![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
(click on picture to read text)
Political graphics, 1964
36 minutes ago
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
The Politics of Angels
"Seven Angels"
Angels were not viewed solely as good natured guardians and radiant females with golden wings that protected children. The Angels of the Hebrew tradition and in the Old Testament were also warriors who defended Creation from evil with brutal force if commanded.
Not only were Angels Biblical but they formed the background that arose from the ancient Hebrew worldview. The world of Eden, the great king Melchizedec, and the earliest descendants of Adam and Eve resonated with the presence of Angels.
Yet today Angels are relegated to a backseat in the world of Christians. Often they are depicted as “new age” fairies looking like the cover art from a “romance” novel. At other times Angels are little more than chubby cherubs decorating a greeting card. Instead of a source of power for the faithful to defend us from our enemies, Angels have become a caricature. What happened?
Some Background
In a series of Church synods (meetings) between 743-745 AD the politically minded Pope Zachary was trying to finesse some thorny diplomatic issues. The Frankish and Germanic interest in the Church required power-sharing while in the East he had grave problems with Constantine V (son of Leo III) of Byzantium. In an attempt to placate the iconoclastic (image destroying) Constantine and keep peace in the burgeoning north Pope Zachary “downgraded” the role of several Archangels to sainthood at the behest of the Constantine faction.
Zachary’s actions briefly satisfied the desecrations of Constantine but gravely damaged the spiritual power of Christendom. At nearly the same time militant Islam was busy with the destruction of Christian North Africa and the invasion of Spain. Pope Zachary’s spiritual shortsightedness helped fuel the Islamic invasion which continues today.
Although the actions the Pope took were on the local synod level and did not rise to the official level of a General Council; the issue smoldered. Somewhat clarified by the next General Council (Second Nicaea, 787 AD) that conditionally supported the veneration of various religious images; the damage was done. Due to the volatility around those who supported the Angels with their use as a tool to acquire strength through devotion and the violent iconoclasts like Constantine V the matter was swept under the rug.
Angelic Politics
The policies of iconoclasts in the Catholic Church were nearly identical to the beliefs of Islam who completely forbade the use of Angelic images. So this controversy became a net gain for Islam which was able to get the Catholics to turn their backs on one of their most important allies; the Corps of Archangels.
As is sometimes the case Protestants fell in line and repeated the mistakes of their Catholic forerunners. Not understanding that there is a politics to Angels, Christians have allowed one of their most powerful assets to lie dormant while the enemies of Christendom celebrate one victory after another.
Even though the spelling and pronunciation has change over many millennia, The Seven Ruling Archangels; Raphael, Haniel, Michael, Gabriel, Zophiel, Sammuel, and Zadkiel: are eternal. They are a profound presence in our life whether we are aware of it or not.
Existing at the edge of consciousness these spiritual beings are the messengers, guardians, and soldiers for God. Angels guard the Gates of Eden; they visited Noah, came to Abraham then annihilated Sodom and Gomorrah, protected Mary, and provided innumerable un-named acts. All seven Archangels visit us in the Book of Revelations and absolutely declared their inherent dominion in prophecy.
Yet we want to turn them into pudgy little cherubs? Do we want to allow them to be controlled by pagans and Muslims? The answer for me is NO. I say they are our allies and the conduits to God.
With militant Islam on one horizon and militant materialism on the other horizon the only way we have to look is straight up. Without the alliance of God and his warrior Archangels we are naked and powerless in these “raven days” of our civilization.
D. S. Reif
"Seven Angels" Pencil drawing on paper.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
AVATAR: a Review
Avatar, James Cameron, Director; Colin Wilson (et. al.) Producer; James Cameron, Writer; Twentieth Century Fox; Jerry Bruckheimer Film; 2009.
The release date of a movie is sometimes as telling as the subject of the movie. The fact that the film Avatar has been several years in production does not detract from the timing of Twentieth Century Fox and Mr. Bruckheimer’s release of this monster film.
Resonance is an aspect of fit and the fit of this movie to the time it was released is beyond coincidence. The spectacular filming and special effects notwithstanding the film’s underlying message is so transparent that it shocked me and I am nearly un-shockable when it comes to culture.
Set in a future sci-fi world on a planet named Pandora the plot revolves around the conflict between an intergalactic mining company and the indigenous population of idealized “noble savages” to use a 19th century stereotype that fits this plot device. At first blush the viewer might think this is the Brazilian rainforest and a terrible logging company has come to rape the forest and accelerate global “warming” in the process; or something equally as trite.
