated for those able to afford ‘less” by bringing in taxpayer money; however Obamacare didn’t change the basic picture, although it confused the issue… dental and eye care was still out of the picture… So was the little detail that Medicare is just 80%…

So the rise of plutocracy, Obamacare, Transferring Assets to Rich People, has corresponded to a lowering of life expectancy. 

One interest of a wealth tax is to reduce this confiscation of much by a few. Just taking wealth and reducing the national debt would reduce economic activity, and increase the worth of wealth, thus confiscate more from the commons, and make the wealthy relatively wealthier, achieving the exact opposite effect. So using a wealth tax to reduce debt… the latter being an obsession of the wealthiest and less economically active, would serve the wealthy, not most of the population. 

Instead, one has to use a wealth tax to augment economic activity and avenues for most people to increase their worth. Some of the wealthy argues that seizing two cents of their wealth would reduce the recycling of their wealth, the recycling of these two cents, into economic activity. A way to avoid this would be to enforce the recycling of 100% of the taxed wealth into economic projects. To avoid this, one should allow no injection of taxed wealth in the general budget. Thus one could present the wealth tax not as a redistribution tax, but a Wealth Economic Activation Tax. WEAT

Thus a wealth tax will have the following beneficial effects on civilization:

  1. Economic Activation of the US wealth tax, the Wealth Economic Activation Tax will be its first effect, forcing money out of the vaults of the wealthy. Those vaults could be bonds, real estate, money losing media… So WEAT will increase what is technically known as the “speed of money”.
  2. Removing even the possibility to plot to confiscate wealth from the general economy, society and democracy will be the second effect, it will inflect the economic organization of society. In today’s society, the plutocrats have so much clout, they establish government for all to see (Davos). Once the wealth tax is in place, connivence of the government and Deep State with plutocracy will be replaced by an adversarial relationship. The Davos mindset will look for what it is: a conspiracy of criminals. 
  3. The Wealth Tax will foster progressive diminution of plutocracy, that is will save civilization from the control of the mentality which a few power obsessed, evil inhabited families impose at all levels of government, and society.  

The wealth tax is a must if we want the biosphere, and, a fortiori, civilization, to survive. The wealth tax is why the Roman Republic lasted five centuries (and arguably longer). Learn from history, to be spared the same catastrophes, just, way bigger, and radioactive too.

Patrice Ayme

Are Billionaires Criminals? Is A Wealth Tax Needed To Save Civilization?

November 16, 2019

Jesus, the Christian superhero, is very clear: “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God…” Matthew 19:23-26 Just to make sure, it’s repeated in Mark and Luke. 

More can be very different: excess in anything, even good things, like water or oxygen, kill. Those who drive with grams of alcohol in their blood are criminal. So are those who drive countries with billions in their blood. It’s high time to understand the emotion underlying this. In the first century of the American Republic of United States, there were no billionaires.

What’s money? Power. A quiproquo of power. Once in the mountains south of the Caspian, I gave money to a baker I had just met, after a long run in the jungle, and he gave me in exchange a hot delicious nān. I got the life sustaining energy of his oven, skill and bread preparation in exchange for pieces of paper representing worth. The problem with billionaires is that there is no more quiproquo: they have it all, we have it none. There is none of the minimum equality necessary to constitute a human society. Our interaction with billionaires is fundamentally inhuman.


The Power of Plutocrats Can’t Be Measured by Wealth Alone: they control the media, hence minds:      

Plutos control the media, hence minds. As they control all the media, they control all the minds. Minds so controlled, they don’t believe they are controlled. In the last week, each time I tried to publish a comment on public media, I was blocked (I am not even sure my own Twitter and Facebook account work, as posts get individually blocked, unbeknownst to me: I think my post are posted, but only me see them!) That censorship includes my 30+ year old subscription at the New York Times (which, like Facebook, the NYT doesn’t like Elizabeth Warren at all, and has run extensive articles on how good plutocrats are; my comments were blocked; the NYT ignored my protests). Search engines also get controlled: Google. according to the Wall Street Journal, controls even inflammatory titles. The title of this essay could get the site blacklisted, according to the WSJ:

How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results
The internet giant uses blacklists, algorithm tweaks and an army of contractors to shape what you see
By Kirsten Grind, Sam Schechner, Robert McMillan and John West
Nov. 15, 2019 8:15 am ET.

