Archive for the ‘Fascism’ Category

Want Genius? Get Out Of The Gilded Box Global Plutocrats Designed

October 5, 2020

A PhD in a field X means one has done studies in X, but it also means one has PLEASED A HANDFUL of senior members of the PhD GUILD… One has entered a hierarchy. When I mixed up with the best and brightest, I was struck how hierarchical it all was [1].

The fact that professional intellectuals have to aspire to belong to a guild, to please a hierarchy to get the crumbs that feed them as the pigeons they are has the following consequence: Most great mental advances of humanity are from AMATEURS, OR INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATORS, NOT GUILDERS; it’s a historical fact. The very fact that “amateurs”, people who love a subject are viewed in a pejorative way is itself pretty telling. It is basically saying that working for love is inferior to working for a stipend: the lover is inferior to the prostitute, on matter of (prostitution?) principle. The prostitution principle makes employers the ultimate adjudicators of intellectual worth. And now the ultimate adjudicators are the global plutocrats.

I agree with Nietzsche’s analysis, but I go much deeper: the universal principles the infernal trio of those lovers of each others of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle subscribed to were the universal principles of plutocracy against democracy. Plutocracy is intrinsically for mental fascism: deriving everything from a few principles which serve the owners. Socrates, heir of a small fortune, lived like a whore for wealthier than him. Plato, a gilded youth of Athens, aspired to be the Syracuse tyrant’s boyfriend, and Aristotle, a spawn of the innermost circle of the Macedonian tyrant, was the mastermind of the takeover of the world by his Macedonian students. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, are the evil artisans of the ultimate plutocratic box. The consequences were dramatic: ARISTOTLE DESTROYED DEMOCRACY

Yes, ARISTOTLE DESTROYED DEMOCRACY, by building the box nobody was supposed to get out of [2]

It is true that individuals who, while members of the PhD GUILD do not follow the dogmas of the guild, are described as “fringe” and dangerous radicals, and lower order sorts. I was long around the highest top circles in math-physics and I noticed the very highest (Nobel, Field medal ranks) were less arrogant than the ones below them…  The very top guys (De Broglie, Feynman, Wheeler, etc.) were just the opposite, humble and frank. But very consumed by their narcissistic selves…

The intrinsic nature of genius means one is out of the box: the box is not a genius, it’s a prison: new ideas come always from the outside, not the stampeding herd. So the very definition of genius implies asocial behavior towards the GUILDS. 

This can be seen even in individuals such as ABELARD and BURIDAN, Middle Ages super thinkers who were the equivalent of celebrity rock stars in their times… So they were very famous. Abelard led the war against Saint Bernard, the de facto Pope and a crazed advocate of the 2nd Crusade; two centuries later, Buridan, rector of the world’s most famous university, Paris, advised four kings and was loved by a queen, etc… and also had a gigantic following, including the Oresemes, Oxford computing school… They were very famous but still they rocked the boat… Both fought the power of the church in a way which required extreme courage.

An example of resistance of dogma to significant fact is Dark Matter: the evidence for it is nearly a century old, but it was denied… It is a highly significant fact, as it means, POTENTIALLY, that existing physics is 96% IRRELEVANT. As an amateur of sorts, I found an obvious (?) POTENTIAL solution: a finite Quantum Interaction (there is no Quantum Interaction if CIQ, Copenhagen Interpretation Quantum… But I am sure Newton would agree with me, because he wrote on the subject, famously about gravity).

The problem with the identification of the PhD and UNIVERSITY EMPLOYED GUILD with the top intellectual class is that universities, and “university affiliation” are that universities are all in the employ of the top plutocratic class and its agent, the GLOBAL DEEP STATE… This enables the Global Deep State to establish its worldwide mind control.

An example is so-called “French Theory” an all-encompassing philosophical theory, which has been interpreted as saying that there is nothing as a superior cultural trait. Believing in the superiority of some system of thoughts over others is… racist.

Thus, in particular, claiming that “All Lives Matter” is racist.

Wait… what? Ah, because the founding members of “French Theory”, like the ignorant and, or, biased Claude LéviStrauss (a French anthropologist and ethnologist founder of “French Theory”) believed that the West rose on mayhem, and, implicitly, only mayhem… This has been parroted and amplified ever since, in an avalanche of Black Lies. And Black Lies Matter!

Whereas, in truth, the West rose on… Amateur geniuses… certainly the USA, a colony of Europe, rose on much more mayhem than necessary, but that’s another story.

The Occident arose from the creative destruction of yesteryear’s obsolete spiritual prisons… The history of ideas is the history of jailbreaks.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] Since then Zarathustra, or Nietzsche, following Descartes, himself echoing Montaigne and his “ivory tower”, will guess that I have entered a higher phase, where mixing would be akin to dilution: there is a time for the cave up high in the mountains, and the dialogue with the centuries…

***

[2] Abelard, then Buridan, did get out of the Aristotelian box, It was perceived to be so at the time. Peter the Venerable, abbot of all powerful Cluny (by far the largest Christian church at the time) protected Abelard from Saint Bernard. He called Abelard “our Aristotle”.

Did Xi’s Great Reich Have World Criminal Intent? 

May 13, 2020

Other title, to sound more serious:

All dictatorships  are criminal, in peacetime. But it is one thing, to be criminal inside one’s own country, and it is another, to project one’s criminality onto the world. At first sight, Xi’s regime did the modern equivalent of distributing smallpox blankets to the savages. And we are the savages. So we have been savaged.

At the very least, the West should be able to find out what happened. But Xi’s dictatorship has blocked inquiries. 

My old position on the subject was that the pandemic was made possible by the closed nature of the People Republic of China. But that position turns out to be too moderate. At some point, at the latest around January 7, 2020, Xi and his goons were aware of the danger posed by the new Coronavirus. Why the 7th of January? Because Xi then gave a discourse about the virus to his top goons. By January 23, the enormous city of Wuhan (bigger population than Sweden), and the province of Hubei (as populous as Turkey or Germany) were lockdowned. In particular, all flights were grounded. All land communications were cut out of Hubei, or within Hubei, between cities and villages.

[Vice-President Biden and Virusman Xi, 2013.] US Plutocracy made Hitler, to propel its own greed and empire, in the guise of good business, and jettisoned the German fascist states, when it became useful to do so… twice… US plutocracy also helped to make Xi, same idea. Xi changed the Chinese constitution after being encouraged in his way by Obama goons and US plutocrats, for years. But jettisoning the “Central State” (China) may prove harder… Lest we act now: Xi inherited his power from his dad, but he is still relatively weak, with enemies inside. To wait means a Chinese Kim style family. Virusman is still not as virulent as he will get, now is the time.

Meanwhile the WHO and its head, pushed and installed by Xi and his friends, kept on saying the virus couldn’t be transmitted human to human. Now this head of the WHO is the first who is not a physician, and comes from a country (Ethiopia) with tortured politics (the present leader of Ethiopia got a Nobel Peace Prize but is involved in a nasty civil war now). 

At the very least Xi’s dictatorship is guilty of CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE; they committed acts, such as authorizing flights from Wuhan to the rest of the world, or claiming there was no human to human transmission, while knowing very well that such positioning endangered the rest of the world. And the result was hundreds of thousands dead worldwide, millions sick, and economic damage commensurate, so far with China’s entire yearly GDP.

When it arose after 1948, the Cold War with Russia was NOT caused by Stalin’s USSR being criminally negligent and bringing the death of hundreds of thousands of citizens of NATO countries [1]. In other words, the Cold War got launched, although there was no act of war (Casus Belli: Case Of War).

Xi and his goons knew, by early January, that there was human to human transmission. Had there been free press, free media in China, it would have been obvious there was a vicious SARS epidemic going on, at least a month earlier. Here is the problem of having a Closed Society. But, when the leadership of the Xi Reich decided to act decisively one way, to save massively lives inside China, while it and its agent (the WHO) decided to act the opposite for lives OUTSIDE China, one can only conclude there was a deliberate policy to inflict a pandemic onto the rest of the world.

Did Xi’s Dictatorship have criminal intent? Looks like it. Plutocratic sycophants go around and say a new cold war, this time with a Chinese dictatorship, would be a terrible mistake. Methinks that it would be a worse mistake to do nothing. The casual disregard of most of humanity by Xi is a warning. Let’s not forget his dad was from a regime which didn’t mind to kill dozens of millions to get its way.

What to do?

***

Ideally, overthrow the dictatorship… But remember what happened with Sparta, Athens and Persia: 

The situation we have with Xi’s Great Reich is similar with the Direct Democracy of Athens facing the fascist Persian plutocracy. What happened then is that Persia attacked and was defeated in two separate wars it launched. Then Athens tried to free Egypt, its ancient trading partner, in a long war it lost. Persia gained time, and then Sparta attacked Athens, and after thirty years, won, thanks to massive Persian financial intervention (Persia paid and made a Spartan fleet which was the proximal cause of Spartan victory).

What is the exact analogy? China as Persia, Russia as Persia, and the rather more than less degenerated West as Athens. Now Russia is getting hit hard by the Corochinavirus. And, differently from Sparta which was a fascist, racist, lethally murderous regime, Russia, is, nominally, a Republic with a permanent feature, strongman Putin, reminiscent of Pericles. Pericles had an excellent second wife, the philosopher Aspasia, but, he was, overall, a small-man fool (long story involving Pericles’ war plans conducive to a devastating epidemic, as happened; and also self-contradicting, self-destroying, and Athens’ destroying xenophobia). Now Putin has no Aspasia, a state-of the art thinker, instead he goes to talk with monks, who are state-of-the-middle-ages thinkers…

Thus, it’s important to not drive too much of a wedge between Russia and the rest of the West… (I am an old enemy of Putin, who couldn’t resist capturing Putin, land occupied by the Ancient Greeks for a millennium before the Huns came from Mongolia, causing invasions all over).

***

Shutting down Xi should be easy:

Bring back as much of the essential economic activities of the West presently conducted inside China until such a level that full war can be conducted the next day. Yes, full war. That means, for example, that the countless drugs presently made in China including the active principles of many antibiotics, and even hydroxychloroquine, should be brought back (even the hydroxychloroquine “made” in India uses an active principle from China). All dual purposes technologies should be exported to China when and only when they are militarily obsolete. 

This will require a refoundation of the US patent system, devastated by Obama and his China friendly plutocratic monopolistic goons… many of them billionaires giving the appearance of a soul to the “Democratic” Party.

As far as a global trading system is concerned, doing without the Chinese dictatorship would not just be salutary, it would be easy. First we can collaborate with India, a giant democracy, soon even larger in population than China… And historically, India was a crucial part of the Middle Earth supercivilization, the Indo-Euro-African ensemble. There is all of South America, all of Africa, to trade with. Trading to the obsessive extent we have been doing, with the Chinese dictatorship has only encouraged the rise of a more malignant form, the Xi regime. The Xi regime is the most aggressive regime based in Beijing since the Mongols ruled China (and tried to invade Japan and Indonesia…)

***

The kindness towards dictator Xi went in parallel with the kindness towards our own plutocrats

… which the Obama puppet regime displayed. Admiring a big strongman is conducive to admiring the smaller monopolists collaborating with him. Reminder; this is what happened with Hitler: without his US plutocrats to feed him, finance him and arm him, Hitler would have been nothing. IBM having the entire monopoly of computing inside Hitler’s Reich is enough of a proof. The same. Or similar happened with hundreds of other major US-Nazi industries. We have a similar situation with Xi Reich. It should be discontinued. 

As the Romans used to say: Si vis pacem, para bellum! If want peace, prepare war. Time to prepare war with Xi. After all, war with us is what he has been conducting (with much help from his friends the Western plutocrats). Not true? Prove it. We will soon have millions of corpses to point at, and the king of China has to explain to us why it’s not his fault, when everything points to the contrary. 

Do we want the world to live, threatened by such a lunatic?

Patrice Ayme   

***
***

[1] If the Cold War was launched without Casus Belli, one may ask if the Cold War was not an over reaction. No, as far as the US plutocracy was concerned, for three reasons:

  1. The Cold War was designed to cover the tracks of the US leadership (FDR + Deep State + US plutocracy behind both)… which had given half of Europe to Stalin.
  2. The aim of giving half of Europe to a stupid dictatorship was tantamount to keeping the other half of Europe, the old main center of civilization, hence creativity, under watch by the Stalin watchdog. Hence, instead of focusing on the problem of plutocracy and exactly what just happened within Europe (crafty promotion of German fascism and Nazism by US plutocracy), the European intellectual class launched itself in idle pursuits.
  3. It launched a kabuki theater of fighting pseudo problems (like the Vietnam War: the US and Vietnam are now allies)… instead of the real problem, namely who is pulling the strings in the West.  

Enforcing Cretin Cult: Why Jesus Was Invented By Emperors In 325 CE And 381 CE

April 12, 2020

(Easter Sunday, April 12, 2020, let’s celebrate Christianism and its namesake, Cretinism!