To begin with sensible people should understand that when viewing this picture one must allow for the fact that the movie industry is by and large a California thing. Consequently, many of the metaphors used here are skewed towards the “new age” wonderland that is what passes for a worldview within the visible Hollywood community. There are a lot of goofy caricatures like the quasi-aboriginal natives and the evil mining company eaten up with avarice.
These hyperboles noted there was to me a thinly veiled story line just underneath the surface. It goes something like this. The Obama administration drops in from outer space with a crew of currency trader pirates, Cook County crooks, cut-throats, communists, and other assorted goons on the lush planet called America. There they make war on the indigenous population of religious, hard working, family oriented people (known as The People) who dwell in the Great Community Tree.
The feckless Hamlet-like mining manager Parker Selfridge (played by Giovanni Ribisi) is the President Obama cutout while the ruthless commander of the company militia Col Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) fills out the part of Rohm Emanuel; President Obama’s enforcer. The hero, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is a disabled ex-Marine who is “cloned” into the body one of the natives. He is the quintessential good hearted American who goes along with Quaritch until he sees the errors in his ways.
The kindly and wise natives are a transparent analogy for the American people who grudgingly go along with the mining company until pushed too far. When the Colonel orders an attack on the great Tree community which is of course is the “Tree of Liberty” the natives revolt with the help of the ex-Marine Jake who sees the evil intent behind the mining company.
There ensues a scene that can only be the Tea Party people without weapons fighting against Parker’s company. Masses of “little people” rise up against the arrogant alien power that has descended from outer space but “The People” eventually prevail. With a dramatic “perp-walk” near the end of the film “The People” kick the Obamanauts…eh…I mean the mining company off the planet.
At first I thought the film advocated the violent overthrow of the Administration but coming to my senses I realized this was all just a story. It is only a sci-fi film.
Beyond the obvious tour de force of the film crew and special effects; mention needs to be made of the fine job the Art Department did. A notable example is the female lead Grace (Sigourney Weaver) looked great in her part. The Costume Directors did a fine job of not only respecting the character but also Ms Weaver by giving her a believable and distinguished wardrobe.
If you are a supporter of the Administration you might want to stay home. But everyone else will enjoy this space opera political thriller.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Lincolnism
"Hats off to Abe"
The recent Healthcare debate has its roots in American history and the legacy of President Abraham Lincoln. Simply put the political philosophy of Abraham Lincoln is that the central government is the final authority regarding policy for everyone in the country. At the end of the day, the various States, therefore, are subordinate to the control of the central government (centralism). All policy disputes will ultimately be settled by the central government. Centralism is the end of federalism.
The political software of the United States is Lincolnism. Both parties are ruled by the principles that evolved from the outcome of the American Civil War. The doctrines of Mr. Lincoln increasingly became the only framework in which policy is discussed.
The apparent victory for the centralist policies of emerging republics like the United States became the model for popular centralism worldwide. Lincolnism became the underlying method for, among others: Bismarck, Lenin, and Mao.
Lincoln's centralism was greatly admired by Karl Marx. Mr. Marx had been advocating similar policies as a way of promoting national and international socialism. In fact, the ideas of Marx and Lincoln regarding the subject of centralism are remarkably similar.
The reality that there was a broad cross-pollination of ideas between American centralists and Marxists before during and after the War Between the States has been thoroughly examined by Kennedy and Benson. The centralist influences of Lincoln’s policy are well documented by Thomas DiLorenzo and others. Despite the throttling efforts of the predominately leftist Establishment to stifle the understanding of Lincoln’s centralism; the truth has slowly come out.
Although it is true that Lincoln was technically not a Marxist it is similarly true that Marx believed in Lincolnism. With Lincoln being a politician and Marx being the prototypical community organizer these two nineteenth century centralists have combined to not only shape the profile of both American political parties but nearly all the political debate worldwide.
That President Obama has embraced Lincoln as the icon of his administration is not news. Nearly every President since Lincoln has paid homage to him. So is it little wonder that in order to “fix” the health care industry Mr. Obama has sought an answer using the central government: an artifact of Lincolnism.
Obama’s beliefs seem normal, however, what is really curious is that the alleged political opposition to Obama’s policies are similarly rooted in the very Lincolnism that they are contesting. Recalling that the Republican Party claims Lincoln as their founder it seems peculiar that they are resisting Obama who comes out of the same tradition; so to speak.
From Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele to Rush Limbaugh and from Senator Olympia Snowe to Sean Hannity; across the upper tier of Republican advocates there is nothing but loyalty to the legacy of the Lincoln model. At the same time both Parties and nearly everyone who speaks for them show contempt for those who legitimately opposed Lincoln, that is; the agenda of Constitutional federalism formulated by Davis, Calhoun, Jefferson, and others.