More on this in another essay. I have been saying as much for many years, from personal experience with personal banning, personal sudden disappearance from search engines, etc. Gates of Hell’s search engine has completely blocked me off, long ago. Hey but those are great, remember, they get the Medal of Freedom (for caging us all?):

One of whose who caged us all, rewarded for caging us all. Is a bribe a bribe, when it has not been received yet? Gates of Hell rewarded for being thieves who made it so that thousands of tons of carcinogen were spread in Africa? That would be business as usual. (Gates financed Monsanto, the glyphosate/roundup maker, and used their foundation for leverage.) In a future, more ethical society, this will be viewed as a criminal act. And also as bribery. Plutocrats get honored for stealing ideas, conspiring to own the world, investing in industrial biocide carcinogenic production (glyphosate), and being friend with whom they sponsor, will provide for, and for giving their non-college educated advice in matter of national education…

All these MSM media are owned by plutocrats, and they exert their power. The old retort plutocrats have trained their little dogs to bark back, is that I can subscribe to something else. Not so: all the Main Stream Media (and its alter ego on the Internet) is owned by plutocrats. All of it. Even PBS and NPR are under Pluto influence and financing (they crowe about it).

Now the ownership of the media by plutocrats doesn’t contribute much to their financial wealth. So why do plutocrats own media, MSM or Internet? Because plutocracy is not just about wealth. Plutocracy is about power. Pluto-Kratia: Evil-Power. Because, like Satan of old, what interests Pluto-Krats is the satanic power they exert on minds. By owning media, plutocrats infantilize humans, mold their minds, whichever way they want, make them engage even in self-hurt, and  thus, they own minds, as others owned pets, before animals had rights. When the Gates (of Hell) and their Pluto peers pay for Project Syndicate, a pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-rebellious Internet media company, it enables them to control a FAKE OPPOSITION founded on fake news, fake opinions, fake emotions. Thus they such all the oxygen.  

PARIS, FRANCE – DECEMBER 12: Bill Gates (R) and Richard Branson leave after a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron as he receives the One Planet Summit’s international philanthropists at Elysee Palace on December 12, 2017 in Paris, France. Macron is hosting the One ClimateSummit, which gathers world leaders, so-called philantropists (actually the executioners of planet and civilization)and other committed private individuals to discuss climate change. (Photo by Aurelien Meunier/Getty Images). One of my personal enemies was there, he intervened to kick my daughter (successfully) out of school, since. When Obama finished his presidency, he climbed with his wife into a persoanl jet of Branson (to the left). Then the two corrupt ones spent weeks on the private island of Branson… Said tax free island enables Branson, owner of Virgin, to pay very little taxes. It’s cool with Obama, Obama, like Biden, is a cool guy, no billionaire he doesn’t love. Love makes the cash go around… The US economy loves these two guys. No tax loophole is big enough…

Our elected leaders favor the hyper wealthy, and honor them, and get them to lead, or go tax free, or present tax loopholes which will enrich them and their descendants, for ages to come. 

Look at Gates getting their medals: identical scenes are found all over the planet. Facebook guy, another NON college educated Pluto has been received in presidential palaces all over, including the French one. A hyper powerful man decorates another. What are they congratulating themselves about? The state of the planet? Think of it: computer science professors consider Gates hijacked a software developed in universities (that is with public money, public power), and then “developed” it for IBM because his influential mother, daughter of a banker was sitting pretty on the IBM board (a company which should be most famous for helping Hitler be all he could be).  


Rome collapsed because it became stupid, whereas degraded ecological, economic and military circumstances required it to become smarter. That stupidity was imposed from the top: emperor Domitian, for example, tolerated only stoic philosophers, because those teach the sheep how to be kicked everyday and take it with fortitude. The Roman Republic fell into chain reaction plutocracy from a failure of its wealth tax caused by globalization, which enabled the wealthy to escape the (now) local wealth tax [1]. 

Sharp thinking became the enemy in Rome, it’s all too often the enemy now: when I say something real intelligent and uncommon in the New York Times, it censors me (I am a long term subscriber and use the paper as a lab on Demoncracy).

The New York Times is of course opposed to Warren’s program… Her program is very similar to what I have proposed for more than 12 years…(Although I viewed the imposition of Medicare For All a mistake made to make the program fail; instead, I believe in the “Public Option” which is M4A by choice, operating as zero cost… it will kill for profit basic health care).