A virus paralyses the planet, with three billion people under lockdown. An earlier virus was Jesus, that ideology which terminally paralysed all of Antiquity, to the point society and the economy collapsed, and, thus, military defense.

Can I describe a direct connection? Besides Roman emperor Valens embracing the psychology of the jealous Christian god, which brought the victory of the Goths (379 CE)… Besides the empire being made in the image of the Bible, with one big bully on top? 

Here is a direct mechanism for how Christianism collapsed the empire: the refusal of punishment of bandits by the governing bishops, after 395 CE, made trade to and from cities impossible. Thus cities became impossible, and so did farming. That collapsed the tax base, hence legions couldn’t be paid anymore, and were entirely removed from many provinces, for example Britannia, Germania, Gallia… (~400 CE.)

Fascism is one of the oldest instincts of the human lineage: that’s how respect was instilled in predators. The group bound together by a few simple ideas and feelings acts as one to enact with lethal force its concentrated power. Hence its symbolics: rods bound together around an axe. In a democracy the ideas and feelings binding all are justice, equality, fraternity, and, paradoxically, liberty. Thus, in a democracy the axe gets deployed only when in dire need: war… But also bandits on the highways…

In a fascist imperial oligarchy, by definition it’s the imperium, the command of the chiefs, which unites. The problem is that imperial fascism, a command without a justification, except to please an oligarchy, erodes liberty in the long run, from which mental creativity arises. Diocletian, by creating its “Tetrarchy” (the rule of four), tried to go around the idea of monarchy (the rule of one). But the fact is, the emperors were like living gods. 

icon representing Constantine, covered with jewels and gold (center), at Nicaea among top bishops

Emperors Aurelian and Diocletian, re-establishing the empire under the form where the emperor was called “DOMINUS”, pushed the cult of Sol Invictus. Constantine, while making himself first a “compagnon” of the Unvanquished Sun, more craftily recognized that the cult of Jews was more adopted to fascism: after all, Israel had pretty much self-destroyed from unhinged bigotry. Something that stupid was what imperial fascist tyranny required! 

Hence Christianism, a particular form of fascism, political and intellectual, was invented by the fascist in chief, as a coherent doctrine which could seduce what was left of the intellectual class of the empire, vital to administration. One had to marry the “Logos” of the Greeks with the superstition of the Jews. This is what Nicea accomplished.

The resulting ideology was then officialized as “Catholic Orthodoxy” (“Common Opinion Universalism”) and later “Nicene Creed” from the city of Nicaea, where Constantine postured as the “13th Apostle”. Constantine and His mother are saints of “Orthodox” Christianism. https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/…/emperor…/

Constantine Sol Invictus Coin: Solis Invictus with the legend SOLIS INVICTO COMITI: CONSTANTINE, COMPAGNON OF UNVANQUISHED SUN

Nicea was when many points of Christianism were decided. The faith was literally invented through non-ending debates….For at least three months (May 20-August 25).  In particular the idea of the Trinity was decided, and the co-essential divinity of the Son,… against Arius, a famous cleric in Alexandria. The bickering debates were unending, Constantine got exasperated. The co-essential divinity of the Son, was decided… That’s the so-called Jesus… In particular, when to celebrate Easter was decided…

***

So, fasten seatbelts, oh sheep of the shepherd… Who heard of Nicaea 325 CE and Constantinople 381 CE… when Christianism was invented, under the presidency of Roman emperors? (Both of whom were famous, and very lethal generals…) I am going to try to enlighten the abyss…

The First Council of Nicaea, starting on May 20, 325 CE, invented and adopted the Nicene Creed which described Christ as “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, and the “Holy Ghost” as the one by which was incarnate… of the Virgin Mary“: “the Word (“Logos”: Logic!) was made flesh and dwelled among us“. About the Father and the Son, the creed used the term homoousios (of one substance) to define the relationship between the Father and the Son. After more than fifty years of debate, homoousios was recognised as the hallmark of orthodoxy, and was further developed into the formula of “three persons, one being“.

Jesus Christ is described as “Light from Light, true God from true God“. 

Jesus Christ is said by the “Nicene Symbol” to be “begotten, not made,” asserting that he was not a mere creature, brought into being out of nothing, but the true Son of God, brought into being “from the substance of the Father.

Christian level reasoning: Clearly the Moon looks like it’s melting into the sea. The evidence is strong. Science is wrong, Jessusss save us! Especially if you don’t exist! No wonder the most useful word “cretin” was derived from “Christian”. Never say Christianism doesn’t have some uses…

He is said to be “of one being with the Father,” proclaiming that although Jesus Christ is “true God” and God the Father is also “true God,” they are “of one being,” in accord to what is found in John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” The Greek term homoousios, or consubstantial (i.e., “of the same substance) is ascribed by Eusebius to Constantine who, on this particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority. The significance of this clause, however, is extremely ambiguous as to the extent in which Jesus Christ and God the Father are “of one being,” and the issues it raised would be controversial in the future.

The Nicene Creed said little about the Holy Spirit. All attention was focused on the relationship between the Father and the Son, without making any similar statement about the Holy Spirit (this would come in 381 CE):

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; (…) And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost. (…).” — Nicene Creed

Toward the end of the Council, the majority of bishops present (officially 318) excommunicated Arius and others they didn’t like. 

Constantine, glittering in threads of gold through his clothing, sparkling with precious stones, then pronounced civil judgements. The emperor banished those excommunicated attendees into exile (as a result, Arius would convert the Germans). This state violence inaugurated the practice of using secular, arbitrary imperial power to establish doctrinal orthodoxy within Christianity, an example followed by all later Christian emperors, which led to vicious circles of Christian violence, which would culminate in the Thirteenth Century with the holocaust of all the Cathars (“the Pures”, in Greek), more than five million Christians who disagreed with fine points of the Nicene Creed… killed to the last, with all their books and documents. That would teach them to have women bishops… 

Also burning Jews and various heretics alive, some still girls, until the Nineteenth Century, to Voltaire’s indignation… 

The next major Christian fascist, Roman emperor Theodosius I, established outright Christian terror and Inquisition, up to the penalty of death, according to his imperial whim. Non-Catholics were declared to be “madmen”… subject to the whim of the emperor. 

***

At the First Council of Constantinople (381), the Nicene Creed was expanded, becoming the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, which says that the Holy Spirit is worshiped and glorified together with the Father and the Son. Many details of the adventures of the “Son of God” were then established on paper, to make sure of what the “faith” was going to be exactly about… Disagree with those fine theological points, and the emperor may have you burned alive (after confiscating your property). Hence the veracity of all this became more than a matter of faith, but the very essence of survival… It didn’t matter how well you thought: you had to believe correctly, or secular power could burn you, as recommended by Saint Paul…

So no wonder “He” left no historical traces: “He”, Jesus, was debated and constructed, three centuries after he supposedly lived. “He” actually mostly lived in the heads of Fourth Century bishops. Actually, because it looked as if “He” was born rather in Spring, according to Gospels, the bishops in command of the empire after Theodosius I’s death (395 CE), moved “His” birth to the Winter Solstice, which with its “Saturnials”, cut conifers and exchanges of gifts, was the most popular holiday… For more than a millennium… More precisely even, Christmas was set to December 25th because it was the date of the festival of Sol Invictus, the major Greco-Roman deity. On 25 December AD 274, the Roman emperor Aurelian made it an official cult alongside the traditional Roman cults…

Jesus The God was a sin against reason of the Late Roman empire, and a cause of comorbidity of the empire by making it intolerant to reason, and in love with stupidity. Christianism was not an innocent cult, but a lethal passion masquerading as respectable. The respect was owed to Constantine, mass murderer of the eunuch Egyptian priesthood, killer of his nephew, executioner of his son, boiler of his wife, for all to see: it was a matter of personal survival. Constantine contrasted “the houses of lies” (Pagan temples) with “the splendours of the home of truth“. Weird in someone who boiled an empress mother of five of his children. But Christians get the Saints they deserve…  

So, Christians, please enjoy Easter! Roman tyrants invented it to subjugate you, and their modern descendants are grateful that the old trick still works…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

P/S: Immediately after this was published, I was banned and blocked from the largest philosophy club on Facebook, with nearly 300,000 members: I can’t access it, it disappeared, with all my interventions, comments, contacts, etc. For Easter one of the “moderators” had written a few lines observing there was no historical proof of the existence of Jesus (a theme I have broached myself long ago). I intervened and added that actually most the Jesus theory, and even when he was born, was decided in the Fourth Century, in particular in 325 CE and 381 CE.

As a result of my annihilation, without any warning, that notion will then not be disseminated, as it stopped existing in that part of Facebook. I don’t know who ordered my annihilation. Facebook itself?

Should the real annihilation of the virtual presence of a human being legal? The Romans practiced the method, they called it “damnatio memoriae” (actually invented much earlier, thousands of years earlier, in Egypt) No, not without a justification that could hold in court. It’s not just a question of etiquette, it’s a question of diversity of thought, and fighting the hatred of tribalism, which is always founded on alienation (makin the oher foreign).

FAKE THINKING: That FAKE “FRENCH THEORY”, Now Complete With Highly Honored Fascist Spy!

July 1, 2018

Ironically labelled “French Theory” has always been connected to fascism. It’s basically fascism with a Latin Quarter face (it started with fascination for, and duplication of, the famous Nazi with a pensive face, Martin Heidegger… went on with Stalin, Mao, etc… while secretly enthralled by, and working for, Uncle Sam…).

Anyway, just when you thought things couldn’t get more ridiculous in the highest circles, new developments surface, in the same line of connection of “French Theory”, aka “Postmodernism” with political fascism and tyranny…

***

Worse Than FAKE NEWS: FAKE THINKING!

The worst problem with fake news is that it leads to erroneous thinking… and erroneous emotions. And then vicious tribalization.

Rousseau famously claimed everywhere he looked, people were in chains. Well, not really in literal chains, it’s worse. Instead people willingly, proudly, and comfortably, wear minds which subjugate them. Minds addicted to the power of fake thinking! The most fundamental form of fakery in establishing erroneous thinking takes real facts, but makes the logic whatever it wants, by selecting said facts carefully (an example is much of the theories about WWI). Now we have way worse.

Yes, there is also fake emoting, as in the “unboxing” of brainless corrupt “YOUtubers”, generally involving parents prostituting their children (should be unlawful).(Yes YOUTube is part of the Google “no-evil” empire.) As mercantilism has invaded all behaviors, the spectrum of mental diversity has shrunk below a shrinkwrap of overwhelming greed.

Fake thinking is devouring the world: see (in the notes below) the tribal attacks against Senator Sanders by pseudo-progressives, or the demand, in France by similar pseudo-progressives to have the “white persons” separate from the alleged victims.

A main mechanism of fake thinking, going back to Herder (18C), claims that it is not reasoning which matters to certify truth, but which tribe you identify with. (Or get forcefully identified with.) This was one of the main underlying principles of Nazism, but it also underlays any totalitarianism: any totalitarian regime embraces minds totally as tribes do, so it’s inherently harnessing all the tribal instincts.

The inclination to be seduced by that sort of incorrect thinking, its entanglement with tribalism, had a huge impact on the Twentieth Century; it is the root of all its ills.

***

300 hundred pages showing one of the most celebrated French Theory intellectual was just a butcher of a dictatorship. It’s not just politicians like Clinton or Obama (Netflix!) who get paid to express thoughts conducive to the domestication and subjugation of “We The People”. Most prominent intellectuals are in payments situations: they are paid to play. Many of the most officially respected intellectuals of the Twentieth Century were worthless scums, and worse: Consider Heidegger, Brasillach, and an entire herd of German. Julia Kristeva, who has been showered with honors for her thinkerism was an agent of the Bulgaria’s State Security services, the Darjavna Sigournost, the Bulgarian KGB, a criminal organization organizing assassinations of human rights activists on foreign soil, while Kristeva was doing the bed of French intellectuals. A meta analysis of her conceptology shows her to be mad, abject and totalitarian… BTW, she denies being a spy although the evidence is overwhelming, and online, nearly 300 pages of it. Of course, Harvard supports Kristeva the liar. Will the French take away her title of “Commandeur de la Légion d’Horreur”? That’s the honorable thing to do! Otherwise the horror becomes blatant!

(There is a long tradition of intellectuals paid to influence the public, and, or leaders. Plato was exhibit number one, as he entangled himself so deeply with two successive tyrants of Syracuse, the first one ended up selling him as a slave. Aristotle was even worse: he may single-handedly have launched two millennia of monarchy. Socrates was executed for having been the teacher, influencer, lover

***

FAKE Thinking Made The Germans Criminally Insane In World War One & Two:

Indeed, much of the conventional version of many a history is fake, because ultra significant dimensions have been omitted. Deliberately. By malevolent actors. This enables malevolent actrs to seize, or keep power. And soon the reality that these other crucial factors existed gets forgotten.