Routinely tarred with the epithet of “Southern” there is a stirring of influence by thinkers (some noted above) that advocate a reappraisal of Lincolnism and its consequences. With the government’s intellectual tank on empty and the trajectory of the national interest heading for bankruptcy or worse the ears of the populace are hungry for viable alternatives. Yet popular critics of the administration seem unable to come to grips with Lincoln and his continuing influence.
The political software of the United States is Lincolnism. Both parties are ruled by the principles that evolved from the outcome of the American Civil War. The doctrines of Mr. Lincoln increasingly became the only framework in which policy is discussed.
The apparent victory for the centralist policies of emerging republics like the United States became the model for popular centralism worldwide. Lincolnism became the underlying method for, among others: Bismarck, Lenin, and Mao.
Lincoln's centralism was greatly admired by Karl Marx. Mr. Marx had been advocating similar policies as a way of promoting national and international socialism. In fact, the ideas of Marx and Lincoln regarding the subject of centralism are remarkably similar.
The reality that there was a broad cross-pollination of ideas between American centralists and Marxists before during and after the War Between the States has been thoroughly examined by Kennedy and Benson. The centralist influences of Lincoln’s policy are well documented by Thomas DiLorenzo and others. Despite the throttling efforts of the predominately leftist Establishment to stifle the understanding of Lincoln’s centralism; the truth has slowly come out.
Although it is true that Lincoln was technically not a Marxist it is similarly true that Marx believed in Lincolnism. With Lincoln being a politician and Marx being the prototypical community organizer these two nineteenth century centralists have combined to not only shape the profile of both American political parties but nearly all the political debate worldwide.
That President Obama has embraced Lincoln as the icon of his administration is not news. Nearly every President since Lincoln has paid homage to him. So is it little wonder that in order to “fix” the health care industry Mr. Obama has sought an answer using the central government: an artifact of Lincolnism.
Obama’s beliefs seem normal, however, what is really curious is that the alleged political opposition to Obama’s policies are similarly rooted in the very Lincolnism that they are contesting. Recalling that the Republican Party claims Lincoln as their founder it seems peculiar that they are resisting Obama who comes out of the same tradition; so to speak.
From Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele to Rush Limbaugh and from Senator Olympia Snowe to Sean Hannity; across the upper tier of Republican advocates there is nothing but loyalty to the legacy of the Lincoln model. At the same time both Parties and nearly everyone who speaks for them show contempt for those who legitimately opposed Lincoln, that is; the agenda of Constitutional federalism formulated by Davis, Calhoun, Jefferson, and others.
Routinely tarred with the epithet of “Southern” there is a stirring of influence by thinkers (some noted above) that advocate a reappraisal of Lincolnism and its consequences. With the government’s intellectual tank on empty and the trajectory of the national interest heading for bankruptcy or worse the ears of the populace are hungry for viable alternatives. Yet popular critics of the administration seem unable to come to grips with Lincoln and his continuing influence.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Riding Vengeance
Riding Vengeance with the James Gang, Donald Gilmore, 2009, Pelican Publishing, Gretna, LA, 367 pages, historical novel, hardbound, $23.00
Previously most books about the James boys invoke either a re-fighting of the War Between the States or a morality lesson about the Missouri outlaws. This book does neither. It is a historical novel that views the main characters in the milieu they lived in from their own point of view. It is exciting and genuine straying little from the extraordinary record of events.
Donald Gilmore’s frontier history book, The Civil War on the Missouri/Kansas Border, gives him splendid credentials to write this novel. That book is full of research and detail and to the chagrin of the History Establishment challenges the existing left-wing pretensions that attempt to define the South, Missouri, and the War.
In a sense the James Gang book picks up where the other book leaves off. It not only recalls the War but follows real flesh and blood people as they attempt to sort their lives out in a world gone mad. Certainly the Yankee invasion and attempts to smash the people of Missouri is now beyond our comprehension. The genocidal policies of the Lincoln administration had real consequences regardless of how they have been swept under the Establishment rug. Those consequences are the ground this book inhabits.
The novel is organized in a chronology beginning in November 1861 and ending in November 1876. Journal style it examines selected significant days and threads them together as a historical narrative. The James boys and the Youngers were all Confederate soldiers and strong Southern partisans as was most of their state.
We are exposed in the beginning to scenes of the invasion and war. Union soldiers murdering, looting, torturing civilians, and killing their pets in an arrogant orgy of oppression. The cost of a U.S. Armed Services choosing to back the wrong side and put their forces behind the Lincoln cabal was a disaster for the military’s long term standing. Those chickens are coming home to roost in our time. Let us pray that it does not happen again. But Gilmore, a military historian by trade, shows great courage by exploring this part of the story.
