28 August 2009

Organic Philosophy, Plato and National Socialism

Recently Johann Luther published an article entitled 'Plato and the National Socialist Ideal', which deserves some comment, because it attempts to forge a link between the ideals espoused in Plato's 'Republic' and by National Socialism. Luther splits up his argument into five sections, which are: 'The Role of Each Man in Society', 'Education', 'The Raising and Development of Children', 'The Life and Duties of a Guardian' and 'The Philosopher King and the Fuehrer'. I would like to address some of the arguments put forth in the first three sections from the perspective of National Socialism as I would suggest Luther has made too simplistic an analysis in trying to equate the two sets of ideals. I will not, however, address the matter from the context of Plato's work as I am informed others with more specific knowledge will do so. To be clear I am not arguing against Luther's thesis that there is a form of synthesis between Plato and National Socialism, but rather that Luther has oversimplified National Socialism to make it seem that the two ideals are closer than they, in fact, are.

The Role of the Aryan in Society

Luther begins his article by asserting that one can never be an expert in more than one profession and then goes on to state that people are inherently suited for one kind of occupation due to their different nature in his section on 'The Role of Each Man in Society'.

Luther here is ignoring a fundamental point in that he hasn't defined and discussed the two terms he is using, because a profession is not the same thing as a kind of occupation. A profession is a specific type of employment, such as being a carpenter, a mechanic or a managerial accountant, not a kind (i.e. type) of occupation, which would imply less specific categories such as skilled labour, unskilled labour, managerial labour and so forth. This already makes Luther's analysis problematic, because he is conflating two terms, which imply different things as if they are exactly the same thing.

This vagueness comes out in his ancillary point, which is that members of the Aryan folk, not 'people' as Luther mistakenly terms them (which is again vague and doesn't implicitly include the recognition of race as National Socialism demands), are suited to only one kind of occupation. Now this is problematic, because this is obviously not the case. Since people can be inherently suited for multiple types of occupation and for numerous different professions. For example: a man who works as a manager could as easily become an unskilled labourer if it was necessary and indeed such men do do so in the privacy of their own homes when they do the gardening for one instance and when they put up shelves in another.

This means that Luther's point about there being a type of occupation which everyone is inherently suited for is incorrect, because it doesn't take into account the flexibility of humans in general, but also ignores the lessons from the animal kingdom in regard to behaviour such as tool use and the assigning and competition for group roles.

Now in the case of an individual's profession we also come across the problem of this vagueness in Luther's argument in so far as a man can be suited to multiple professions. For if a man has a good grasp of numbers and the ability to analyse numerical trends. Then he is suited for several different professions, such as the various different types of accountancy, statistical analysis, banking, professional gambling and speculating in stocks and shares (etc). We cannot reasonably call these the same profession, because although they use the same basic skill base: they are variant in the difficulty of the task, the types of data needed, the responsibilities implicit in them and the results expected.

Both these points would be valid at the time when Plato wrote 'Republic': although somewhat less so due to a lack of many of these occupations at the time. Luther needs to take into account that although the idea may sound like a truism upon closer inspection it is not so.

Even if Luther were to argue that the type of occupation and the profession an individual was suited for was determined by the state then he would also find logical problems. Since the issue of multiple suitability raises its head again even if one was to follow the Marxist axiom: 'from each according to his ability'. This issue is caused by having overlapping skill sets so that one skill set will not automatically indicate just one type of occupation and one profession, but rather several of each. This is why, for example, you find mathematicians becoming geneticists, because the skill set can allow them to be both, because the former is part of the latter.

Where the argument could be made is that the state, if we regard it like an organism, would need to evolve a specific selection strategy so that it could select a best fit skill set for its requirements. For example: an individual member of the folk might be a brilliant military tactician and a good leader of men, but also an able legal theorist. What should the state do?

Simply put the state's reaction as an organism will, if it is healthy (i.e. it is interested in doing the best for itself and the nation), be one of cutting its cloth for its specific circumstances. So if the state, for example, has not fought a war in fifty years and has no significant enemy that may pose a threat to it, then the individual member of the folk will be selected for a profession and type of occupation in the field of legal theory (a legislator, private advocate, public prosecutor, academic legal theorist etc). However if the state, for example, believes, rightly or wrongly, that it may have to fight a war, of conquest or defense, in the near future then the individual member of the folk will be selected for a profession and type of occupation in the military field (a field officer, staff officer, officer trainer or military analyst etc).