 

The history of World War One and World War Two are full of those. Fake versions of what really happened, alleged histories before, during and after World War One were the main logics which enabled the Nazis to be elected to power.

A particularly spectacular instance occured when a British general talked to Ludendorff, the effective head of the German army, in a cafe in Germany, around a table, after the German defeat. Ludendorff explained to his British colleague why he would have, for sure, won the war, but for the betrayal by German Commies and other saboteurs. The British officer, not believing one word of it, sneered back:”So you would have won, if you had not been stabbed in the back?” Ludendorff, delighted, opined. Ludendorff would soon help found the Nazi Party around a couple of ideas like that. He was the basic founder of Nazism, even before Hitler was sent to spy on it (and named it!).

So Ludendorff turned around an idea which was originally meant to be a scathing critique, and made it in one the sacrosanct Nazi myths: Germany lost WWI only because it had been stabbed in the back by bad actors, including, but not limited to Communists and Jews. So eliminating those would make Germany win, next time. (That was obviously false: the two Battles of the Marne which the French military won in September 1914 and July 1918 are the proximal causes of German defeat. And there is a whole cortege of causes after that, of a purely military nature: had not the US helped Germany in 1914-1917, the German defeat under Franco-German blockade would have been much earlier!)

Most Germans ended up believing that, indeed, they had been stabbed in the back… by other Germans: therein a key element of the so-called Holocaust (actually not everything burned!)

***

Yesterday’s Lies Still Animating The World:

This is not just history. A similar flawed idea, launched this time by Lord Keynes, a key architect of the present, flawed world order, hated the Versailles Treaty… and especially the Poles. Thus was born the theory that the Versailles Treaty caused the Great Depression (a ridiculous idea, but basically written down inside Keynes’ work) and legitimate German gripes (entirely valid, if one believes, as Keynes did, that Germany should be the owner and sole proprietor of Eastern Europe!

To this day, the lie that the Versailles Treaty, and thus France, caused Nazism is learned, by rote in US schools. The next step is that Americans believe that France collaborated with Hitler (whereas the French empire declared war to the Axis, suffering in the process 2 million dead!).

France should sue about such lies. This is not a far fetched notion: Poland tried to pass a law that Auschwitz shouldn’t be depicted as a “Polish” camp. Global plutocrats, mostly in the US and Israel, just forced the Poles to withdraw their law! Thus proving that such laws, punishing lies, are indeed very dangerous for the established order! (I support laws against holocaust denials, but please notice the plural I use…)

***

French Theory Accompanied, Chronologically US Plutocratization, No Accident:

Starting in the 1950s, great US plutocratic universities’ “Humanities” departments fell in love with a galaxy of French thinkers.

Some say “deconstruction” is “French Theory” main axis… As if all thinkers thinking creatively didn’t have to deconstruct, ever since there are primates and they create!

So forget that. The main axis of “French Theory” has been the claim that all systems of thought are tribal. Yes, the tribe is what makes the thought.

The French Theory’s main authors were many: Louis Althusser, Jean Baudrillard, Simone de Beauvoir, Hélène Cixous, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Félix Guattari, Luce Irigaray, Julia Kristeva, Jacques Lacan, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Jean-François Lyotard, Jacques Rancière, Monique Wittig et Pierre Bourdieu.

Some US thinkers duplicating French theory were: Judith Butler, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Stanley Fish, Edward Said, Richard Rorty, Fredric Jameson, Avital Ronell, Donna Haraway

De Beauvoir was a Nazi propagandist, Kristeva an agent of criminal mafia of assassins…

Well known nice charming little philosopher Martha Nussbaum from the University of Chicago suggested that the abstruseness is calculated to awe the naive (and as I will repeatedly explain below, not only, there is a much greater plutocratic scheme at work):

“Some precincts of the continental philosophical tradition, though surely not all of them, have an unfortunate tendency to regard the philosopher as a star who fascinates, and frequently by obscurity, rather than as an arguer among equals. When ideas are stated clearly, after all, they may be detached from their author: one can take them away and pursue them on one’s own. When they remain mysterious (indeed, when they are not quite asserted), one remains dependent on the originating authority. The thinker is heeded only for his or her turgid charisma.”

Here is an excerpt from an interview in which Noam Chomsky (something of a famous obscurantist himself, linguistically speaking) excoriates the unreadable Jacques Derrida and misogynistic Jacques Lacan, along with Lacan’s superstar disciple, Slovenian fashionable murky “Marxist” theorist Slavoj Žižek, for covering up intentionally below obscure, inflated, misleading language to make trivial “theories” seem profound. Chomsky  (himself prone to all too easy, inflated claims) calls Lacan a “total charlatan.”And indeed.

The “French Theory” is fascist (any follower of Marx is, by definition a fascist, as Marx advocated “dictatorship”… a concept on the face of it way worse than the original Roman concept of fascism). The “French Theorists” lined up against the, student led, genuine thinking led May 68 uprising. They pretended it was “insufficiently proletarian”. The problem here is that the “Proletariat” notion was the lowest of the low, originally (the concept goes back to Rome, once again). Why should the lowest of the low lead? They are genetically (modern science shows) unable to do so. Indeed Marx was from a very wealthy family, and he got angry when Prussia undercut the family vineyard side business. Hardly a member of the “proletariat”. His colleague, friend and sponsor Engels was outright a plutocratic heir.

Sollers, Kristeva’s lover, chief editor of “Tel Quel” hailed from a family of very wealthy Bordeaux industrialists, pontificated during May 1968: “All revolution can only be Marxist-Leninist!” Lenin, a co-conspirator of the German Kaiser who launched WWI, instituted Marxist terror, extermination camps, assassinate the Czar entire family, and entrusted the giant empire to Stalin, a reconverted seminarist turned gangster…

Then, as the appeal of Soviet degenerated terror faded away, the “French Theorists” embraced Maoist China. Kristeva celebrated traditional upper class Chinese foot binding as “empowering”… just as killing Israeli athletes at the Olympics in Munich in 1972 was “necessary”. Sollers later wrote an article “Why I was Chinese“. No, he was not “Chinese”, he was pro-dictatorship oppressing China and killing millions of Chinese…

***

Why did all this “French Theory” happen, and why did it become so popular?

Because it replaced The Enlightenment by Obscurantism. Idiotic theories were born, as from Edward Said, claiming one can’t talk about the “Orient” if one is not from there, otherwise one is an “Orientalist” (notice the analogy with “racist”). Instead I say it as it is: The Levant, and North Africa have been occupied, for 13 centuries by a succession of dictatorships hiding behind a fascist, militaristic religion, the ultimate metaphysical excuse, enforced by lethal threats within the religion.

Who profits from replacing Enlightenment by Obscurantism? Well, those who prosper from the Dark Side, that’s why it is called the Dark Side: its workings, emotions, logics are all obscure, many have to go unsaid. In particular plutocrats, and, more prosaically monopolistic technology exploiters such as Google and its YouTube channel, which prostitute children by the thousands… And instituted the global trade system which is boosting their already enormous powers, quickly!

***

“FRENCH THEORY” IS FAKE, And We Already Saw that Sort Of Fake “Thinkery” In Athens, 24 Centuries Ago:

“Thinkery” is an excellent concept originated by Aristophanes, a conspiracy of those determined to drag thinking in the mud. I believe that much intellectual activity in France in the Twentieth Century, among the most renown so-called “intellectuals” was fake. It was even worse than the works of “new philosopher” Bernard Henri Levy, a poster boy of the reaction against “French Theory” (and thus little appreciated in academe, but with his even more powerful networks; ultimately they served the same master, global plutocracy!)

“French Theory” was all about self-promotion, self-dealing… just like BHL who got huge subventions for French governments, as part of “France-Afrique”, making him a billionaire. Such was the corruption in French “intellectual” circlesu

The “philosophers” had sometimes the right idea, or two just like broken clocks do. But, mostly they were themselves engaged in a vast conspiracy which pretended that all systems of thought had no more validity than any other conspiracy organized by any other tribes. Pivotal to “French Theory” was something called “structuralism”. An idiotic notion: mental structures are everywhere. Speaking of “Structuralism” is as smart as thinking of “Thinkerism”.

Actually, when Aristophanes made fun of that other self-promoting idiot, Socrates, in “The Clouds” he made Socrates founder of the “Thinkery”….  

  1. What’s the difference between a Mafioso and a structuralist?
  2. The latter makes you an offer that you can’t understand.

The Clouds was a comedy of ideas, but it is also deadly, lethal stuff. Socrates undermined Athens. “French Theory” undermined more than civilization, thinking itself. Aristophanes exposes the idiotic theories of Socrates and his plutocratic accomplices, and observes they are so asmart, they make people believe in the most aburd notions, even about physical reality.

And this is exactly what happened: Aristotle, the philosophical grandson of socrates invented his thoroughly idiotic physics, which ruled until Buridan in Paris, a towering genius, demolished it around 1350 CE, seventeen centuries later (Aristotle had forgotten about friction; Buridan re-established it, and simplified all by discovering what is now called Newton’s First and Second law, in his impetus theory).

Plato considered The Clouds a significant contribution to Socrates’ trial and execution in 399 BCE. Well, indeed, and for very good reasons… One can’t just spend all of one’s time as Socrates did, riling against democracy (and science) teaching viciousness to the youth, when the democracy is close to extinction, to the point they lead a dictatorship against it. It is no coincidence that plutocrats and their schools have loved Socrates and his spiritual descendants, Plato and Aristotle. My logic is more historically informed than is usual among philosophers whose expertise is generally restricted to quoting dead people, not the fact which explain them. Aristotle gave, in his attack against democracy the arch example of self-dealing fake thinking. He should be repudiated:ARISTOTLE DESTROYED DEMOCRACY

Athenian civilization was killed by plutocrats, first Macedonian plutocrats, then Republican Roman plutocrats , then, another six centuries later, by Roman Catholic theo-fascist plutocrats… In the latter case the Athenian “thinkeries” were outright closed, because they displeased Christ (admittedly a susceptible moron).

***

“French Theory” became a Trojan Horse against civilization, and even thinking in general:

This attack against humanity, thus We The Peoples” of France and the West, in particular, left the field to global, tax free, working class free, law and regulations free plutocrats. That was the use of this apparently arcane and useless exercise, that was why “French Theory” became popular in the top (most plutocratic) universities.

Just as Socrates “Thinkery” undermined Athens, with his absurd theories, the “French Theory” thinkery undermined thinking itself.

How did “French Theory” do that? By barking up wrong trees frantically, “French Theory” prevented mental activity to be directed where it should have been. Thus French Theory hid the real problems. Most “French Theorists” were in love with fascist dictatorships (Kristeva being a perfect example, first a Bulgarian agent, then a Maoist propagandist, like  the ridiculous Sartre and his ilk. That made them rather similar to Aristotle, the lover, or teacher of Macedonian tyrants (Philippe, Alexander, Antipater, etc.)

***

Shooting De Beauvoir:  

The big mistake of the Versailles Conference of 1919 was not to have shot the top 1,000 leaders of Germany. Those monsters had caused an enormous world war which killed dozens of millions (including the epidemics and other health disasters they caused, like the “Spanish” flu and famines; concentration of armies lead to epidemics, that was well known, even 25 centuries ago). As they escaped punishment, they got ready to do it again, even worse. Hence not executing those 1,000 German traitors against civilization led straight to Nazism. And the head had to be punished. Nietzsche saw that clearly by 1880 CE.

The mood of love of dictatorship was central to “French Theory”. Marx and the Kaiser and Lenin, partook in the same mentality of the love of violence, terror, dictatorship, and “French Theory” extolled it. (The Kaiser used Lenin and his top accomplices to sabotage Russia, in a most striking conspiracy.)

This love for horror and tyranny should be viewed as turning most of the famous, publicity greedy practitioners of “French Theory” into obvious traitors, not just Simone De Beauvoir. De Beauvoir was a high level Nazi propagandist working at Radio Vichy as late as 1944!  Never mind. If you point that out at Harvard, they probably feel you are unworthy to be on a campus, on any university campus.

Simone De Beauvoir could have been shot in 1944, for having worked as a Nazi propagandist at a very high level earlier that year (As a teacher, she shouldn’t have needed the money). That she wasn’t shot, or even judged, tells volume about high level corruption in French intellectual circles! (France executed 40,000 Nazi collaborators, and  thousands did less than De Beauvoir!)

This is not so far fetched: the famous writer Brasillach was condemned to death (for Nazi propaganda). To spare himself penetration by red hot bullets, he sent De Gaulle (then president) a sob story to spare him that pain and indignity. De Gaulle refused: an example had to be made, a bit as one was made in Athens with Socrates in roughly similar circumstances. So Brasillach was executed. Much later, photographs showing he observed the massacre of innocent people by the Nazis, surfaced. In that particular case, De Gaulle acted well, rejecting the sob story appeal Brasillach wrote to him directly.