But it is not at all a Yankee bashing screed: far from it. It is a tapestry of daily life, extraordinary times, cultural crosscurrents, and violence woven together with fact, lore, and dialog. At first blush I though it was going to be something like the Akira Kurosawa movie The Seven Samurais. But as a novel it started to feel more like the time bending of Gore Vidal without the posturing or maybe James Elroy without the garlic and cops.
Gilmore knows his characters like Elroy knows the mob. There are parts of this book where Gilmore is so deeply into the heads of these characters that it is almost spooky. I’ve done a great deal of research in this area and know the psychic landscape well but not as well as Gilmore.
After the James gang executed the would-be Pinkerton assassin, John Whicher, Frank James was left to ruminate about the world situation and pondered Whicher’s fate. On page 181 he says to himself, “(Whicher) had been woefully misguided by wishful thinking and fatal misconceptions. (but)…life was complex and had hidden dimensions that a man of the world needed to recognize. The man on the street believed simply in lofty concepts of democracy and the rule of law. That suited ordinary workin’ folks…it described the world that history books talked about. But there is a harder reality, a parallel world, difficult to fathom, ruled by influential families, big money, business, politicians, their armies, and an elaborate network of hangers-on like Pinkerton. It was a cruel, manipulative world, its intentions largely obscured from most people, shrouded in propaganda, lies, deception, intrigue, scheming over money, and sometimes murder, when it was expedient.”
This is likely how they thought. Frank and Jesse as well as the Younger were educated men who were well read in their day. It is their understanding of the world as it was (and is) that fascinates us and brings us back to their story which the author brightly illuminates.
Gilmore gives lengthy coverage of the debacle at the Northfield, Minnesota bank robbery. The ironies and omens leading up to the action on the bank reaped their fortunes in the failure of the mission. Yet the story of the escape is riveting and page turning. The Youngers are captured with others in the gang but somehow Frank and Jesse despite injuries and being shot up elude the biggest manhunt in U.S. history and evade the Minnesota forces. The men cover hundreds of miles of hostile territory on foot, horseback, bareback on stolen farm animals; use their wits, guns, and charm to get food and get away. The narrative is breathtaking and is true to the conditions of the time.
Gilmore’s ethical balance is painted in unrelenting colors. Condon or not these were all tough men who were endowed with a sinewy strength and courage that was ruled by their past and destiny. They were real outlaws in the most exalted sense of the term. Not good guys or gooey TV bad men; the James gang were men of their time shaped by a terrible traitorous war. They were “real” outlaws not the Dr. Science climate crooks, currency traders, terrorists, or government big shots that pass for outlaws today.
The book is a good history novel with lots of treats for James gang fans, western history lovers, and Civil War buffs. Maybe a little too heavy on characters for my taste, this can be confusing at times but that said I think the book will satisfy anyone who is interested in this genre.
Buy the book: Riding Vengeance with the James Gang
Previously most books about the James boys invoke either a re-fighting of the War Between the States or a morality lesson about the Missouri outlaws. This book does neither. It is a historical novel that views the main characters in the milieu they lived in from their own point of view. It is exciting and genuine straying little from the extraordinary record of events.
Donald Gilmore’s frontier history book, The Civil War on the Missouri/Kansas Border, gives him splendid credentials to write this novel. That book is full of research and detail and to the chagrin of the History Establishment challenges the existing left-wing pretensions that attempt to define the South, Missouri, and the War.
In a sense the James Gang book picks up where the other book leaves off. It not only recalls the War but follows real flesh and blood people as they attempt to sort their lives out in a world gone mad. Certainly the Yankee invasion and attempts to smash the people of Missouri is now beyond our comprehension. The genocidal policies of the Lincoln administration had real consequences regardless of how they have been swept under the Establishment rug. Those consequences are the ground this book inhabits.
The novel is organized in a chronology beginning in November 1861 and ending in November 1876. Journal style it examines selected significant days and threads them together as a historical narrative. The James boys and the Youngers were all Confederate soldiers and strong Southern partisans as was most of their state.
We are exposed in the beginning to scenes of the invasion and war. Union soldiers murdering, looting, torturing civilians, and killing their pets in an arrogant orgy of oppression. The cost of a U.S. Armed Services choosing to back the wrong side and put their forces behind the Lincoln cabal was a disaster for the military’s long term standing. Those chickens are coming home to roost in our time. Let us pray that it does not happen again. But Gilmore, a military historian by trade, shows great courage by exploring this part of the story.