Now this assumes that the state simply determines what an individual member of the folk's occupation is going to be and unless we were to postulate a National Socialist state as something akin to that envisoned by Marxism-Leninism in the economic sphere then it is not going to be realistic. Since the state cannot determine what an individual member of the folk is going to spend their life in pursuit of, either using or in spite of their biological abilities, it is therefore somewhat redundant and unrealistic to assume or argue that the state simply allocates a type of occupation and a profession.

This therefore leads to the consideration of whether it is indeed possible for the axiom, appropriated by the Marxists, 'from each according to his ability' to hold true in a National Socialist state?

I would argue that it would indeed hold true if we take a less mechanical and more Darwinian approach to the problem. Luther's model is inherently mechanical in nature, in spite of its references to biology, so his approach is one of understanding things as one would understand the cogs of a machine. However if we use of one of the twin vectors of Darwinian thought, fitness, and modify our understanding of the statement 'from each according to his ability' to not include simply a skill set, but the important ability to realise what talents and skills one has and to be prepared to do everything that one ethically can to realise what one wants to achieve with one's talents and skills.

Therefore if we modify our understanding in this way: it follows that the state understood organically will be able to select those who have ability, because they will push themselves to the front. This is not to say that those who push themselves to the front in order to be considered for a service to the state will always be the best the nation has to offer in respect of the specific talents and skills required, but they are the best fit that the state is aware of, because even if they are not perfect they have made themselves known. For if a talent is not used then it is a waste, but nor can the state acquire perfect knowledge. The only way for the state to select the individuals who can serve it best in the desired profession or type of occupation would be to take full control of the educational system and to discover early on in an individual member of the folk's life what talents and skills he or she possesses.

However again this comes to an apparent point of conflict with National Socialism in so far as this might suggest a state based on Marxism-Leninism, i.e. socialism or communism, where the state gets to employ who it likes. This is, of course, mutually exclusive to National Socialism, which demands struggle and evolution. So there would have to be private enterprise and this therefore leads us to a point of conflict in so far as should the best of the folk go to serve the public or the private sector?

This is conflict is endemic, but not noted, within Luther's article, where it would have to be addressed for Luther's argument, following Plato, of an individual member of the Aryan folk being suited to one occupation. For this suggests that these individual Aryans are selected by some unknown process, which implies a form of objective determinism rather than what is commonly called 'the marketplace' or supposed 'pure competition'.

To solve this apparent conflict we have to understand that in National Socialism: the state, understood as an organism, is not viewed as a separate entity from the members of the nation i.e. the Aryan folk. National Socialism views the state as the natural government of the Aryan created by their will, i.e. by race soul, so that they can utilize their talents and skills in a civilisation where fear of crime, social disorder and other common ills are at an absolute minimum although never completely irradicated. The state is literally an organic outgrowth of the Aryan racial mindset, based on order, discipline, honour and the recognition of truth in all its forms, which arises from Aryans whereever they maybe and unless foreign racial elements enter and pollute the Aryan racial mindset by their biology then the Aryan will form similar although somewhat diverging state: dependent, of course, on the environment the Aryan is then evolving in and the contents of that particular Aryan gene pool all factors being otherwise equal.

With the public sector, i.e. the state, being an outgrowth of the Aryan race soul in National Socialism: it therefore follows that the private sector is also an outgrowth of this racial nature. The solution to this apparent conflict lies at the heart of the National Socialist weltanschauung in so far as both the public and private sector are expressions of the Aryan race soul and therefore they are both the 'state', if you will, but simply different expressions of the state.

In this conception therefore it is implied that in times when the public sector needs all the best of the folk to serve it, for example during an extended war, then the private sector will understand and not oppose these moves. However in times when the private seector needs all the best of the folk to serve it, for example during a time of economic expansion the public sector will understand and not oppose these moves. This is not to say there will not be competition between the public and private sectors for the best members of the Aryan folk to serve them, but that that competition will be of a generally friendly and constructive nature on the understanding that the two sectors have important roles to play at different times in the life of the nation.