So the New York Times came up with a flurry of studies pretending that the wealth tax will reduce economic activity as it will be used to reduce the national debt. And to accuse Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, two economists at the University of California, Berkeley, who advise Warren, to not have considered how it would affect growth. 

Now, of course, the whole idea of the wealth tax is to augment growth. As Rome fell into plutocracy, ever deeper, it shrank intellectually, sociologically, economically, politically and finally collapsed demographically. All this, from no wealth tax…

And the worst is that recent detailed studies show that Rome was no more of a plutocracy than the modern USA… The present situation of course is worse: in Rome, plutocrats didn’t own media, and thus didn’t forge minds. Now they do.

Rome collapsed from plutocracy, because plutocracy is entangled with the stupidity which enables it to exist. Too much stupidity, and civilization dies. Also, this time, the biosphere is dying too.

So yes, we need a wealth tax to save civilization. And behaviors of our elected representatives pandering to whom are arguably the world’s most powerful criminals and destroyers of the biosphere is bribery, at an apocalyptic level. Jesus would not have been amused and history shall be even less forgiving.

Patrice Ayme

Nazi Germany Won The Battle Of France Of 1940, Because It Was Desperate

November 14, 2019

The original Aufmarschanweisung N°1, Fall Gelb (Campaign Instruction No 1, Case Yellow), was a German army plan to push the Allied forces back through central Belgium to the Somme river, in northern France, with similarities to the 1914 campaign of the First World War.

It had to be disregarded, after a plane with the plan crash landed in (neutral) Belgium.

It was thoroughly anticipated by the French High Command, and the French six million man army was ready for it.

The French had 3,000 serious tanks, including heavy tanks the Nazis didn’t have, and couldn’t destroy. The tanks were dispersed in various elite divisions, but also concentrated in seven divisions equivalent to Panzer divisions, plus three super heavy divisions without equivalent on the Nazi side. 

The Nazis had 1,000 German made tanks, mostly light and medium. Plus 1,000 captured Czek tanks. They had ten Panzer divisions. 

British aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean, August 10,1942. The Nazis didn’t plan to have one single carrier in action before 1945…

On paper, the French plus British had much more planes than the Nazis. But half of the French air force was deployed far away, and the British kept much of their force in reserve in May-June 1940. It was estimated that, by mid-June the French air force could have recovered air supremacy over France (by recalling modern planes from far away). It threw the towel for other reason (the army couldn’t insure the safety of the air bases; so hundreds of brand new, high quality planes were flown to North Africa).

The British Navy was more than many times the Nazi Navy, and had several carriers (one of them lethally hobbled the Bismarck, which was hit by 3 or 4 torpedoes, one of which crippled its rudder). The Germans had no aircraft carrier, and just two serious battleships under construction. The French Navy was more than the Nazi Navy. It had one carrier, and was building more. Its fast battleships could handle the Bismarck class. It had large submarines.

France and Britain knew that they would have become overwhelmingly stronger than Nazi Germany within months… while staying connected to the world, including their crazy US child. Many US companies were starting to help France and Britain. Out of Franco-British airplane requirements and a contract with a US company, came the P47, the Mustang, a long range fighter which the US ended up ordering… and which was a game changer (as it escorted bomber fleets). France a six million, 110 divisions army. Britain had only a 300,000 man professional army…. but ready to train millions, after a draft. Germany had 150 divisions.

Britain, all by itself, even after France ceased fire, was able to completely embargo Nazi Germany… Disastrously for the Nazis. That meant no more oil from the USA. Germany could only get oil from the Soviet Union! After Germany attacked the USSR, it ran out of oil: it had no more in 1942, hence the mad dash towards the massive oil fields of the Caucasus, and, thus, to Stalingrad (to protect the side of the oil thrust)…. That was called Operation Edelweiss….

By the time they got to Stalingrad, then the German tanks were run down, their machinery used up, failing. And they were out of oil. And out of all too many qualified soldiers, with 50,000 of the elite fanatics killed in France, and the Nazi paratroops pretty much annihilated in a very costly victory in Crete… And then the disastrous defeat at Moscow in December 1941, in view of the golden bulbs of the Kremlin… The Nazis had lost the war, and some German officers knew it.

All of this was so obviously predictable that the desperate gamble of stealthily sneaking through south Belgium’s Ardennes most of the Nazi army became the only ray of hope Nazi generals could entertain….If the Nazi army had been detected in a timely manner, the Nazi armed forces would have been decapitated. But what else could they have done? Like the Japs at Pearl Harbor, all their options were as many avenues towards oblivion. The question was not whether they would be defeated, but how soon.