***

Today’s Plutocracy Arose directly From French Theory:

The  nefarious work of many other experts of “French Theory” was more destructive: by making fun of thinking itself to the point of annihilating it, they worked against civilization, and for the great empires, those of Stalin and Nixon/McCarthy, and Mao… And now their successors. The mission of these fake intellectuals, whether they realized it, or not, unwittingly or not, the reason why they were so rewarded. was to make fake thinking fashionable.

Fundamentally, the fakery of the obscurantist thinkery known as “French Theory” destroyed the Enlightenment in France, and the USA, hence the world. Preparing thus the mindset for ever greater inequalities, by abrading the very sense of what it meant to think critically.
This is also why so many intellectuals embraced  too much tolerance for Islamism, a terroristic system of thought Voltaire himself had condemned as stridently as he condemned Catholicism, for the same reasons (Voltaire’s critique of Islam is now censored in Europe, something which goes hand in hand with “French Theory”)

Those fake intellectuals succeeded in imposing their fake pursuits as all the truth we could aspire to. So now what is officially viewed as higher philosophy is pretty such a lie that it diverts any efficient critique against the established order.

That one of the most obvious fakers in the world was viewed as a a top, most honored, philosopher for so long, is revealing of the heights fake thinking reached. Yes, Julia Kristeva, was just a Bulgarian spy sent by a terrible dictatorship. She embraced tyrants, worked for them, she is an enemy of thought, her followers are despicable, that pretty much sums it up.

***

As Corrupt As It Gets:

When the Nazis came to power, young punk, pseudo-philosopher Heidegger, an ex-seminarist (like Stalin) cow splattering proto-Nazi BS, put a Nazi uniform, became chief of his university, and proceeded to fire all Jews and dissidents. What “French Theorists” did was even worse, because they had much more influence.

When the Soviet tanks invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, to crush democracy there, the foremost media of the “French Theory” celebrated that. The criminal idiot Sollers said it was to celebrate “his love for Kristeva” (the Bulgarian agent above, one of Europe, doomed Europe, most honored “intellectuals”, just referred to). One is talking as bad as intellectual corruption can go here. And make no mistake: such “intellectuals” are as, or more rotten than the worst “Big Capitalists”. They can be much worse, because they have more mind binding impact on the people at large. Certainly Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism were intellectual phenomena first: and they were inspired by… Marxism (a fact about Nazism that is little known, although Hitler wrote it explicitly!)

“Oh, I tried the Left Bank. At university I used to go with people who walked around with issues of Tel Quel under their arms. I know all that rubbish. You can’t even read it.”

— Philip Roth, The Counterlife

I did more than ‘try the Left Bank‘. I actually lived and studied there. But I lived and studied the real thing, all the way back, melding in spirit with the ruins of the Roman City still visible there.

The history of Western Civilization had ups and down, when Paris, for centuries, was the West’s largest city and the center of its intellectual life, it was considered an obvious notion known by all, that the “translatio imperii”, the translation of command, of intellectual command, had gone from Athens (not Rome) to Paris. When Athens had confronted, and fought to death Persia, and nearly two centuries later, Macedonia, moving Athens to Italy was considered, or even to move her further west with the help of Massalia (the Etruscans, 9 centuries earlier had moved from the Levant to Tuscany, to grab the iron mines)… Marseilles, which was the Greek city which stayed independent from Rome the longest (succumbing to Julius Caesar)… And which was first to measure the Earth (and very accurately), was ready to help.  

The Macedonian fascists found several treacherous Athenian intellectuals (cum politicians) of tremendous influence such as Aeschines to help them out in their war against Athenian democracy. The Nazis could have been stopped easily, had the US Republic lined up with its parents and creator, France, as it should have. But guess what, US intellectuals, supposing they exist, failed completely that way. And to this day, they fail: they are still making excuses for not having fought the Nazis, dropping the french Republic, the Jews, humanity and German generals, in one fell swoop…

***

You Want Nice? Then Start Thinking so hard that you get it right! 

Real thinking requires humility and clarity, and, above all, realism. In particular having the courage of calling thugs, thugs, and idiots, idiots. Not polite? Not the point! Not everything is positive: there are no peaks without abysses at their feet!

One can’t have democracy without much more power than potential opponents, as Athens found the hard way, taking 2,300 years to recover (partially). Many good willing progressives don’t understand this. A dependance of Enlightenment, goodness upon the Dark Side is not comfortable! However, the story doesn’t stop here.

Indeed, if democracy, civilization, human existence and thinking can’t survive without the Dark Side, the Dark Side has to be managed well. That is both unavoidable, and at the core of progress, and even viability. The “French Theory”, following the most prominent parts of Marx’s mood, made such an advocacy of evil for evil’s sake, that they durably poisoned progressivism… to the point Islamism came to be viewed as progressist… just as Leninism, Stalinism, Nazism, Fascismo, Maoism, Castrism, even Chavism came to be viewed as good and true.

In the end, that served only the forces of plutocracy, and this is why “French Theory” is so popular in the wealthiest, most plutocratic universities, where they teach spectacular lies such that the French Republic caused Nazism by insisting (with the US, truth be told) that countries such as Poland or Czechoslovakia, or Hungary should be free of German hegemony and occupation and racism and exploitation. Or that the US let Nazism happen because it was “isolationist” (when in truth it was actively pro-Nazi and acted AGAINST the German military when the German military basically asked them for authorization to make a coup against the Nazis), or that the USA didn’t nothing against the Holocaust because they didn’t know (French and Polish governments knew, in details and informed the US ), or that, another great lie, that the US government gave half of europe to the butcher Stalin because there was no choice (Patton could have been in Moscow within months, or Berlin in days, had he been given the go-ahead). And so on.

So many lies, and they call it history. So many absurdities, and they call it “French Theory”. It’s no theory, just something to make us all stupid and discouraged, so we can be better exploited.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note 1 Sanders as anti-progress, because he is for content, not tribe, is itself an example of fake thinking.

Once Bernie Sanders said in a famous statement that it’s not enough for somebody to say, “I’m a Latina, vote for me… What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry. For this Sanders was hated by loud pseudo-feminists and pseudo-transgenders (some people have considered me transgender too, and I am certainly feminist, thus, I feel very relaxed about denouncing the exploiters of these notions, having been called pejoratively everything).

(Attack against Sanders by pseudo-left look divisive, and of course they are. Such people are paid for division… by the powers which profit from division.)

***

Note 2: Consider World War One inception. What’s the real truth (according to me)?  As I have explained, six men at the top of Germany planned a world war.

***

Note 3:  The betrayal of progress by all too many French intellectuals is an ongoing process: watch French mathematician and Fields Medal Villani, a self-obsessed villain who spends lots of time being taken in pictures, posing this way and that, playing special, singing the praises of the hyper terrorist Algerian Front National de Liberation, FNL, an Islamizing terrorist mafia holding Algeria in its grip since De Gaulle, himself a double dealing racist, gave the country to them (so they better destroy it? That 47 years of iron grip dictatorship hundreds of thousands of Algerians killed (official reckoning)… and Villani loves it, in the great tradition of “French Theory”, where, the higher the body count, the greater the truth…

Villani is a Macron MP, who, fundamentally, spits on France by insisting that those who helped explode bombs, against innocent french civilians, are, fundamentally hero. Villani’s logic of horror and terror is of greatest help to the Islamists, Said Salah Abdeslam, sole survivor of the assassins who killed and wounded 500 innocent civilians in Paris, November 13, 2015: “Muslims defend themselves against those who attack them. Put aside your anger, and reason for a few moments, you are victims of the errors of your leaders.” (Original French: “les musulmans se défendent contre ceux qui les attaquent. Mettez votre colère de côté et raisonnez quelques instants, vous ne subissez que les erreurs de vos dirigeants.”)

This is exactly vilain Villani’s logic. Villani goes even further, as he wants to honor the terrorists… In Villani’s academic circles, this is well considered, and they pluff themselves with their importance and humanity, not understanding for a second that they serve those who control power, worldwide…

***

Note 4: When one crushes infamy, politeness shouldn’t be a consideration, indeed! See: “White America’s Age-Old, Misguided Obsession With Civility.”

(By Thomas J. Sugrue, a professor of history and social and cultural analysis and author who correctly holds that “those who say that the civil rights movement prevailed because of civil dialogue misunderstand protest and political change.)

***

Note 5: Bourdieu and Foucault said to a number of people (including yours truly, or Berkeley’s all too famous Searle) that if they wrote clearly, they would not be taken seriously in France. Why is this? Because of what is the main idea of this essay: the “French Theory” philosophers are esteemed by the global plutocratic establishment (which finances the world’s top universities, in particular the US ones) precisely because they obscure everything, and foster an adulation for obscurity, in contrast to one for Enlightenment. That’s their raison d’etre. (They also have interest to not make too obvious who their dark thinkery profits… Same problem as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle…)

Europe’s Torture of the 1,000 Cuts

May 24, 2018

For horrible crimes, Chinese Justice had a memorable type of execution, the Torture of the Thousand cuts (Lingchi). Its name describes it pretty well. The last such official executions were around 1900 CE, but Europe is trying its best to renew with this tradition.

Europe, and not just Europe, is suffering from the torture of the 1,000 cuts made by a crazed, increasingly sadistic and controlling plutocracy. Cuts in identity, cuts in education, cuts in health care, cuts in dignity, cuts in industry, cuts in state support where it crucially matters, cuts in pride, cuts in hope, cuts in heritage, cuts in social services, cuts in research, cuts in biodiversity, cuts in responsible agriculture, cuts in public services, cuts in welfare, cuts in retirement, cuts in implementation of the laws when applied to Islam and immigration, cuts in money going to We The People, as ever more go to banks and plutocrats, etc.

And the worst? Europe doesn’t even know about the formidable extent of it all, and how much of a vast conspiracy it all is! Or, at least, Europe doesn’t know enough to do something about it! Why? Because the European media, as the media throughout the “West” is owned by the same class which keeps on cutting “We The People” in ever thinner slices. Thus, all preceding cuts are enabled by Europe’s deepest cut of them all, a cut in cognition, both affecting which facts are known, and which logics rule.

An example of plutocratic propaganda? Paul Krugman’s anti-Euro Obsession. On the surface, it looks an innocent quirk on his part. In truth, it incites those who read him to focus on the wrong thing, A technical mistake was done, a detail went catastrophically wrong, says Krugman. Instead, I assert there is a vast conspiracy, a plutocratic conspiracy, and that catastrophe was planned to control the entire planet. Says Krugman: “Many of Europe’s problems come from the disastrous decision, a generation ago, to adopt a single currency.”  

True, the Euro, as it is, was created only partly, it’s like a bird, with wings, but no feathers: crucial institutions were supposed to follow to support and organize the Euro. However Great Britain, not in the Euro (at this point, but supposed to join it later… until it decided upon Brexit!) sabotaged, as much as it could those Euro-supporting institutions, which the Euro was supposed to trigger (then Germany found the present Euro system all too comfortable…)

President Barack Obama and co-conspirators: One thing, one plot Europe suffers from: the US high tech conspiracy, which robbed Europe of freedom, innovation, revenue, among other things (now Trump wants to tax European cars 25%, on the pretext that US SECURITY is under attack by German cars parked below Trump Tower… And that proved my point that the US giant monopolies, “GAFA”, “FANG” make an assault against European security!). The spirits of how many laws are broken here, in this White House photograph? Political corruption, monopoly formation, mass surveillance of We The People, conspiracy, oligarchy inception, technology hijacking, patent law termination, among others. (See Note 7 below.)

The real problem of Europe, as of the USA and the rest of the West, is the rise of the .1%, gathering ever more power as it becomes ever wealthier. And that power it uses to confuses the issues, and make We The People non-cognizant of the tragedy at hand, such as how the .1% pay too little taxes. But it doesn’t stop there.

On Sunday, May 20, 2018, CBS’ “60 Minutes” finally explained the obvious, that it contributed to carefully hid for years, namely that Google is a (world) monopoly, that the US Federal Trade Commission found this, and recommended criminal prosecution, but the Obama officials decided to not do anything about it. They showed a picture of Obama all in love, smiling to the Google CEO, with dollar signs in the eyes (the Obamas cashed out big time on their Silicon Valley corruption, the next day). At this point Facebook and Google get 85% of the advertising revenue on the Internet. Spy agencies are doing great in the US, and their world monopoly is part, parcel and tool of the US plutocracy world monopoly (which Hitler led a subsystem of, until he could be disposed of, to implement an even greater conception…). Yes, 85% of revenue: good job, Obama, here is your cash!  

When some get everything and the others nothing, that’s called a tyranny.  

Tyranny and torture, the thousand cuts. It happened before. Many times. And civilization collapsed. Problem: this time, it will not be one, or a few civilizations collapsing, among others. Instead, it is civilization, the one and only, and the entire biosphere, which is slashed with a thousand cuts…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note 1: As the situation degrades in Europe, the governments in place, and the oligarchies in place, are taking extraordinary measures which should be seen for what they are: the rise of fascism (details another time). And yes, they use FANG (Facebook Apple Netflix Google) to do so. The Obamas just got a cushy job at Netflix. Monopolies are economic fascism (to go with political fascism, as happens clearly in, say, Egypt, where the military state of dictator-president Sisi owns an enormous part of the economy).