This brings us onto a point that we should touch on, even in passing, in so far as the National Socialist ideology does in fact recognise that social, political, racial and economic 'classes' exist in the current world and that 'classes', if you will, will always exist along the natural striation of ability boundaries as related to what the current socio-political system dictates.

To briefly explain this: it can be said that, for example, in a system of political and social liberalism based on laissez-faire capitalism (i.e. 'each to their own' and 'do what thou wilt') that these 'classes' will naturally take on the form of those who are most suited to be selected in the current worldview and those who are not. What would be, and is, selected for at the moment is the exploitation without reservation of your fellow Aryan, lying, cheating, doing anything to get ahead and in essence following Rand's idea that an elite should do what it likes and do anything to succeed (and damn everyone else).

If we were to take the apparently inverse side and ask what would happen in a system of state socialism (i.e. communism)? Aside from the half-baked theory often propounded by Marxism-Leninism: the actual experiences of communism have shown that what is selected for is very similar to capitalism. However rather than endorsing everything what is selected for is adherence to the party line, moral flexibility, radical views and so forth: not actually caring for the very 'proletariat' the Marxists and their ilk claim to be 'fighting for'. In essence therefore the upper class in a communist society is made up of party members, particularly the 'old guard' from the pre-communist days, and the underclass is made up of anti-communists and those resistant to communist doctrine (for example Christians in the old Soviet Union).

All that is occuring here is that 'classes' are created by the governing ideology and whatever that ideology may propound it shapes those 'classes' accordingly. However, as Luther rightly points out, in National Socialist philosophy, despite these 'classes' being recognised as existing, asserts that these 'classes' should be changed to be based on biology and race. What National Socialism therefore asserts is that the current 'classes' should be gradually disposed off and that society should instead be striated by lines of racial purity combined with ability. So, for example, rather than somebody being manual labourer, because they can't afford to go to university and better themselves, despite being of pure Aryan ancestry and high intellectual ability, in National Socialist society they would be selected from their earliest youth as being of pure Aryan origin and of conspicious talents and therefore trained for types of occupation and professions that suit their talents, skills and biological inclination (i.e. their personal interests).

We will discuss this part of the National Socialist educational philosophy in reply to Luther's article in the next section, but before we discuss the issues that arise out of this. We need to expand upon the point that has been made above in so far as biological inequality is concerned.

We have stated above that in National Socialist philosophy the nation is stratified along racial and ability boundaries (in that order). This is based on the recognition, as Luther correctly recognises, of the biological origins of our talents and skills in so far as environment only alters the expression of our inherited traits rather than creates new ones in terms of a single generation. This is a fundamental point which contradicts much of what is currently taught as 'accepted scientific fact' in the social sciences and the humanities, but it is vital to recognise that whatever way we wish to see what the hierarchy of sciences tells us: we cannot escape this fact. Organisms are born inherently unequal and no amount of environmental tinkering is going to make up for a lack of ability (as opposed to mere lack of opportunity, which the lack of ability is often, deliberately, confused with). What we apply to the animal kingdom we must apply to humanity: there is no escaping the fact that humans are animals like any other no matter what Marxist scientists have spent their lives desperately trying to argue (often falsifying their data or suppressing data to do so).

Where Luther makes a mistake is when he asserts that environment is secondary to biology, which is a chicken and egg argument in so far as in evolution environment manipulates biology, but biology is what environment acts upon. We must realise that nature and nuture are, in a sense, symbiotic to each other, but not in the sense that Marxists claim.

The Marxist claim, often confused with the arguable reality, is that because environmental pressures can manipulate biology we can therefore suggest that biology is highly malleable (because evolutionarily it can be manipulated to produce certain effects) and that therefore we may conclude that biology doesn't matter and that therefore race doesn't exist (because we can manipulate biology so therefore all that needs to be changed is the environment). The Marxist argument that I have simplified is cognitively related to positive eugenics (i.e. selective breeding to a particular goal) in so far as it suggests that we can genetically engineer people by their environment (i.e. it is a modified form of Lamarckism).