Because of a succession of (Nazi) miracles, the desperate Nazi plan of May 1940, worked…Most of the German army and air force attacked a single French reserve division in a hyper concentrated assault at Sedan… Just as in 1870 and 1914… Suicide charges by dedicated Nazi engineers had to be used to defeat French fortifications. The British Second Armored division which was supposed to be behind the French B division, had not been deployed. Had it been there, with its Mathilda tanks, superior to the German ones, the Nazi assault would have turned into a rout.


Paradoxically, the Nazi victory of May-June 1940 insured than an already bad world war was going to get way worse. First the British had kept enough air force in reserve to defend Britain… while the Nazi air force had suffered grievous losses in 6 weeks of aerial fighting over France. So the “Battle of Britain” of August 1940 was promptly lost. Then, because Britain couldn’t be defeated, so the USSR had to be attacked… But, as it turned out, not only was Britain undefeated, but it started to bomb Berlin significantly, and then the British ruled the Mediterranean (most of it, most of the time), hence forcing a very costly intervention in Crete, weeks before the attack on the USSR, which had to be delayed). 


This shows that the fortunes of serious wars are full of twists and turns. On the face of it, though, the Germans should have thought five minutes about it in the 1930s: they couldn’t win another repeat of 1914. This time, the French and the British had overwhelming force. But, well, the Germans, in a feat of collective hypnosis, persuaded themselves they lost because of the Jews and the Communists, stabbing them in the back… Actually, by 1918, German explosive production had collapsed (it was perhaps 10% of France’s), and the French led offensive in the Balkans condemned Germany to starvation…

A frontal assault on the French army in 1940, as the original Nazi plan had it, would have been costly: on August 22, 1914, in furious counterattacks, the French army suffered 27,000 soldiers killed in action at the Battle of Charleroi. In one single day. That drove the aggressors mad: they engaged in a frenzy of war crimes. The initial frontal attack planned in 1940 would have brought the same sort of action, namely extremely violent French reactions… At Bir Hakeim, in May-June 1942, 3,000 French soldiers held for many days, the entire Afrika Korps and the Italian army… preventing the annihilation of the British Eight army… and the only chance for the Nazis to get to Iraqi oil.

There had been a stalemate in 1914–1916, helped by the breaking of the Franco-British blockade of fascist Germany by US plutocrats bringing crucial war supplies through the officially “neutral” Netherlands. But how can one be “neutral” when one is helping fascist invaders? The same thing was not going to happen in 1940, as Hitler invaded “neutral” countries. Thus the prognostic of the war launched by the Nazis was grim. Ludwig Beck, chief of the German general staff, said that Germany was in a much less favorable position in 1939 than in 1914. That’s why he resigned.

So why the senseless war? Just to lose it, same as somebody jumping from a tall building: it’s not done to win. An erroneous picture of Germany and fate had to come crashing to earth first.

If one wants to win a war, one better be at peace with oneself… First.

Patrice Ayme

“Neoliberalism” Is Neither Liberal, Nor New. Plain Old Plutocracy.

November 12, 2019

“Neoliberalism” is neither. It is not attached to liberty, but to slavery. And it is nothing new. Plutocracy is the cancer of civilizations, and kills them readily. But this time, the entire biosphere is going down.

A better name for “Neoliberalism” would be “plutophilia”, the love of the darkest passions, the love of plutocracy, which is etymologically and in reality, the rule of evil (as this is exactly what pluto-kratia means: the rule of wealth being a particular case of Pluto’s propensities).

“Neoliberalism”, was initially called “trickle down”. One of its axioms was as professor Stiglitz says: “the credibility of neoliberalism’s faith in unfettered markets as the surest road to shared prosperity[1]. However, by “markets” one really meant “merchants”.

When only a few have all the disposable cash, they have all the power, It’s not just bad for ethics, democracy and the sense of fairness we primates all share. It’s also terrible for incentive, motivation, and the blossoming of ideas.

Indeed, what is a market? Who dominates a market? Well, those with enough capital to do so. In other words, the wealthy, or those that banks have decided to lend to… typically, again, those with collateral, namely the wealthy. So the banking system, if it looks for a profit, makes the wealthy wealthier. Hence the so-called “unfettered markets” were, in truth, the unfettered wealthiest, while the fetters were put on everybody else.  