***

Note 2: The Obama administration was little more than the Google implementation office, and that has been known for years. See:

https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/googles-remarkably-close-relationship-with-the-obama-white-house-in-two-charts/.

***

Note 3: The two Italian anti-EU parties are now in power, as they  control Parliament. I share their (very important) dedication to Direct Democracy. However they have quite a few lunatic ideas which may obscure their focus. (The Lega (ex-Lega Norte), one of the two, admires Switzerland… without having embraced Swiss realism).

***

Note 4: To my surprise, the New York Times not only published a shorter version of the preceding comment, but used it as a “pick”. My, my, my, times have changed at the Times since the editor changed last Fall! (The son of the owner replaced his father who was apparently too plutocratic by half…) Now I am “picked” again… As I used to be, more than ten years ago, before being banned from the New York Times, although a full subscriber, during the entire Obama presidency (teaching me for having helped Obama become president…)…

***

Note 5: Annotating Paul Krugman’s “What’s the Matter With Europe?

Krugman: “If you had to identify a place and time where the humanitarian dream — the vision of a society offering decent lives to all its members — came closest to realization, that place and time would surely be Western Europe in the six decades after World War II. It was one of history’s miracles: a continent ravaged by dictatorship, genocide and war transformed itself into a model of democracy and broadly shared prosperity.

Indeed, by the early years of this century Europeans were in many ways better off than Americans. Unlike us, they had guaranteed health care, which went along with higher life expectancy; they had much lower rates of poverty; they were actually more likely than we were to be gainfully employed during their prime working years.

But now Europe is in big trouble. So, of course, are we… democracy is under siege on both sides of the Atlantic…

Many of Europe’s problems come from the disastrous decision, a generation ago, to adopt a single currency. The creation of the euro led to a temporary wave of euphoria, with vast amounts of money flowing into nations like Spain and Greece; then the bubble burst. And while countries like Iceland that retained their own money were able to quickly regain competitiveness by devaluing their currencies, eurozone nations were forced into a protracted depression, with extremely high unemployment, as they struggled to get their costs down.

Patrice Ayme’s answer: Iceland’s troubles have nothing to do with the Euro, everything to do with excess leverage in, and, crooked finance; and Germany, the Eurozone’ biggest economy is doing extremely well… To the point Merkel imported more than a million Muslims, wholesale: not enough workers…

***

Krugman: “This depression was made worse by an elite consensus, in the teeth of the evidence, that the root of Europe’s troubles was not misaligned costs but fiscal profligacy, and that the solution was draconian austerity that made the depression even worse.

PA: [Right: the USA threw at least twice more money at the crisis than Europe did, through plutocratically biased “Quantitative Easing”; Nota bene: I long called it a depression, now I am happy to observe that, eight years later, Krugman has adopted my semantics.]

Krugman: “Some of the victims of the euro crisis, like Spain, have finally managed to claw their way back to competitiveness.”

PA: Thus proving that the problem is NOT the Euro itself… Spain is the Eurozone fourth largest economy, by a long shot!

Others, however, haven’t. Greece remains a disaster area — and Italy, one of the three big economies remaining in the European Union, has now suffered two lost decades: G.D.P. per capita is no higher now than it was in 2000.

So it isn’t really surprising that when Italy held elections in March, the big winners were anti-European Union parties — the populist Five Star Movement and the far-right League.

PA: [The “League” started as a Northern Italy autonomy party, the Lega Norte; Northern Italy, which used to be full of Gauls, before Roman conquest, is arguably more part of northern Europe than southern Italy… In particular paying taxes to Rome is neither here nor there: even in the Late Roman empire, Italy was governed from the Po Valley… In particular Milan… One should resist calling all the autonomy parties “far-right”.]]  

Krugman: “In fact, the surprise is that it didn’t happen sooner.

Those parties are now set to form a government. While the policies of that government aren’t completely clear, they’ll surely involve a break with the rest of Europe on multiple fronts: a reversal of fiscal austerity that may well end with exit from the euro, along with a crackdown on immigrants and refugees.”

PA: [Krugman seems to take for granted that one is bad, if one doesn’t want a billion Africans to move to Europe. Italy is flooded by more than 5 million migrants and refugees, around 10% of the population. By comparison, the savages who brought the Roman empire down were proportionally much less in numbers. Now, of course, the migrants into the Roman empire around 400 CE craved for Rome’s wealth, and although those migrants were Christians, they were illegal, and, although the Goths were finally accommodated, they still destroyed the Roman army… Nowadays many, if not most, illegal migrants to Europe are from a religion which has made a religion of hating all what the Greco-Roman Europe i world stood for… except for slavery and sexism… So why is Krugman so pro-illegal migrants? To better destroy Europe?]

Krugman: “Nobody knows how this will end, but developments elsewhere in Europe offer some scary precedents. Hungary has effectively become a one-party autocracy, ruled by an ethnonationalist ideology. Poland seems well down the same path.

So what went wrong with the “European project” — the long march toward peace, democracy and prosperity, underpinned by ever-closer economic and political integration? As I said, the giant mistake of the euro played a big role. But Poland, which never joined the euro, sailed through the economic crisis pretty much unscathed; yet democracy there is collapsing all the same.”

PA: Europeans, after centuries of religious terror from Catholicism, are afraid that the same is now imposed on them in the name of Islamism… which has a lot in common with Catholicism, including lethal hatred for the Jews. This is not all scholar talk: Erdogan, the Turkish tyrant, evoked it, in December 1917.

***

Note 6: Obama & his goons didn’t outlaw financial derivatives trading, now bigger than ever, 1.2 quadrillion dollars, 20 times world GDP. By creating FACA, Obama & his goons said they did something about banks, but it was all sand in the eyes of his supporters, boosting world plutocracy!

***

Note 7: Here is the BS propaganda of the Obama White House officially attached to the picture above, a depiction of the colossal hypocrisy of these power-grabbers and the money changers who propel them:”President Barack Obama joins a toast with Technology Business Leaders at a dinner in Woodside, California, Feb. 17, 2011.

(Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements… that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.

Yet, what is the scene depicted by that picture, except the advertisement of a vast commercial, monopolistic political plot?… Which violates, as I said, the spirit of the most basic laws of a (pseudo-) democratic Republic? In the picture above, Obama is center-stage with fourteen other plutocrats or plutocratic servants, seated clockwise as follows:

Barack Obama, President of the United States, drunken on the power of killing civilians overseas with robots, in countries the US is not even in conflict with, while endowed with the Nobel Peace Prize, because no outrage is high enough to challenge plutocracy and its colored boy-servants.

Steve Jobs, chairman and CEO of Apple

Steve Westly, managing partner and founder of Westly Group

Marissa Mayer, vice-president of consumer products at Google

Eric Schmidt, chairman and CEO of Google

Art Levinson, chairman and former CEO of Genentech

John Chambers, CEO and chairman of Cisco Systems

John Doerr, partner in Venture Capital Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (hosting the event)

Larry Ellison, co-founder and CEO of Oracle

Reed Hastings, CEO of NetFlix

John Hennessy, president at Stanford University

Carol Bartz, president and CEO of Yahoo!

Dick Costolo, CEO of Twitter

Then an unidentified person, and Mark Zuckenberg, surveillance agent extraordinaire….

Drink The Kool Aid With Madeleine Albright…

April 6, 2018

Drinking the Kool-Aid is an expression commonly used in the United States that refers to any person or group who goes along with a doomed or dangerous idea because of peer pressure, following an abusive leader, or leaders, to the bitter, deadly end. The phrase often carries a negative connotation when applied to an individual or group. It can also be used ironically or humorously to refer to accepting an idea or changing a preference due to popularity, peer pressure, or persuasion. In recent years it has evolved further to mean extreme dedication to a cause or purpose, so extreme that one would “Drink the Kool-Aid” and die for the cause.

The phrase derives from the November 1978 Jonestown deaths, in which over 900 members of the Peoples Temple, who were followers of Jim Jones, died, many of whom committed suicide by drinking a mixture of a powdered soft-drink flavoring agent laced with cyanide and prescription drugs Valium, Phenergan, and chloral hydrate, while the rest of the members, including 89 infants and elderly, were killed by forced ingestion of the poison…

***

Dr. Albright was United States secretary of state from 1997 to 2001. Nobody will now believe that the Clinton administration was a time of great progress: war was pursued, under the form of a cruel embargo, including an embargo of drugs, against Iraq, while rogue US citizens, some connected to Harvard U, advised the leaders of Russia to restore the Russian Republic through plutocracy (a phenomenon which brought us Putin)….

Ms Albright wrote for the New York Times: “Will We Stop Trump Before It’s Too Late?” Contrarily to what that title seems to imply, she doesn’t assert that Trump is going to establish fascism in the USA, but that his alleged rogue attitude makes, worldwide, a bad situation worse (in part as Trump makes fun of the established order). 

900 people died at Jamestown, just because they followed the leader. Ms. Albright wants us all, like Mr. Obama, to have “leaders” to follow too. Meanwhile, we are invited to drink the kool aid too, and join in the Earth massacre? Or, at least, the massacre of our own judgment?

Albright writes:

“April 6, 2018

On April 28, 1945 — 73 years ago — Italians hung the corpse of their former dictator Benito Mussolini upside down next to a gas station in Milan. Two days later, Adolf Hitler committed suicide in his bunker beneath the streets of war-ravaged Berlin. Fascism, it appeared, was dead.”

Not so simple: Fascism didn’t die in May 1945. Far from it. Fascism is not just a “right wing” phenomenon. It is more about people feeling and thinking all alike, like the fasces bounded together around an axe, which is where the concept comes from, to symbolize in Rome “We the People” bounded around the lethal power of justice. Fascism is first of all, this binding together of a population as a weapon around a threat.

In May 1945 the fascist Stalin was alive, and well. Fascists such as Mao, Ho Chi Minh, were helped and financed by the USA (!!!) The US overall behavior in the war was highly suspect: why didn’t the USA declare war to Germany in 1939, when France and Britain did? Why did the USA wait until Japan and Germany attacked the USA? De facto, US placidity against it enabled the Axis to believe it had the tacit support of the USA (until it found otherwise in late 1941).

Albright:

To guard against a recurrence, the survivors of war and the Holocaust joined forces to create the United Nations, forge global financial institutions and — through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights — strengthen the rule of law. In 1989, the Berlin Wall came down and the honor roll of elected governments swelled not only in Central Europe, but also Latin America, Africa and Asia. Almost everywhere, it seemed, dictators were out and democrats were in. Freedom was ascendant.

Today, we are in a new era, testing whether the democratic banner can remain aloft amid terrorism, sectarian conflicts, vulnerable borders, rogue social media and the cynical schemes of ambitious men. The answer is not self-evident. We may be encouraged that most people in most countries still want to live freely and in peace, but there is no ignoring the storm clouds that have gathered. In fact, fascism — and the tendencies that lead toward fascism — pose a more serious threat now than at any time since the end of World War II.

(Survivors of war and “the Holocaust”? There were 5 million Jewish survivors of the attempted murders of all Jews in Europe; however, between the Nazis, Stalin and Mao, the number of people who died in extermination camps was above… 60 millions… In a 30 year period… So let’s be careful, about the notion of “the Holocaust”… Which one?)

Ms Albright doesn’t mention that this system she cherishes was set-up by the USA, to profit the USA more than the rest of the world (the FDR administration having bought Stalin by offering him half of Europe).

Ms. Albright evokes a so-called “free press”, as a conveyor of truth (please, All Bright, tell me why the New York Times and The Guardian, both supposedly left of center, banned all my comments for more than five years? Just because they could? Or because they didn’t like my theory of plutocracy?) However much of the press has been owned or influenced (through sponsors) by the wealthiest individuals. And the Internet is ravaged by “fake news”.

Among the causes of strife Ms Albright identifies, worldwide, the main one, the perception and actuality of inequality, is not mentioned. Wealth, and the plutocracy it brings, are exponential phenomena. They are the main threats to civilization. Actually, people voted, at least in part, for Hitler and Mussolini precisely because those two campaigned explicitly against “plutocrats” and inequality.

The problems are piling up quickly, many of them driven by climate change. This makes most people fearful, anxious to bundle as one and strike: fascism. But that’s just a symptom. The root cause is inequality, not just in wealth, but also in decision-making.

Patrice Aymé 

Note: Here is Ms. Albright, dissembling away in the traditional way:What is to be done? First, defend the truth. A free press, for example, is not the enemy of the American people; it is the protector of the American people. Second, we must reinforce the principle that no one, not even the president, is above the law. Third, we should each do our part to energize the democratic process by registering new voters, listening respectfully to those with whom we disagree, knocking on doors for favored candidates, and ignoring the cynical counsel: “There’s nothing to be done.”