This argument leaves out the egg and wants to just deal with the chicken so-to-speak, despite the claim often being made that it is dealing with both (when it patently is not since paying lip service to an idea is not the same as applying that idea to your thought). If we consider this argument: we see that it assumes that humans are rather like fruitflies in so far as if you subject them to certain conditions they will quickly biologically adapt to them (i.e. race will become no more and we will be a big brown glob of humanity if you will). This is important, because in making these kinds of arguments the Marxists ignore the fundamental difference between humans and fruitflies (which I am using as an example rather than as a strawman as some might accuse me of) assuming that they operate on the same basic platform and that they will evolve quickly to fit their environment.

To note here in passing the Marxists also presume that social pressures, rather than environmental ones more generally, are the key to this evolution so they assume that if you provide food and tools to a negro then the negro will become like an Aryan, because he has food and tools that he didn't have before. They also tend to remove the evolutionary vector of fitness from their calculations as they have removed the manner in which evolution, i.e. death due to incapability to find a mate, acquire food and/or survive the conditions, removes the unfit from a biology entity: therefore marring their breeding stock causing long-term dysgenic trends to be heightened by the existence of a significant unfit, and often fast, breeding population.

However they do not account as to how different the biological platforms are both historically and at the present time. This assumption of the sameness of humanity and fruitflies, similarly that different sub-species of humans are the same biological platform, is rather unjustified as one doesn't consider apes to be 'the same as' humans and nor do these same Marxists seek to accord them 'rights' or suggest that they are 'members of the proletariat' when they share nearly all of their genetic material, in terms of genetic similarity, with human beings.

If we therefore consider the environment without considering the platform, i.e. the biology, then we commit the cardinal error of only taking into account half of the generalised causes of evolution. If we consider the biology without paying environment sufficient attention then we commit a similar error of not taking into account the environment pressures, which need to be understood and manipulated to give the best long-term future to the Aryan folk.

It is not a matter of environment being subordinated to biology, but rather that biology and the environment in essence act upon each other (i.e. symbiosis). We can manipulate both through positive and negative eugenic policies with the positive policies acting upon environment and the negative policies acting upon biology. Luther's assertion that we cannot all strive to be scientists is correct, but what Luther does not mention is that although we are not all able to strive to be scientists. This does not mean that we are not all capable of producing children who may be able to become scientists. In so far as if it is necessary that the nation needs more scientists then part of any program to remedy this must be to manipulate biology and environment to produce a long-term solution to this problem. Rather than training unsuitable members of the folk to be scientists who then, because they are not suitable, will likely do an unintentional disservice to the folk by retarding the advancement of National Socialist science by their fundamental lack of biological ability in this area.

When National Socialism considers inequalities it does not look upon them as being a problem, but rather as Luther points out, it looks upon them as natural variation that can and should be used to the Aryan folk's advantage by the state. It is not a question that everyone has the 'right' to become a scientist, but rather that everyone has the 'right' to do what they are most suited and happy doing. If you tell the Aryan folk that they can all become actors and stockbrokers then you will find that there are a great many individual members of the folk who are disappointed in their unnatural ambitions, because they are not biologically suited to being an actor or a stockbroker. If these individual members of the folk manage to become an actor or a stockbroker then we can only count it as an opportunity cost in so far as they were not naturally suited to acting or stockbroking, but managed to succeed and would have in fact been of better service to the folk in other professions.

There is the cost to the folk in so far as there may well have been naturally suited actors and stockbrokers for those positions who are now forced to seek employment in other areas inadvertently causing harm to the Aryan folk by being unsuitable to their professions, but having to take that employment regardless. Therefore such an issue impacts upon the folk in a cascading manner in so far as when a mathematician wants to be a celebrity singer then they potentially force the naturally suited celebrity singer into being a mathematician: therefore causing harm to the nation by introducing members of the Aryan folk who are not suited for a profession into that profession and thus causing damage to that profession's contribution.

The point here is that expectations must be realistic and that is the job of the National Socialist educational philosophy, which we can now discuss having expanded upon Luther's argument about the natural inequality of organisms.

The Education of the Aryan Folk

Education is one of the most important parts of the National Socialist weltanschauung and it is essential to what Luther asserts to be an important goal outlined by Plato: the creation of a moral community. To this end Luther asserts that Plato's statement that 'cultural studies should be before physical studies' is incorrect in so far as Luther believes that a healthy mind requires a healthy body.