But it is not at all a Yankee bashing screed: far from it. It is a tapestry of daily life, extraordinary times, cultural crosscurrents, and violence woven together with fact, lore, and dialog. At first blush I though it was going to be something like the Akira Kurosawa movie The Seven Samurais. But as a novel it started to feel more like the time bending of Gore Vidal without the posturing or maybe James Elroy without the garlic and cops.
Gilmore knows his characters like Elroy knows the mob. There are parts of this book where Gilmore is so deeply into the heads of these characters that it is almost spooky. I’ve done a great deal of research in this area and know the psychic landscape well but not as well as Gilmore.
After the James gang executed the would-be Pinkerton assassin, John Whicher, Frank James was left to ruminate about the world situation and pondered Whicher’s fate. On page 181 he says to himself, “(Whicher) had been woefully misguided by wishful thinking and fatal misconceptions. (but)…life was complex and had hidden dimensions that a man of the world needed to recognize. The man on the street believed simply in lofty concepts of democracy and the rule of law. That suited ordinary workin’ folks…it described the world that history books talked about. But there is a harder reality, a parallel world, difficult to fathom, ruled by influential families, big money, business, politicians, their armies, and an elaborate network of hangers-on like Pinkerton. It was a cruel, manipulative world, its intentions largely obscured from most people, shrouded in propaganda, lies, deception, intrigue, scheming over money, and sometimes murder, when it was expedient.”
This is likely how they thought. Frank and Jesse as well as the Younger were educated men who were well read in their day. It is their understanding of the world as it was (and is) that fascinates us and brings us back to their story which the author brightly illuminates.
Gilmore gives lengthy coverage of the debacle at the Northfield, Minnesota bank robbery. The ironies and omens leading up to the action on the bank reaped their fortunes in the failure of the mission. Yet the story of the escape is riveting and page turning. The Youngers are captured with others in the gang but somehow Frank and Jesse despite injuries and being shot up elude the biggest manhunt in U.S. history and evade the Minnesota forces. The men cover hundreds of miles of hostile territory on foot, horseback, bareback on stolen farm animals; use their wits, guns, and charm to get food and get away. The narrative is breathtaking and is true to the conditions of the time.
Gilmore’s ethical balance is painted in unrelenting colors. Condon or not these were all tough men who were endowed with a sinewy strength and courage that was ruled by their past and destiny. They were real outlaws in the most exalted sense of the term. Not good guys or gooey TV bad men; the James gang were men of their time shaped by a terrible traitorous war. They were “real” outlaws not the Dr. Science climate crooks, currency traders, terrorists, or government big shots that pass for outlaws today.
The book is a good history novel with lots of treats for James gang fans, western history lovers, and Civil War buffs. Maybe a little too heavy on characters for my taste, this can be confusing at times but that said I think the book will satisfy anyone who is interested in this genre.
Buy the book: Riding Vengeance with the James Gang
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Bedeviled
The Obamacrats have changed the orientation of the Democrat Party from Jefferson and Jackson to the Chicago leftist establishment. More ominous is they have moved the geographic center of gravity of the Party from America to fin-de-siecle Russia with its decadent mixture of the occult and Bolshevism.
It is no secret that the current administration is an ideological stepchild of the Chicago Marxist labor movement that gave rise to the premier community organizer Saul Alinsky. We have spoken before about the theomachist proclivities of Mr. Alinsky and those who have come after him.
Mr. Alinsky penned a few notable lines not the least of which was his dedication to his most famous book Rules for Radicals in which he revealed his enthusiasm for Lucifer, i.e., Satan or the Devil. Referring to Lucifer as the “first revolutionary” Alinsky was of course signaling his intentions to a wide audience of the anti-Christian intelligentsia including the establishment surrounding the University of Chicago.
That is not news to anyone who has followed this Marxist philosopher. What is not so well known is that his comments were also a deferential reference to nouveau revolutionaries in pre-Soviet Russia. This period of intrigue and revolution is very sacred to the hard left elitists in the Democrat National Committee (DNC). The era was romanticized in the 1981 movie Reds starring Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, and Jack Nicholson; a classic to socialists.
The elevation of the Devil to political icon is a relatively new contribution to the politics of Western civilization. Author Kristi Groberg has done some interesting research in this area and we can thank Marxist thinkers in “Silver Age” (1890-1915) Russia for this new development*. They reasoned that by allying themselves with the image of Satan they could co-opt the power of the Devil to advance their anti-Christian agenda while surrounding themselves with the mantle of rebellion against the Orthodox Church and the Czar. Casting themselves as the ultimate outsiders these socialists relished their iconoclastic image.