But, unfettered, wealth grows exponentially (as the wealthiest have nearly all the money and lend it, leveraged, to the wealthiest, namely themselves). 

This is exactly what happened: the wealthy got wealthier. And what is wealth? It is power onto others. So the powers of a few grew, onto most people, helped along by a government by “representatives” which learned to act in its own best interest, serving power, that is, wealth. 

“Neoliberalism” fostered, in turn, other myths, first of which was that, unfettered globalization, worldwide, was good for the Republic. Actually, globalization was a disaster: it undermined social rights and taxation. 

The most spectacular example of the disaster engineered by unfettered globalization was the Roman Republic. The Roman REPUBLIC, which lasted 5 centuries, had an absolute wealth limit. And the Roman Republic lasted 5 centuries because it had an absolute wealth limit.

One could argue, and it was argued at the time, that the Res Publica kept on going, in many ways until the end of the “Principate” Diocletian insisted to be called “Dominus” and be considered a living god; in any case, the political regime inaugurated by Augustus should be called a “plutocratic Republic”, and there was a famous dinner, under Domitian, circa 80 CE, where the principal plutocrats of Rome, Domitian among them, argued just that!)

The Florence Republic fell to plutocrats, the Medici, a family of bankers, after exactly 417 years, precisely because it had no wealth limit. (In that case the collapse into plutocratic dictatorship was more brutal than with Rome.) 

There was an absolute wealth limit, because the wealth tax, during the Roman Republic, was 100% above a  threshold (the threshold was pretty low, at most 30 million 2019 dollars, and maybe as low as ten million). Above that threshold, 100% of the property was transferred to the Ager Publicus.

After 200 BCE, and the Second Punic war, having had to fight extremely hard, at immense cost and sacrifice, in Greece, Spain, Africa, the Roman republic became global. Yet, taxation was still local, so wealthy Romans were able to escape the wealth limit, by residing overseas, and Roman billionaires appeared.

The plutocrats immediately started to plot against the Republic. The best way to do that was to corrupt it, by buying politicians. It took many generations, but the Republic declined and collapsed, in spite of the life endangering efforts of many heroes, including the Gracchi brothers, Marius, and his nephew Caesar (Caesar passed a wealth distribution law in 59 BCE).


Plutocracy expects We The People to believe that a few know best, and deserve all the wealth, all the powers. As a result calamitous policies are engaged into, because only a few brains, without debate, devoured by greed, don’t think too well. Moreover, plutocratic policies look accidentally bad, but they are actually so by design: the worse things get, the more the worst gets going. The more evil things get, the more at home plutocracy is, the more evil can rule… 


A particular example of these satanic policies is the climate catastrophe, which is part of a mass extinction, the likes of which have not been seen in 70 million years. There were technologies, at the ready already in 1990, to prevent the CO2 catastrophe: in 2019, France pollutes 5 tons of CO2 per capita (the world average), California 9.2 tons, the USA 16 tons, Canada and Australia more than 16… So France knows how to do it, and the others chose not to (the UK, Spain and Italy are around 6 tons; whereas hysterically pro-coal Germany is at 10 tons…) The mood in France is more ecological, more egalitarian, more social… All this is related: respect the environment, just as, and because, you respect your neighbor. Disrespect the environment, as countries like the US, Australia and Canada do, disrespect the neighbor.    

The global plutocracy is indeed intensely related to its fossil fuel component: fossil fuel money is recycled through Wall Street. US President FD Roosevelt set-up that system, meeting with Ibn Saud on the Great Bitter lake in Egypt, shortly before his death. Similarly, when Obama became president, he presented fracking as “the bridge fuel to the future”, and Wall Street, applauding, made massive fracking investments on the lands and water Obama put at its disposal. Thus, once again, the US is the world’s greatest fossil fuel producer: alleluia, say the “America First” crowd, and one expects them to make dark secret masses to their hero Obama, who made fracking into the lifeblood of the US.


Plutocracy rules through minds. Careful disinformation, and lack of significant information needs to be fed to the masses. Here is an example: 

The New York Times just woke up to the fact that climate scientists systematically underestimated the gravity of the climate crisis we are in. The paper couldn’t explain why this happened, but showed with great clarity how much it happened. I sent a comment basically explaining that the “Neoliberal” regime paid the salaries of those scientists, so they couldn’t be too alarmist, if they wanted to be employed. 