Luther and Plato have made a mistake here. Plato asserts that the only two parts of an individual's education are cultural and physical, because in Plato's era there was no active differentiation between Greek culture and Greek spirituality, because they were tied deeply one to the other. For in Greek culture the stories and legends of the Gods were its intellectual inspiration and figured as characters in many surviving Greek works of both fiction and non-fiction.

However even then we can assert that there was a separation in fact, even if it was not thought to be so at the time, in so far as an individual's spirituality is his own private solace, while the culture, even if overtly religious, is an expression of public rather than personal spirituality in that regard. So because we can interpose this distinction between private and public spirituality we can say that there is another category of education to be considered here, because an individual's personal spirituality may markedly differ from the public spirituality they enact as part of a wider culture. It is from this personal spirituality that we are most likely to find an individual's underlying motivation and therefore a moral community can only be created by educating the Aryan folk in their own spirituality in line with the natural spiritual inclinations of the Aryan race. We can therefore say that there are three segments of education required to create the moral community: cultural, physical and spiritual.

Luther, arguing against Plato, asserts that the physical education should take priority as I have pointed out above. This is, however, in contradiction to his overt assertion that the education should take place simultaneously. For if these types of education take place at the same time. Then how can Luther assign special importance to physical education when he has just criticised Plato for doing exactly the same thing in regard to cultural education? Luther cannot and thus makes a considerable error in his assigning of special value to the physical rather than the cultural education.

Luther's argument that physical education should take priority is in some respects a laudable one, because an individual may or may not have much intellectual talent or be particularly interested in their cultural and spiritual studies. However an individual, even if physically handicapped, can generally perform physical exercise and it is indeed important for all individuals to perform regular physical exercise as to maintain or increase their level of fitness.

What Luther's argument misses is that individuals are going to, and do, biologically differ in terms of their underlying talents and skills i.e. the biology inequality that we discussed in the first section of this article. There cannot be one standard here, because if we are to assign special significance to physical education then we would play to the strengths of only a part of the population and because it would potentially minimise the opportunities for the expression of intellectual or non-physical talent then it would do harm to the Aryan folk in the long run. Where Luther again goes wrong is his application of a mechanistic, quasi-Spenglerian, worldview rather than an organic one based on the hierarchy of the sciences and the principles of evolution.

If Luther had applied an organic worldview: he would have noted that his argument assumes one rule for all rather than noting that organisms will inherently vary, but can be placed into general typologies, but cannot be placed in one single typology beyond those of biological and anthropological classification.

We will discuss the application of this principle to practical education in reply to the next section of Luther's argument: 'The Raising and Development of Children'. However we can state in summary that the application of the principle that individual differ means in practice that each typology will have specific preferences and the education of the individual children who fall under that typology needs to be focused on building on their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses rather than one highly idealised principle built on a slightly abstract notion.

Luther next proceeds to point out that Plato believes that educative as well as public materials need to be regulated, by the state, on the basis that they may undermine the goal of achieving the moral community. Luther agrees with this and we have to agree in so far as Luther's argument implies that there is no such thing as 'freedom of speech' and that it is more a polite, feel-good fiction than a rational cornerstone of any society no matter how idealistic. This we may add is because, as Luther points out, there is always censorship and propaganda in so far as those who create the educative and public materials for enlightenment and learning will always impose a conscious or unconscious bias in the direction of their own beliefs in their presentations. The idea that there is such a thing as an 'unbiased textbook' is, unfortunately, a nonsense purported to create the propagandistic image of non-existent 'freedoms' and 'objectivity' that are asserted without evidence to be rampant in 'democratic' society.

National Socialism recognises this important fact and asserts that the members of the Aryan folk need an honest government, which, rather than simply leave this bias to private individuals and private firms, takes an active role in scrutinizing the materials for distribution to the folk so that the moral community envisioned by the National Socialist state as the expression of the will of the nation can be advanced in a neverending struggle to come closer to perfection. This is important, because National Socialism is often characterised as 'totalitarian' when it is in reality not, but rather is what one might call a benign dictatorship based on the principles of science.