From Albright, nothing about unjust laws which make it so that the wealthiest can pay no taxes, get ever wealthier, and buy politicians… Nothing about direct democracy, all about “candidates”, presumably, “Manchurian Candidates”, brainwashed and all….

How To Alleviate Fake Media Censorship Through Public Utility Legislation

February 28, 2018

The problem of “fake news” cannot be disjointed from censorship and propaganda… Censoring the truth, or replacing it by lies is not very different. The solution to this steering of the public mind into subjugation is to recognize quality thinking and information as “PUBLIC UTILITY”… From the Google-Facebook duopoly, to the most modest websites, as yours truly (legislatively enforced). That means, dear New York Times, and various university professor sites, no more censorship… 

In a few hours, I was censored three times, twice related to Nobel, not so noble, Paul Krugman, the self-described “Conscience of a Liberal”, and his network. More sad than infuriating. 

I had sent to Paul Krugman a pretty neutral piece for his  post “The Force of Decency Awakens”. Krugman claimed that the same emotion, decency, waking up, was the root cause for the renewed fight against sexism, and against guns. Decency comes from the present participle of decereto be fitting or suitable“. Krugman apparently found my comment unsuitable and inappropriate. However that comment was purely about how and why plutocracy grew and how that related to indecency. My comment actually supported what Krugman said, it understood it, it stood under it. Krugman should have been happy to be understood, with not one word against him. But, no, he censored my comment nevertheless (someone at the NYT told me Krugman censors me personally). When Krugman does this, I am always baffled: does he really not understand, or does he censors me because he is afraid of the shareholders of his employers (some of the world’s wealthiest men), or is he simply jealous like the wicked queen was of Snow White?

In his post, Krugman pontificated that:”Political scientists have a term and a theory for what we’re seeing on #MeToo, guns and perhaps more: “regime change cascades.””

 The link was looking at only four revolutions, and asked for big money to go beyond the abstract. I smelled a rotten fish. I looked at that site.  It claims: “REMARQ is a collaboration network from RedLink, designed for researchers and qualified users.” “Qualified users?” I sent a comment. The “Remarq Team” looked at the title of my Aristotle Destroyed Democracy essay (I was electronically informed) and, within minutes, sent me something that got plastered on  my browser: The Remarq team rejected your qualified user request and comment on article Regime Change Cascades: What We Have Learned from the 1848 Revolutions to the 2011 Arab Uprisings. 2018-02-27 14:37”. To be “rejected” by a “team” sounds more abusive than polite.

The theme of ADD is that the respect for Aristotle’s political work is the respect for monarchy, the rule of one. Aristotle’ s main political idea constitutes the bottom principles of today’s political “science”: a few individuals (generally male) should lead We The People, as if we were sheep. This is not idle talk, and a claim Aristotle was a bad influence: Aristotle was actually the leader and mentor of the small group of vicious men who launched the Hellenistic Regimes (which later encouraged the destruction of the Republican spirit in Rome).

The idea of the rule of one, monarchy, defended at the highest intellectual level, is, of course, also the main idea of Judeo-Christo-Islamism, with its big boss, God (which not coincidentally grew with the Hellenistic regimes). Attacking Aristotle, for those who believe in the Guide Principle (Deutsch: Führerprinzip) is like attacking Allah for the worst Jihadists.  Most intellectual professionals paid for their mental work are there to enforce the established order, they do now what the church used to do in the Middle Ages. To rule over minds, one will find more efficient to rule the souls, rather than to wield chains. Here the opinion of Paul Nizan about paid intellectuals, paid to have the correct thoughts and feelings, the watchdogs:

Those whom the establishment feeds wear a chain around their necks, a fable of Aesop already

One difference between someone like me or Nizan (who lived in the Middle East, Europe, Africa) and the political scientists at the “Remarq Team” (who presumably didn’t grew up nor lived in such places) is that I am not paid to tell lies, lies are not what Nizan or I, profess… As paid condottiere of things intellectuals presumably are (why else would they think it is important that others do NOT see my thoughts? If they are so bad, why don’t they rot by themselves?) This observation is not new: since ever, intellectuals have been paid as “watchdogs” (to use Paul Nizan’s expression; Nizan, a friend of Sartre, enlisted in the French army to fight Nazism. Nizan died in combat at Dunkirk, 23 May 1940, part of the enormous French army protecting the evacuation of 330,000 elite soldiers, including most of the professional British army (future instructors to the mass army they would teach), against the entire, vengeful Nazi army

What is clear is that a lot of people are spending a lot of efforts censoring the Internet. The NYT censored my comment on the Krugman essay referred above.  

A physicist specialized in Dark Matter censored my comment on Dark Matter, on her site (not the first time!) although the idea I have been pushing is incredibly simple (thus potentially revolutionary). Whereas people like that physicist are pushing MOND, MOdified Newtonian Dynamics, I am pushing MOQ (MOdified Quantum; which I also call Sub Quantum Patrice Reality, an allusion to the fact that the Copenhagen Interpretation, and its ilk are NOT real…).

A good reason for not having MOND is that, modifying gravitational mass, as MOND de facto does, opens the can of worms of having to modify inertial mass, and, if not, why not… Whereas MOQ/SQPR fills in a gap in the usual Copenhagen Interpretation and its ilk (the other way to solve the gap is the Many Worlds/Multiverse, in other words, angels on a pin, with no limits, whatsoever…) As an exchange on the comments of the Dwarf Galaxy disk problem (predicted by MOQ/SQPR, not by MOND, nor LambdaCDM…) shows, my comment was finally published. It made an analogy between the present situation and the epicycles (an old point of view of mine now adopted by many physicists)… But I am going in much more details. The epicycles’ theory was a consequence of the wrong, ridiculously wrong, Aristotelian physics, at the root, and it may well be what is going on now… Buridan resuscitated heliocentrism, because, first, he got the physics right (also heliocentrism was obvious…)

Delaying comments destroy the debate: the New York Times delayed my comments, by several days, systematically, for years: that allowed the NYT to claim it practiced no censorship (in correspondence with me)… although nobody would read them, then… and then the NYT decided to just censor ALL of my comments, for years. My point is that this sort of steering of public opinion should be illegal, in a public utility (see below)…

I am used to something paradoxical for whom has never been employed by academia (I have ONLY been employed by academia), the scholar as a thief. I was, bad luck, next to some of the greatest, most decorated thieves ever, one of them was one of my best friends (until I discoverer to my horror and depression that he was a thief… There were pages on his thievery at some point in the New York Times; not only he helped then to demolish my career, but he demolished the career of the famous G. Perelman… Perelman got the top prizes in mathematics, refused to accept them, as he said that, then, he would have to tell the truth, and the world of top math would be revealed as the BS it is. Then an angry and discouraged Perelman gave up math (contrarily to repute, math is a social activity; can’t do it when the people you talk to are, you know, thieves, among other problems…).

I had this problem with Black Holes: I suggested, long ago, that the standard reasoning was insufficient because it neglected Quantum effects (say Quark stars, etc.) Now this point of view is standard wisdom.

Thievery is a general problem in research, in a time of insufficient budgets. I have known the detailed case of junior researchers (not just yours truly) seeing their papers rejected, and then senior “peer reviewers” running away with the ideas… which they had just rejected for publication. Greed is not just a plutocratic problem, nor does plutocracy necessarily have to do with making billions. Verily, the power (kratos) of evil (Pluto) is great… especially when directed at honest to goodness thinkers.

Strange world. A tweet of mine, relating to the Bernie Sanders’ Twitter account, was also “made unavailable”. What did my tweet say? Here it is: Problem: Democrats view as too left-wing the taxes advocated by Carnegie, the USA’s first billionaire (19th Century)! Carnegie explained in detail why it was necessary to tax enormous wealth enormously. The only deep reason for taxation is to prevent hyper wealth accumulation!” https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/965670396715511809 …

Am I too left-wing for Bernie? Or, more to the point, is Carnegie now too left-wing for the Democrats and US “Socialists”? Anyway, my tweet was removed by the powers that be (such a dangerous tweet, I agree!) At least Senator Bernie Sanders just changed his position on some guns… Tweeted Bernie, 2/28/2018:

We should not be selling assault weapons in this country. These weapons are not for hunting. They are military weapons for killing human beings.” I replied @BernieSanders:

Hillary Clinton used to complain that Bernie Sanders sided with the NRA. Glad to see the clear statement against military assault weapons..(See? Even Hillary can be right sometimes…)

The Internet is big money nowadays: 73% of the advertising revenue in media goes to the duopoly of Google and Facebook (up from 63% in 2015… and 85% of the growth in said revenue). So, we have, de facto, a monopoly of two! By itself, this should impel governments to act (well, OK, they are acting by doing nothing…)

And what do many Internet agents do? Steer, censor and contrive. Indeed, neither Google nor Facebook create content, they are content to steer We The Sheeple towards their idea of decency. They are electronic leeches. 

It is clear that none of this is innocent. what is happening on the Internet is exactly, on a much grander scale, what Putin is accused of doing: a few individuals and their obsequious servants, manipulating public opinion. So what to do?

***

Remedy: The Notion Of Public Utility Medium:

Public utilities provide an infrastructure necessary to society. They are subject to public control, beyond that of standard private industry. In the case of media on the Internet, the infrastructure would be the most important infrastructure of all, the infrastructure of truth!

As it is, there is a serious problem. As David Chavern has it in the WSJ in “Protect the News From Google and Facebook“: “A partial exemption from antitrust laws would help publishers and readers (Feb. 25, 2018):  The news business is suffering, but not because people don’t want news. They do—more than ever. The problem is that the money generated by news audiences flows mostly to Google and Facebook , not to the reporters and publishers who produce excellent journalism… newspaper advertising revenue fell from $22 billion in 2014 to $18 billion in 2016 even as web traffic for the top 50 U.S. newspapers increased 42%.

Local news is most at risk. As print circulation declines, community news publishers have the hardest time adapting to the ever-changing demands of Facebook and Google algorithms… Tech savvy, digital-only publishers are also struggling. BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti said in December that Google and Facebook are “paying content creators far too little for the value they deliver to users,” and that “this puts high-quality creators at a financial disadvantage, and favors publishers of cheap media.”

And the Wall Street Journal to pursue:Google and Facebook have become the primary and de facto regulators of the news business, and governments around the world are starting to recognize the danger. British Prime Minister Theresa May announced earlier this month that her government would review the economics of internet news consumption. Regulators in Germany, Israel and South Korea are investigating how Google’s business practices have disrupted the media market and harmed publishers and consumers. U.S. regulators, on the other hand, have rarely looked into Google or Facebook—and never at their influence in the news marketplace.

Some voices on the left and right are calling for Google and Facebook to be regulated as utilities. But there is an easier solution: exempt news publishers from certain aspects of antitrust regulation.

U.S. antitrust laws, designed to promote fair competition and prevent consolidation, actually make it harder for traditional news outlets to compete with Silicon Valley giants. Under current law, for instance, news publishers cannot get together and agree to withhold their product unless they receive a return on their investment.”

YouTube (owned by Google) warned some accounts which had reported that the latest school mass shooting in Florida was a “hoax” and the victims were “actors”. Nice, but those sort of “fake news” are not really worse than decades of lies from the Main Stream Media. Lies, or non-saids (French magazines reports that US president Jimmy Carter started the war in Afghanistan, which killed many millions, from his own administration, were censored, so US Americans really don’t know that! By the way, my point of view that Carter, Clinton and Obama were fake, not to say evil, is spreading. In the case of Obama, that depressed me….) For Carter, July 3, 1979 attack against Afghanistan, please consider:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/usa-attack-against-afghanistan/

***

What to do is that there should legal recourse against any medium declared a public utility, and yet, practicing censorship:    

To become a medium of public utility, there should be, and could be, two ways:

  1. Being declared to be so, by legislative decision, and Google and Facebook, and all the major media, certainly should be.
  2. Applying to become so (for example this site would).

Any medium of public utility would have to satisfy some requirements, such as trying to tell the truth when claiming to do so (poetry and fiction would be allowed, but under those labels). Public utility media would also have to avoid censorship, and be ready to justify it (that mean be ready to justify when censorship is applied; for example, the NYT would be required to justify why it censored me systematically when I comment Krugman’s posts…)

More than a decade ago, a philosophy site banned me for life for “fantastic logic” and stealing (from myself) my own (!) intellectual property (which I had made the mistake to put on their site as comments; so they viewed my ideas as their own thereafter, and forbid me to publish said ideas of mine on my old, Tyranosopher, site…) Ridiculous, but at least they provided some reason (last year I learned that the main, very famous philosopher behind that site, an old enemy of mine, called Searle, has been accused of sexual harassment by many girls and women, and was suspended from his prestigious university position; that didn’t surprise me, as I considered him a thief already… Sexual harassment is a form of thievery, and assault.)

When a medium is unwilling to give any reason for the censorship it applies, it should not be given the privileges associated to journalism, the respect of implied scholarship, nor the prestigious aura of “public utility”.  