The New York Times apparently found my explanation alarming, a danger to the elite, and refused to publish it. Just as, over the years, much of the MainStream Media has found any discourse against the “Neoliberal” order deranged and alarming (and censored thousands of my comments). Here my comment explaining why scientists were not too alarmed by the climate catastrophe:

The problem has been that scientists are paid by governments which are manipulated by plutocrats, most of them part of the establishment… And the establishment is fossil fuel plutocracy dependent (say, Wall Street, as an example).

So scientists do not want to bite the hand that feed them. And this is still true. The real truth is that the giant masses of ice of Antarctica will melt with a warming of just a few more degrees. I have explained the exact mechanism in essays on my site, in great detail, for more than a decade. The reason is that half of Antarctica is under water… And the densest water is at 4 degrees Centigrade (roughly 40 Fahrenheit)… 

Thus a hyper catastrophic melting is entirely possible… Millennia before what the old, baseless, “scientific” analyses pretended. 

Also a serious diminution of the oxygen content of the atmosphere, ridiculed by well-fed scientists, is actually entirely possible under very plausible (yet complex) scenarios. And so on.

The plutocracy which rules over us is mostly fossil-fuel based. Any plutocracy knows that it needs to control the minds. Nowadays this means controlling the scientists. The gross attack, “climate denier” style, are there only to confuse us.

The real danger is the subtle disinformation that the situation is not dire, that we have time, it’s a question for the grandchildren. I have lived in smoke for weeks on end in the tech metropolis of the San Francisco Bay Area: the burning climate catastrophe is upon us now. One can see it very clearly when one looks outside, and all one sees is smoke.

To free ourselves from “Neoliberalism”, which is economic neofascism by another name, will require a great intellectual effort. I don’t see our schools, including universities, committed to it.

Patrice Ayme



[1] The End of Neoliberalism and the Rebirth of History
For 40 years, elites in rich and poor countries alike promised that neoliberal policies would lead to faster economic growth, and that the benefits would trickle down so that everyone, including the poorest, would be better off. Now that the evidence is in, is it any wonder that trust in elites and confidence in democracy have plummeted?

NEW YORK – At the end of the Cold War, political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote a celebrated essay called “The End of History?” Communism’s collapse, he argued, would clear the last obstacle separating the entire world from its destiny of liberal democracy and market economies. Many people agreed.

Following the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, open societies were triumphant and international cooperation became the dominant creed. Thirty years later, however, nationalism has turned out to be much more powerful and disruptive than internationalism.

Today, as we face a retreat from the rules-based, liberal global order, with autocratic rulers and demagogues leading countries that contain well over half the world’s population, Fukuyama’s idea seems quaint and naive. But it reinforced the neoliberal economic doctrine that has prevailed for the last 40 years.”

Fukuyama, a Fukushima of the intellect was, and is an idiot, as a would-be master thinker, but extremely intelligent in the satisfaction of his greed, and a very useful idiot for the global plutocracy. Yes, an idiot: how can one be more idiotic that claiming nothing new will happen in history ever again, because “Neoliberalism” was , and is, the best of all possible worlds? The best of all possible worlds for Fukuyama himself, yes. Of course. As for many idiots, the rule of one, the rule of the self, is the rule of all.

Fukuyama is swimming in a sea of honors (…or horrors, depending upon the perspective). I am surprised he didn’t get a Nobel yet, considering how useful he is for the establishment.

Recently Fukuyama/shima was, among other things, “Mosbacher Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law” at Stanford University. A rattlesnake teaching medical care. In August 2019 he was named director of the “Ford Dorsey Master’s in International Policy” at Stanford. (That Ford plutocrat, aka “philanthropist” seems to have no relation with the original sponsor of Adolf Hitler, Henry Ford… I perfidiously checked, already chuckling…)

Before that, he served as a professor and director of the International Development program at the School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University. Yes, there are plutocratic universities (I used to teach at Stanford, by the way…)

If The USA Had Been Decent, Would The Nazis Have Disturbed The Peace?

November 10, 2019

History follows some paths. There are others. Just as with thought experiments in physics, inquiring minds inquire best by weighting the factors, making thought experiments in history (all historians have always done this, to an extent or the other, connecting the dots). The most interesting and instructive weighting of the facts occur when one changes nearly nothing, and one changes events slightly according to not just plausible, but probable scenarios. (The military learns much by running “what ifs” scenarios, and does this all the time [1]). It turns out that history is full of butterfly effects, where a small fluttering somewhere has giant effect after a while (the weather is notoriously that way with a three week horizon). Therein a morale: if one wants history to enfold optimally, looking forward, one should not neglect the utmost precautions. Including the fact that too much precaution can kill precaution, if one doesn’t understand the underground logic at hand.