'Freedoms' to National Socialism are not 'rights' in the strict sense, but rather an individual member of the folk has a list of duties to the state, as the representative of the nation, and in return for the enactment of these duties the state grants the individual member of the folk a list of freedoms. This works similarly to the system that is used by militaries around the world where in return for obedience and the carrying out of orders soldiers are granted the 'freedom of the city' and other such perks. In essence therefore the core of National Socialism is the militarisation of society into a disciplined and orderly whole.

Now it should not be imagined that a 'democracy', or more correctly plutocracy, is somehow more 'free' than a National Socialist state for a 'democracy', regardless of its claims, operates on similar basic principles in order to enforce a modicum of order onto society it simply masks those functions with feel-good terms and propaganda. However National Socialism ardently believes that this is not caring for the nation at all. Since it involves cynically lying to the Aryan folk and then trying to cover that up with fine words and heightened idealism. What National Socialism again asserts is that the state, as the representative of the nation, needs to be honest, as far as is possible (i.e. regarding policy, institutions and so forth and not with necessary secrets, which benefit the nation by their not being made public, like those of the military variety), with the Aryan folk who make up that nation: for the key point is that there is a contract of trust written in blood between the National Socialist state and the nation that it represents. For the nation and the state are a living entity that exists in symbiosis without one the other will die.

Therefore National Socialist philosophy dictates that the educative and public materials must be subject to approval by the state, because unless that is so then one is being essentially hypocritical, because one is asserting by implication that only the state carries out the task of conducting propaganda, while the individual and firm does not. We can thus only declare that National Socialism requires that the education and public materials be supervised by the state as the representative of the will of the nation. For only the state has 'good intentions' in any meaningful sense, because it is the representative of the will of the nation rather than the individual or the firm who is only representative of minority interests, which may or may not be the best interests of the majority. However only an entity with the ability to see the larger picture and consider the effects of a form of propaganda can be allowed to control what educational and public materials are present in society and that entity can only be the state.

In this we have taken Luther's argument and advanced it further in its critique of 'democracy' and the idea that there is such an entity as 'freedom'. We have suggested and argued that there is no such thing as 'freedom' beyond the subjective sense of that felt, rather than known to exist, by the individual. We have stated that National Socialism's answer to this is one of honesty with the nation rather than trying to deceive the nation with slogans and fine-sounding words.

The Educational Development of Aryan Children

Luther in his third section, 'The Raising and Development of Children', argues that Plato's insistence on what he terms the 'sharing', or altruistic, aspect of a community in regards to the relationship between parents and their children that should, in Plato's view, be blurred in order to facilitate the treating of all citizens as brother, sister, son, daugher, father and mother (etc). Luther's argument against this is that there is such bonds are natural and therefore should be respected. However what Luther is misunderstanding here is the context of what Plato wrote and what model he was using for it. That model in Plato's case was the Greek polis, best transliterated as race-based (or folkish) city-state, of Sparta, which was and is famous for its warriors and close communal life. Sparta did not destroy the role of the parent, but rather it took children away from their parents when they had sufficiently grown to be able to independent of their parents and the state then raised them only releasing them to live at home once they were considered to be men and had wife who preferably had already born them a son.

With this we understand Plato's logic in so far as he is not suggesting that the destruction of the family-bond takes place as this was not the case in Sparta, where mother's famously told their Spartiate sons to come back with their shield or on it [i.e. dead], but rather is suggesting that the family bond be expanded to encompass the entire of the members of the state. So that you will call your friend brother, your uncle father, your niece daughter, but still call your mother and father by their correct titles. What Plato is asserting is that a state functions best when the nation, that is in symbiosis with it, treats each other as they treat their family members i.e. with respect, consideration and honour.

This same principle is found in National Socialism in the idea of referring to all Aryans as 'comrade' and your mate as 'life-comrade', while still calling your father and mother by their titles. It is meant to engender respect across previous lines that were thought to be distinct, because it is all to easy to slip into the mistake of materialistic individualism and think only of yourself. What Plato and National Socialism are trying to achieve by doing this is to re-create the feeling of family and responsibility across these previous lines that were thought to be distinct. Both Plato and National Socialism as essentially re-creating the state along the lines of the title of Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges' work: 'Family, Kin and City-State'.

Luther then proceeds to argue that military schooling would be the answer offered by the National Socialist state and that this would engender the necessary level of cultural, physical and spiritual education that Plato suggests would be necessary for the formation of the moral community. Luther is perhaps misunderstanding the nature of National Socialism here in so far as what he argues seems to suggest that the military should take over the education system.