Your devoted servant, glad to be, hopefully, of some public use,

Patrice Aymé

PLUTOCRACY: EPIGENETICS, Not Just Wealth And Democide

December 12, 2016

CHOMSKY FINALLY Agrees With Patrice AYME: AMERICAN DREAM DIED BECAUSE OF PLUTOCRACY… But Chomsky does not go as far as using the word. And that makes him, and his devoted followers, miss the most sinister aspects of it all, and the reason why it is so hard to fix plutocracy, the EPIGENETICS OF EVIL. Thus they complain about the fleas, not the wolf carrying them. Details about how that instrument of US plutocracy, Nazism, came to be, thanks to US plutocracy and its banks, illustrate the demonstration: as long as something that big in the calculus of evil is altogether missed, there is little hope…

***

English America did start as a plutocracy in the sense of an extremely wealthy class of the wealthiest investors sitting in England, after having ravaged Ireland. Jamestown was like that, Yes, it was a tiny hamlet fortress, but then the colony grew, mostly from using slaves for tobacco farming. Then England, wrecked by civil wars and revolutions, lost control of its American colonies until the 1700s. Attempts to make Lord Penn the ruler of Pennsylvania ended up in the American Revolution.

Washington, Jefferson, and Al. were very wealthy and somewhat satanic, as they held slaves, and killed Natives, but they were small fry relative to blue blood European plutocrats, who were much wealthier, and thus had to be much more satanic to stay in power.

So the English American republic became a not very plutocratic republic (if one doesn’t consider slavery, and the massacre of Native Americans, two huge ifs…) And on it went. The rebellious Confederacy was to some extent a plutocratic revolt centered around the idea of buying, selling and abusing people as if they were chicken: it failed.

The first US billionaire was Carnegie. Carnegie was far left, by today’s standards, advocating 50% tax on the wealthy, and punishing estate taxes. His widely advocated ideas brought a mood conducive to the passage of the anti-trust act under President Teddy Roosevelt. Here is how the top 0.01%, the top 30,000, are doing in the USA:

Inequality Fosters Plutocracy, The Rule, Not Just Of Wealth, But evil & Bad Genes

Inequality Fosters Plutocracy, The Rule, Not Just Of Wealth, But evil & Bad Genes

So when did the US democracy go bad? JP Morgan, a banker, escaped the anti-trust thrust.   Dr. Schacht, a German banker cum economist joined the Dresdner Bank in 1903. In 1905, while on a business trip to the United States with board members of the Dresdner Bank, Schacht met the famous American banker J. P. Morgan, as well as U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt. Schacht  became deputy director of the Dresdner Bank from 1908 to 1915. Meanwhile, when Wall Street collapsed in 1907, JP Morgan “bought all of it” (or at least a big part of it), bringing the market around.

By 1914, US plutocrats, and the racist president Wilson, conspired with the German Kaiser, enabling the Kaiser to hope to destroy his personal enemy, and the enemy of German, if not American and British plutocracy, the French Republic. That magnificent plot backfired on Germany when Great Britain declared war to the Kaiser within days of its attack on France.

But it did not backfire for the USA, just the opposite: the US supported the Kaiser for three years with ammunition components, etc., while the UK and France piled up debts to the USA. More exactly, US plutocrats made a fortune, while putting the UK and the French Republic in their debt.

In 1919, US plutocrats made it so that German fascists could have another go at the French Republic, by brandishing, of all things, the concept of peace.

Remember, for US plutocrats, the motto of the French Republic, Liberty, EQUALITY… sounded like a funeral bell tolling. They absolutely had to remove that menace: at the time, the French empire was larger in population and extent, than the USA itself, and had the world’s most powerful army and air force (yes France was then mightier than the USA in several ways).

While arguing that Germany should be protected from France, the US requisitioned giant amounts of German private property, then transferred that, with characteristic generosity, to US plutocrats, finishing the deal, by burning the records of these chummy transactions, in a highly convenient blaze, which made the transfer of these properties safe from retrospective consideration. I am not joking: the cause of the burning of the Commerce Building on January 10, 1921 was never determined: rats, smoking were excluded, and electric wires kept new and perfect. The fire started in the file room, was all over said room in a couple of minutes, and lasted five hours.

In any case, the US became the de facto overlord of the so-called “Weimar Republic” (the official name was “Second German Reich”; Hitler changed it to “Third German Reich” in 1935). That enabled US plutocrats (some of them Jewish) to turn around the US antitrust law.

The symbiosis between Nazism and US plutocracy was total, including the latter giving birth to the former. Dr. Schacht was central in this (and that’s why he was judged and exonerated, as one of the top 24 Nazi war criminals in 1945 at Nuremberg).

To win the war, the US became, de facto, a sort of social democracy. It slowly went back to plutocracy when Nazi operators and collaborators such as the Dulles brothers, took control of the USA in the 1950s. A quick learner and follower, Richard Nixon, became president in 1969, setting up the HMO system, while making an alliance with the Chinese dictatorship.

Ford, Carter, Reagan, ramped up the plutocratic pressure. The dam broke under Clinton, who actually dismantled the MOST IMPORTANT legislative piece of president Franklin D Roosevelt’s long presidency: the Banking Act of 1933 (“Glass Steagall”).

The Deep State, suitably plutocratized then established a number of evil corporations which were used as intelligence agencies (internally and externally). This is when Sheryl Sandberg was parachuted from the Treasury Department where she was the official girlfriend of Lawrence Summers (successor of R. Rubin, ex- Goldman Sachs chair) to Google and then Facebook (she will meet with Trump Wednesday).

Inequality grew.

***

Chomsky, A Crow On Its MIT Branch, Crowing Lugubriously:

That was for the causes. Chomsky started to condemn the “financialization” of the USA for the acceleration of inequality in 2013, under Obama (Patrice Ayme explained that it was caused by the abrogation of the Banking Act, already more than 10 years ago; Chomsky vaguely describes, Patrice explains…).

Here is Chomsky’s latest description: “The ‘American Dream’ was all about class mobility. You were born poor, but could get out of poverty through hard work and provide a better future for your children. It was possible for [some workers] to find a decent-paying job, buy a home, a car and pay for a kid’s education… It’s all collapsed — and we shouldn’t have too many illusions about when it was partially real… The so-called American Dream was always based partly in myth and partly in reality.” Chomsky said, noting that Americans are losing their hope due to “stagnating incomes, declining living standards, outrageous student debt levels, and hard-to-come-by decent-paying jobs.”

“The inequality in the contemporary period is almost unprecedented. If you look at total inequality, it ranks amongst the worse periods of American history… However, if you look at inequality more closely, you see that it comes from wealth that is in the hands of a tiny sector of the population…

The current period is extreme because inequality comes from super wealth. Literally, the top one-tenth of a percent are just super wealthy,”

Chomsky describes. One of my trusted commenters asked me recently what I thought of Chomsky. A philosopher is not just a botanist. A philosopher would explain, and suggest new explanations. Chomsky also avoid to use the concept of “plutocracy”. He describes it, he describes how wealth, being powerful, grabs power… But he doesn’t label it… which prevents him to go at the bottom of things, as he usually focus on “imperialism”… a completely different notion (imperium, that is military command, may happen with or without plutocracy; initially the concept was from the Roman Republic, which was not a plutocracy). 

***

Plutocracy, Epigenetics of Evil:

However, that comes short. Very short. Chomsky does not dare to cross the semantic Rubicon of calling it for what it is, plutocracy, the evil power, the genetics, and epigenetics, of evil.

This is why Chomsky clings to the idea that the American Founders debated what is at stake now. Now, they did not: the Internet has changed everything, starting with the minds, the moods, hence the genes, or the genetic expressions, to be a bit more precise. We know that fishes in a changed environment, change genetically. Females can become not just males, but super males.

Plutocracy is not just the rule of wealth. We know, from studying epigenetics in other species, that animal behavior influences genetic, let alone neurohormonal expression.

The absolute power of enormous wealth does not just corrupt absolutely, it corrupts genetically.  

Complaining about the fleas is good, but seeing the wolf carrying them, better. Wisdom is not just about seeing what’s wrong, but doing better what can be improved.

Patrice Ayme’

Socrates A Poisonous, Unexamined Fascist?

September 22, 2016

The Pathos Of Truth Seeked & Violated. Unexamined Fascist, Unexamined Prostitute? Both. Why Was That Covered Up, So Long? For The Same Exact Cause Which Made Socrates Famous!

The death of Socrates keeps haunting philosophy. And that, per se, is a sad, yet very revealing tale. The old common wisdom was that Socrates died, as a martyr to truth (as Hypatia, Boetius, Giordano Bruno, and many others certainly were). You want a hero for philosophy? Celebrate Jean Cavaillès. In the presence of Cavaillès, Sartre nearly wetted his pants. We will see that the mood behind Socrates’ actions is significantly different. Socrates was rather on the side of those who killed Cavaillès.

Indeed, a casual look at the basic setup of Socrates’ trial contradicts the theme that Socrates was mostly a martyr for truth. Socrates was simply accused to be the mastermind of the young dictators who ruled Athens after her tremendous defeat, and half annihilation at the hands of Sparta, the tool of Persia. Socrates was also mentor, friend and lover (!) of the young Alcibiades who, deprived of a generalship by Athens, then betrayed her for her lethal enemy, fascist, ultra-racist, Persian financed Sparta.

Agreed, philosophy needs heroes, and has plenty. Here is one:

Jean Cavaillès. Here Is A Hero For Truth & Philosophy. Socrates Was Nearly The Exact Opposite.

Jean Cavaillès, Anti-Fascist Martyr. Here Is A Hero For Truth & Philosophy. Socrates Was Nearly The Exact Opposite.

[Jean Cavaillès was tortured and assassinated by the Gestapo in 1943-1944. He is buried in the crypt of the Sorbonne.]

Thus Socrates was a sort of Charlie Manson of serial traitors and killers, whose mental actions led, or accompanied, Athens’ near-death experience in losing a devastating war, and the resulting dictatorship by Socrates’ students. Temples of democracy such as Britain, France, and the USA have gaily executed traitors, or incompetents, for much less than that.

Socrates Used To Look At People As A bull Does. Ugly Inside Out? To Reveal the Truth, Some Will Say Torture Works Even Better

Socrates Used To Look At People As A bull Does. Ugly Inside Out? To Reveal the Truth, Some Will Say Torture Works Even Better

Stanford political science and classics professor, Josiah Ober opines in “The Civic Drama Of Socrates’ Trial” that:  “Conventional wisdom sees Socrates as a martyr for free speech, but he accepted his death sentence for a different cause… In his influential interpretation The Trial of Socrates (1988), the US journalist-turned-classicist I F Stone saw this trial as an embattled democracy defending itself. In Stone’s view, Socrates had helped to justify the junta’s savage programme of oligarchic misrule and was a traitor. More commonly, Socrates is seen as a victim of an opportunistic prosecutor and a wilfully ignorant citizenry. In truth, politics is indispensable to understanding the trial of Socrates, but in a slightly more sophisticated way.”

I love sophistication, philosophy is all about increased sophistication (so is science). Sophistication, translated, is wisdomization: sticking to reality ever better by ever more subtle, complex logic.

The point was not so much that Socrates justified the savage programme, but that he formed the minds who organized said programme, “corrupting the youth”. And he was at it again, even after being amnestied. Professor Ober describes the problem well (although he fails to fathom the enormity of what he describes).

Stanford’s Josiah: For what people today call ‘the wisdom of crowds’, Socrates had nothing but scorn. Athenian democrats who argued that the many, the group, were collectively more likely to get important matters right than any individual expert earned his antipathy. Whether or not anyone actually was expert in the art of politics, Socrates certainly supposed that there could be such an expert, and that the Athenians were deluded in thinking themselves collectively wise.”

The “experts” would have been naturally his rich, best (“aristos”) boyfriends. Professor Ober is led to the obvious question, but fail to recognize that he does not answer it:

“How did Socrates both scorn the idea of collective wisdom and yet maintain obedience to Athens’ laws, even when he disagreed with how they were interpreted? The rudimentary answer lay in the foundation that Athens (as opposed to, for example, Sparta) provided in its laws and political culture. Athens mandated liberty of public speech and tolerance for a wide range of private behaviour.”

Yes, but public incompetence could lead to trial (as happened to Pericles and many strategoi, generals and admirals). Anyway, that is not an answer. I will give a better answer: Socrates himself had no answer to his drastic self-contradictions, so hise self-delusion fatally committed him to self-destruction. Yet political science professor Ober sees the problem:

“By 399 BCE, however, four years after the end of the tyranny, and with Socrates doing the same things in public that had seemingly inspired the junta’s leaders, the Athenians regarded his speech very differently. In the eyes of the majority of his fellow citizens, Socrates was no longer an eccentric with potential for contributing to public life. He was now either a malevolent public enemy, or deluded and dangerously unable to recognise that his speech predictably produced seriously bad outcomes. And so the way was left open for Meletus to launch his prosecution.”