This is what happened in Nazi Germany, when the army command tried to reintroduce rationality: it didn’t work, because they had missed the evil design of the Anglo-Saxon Deep State, and its attached plutocracy.

Ludwig Beck, a real hero in his belated struggle against Hitler, but too trusting of the Anglo-Saxon elite. Beck was chief of the German army and, from pro-Nazi, turned into an anti-Nazi conscious of the madness of Hitler and Al. He directed his subordinates, including the top admirals, to propose to the Americans and the British to announce that the USA and the UK would side with France in case of conflict with the Nazis. He was going to use this as a pretext to make a coup against the Nazis. Instead the US and UK warned Hitler of the conspiracy. Fired by Hitler, who couldn’t do more than that, as Beck’s prestige was immense, he organized behind the scene the coup of 1944. He was asked to commit suicide.

The question was asked: If the US joined the League of Nations, would WWII have occurred?

Let me change the question slightly into: If the US had respected its parent, France, and practiced other aspects of basic decency of a civilized nation, as its Gallic parent had tried to instill to it, would WWII have occurred? Or, otherwise said: If The USA had Been Decent, Would The Nazis Have Disturbed the Peace?

The short of it: no.

World War Two happened because the French Republic had more than enough with the Nazis. The French had been itching to go destroy Hitler since the latter invaded Spain in 1936 (with the help of the rogue Franco, and fascist Italy). However, after agreeing to come to the rescue of the Spanish Republic, the French, led by PM Jewish Socialist Blum, were submitted to scathing threats from London and Washington, so they didn’t. Then there was the Munich circus, followed by Hilter invading Czechoslovakia, Austria… 

After the fall of Spain (early 1939), the French stiffened the Polish spine, and added a chastised Great Britain in the appendix to the Franco-Polish treaty (“entente cordiale would apply…) Cornered, an enraged Hitler made his ultra secret alliance with fellow dictator Stalin official. Surely, now confronting fascist Japan, Italy, Germany and the USSR, the French won’t attack? But the French were undeterred. At that point the Nazis were stuck. They couldn’t lose face: Hitler knew that the German generals had nearly staged a coup already.

What could have stopped the war? Those German generals: they had all the power. Had the USA declared it sided with France, the generals would have known they were facing the infernal trio of France, Britain and their progeny, the USA, and, thus, Germany couldn’t win. So they had to stage a coup to save Germany, as they explained in 1937 to the Anglo-Saxon ambassadors.

However the position of the USA in 1939 relative to Nazism was not clear: plutocrat FDR detested egalitarian, socialist France, and wanted to grab all her colonies to make them part of the US empire. Moreover US plutocrats were roaming all over Germany doing excellent business under Hitler, owning a large part of it: IBM had the monopoly of computing, for example, a gift of Hitler (see “IBM and the Holocaust”). Finally, the US was a racist country, and much of Nazism was copied from US themes.


The very idea of League of Nation was born in France in 1916 (and then co-opted by hyper racist Wilson). So the entire US “isolationist” posture, which didn’t apply to Nazi Germany (the “Third Reich” was full of US plutocrats, US investments, US tech, etc.) was more directed against France, and an excuse for the US to deal with Germany as a new “Wild West“… like the myth of the “crippling” reparations, launched by racist plutocrat Keynes, who was enraged that Eastern Europe had been freed from Germany by Versailles… (the reparations were so little “crippling” that the French are still rebuilding, more than a century after the fascist German invaders dismantled even treasures of the Middle Ages…)

To be in the League, per se, would not have been enough, to prevent WW2. However, had the USA being just decent with its parent, France, the German generals would have seen their defeat was unavoidable, as the USA was siding with France.