Satanist author and playwright Valery Briusov (1873-1924) and others were in the orbit of influential cultural impresario Georgy Chulkov; all friends of socialism. These activists advocated using their “art” as a weapon against the up-tight bourgeois sexual and religious establishment of pre-revolutionary Russia.
Impressed by Chulkov’s manipulation of symbols for political purposes propagandist writer Anatoly Lunacharsky promoted mythic image making and drew inspiration from Briusov. Seeing that powerful religious images could be used to promote “the Revolution” in the salons of the elites Lunacharsky initially welcomed Satanists and other practitioners of the Black Arts as allies to fight the enemies of the socialist state but would eventually betray them when they became too powerful. In the end proving that socialists are more unscrupulous than Devil worshippers.
Fifty years later in the writings of the Marxist labor movement of Chicago these themes resurfaced. Tampering with the underworld and allying oneself with the image of Lucifer is a dangerous proposition. Mr. Alinsky may have thought he was being a smart-ass when he penned his sophomoric remarks. Or maybe his motives were more sinister. Nonetheless, it is evident that he was using a very calculated historic reference when he dedicated his work to Satan.
I wonder if the Chicago left-wing establishment now in control of Washington knows what sort of baggage they have picked up: or do they even care?
* Much more research on this subject: http://academic.reed.edu/russian/courses/408syllabus.doc
It is no secret that the current administration is an ideological stepchild of the Chicago Marxist labor movement that gave rise to the premier community organizer Saul Alinsky. We have spoken before about the theomachist proclivities of Mr. Alinsky and those who have come after him.
Mr. Alinsky penned a few notable lines not the least of which was his dedication to his most famous book Rules for Radicals in which he revealed his enthusiasm for Lucifer, i.e., Satan or the Devil. Referring to Lucifer as the “first revolutionary” Alinsky was of course signaling his intentions to a wide audience of the anti-Christian intelligentsia including the establishment surrounding the University of Chicago.
That is not news to anyone who has followed this Marxist philosopher. What is not so well known is that his comments were also a deferential reference to nouveau revolutionaries in pre-Soviet Russia. This period of intrigue and revolution is very sacred to the hard left elitists in the Democrat National Committee (DNC). The era was romanticized in the 1981 movie Reds starring Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, and Jack Nicholson; a classic to socialists.
The elevation of the Devil to political icon is a relatively new contribution to the politics of Western civilization. Author Kristi Groberg has done some interesting research in this area and we can thank Marxist thinkers in “Silver Age” (1890-1915) Russia for this new development*. They reasoned that by allying themselves with the image of Satan they could co-opt the power of the Devil to advance their anti-Christian agenda while surrounding themselves with the mantle of rebellion against the Orthodox Church and the Czar. Casting themselves as the ultimate outsiders these socialists relished their iconoclastic image.
Satanist author and playwright Valery Briusov (1873-1924) and others were in the orbit of influential cultural impresario Georgy Chulkov; all friends of socialism. These activists advocated using their “art” as a weapon against the up-tight bourgeois sexual and religious establishment of pre-revolutionary Russia.
Impressed by Chulkov’s manipulation of symbols for political purposes propagandist writer Anatoly Lunacharsky promoted mythic image making and drew inspiration from Briusov. Seeing that powerful religious images could be used to promote “the Revolution” in the salons of the elites Lunacharsky initially welcomed Satanists and other practitioners of the Black Arts as allies to fight the enemies of the socialist state but would eventually betray them when they became too powerful. In the end proving that socialists are more unscrupulous than Devil worshippers.
Fifty years later in the writings of the Marxist labor movement of Chicago these themes resurfaced. Tampering with the underworld and allying oneself with the image of Lucifer is a dangerous proposition. Mr. Alinsky may have thought he was being a smart-ass when he penned his sophomoric remarks. Or maybe his motives were more sinister. Nonetheless, it is evident that he was using a very calculated historic reference when he dedicated his work to Satan.
I wonder if the Chicago left-wing establishment now in control of Washington knows what sort of baggage they have picked up: or do they even care?
* Much more research on this subject: http://academic.reed.edu/russian/courses/408syllabus.doc
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Paralysis
Before Major Hasan went on his mission to kill and maim as many of our soldiers as possible there was a lot of legal and cultural groundwork that had to have been laid for the attack to be successful. The radicalization process of the Major was only part of the story. Of course he was turned several years ago by Islamic clerics skilled in mental control techniques: that goes without saying. But the process of placement; putting him in the position to carry out the attack was a much more difficult and patient operation.