Right. What professor Ober fails to mention is that only the intervention of mighty Sparta prevented Athens’ annihilation after she surrendered, having lost already half of her population (other cities wanted to do to Athens what Athens did to Melos). Try to imagine this: the city-state half annihilated, democracy destroyed by Socrates’ students, and then? The strongest mood that Socrates had been instilling was to oppose democracy. And he was again at it, after the amnesty he had profited from. What could motivate such a rage?

Unsurprisingly, Socrates was put on trial for “corrupting the youth and impiety”. (The City was to some extent divinized, with Athena as her protecting goddess.)

“With unsettling metaphors and logical demonstrations, he made it clear that he [Socrates] opposed democracy… Xenophon implies that Socrates chose that sort of speech as a method of jury-assisted suicide: he was… tired of life and allowed the Athenians to end it for him.”

This is what I believe. And I go further than Xenophon, by explaining the cause of Socrates’ depression. Socrates may have been tired of his own contradictions.And may have been ravaged by regret. (Regret, I reckon, is a powerful human instinct.)

The Socrates’ worship interpretation is due to Plato. It poses Socrates as martyr to civic duty. But, as it turns out, “civic duty”, for Socrates, seems to be mostly blind obedience to “the Laws”, while viciously criticizing the Direct Democracy which gave birth to them.

That Socrates respected the laws of Athens while despising the Direct Democracy which had passed them is illogical in the extreme. Yes, I know Socrates said he respected “the Laws”, as if they were disembodied gods with a life of their own. But We The People passed said laws, and they lived only because We The People had created them, and We thge People could extinguish them just the same.

The “Laws” were nothing. We The People was everything. Socrates behaved as if he could not understand that.

Insisting that the Laws were everything reveals that the concept of blind obedience was more important to Socrates than arguing about the nature of what one should be obeying to, and why. Blind obedience is also the traditional ultimate value of standard fascism: law and order as supreme.

Blind obedience had been what the junta’s rule was all about. What the rule of Socrates’ young students and lovers had been all about. That’s also what fascism is all about. However, arguing, debating, fighting is how to get to the thorough examination necessary for the “examined life”.   

The contradiction was, and is, blatant. Socrates’ mental system was shorting out. Socrates had been shorting out for half a decade or more: he ambitiously wanted to “examine life”, but he could not even examine the minds of his followers, let alone his own, or why he was hanging around them. Why was he hanging around them? They were rich, he was not, but he lived off their backs and crumbs. And the feeling of power they provided with (after Obama got to power I saw some in his entourage becoming drunk with power).  

Arguably, Socrates was a martyr to fascism, a Jihadist without god. There is nothing remarkable about that. The very instinct of fascism is to give one’s life, just because fanatical combat is the ultimate value, when one gets in the fascist mood. In this case, the fanatical combat was against We The People.

Posing Socrates as a martyr for intellectual freedom is farfetched: fascism, blind obedience, passion for oligarchs are all opposed to the broad mind searching for wisdom requires.

Some will sneer: you accuse Socrates to be a fascist, why not a racist? Well, I will do this too. The golden youth Socrates loved so much and drank with were hereditary so. Socrates believed knowledge was innate (so an ignorant shepherd boy knew all of math: this is the example he rolled out!) If knowledge was innate, one can guess that the “aristos”, the best, were also innately superior. That is the essence of racism.

Logically enough, Socrates disliked science: nothing was truly new under the sun (as all knowledge was innate). So much for examining life.

It is more probable that Socrates was indeed, just a stinging insect buzzing around, stinging the idea of Direct Democracy. In exchange, his rich, young, plutocratic boyfriends would fete and feed him. Such was Socrates’ life, a rather sad state of affair, something that needed to be examined, indeed, by the head doctor.

Socrates may have been clever enough to feel that he was an ethical wreck. His suicidal submission may have been an attempt to redeem himself, or whatever was left of his honor (which he also tried to regain with his insolence to the jury).

Plato would pursue the fight for fascism (“kingship”). Aristotle, by teaching, mentoring, educating, befriending, advising a number of extremely close, family-like friends, the abominable Alexander, Craterus and Antipater, finally fulfilled Socrates’ wet dream: Athenian Direct Democracy was destroyed and replaced by an official plutocracy overlorded by Antipater (supremo dictator, and executor of Aristotle’s will, in more ways than one).

This trio of philosophical malefactors became the heroes 22 centuries of dictatorship (“monarchy”) needed as a justification. A justification where “civic duty” was defined as blind obedience to the “Laws” (whatever they were, even unjust “Laws”). This amplified Socrates’ hatred of Direct Democracy. So the works of the trio were preciously preserved, and elevated to the rank of the admirable.

It is rather a basket of deplorables. We owe them the destruction of Direct Democracy for 23 centuries, and counting.

And what Of Socrates’ regret for being so deplorable? (Which I alleged he had to experience.) A dying Socrates lying on a couch, uncovered his face and uttered— “Crito, I owe the sacrifice of a rooster to Asklepios; will you pay that debt and not neglect to do so?”  Asklepios cured disease, and provided with rebirth, symbolized by the singing of the rooster calling the new day. This has been traditionally interpreted (by Nietzsche) as meaning that (Socrates’?) death was a cure for (his?) life. Nietzsche accused Socrates to be culprit of the subsequent degeneracy of civilization (and I do agree with that thesis). Certainly, Socrates, a self-described “gadfly” was deprived of gravitas.

Wisdom needs to dance, but cannot be altogether deprived of gravitas, as it is, after all, the gravest thing.. Maybe Socrates felt this confusedly, besides having regrets for his status of thinking insect. Socrates could have easily escaped, and Crito had an evasion ready. By killing himself Socrates behaved like a serious Japanese Lord opening his belly to show his insides were clean, and its intent good. Well, many a scoundrel has committed seppuku, and hemlock is nothing like cutting the belly.

Human beings are endowed with the instinct of regret, because we are the thinking species. It is crucial that we find the truth, and when we have lived a lie, indulged in error, the best of use are haunted by the past, and revisit it to find what the truth really was. Regrets has many stages, like cancer. The most correct philosophical form of regret is to re-established the truth. The cheap way out is to flee from reality, as Socrates did.

How to explain Socrates’ insolence to the jury? There again, it was a desperate attempt at reaching the sensation of self-righteousness and trying to impart it to the jury (this is often seen  on the Internet, with the glib one-liners and vacuous logic which pass for depth nowadays).

The inexperienced democracy in Athens did not always behave well. Athens behaved terribly with Melos (see link above). But the case of Socrates is different. Ultimately, the train of thoughts and moods promoted by Socrates weakened those who wanted to defend the free republics of Greece against the fascist, exterminationist Macedonian plutocracy. Demosthenes and Athenian Direct Democracy was mortally poisoned by Socrates.

Thus, Socrates execution was not just tit for tat. It was not enough of tit for tat. It was a preventive measure, in defense of Direct Democracy, which failed, because it was too meek.

Democracy does not mean to turn the other cheek, to have the golden beast eat that one too. In ultimate circumstances, democracy has an ultimate weapon too, and that is fascism. This is why the Roman, French and American republics prominently brandish the fasces. Fascism is the ultimate war weapon. But fascism is not the ultimate society. Far from it: political fascism, just a few individuals leading entails intellectual fascism, namely just a few moods and ideas leading. Before one knows it, one is in plutocracy, where not only wealth rules, but so does the cortege of the worst ideas and moods which characterize it.

Socrates often talk the talk, contradicting completely the way he lived (for example he said one should never return an injury, but, as a hoplite, he killed at least four men in combat!)

Socrates spoke so well sometimes, that he can stay a symbol of truth persecuted. But, because it is a lie, replacing him by Hypatia, Boetius, Bruno and, or Cavaillès, and, or, others, is urgent. Indeed, the reality is that Socrates was not just inimical to democracy. The current of thought he floated by was inimical to science, mental progress, and the truth he claimed to be pining for.  And even him may have been so overwhelmed by these astounding contradictions, that, in the end, assisted suicide for his pathetic mental writhing was, indeed, the optimal outcome.

Patrice Ayme’

 

Britain’s Unelected Islamist Prime Minister

July 12, 2016

Just when we thought that the funny news out of Great Britain could not get anymore demented, new heights of undemocratic, anti-civilizational absurdity have been reached. To become Prime Minister of Great Britain, a woman has made propaganda, as a ruling leader, in favor of Islam. (Yes, just when you thought that the Clintons having made 153 million dollars from speeches to high finance, and ex-EC president Barroso being employed by Goldman Sachs had reached the highest heights, I am pleased to present to you Theresa May, who would say whatever to get to power…) 

Sharia “Of Great Benefit To Women” Says Britain’s Latest Dictator

Sharia “Of Great Benefit To Women” Says Britain’s Latest Dictator

Theresa May is on the record as an Islamist. Why do I say this? Bear with me. More specifically, while a prominent member of the British government (nearly the longest Home Sec. ever), that woman claimed repeatedly that Sharia Law has “been of great benefit to women“. Alright, she did not say yet that cutting off heads has been of great benefit to men, so she is coming a bit short of the most demented Islamists, I must admit.

“Sharia” is a system of law established by so-called “Islamist scholars“, the little scribes of some of the world’s greatest dictators,  more than a century after Muhammad’s death. From all we know from Muhammad’s life, opinions and sentiments, clearly, the Prophet would have disallowed Sharia.

Muhammad thought women could dispose of their bodies as they wished, whereas Sharia imposes upon them the death penalty if they do in ways Muhammad obviously tolerated. Long subject. Sharia formalizes violence in the Qur’an… Caliph Uthman’s Qur’an, not Muhammad’s (that one was… boiled, all over the Musllim empire!)  And then Sharia goes well beyond anything in the Qur’an.

Under May, Theresa, as “Home Secretary“, and now the new Prime Dictator of Britain, around 100 “Sharia courts” have been established around Britain, with her benediction. This much re-iterated Islamist statements of hers, about the “great benefit” of Sharia, caused a few waves. Thus May, the new Prime Dictator of Britain nominated a commission, to see if there was a problem. Who chaired that whitewashing organization? You guessed it. Two Imams. One may as well, may be, put two bishops in charge of seeing if Catholic Inquisition Courts were not of “great benefit to women”.

Thus, without any election, Great Britain will have a new Prime Minister Wednesday, Theresa May, the “Home Secretary”. When hard-core Brits are asked how democratic that is, they reply: the head of state is Queen Elizabeth, so nothing changed.

Indeed. And Prince Charles, who, like his mother got many millions in European Union subsidies, made more than 20 million pounds of income last year. Prince Charles personally own as much an area of land as two-thirds of Yosemite National Park in the USA (I computed). The Brits say: this is how our democracy works: we debase ourselves, and then think haughty of ourselves, as butlers do, when thinking of their masters.

People with brains will say: that’s how plutocracy works.

The way Great Britain is operated nowadays is becoming a menace, by example, to democracy everywhere around the planet.

Contemplate Malaysia: It has been Islamizing. 50% of the population Is Muslim, and on those 50.2% (official percentage), Sharia law applies, to Theresa May’s delight. Never mind if you were born a “Muslim”, and now you do not believe in that obnoxious, obsolete, fascist, human rights violating superstition of some desert savages. There is now a powerful political movement to impose Sharia on all of Malaysia.

That would be very convenient: if, as a dictator, you have an opponent, you can accuse him to be a homosexual (thus to be stoned, according to Sharia). Actually, this already happened in Malaysia, against the main politician and opponent to the regime. Never mind? The leader of Malaysia and his entourage are suspected to have stolen five billion dollars they happen to possess, inexplicably. No doubt a lot of stolen Malaysian money made it in a neighborhood very close to Theresa May, already (this, the importation of plutocratic capital, became the UK’s main industry, in recent decades…. hence the movement to make the UK safe from Eurocrats, now that Switzerland has fallen under their sway, the sway of Republican law…)

Is it inexplicable to want to please the Islamists that much? “Allah knows, and you do not (to quote the Qur’an). So does Theresa May. Let’s keep it that way, ever more so. Just a hint: many of the world’s richest plutocrats (such as The Sultan of Brunei) claim to be Islamists (not a coincidence: Islam is dictator-friendly, to the point Hitler got some of his main ideas from it, the Fascist Principle, or Fuehrer Principle). The United Kingdom’s strategy? To become the new Switzerland (while forgetting, or, more exactly, ignoring that Switzerland’s main industry is pharmaceutical and food, of top world class level, namely real industrial production, not just worldwide financial conspiracies of the lowest sort).

Patrice Ayme’ (pronounced: A-May!)

  


Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

www.grrrgraphics.com

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For The Best Thinking Possible. Morality Needs Intelligence As Will Needs Mind. Intelligence Is Humanism.

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.

ianmillerblog

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

RobertLovesPi.net

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

coelsblog

Defending Scientism

EugenR Lowy עוגן רודן

Thoughts about Global Economy and Existence