And guess what, as I already said, but it’s worth repeating? The German generals, and admirals, led by a fierce colonel who wanted to overthrow Hitler, and, initially more loosely, by chief of staff Ludwig Beck, who was pro-Nazi in 1930 [2], asked, as early as 1937, the UK and US, to do just that, declare they would side with France. But they didn’t. Instead, the Anglo-Saxons told Hitler… And FDR recalled his friend Dodd, US ambassador in Berlin, an ex-history professor, viewed as too friendly to his French peer, and a determined anti-Nazi. FDR replaced Dodd by a pro-Nazi, and did the same in Britain, installing the notoriously pro-fascist plutocrat mafioso Joe Kennedy as ambassador there… (More details on the Dodd-Francois-Poncet interaction in the book “The Garden of the Beasts”…)

The German generals, as a collective mind, were not smart enough to realize they were going to become victims of the greatest bait and switch imaginable… Although the same exactly had happened to Germany in WW1… (The USA encouraged the Kaiser to attack, and then sustained him, until it became clear that France and Britain were going to win, then switched sides…)

Nowadays, the Germans have finally figured it all out, deep inside… Just as the Brits lost it completely… History is the ride that never ends…

The most amazing part of this subject is that many individuals who believe they know it well, actually keep on repeating the basic Nazi themes (hence my re-education program)…

And, even more interesting, those themes often only partly originated in Germany… Keynes launched the idea that returning Eastern Europe to self-determination was a racial and economic mistake. Even the famous “stab in the back” theme the Nazis used as a pretext against Communists, Socialists, and Jews, had been uttered first by a British general who had lashed back sarcastically at war criminal general and principal original Nazi, Ludendorff… Ludendorff ran away with that theme…  A way to bury his own war crimes under fresh layers of invented indignation…

The myth of the “crippling reparations” exacted by France and Belgium in a spirit of wanton revenge was launched… And survives to this day. Actually the “reparations” amounted to only 5 trillion of 2018 Euros. One out of twenty Frenchman had been killed, in a war cold bloodily launched by fascist Germany. So, roughly the “reparation” amounted to 800,000 Euros by dead Frenchman. That gross computation doesn’t count 4.3 million wounded, including hundreds of thousands mutilated for life. The industrial north east of France had been eradicated in deliberate devastation designed to cripple France. 

Ah, relevance for today? If one can’t still see the manipulations of the plutocrats and their associated Deep State, a century ago, how could one see them today?

Indeed, the fact the deep maneuvers of the US Deep State and its sponsor, US plutocracy, the billionaires and their descendants hidden in Foundations, Boards, Institutes, “Charities”, “Think Tanks”, plutocratic universities and the like, have not been exposed in full, doesn’t just explain the amazing (however ephemeral) success of the monstrosity known as Nazism.

More fundamentally, the obliviousness, and lack of interest, in the maneuvers of the Deep State and its sponsor, Anglo-Saxon plutocracy, explains much of the rise of global plutocracy and its attendant inequality, poverty, drug abuse, decay in education, healthcare and many basic services observed since…

Patrice Ayme



P/S: If I use the expression “Deep State” in the plutophile New York Times, it will censor the comment: We The People in the present day USA have been imprinted to believe that, should they see a conspiracy somewhere, and a fortiori a machine to create conspiracies, one is deranged… BTW, it’s the US Senate which blocked the entry of the USA in the League of Nations… Roughly simultaneously, all the documents revealing the theft of German property by the US government, and its transfer to US plutocrats, conveniently burned with a building in Washington in 1921 (so US Plutos stayed in control of German property they had stolen, thereafter… enabling them to steer Nazis) .

For the mood at work, have a glance at this, from 1943:


[1] Famously, re-runs of the 1940 Battle of France and Midway, give opposite results to what happened. In both cases, huge forces which should have been detected were not.


[2] Ludwig Beck, in a series of memos to the top Nazis and Hitler in May 1938: “The French army is and remains intact and is at the moment the strongest in Europe… The military-economic situation of Germany is bad, worse than in 1917–1918. In its current military, military-political and military-economic condition, Germany cannot expose itself to the risk of a long war…

Furthermore the chief of the German general staff cannot “accept these estimates of the military power of France and England…Germany, whether alone or in alliance with Italy, is not in a position militarily to match England or France. The May Crisis of 21–22 May 1938 further convinced Beck of the dangers of going to war in 1938, and led him to increase his efforts to stop a war that he felt Germany could not win. In November 1938, Beck informed a friend that, from the time of the May Crisis, the only consideration in his mind was “How can I prevent a war?”

On 29 July 1938, Beck wrote a memo stating the German Army had the duty to prepare for possible wars with foreign enemies and “for an internal conflict which need only take place in Berlin” [against the Nazis, that is]. The 29 July 1938 memo is considered the start of Beck’s efforts to overthrow the Nazi regime. However, Beck would resign too early, and alone, and Hitler manipulated him in keeping the resignation secret…