Legal and cultural warfare had to be employed to get Maj. Hasan where he was and provide the cover necessary for him to openly operate within the Armed Forces. Years of legislation, laws, and court ruling, within our political system as well as cultural attacks on Christian values had to be carried out by the neo-Marxist Left in order for their Islamic allies to execute a number of terrorist actions like the spectacular commando attack at Ft. Hood.
The tactic known as “politically correct” is a thought control technique. It in conjunction with other devices has the unique ability to cause moral paralysis. With this cluster of techniques in place the groundwork is laid for events like the Ft. Hood action. Put together here is a careful plan of analysis, action, and deniability by a very determined enemy.
What follows is an excerpt from an essay that I published in the on-line journal The Fireeater in 2007. It was about how the “immigration crisis” was being manipulated in order to exploit weaknesses in our system. It also likened the situation to 16th century Mexico and the Spanish invasion of the Aztec empire.
I write that the time will come “When the invaders have finished their pillage they will turn on the police and the military which will stand quietly while they are slaughtered and mutilated unable to act. The chains of red tape bind them and fear that civil rights lawyers will sue paralyze them.”
The Montezuma Effect
The invasion of the border goes forth nearly unabated and politicians dally with band-aide solutions while the thinkers in the Islamic world scan the horizon for an opening to deal yet another blow to Christian civilization. That being said it is not the illegal immigrants that bother me so much as it is the reaction of the feckless in Washington that is so disturbing. Without the benefit of retrospection they appear to have never considered a similar situation and have nothing to base their policy on. Seemingly the elite advisors to our politicians have their eyes riveted on arcane theories when the real analogy to our current situation resides in ancient Mesoamerica, the Aztec nation, and their king Montezuma II.
Entangled as we are in an unfathomable network of rules, laws, and government edicts we citizens find in it increasingly difficult to control our lives, borders, and even our own history. Confronted on every side we see legal roadblocks to any meaningful control over the direction of our culture which seems to be headed for the dustbin.
Police or even the military cannot stop the illegal immigrant invaders. Thwarted by interest groups who use laws “intended to promote civil rights” in ways not contemplated by the people who adopted them. Municipalities attempt to pass ordinances to deal with the invasion but the central governments stops them on the grounds that only the central government has jurisdiction. Employers who are trying to support their communities hiring only citizens come under fire from lawyers who sue them for discrimination…..
This tangled mess of laws reminds me of the situation surrounding Montezuma Xocoyotzin king of the Aztecs in the 1500’s. When the Spanish arrived in Mexico, the story goes; the Aztec people were so tied to a set of ideas that they mistook Hernando Cortes (1485-1547) the leader of the Spanish Conquistadors for the god Quetzalcoatl. Instead of resisting the invasion Montezuma and the Aztec bureaucracy adhered to a mess of mistaken beliefs, laid down their arms, and then stood by paralyzed as the conquerors promptly subjugated the Aztec then looted Mexico; robbing, raping, and pillaging as they pleased.....
…we have concentrated power in Washington where the Congress usurps the authority of state and local government and adds more power to the bureaucratic labyrinth strangling the public with incomprehensible procedural issues.
We are tied to treaties like NAFTA and other world trade agreements that supersede Constitutional law but are favored by President Bush (and now President Obama). Congress stumbles along ratifying such arrangements with not even a clue of what the consequences of their actions might bring to the local level. Then using these tangled international treaties as precedent the Congress passes one law on top of another to empower this group then that group in an effort to maintain the supremacy of central control so only the central government can decide who will be favored; leaving willy-nilly enforcement to the lawyers.
As a result we get the Montezuma Effect. We have the same set up as the 16th century Aztecs were saddled with: A complex and flawed belief system that results in absolute paralysis in the face of crisis! In short, wrapped in a blanket and smothered with our own laws.
Our leaders have mistaken an illegal immigrant invasion for something it is not and a terrible calamity may arise as an outcome. Make no mistake the strategist of militant Islam, the Baathists, the Red Chinese, and our other enemies are studying these developments. They are watching to see if we are resolute enough to defend what is ours.
Although it is now a brewing nightmare the day may come when invaders will break down your doors rape, murder, and steal while our police and our own military wait across the street and passively watch. When the invaders have finished their pillage they will turn on the police and the military which will stand quietly while they are slaughtered and mutilated unable to act. The chains of red tape bind them and fear that civil rights lawyers will sue paralyze them. No one can defend themselves so we will allow our enemies to subjugate us while we look on trapped by a mistaken belief system; unable to take action.
You don’t think this kind of paralysis can happen? The Montezuma Effect is a real lesson from history. Apply it to the current situation then answer the question.
May 19, 2007
Legal and cultural warfare had to be employed to get Maj. Hasan where he was and provide the cover necessary for him to openly operate within the Armed Forces. Years of legislation, laws, and court ruling, within our political system as well as cultural attacks on Christian values had to be carried out by the neo-Marxist Left in order for their Islamic allies to execute a number of terrorist actions like the spectacular commando attack at Ft. Hood.
The tactic known as “politically correct” is a thought control technique. It in conjunction with other devices has the unique ability to cause moral paralysis. With this cluster of techniques in place the groundwork is laid for events like the Ft. Hood action. Put together here is a careful plan of analysis, action, and deniability by a very determined enemy.
What follows is an excerpt from an essay that I published in the on-line journal The Fireeater in 2007. It was about how the “immigration crisis” was being manipulated in order to exploit weaknesses in our system. It also likened the situation to 16th century Mexico and the Spanish invasion of the Aztec empire.
I write that the time will come “When the invaders have finished their pillage they will turn on the police and the military which will stand quietly while they are slaughtered and mutilated unable to act. The chains of red tape bind them and fear that civil rights lawyers will sue paralyze them.”
The Montezuma Effect
The invasion of the border goes forth nearly unabated and politicians dally with band-aide solutions while the thinkers in the Islamic world scan the horizon for an opening to deal yet another blow to Christian civilization. That being said it is not the illegal immigrants that bother me so much as it is the reaction of the feckless in Washington that is so disturbing. Without the benefit of retrospection they appear to have never considered a similar situation and have nothing to base their policy on. Seemingly the elite advisors to our politicians have their eyes riveted on arcane theories when the real analogy to our current situation resides in ancient Mesoamerica, the Aztec nation, and their king Montezuma II.
Entangled as we are in an unfathomable network of rules, laws, and government edicts we citizens find in it increasingly difficult to control our lives, borders, and even our own history. Confronted on every side we see legal roadblocks to any meaningful control over the direction of our culture which seems to be headed for the dustbin.
Police or even the military cannot stop the illegal immigrant invaders. Thwarted by interest groups who use laws “intended to promote civil rights” in ways not contemplated by the people who adopted them. Municipalities attempt to pass ordinances to deal with the invasion but the central governments stops them on the grounds that only the central government has jurisdiction. Employers who are trying to support their communities hiring only citizens come under fire from lawyers who sue them for discrimination…..
This tangled mess of laws reminds me of the situation surrounding Montezuma Xocoyotzin king of the Aztecs in the 1500’s. When the Spanish arrived in Mexico, the story goes; the Aztec people were so tied to a set of ideas that they mistook Hernando Cortes (1485-1547) the leader of the Spanish Conquistadors for the god Quetzalcoatl. Instead of resisting the invasion Montezuma and the Aztec bureaucracy adhered to a mess of mistaken beliefs, laid down their arms, and then stood by paralyzed as the conquerors promptly subjugated the Aztec then looted Mexico; robbing, raping, and pillaging as they pleased.....
…we have concentrated power in Washington where the Congress usurps the authority of state and local government and adds more power to the bureaucratic labyrinth strangling the public with incomprehensible procedural issues.
We are tied to treaties like NAFTA and other world trade agreements that supersede Constitutional law but are favored by President Bush (and now President Obama). Congress stumbles along ratifying such arrangements with not even a clue of what the consequences of their actions might bring to the local level. Then using these tangled international treaties as precedent the Congress passes one law on top of another to empower this group then that group in an effort to maintain the supremacy of central control so only the central government can decide who will be favored; leaving willy-nilly enforcement to the lawyers.
As a result we get the Montezuma Effect. We have the same set up as the 16th century Aztecs were saddled with: A complex and flawed belief system that results in absolute paralysis in the face of crisis! In short, wrapped in a blanket and smothered with our own laws.
Our leaders have mistaken an illegal immigrant invasion for something it is not and a terrible calamity may arise as an outcome. Make no mistake the strategist of militant Islam, the Baathists, the Red Chinese, and our other enemies are studying these developments. They are watching to see if we are resolute enough to defend what is ours.
Although it is now a brewing nightmare the day may come when invaders will break down your doors rape, murder, and steal while our police and our own military wait across the street and passively watch. When the invaders have finished their pillage they will turn on the police and the military which will stand quietly while they are slaughtered and mutilated unable to act. The chains of red tape bind them and fear that civil rights lawyers will sue paralyze them. No one can defend themselves so we will allow our enemies to subjugate us while we look on trapped by a mistaken belief system; unable to take action.
You don’t think this kind of paralysis can happen? The Montezuma Effect is a real lesson from history. Apply it to the current situation then answer the question.
May 19, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)