This is in itself contrary to his stated premise that cultural and physical education should take equal precedence in his second section, 'Education', but is in line with his placing physical education of the individual children first. We have discussed this contradiction above, but it is well to state that Luther has again applied his mechanistic view of the world in expounding his theories in so far as he has not factored in the evolutionary nature of the organisms who are, after all, the subject of his article.

The mistake that Luther is making in recommended the somewhat general solution of 'military school' is that he takes the notion of the militarisation of society to mean the military will be all powerful and be solely responsible for the education of individual Aryan children. The concept of the militarisation of society is not built, as it might seem from Luther's mechanism, on the military alone, but rather is an organic concept where the different institutions and functions of the state will evolve to become similar to the military in how they run their institution and carry out their function. It is not that the military will rule them, but rather that they evolve to become similar to the military in terms of their outlook, discipline, organisation, loyalty and honour.

That said it should be noted that in National Socialist statecraft there are three basic general powers within the state, represented by their respective leaders appointed directly from the SS by the leader, who make up the key administrators under the direct supervision of the leader. These powers are: the Military, the State and the Church. Each of these powers has a different general area of operation (which overlap each other in terms of individuals so that no individual even a high-ranking member of the Military can be independent of the State and the Church), but all three are forced to co-operate with each other, because they have clearly defined roles and have to co-operate in the running of some functions, which are not natural monopolies, such as education.

The manner in which education would operate under National Socialism would be to apply the principles we have outlined in the first two sections of this article. This would mean in practice that individual children would be left to be schooled by their parents or tutors using an approved curriculum until they have reached a specified age. We will assume for the sake of simplicity that Luther's speculation of the age of twelve is the decision made. Then at this age they would be undergo a series of tests: psychological, academic, physical, spiritual, medical and genetic. In order to ascertain their capabilities and assign them to the correct type of school for the individual child. The child and their parents would then pick the school type that they wish to attend with the opportunity of changing within that list or requesting a new series of tests be conducted (subject to approval to stop frivoluous use of the nation's resources).

The type of schools would be assigned along four general criteria: gender, racial purity, type of ability and level of ability. Each school would be single sex and would provide room and board for all its pupils (with the children being allowed home on school holidays and for special occasions such as birthdays) so as to allow the individual children to focus on their studies and building friendships with each other. Then each school would be at a certain level of racial purity so those children who are found to be pure Aryan are put in different schools to those who are close to being pure Aryan and different schools again to those who are distantly mixed Aryans. In doing this we are applying the principle of stratifying society along racial lines in a eugenic manner as it allows us to separate out the best of the breeding stock and make it as clear as possible that they should, although they cannot be forced to, select mates of their own racial status.

Then each school would be for a different type of ability so that each school would, in a sense, be vocational so those with relatively low intellectual and spiritual abilities, but with strong physical abilities would be placed in a vocational school that would include more physical education with less cultural and spiritual education. The students would also receive specialist lessons, for example, in different trades, such as being a mechanic or a bricklayer, but at the same time also receive a form of military education so that the individual child will be able to defend themselves.

Then each school would be for a different level of ability so that each school would not include too large skill differences similar to how different 'sets' are used in education at the present time to teach individual children of different general levels of ability. So carrying on with our example a student with high physical abilities, but with little ability or interest in cultural and spiritual education would be placed in a top vocational school for his physical ability separated according to gender. So that he might be best able to succeed.

So in essence once an individual child has completed the testing phase then they and their parents will receive a list of different schools across the nation, which would be suitable [these will in most cases be schools with different types and levels of ability depending on the results of the individual child], but they may only pick from the list provided and not from others, which would not be suitable to them. If the individual child wishes to change his or her school then they may do so within that list and if it is felt the child has superior abilities than were exhibited then the individual child or the parents may request a re-test, which would take the form of a formal application and the assessment of that application before national resources are allocated to re-test the individual the child. This is again to prevent frivolous use of these limited resources and is designed to accomodate those individual children who are somewhat late in manifesting their talents and skills.

Now having described the general process of selecting for education: we can briefly summarise the relationship between the education system and the three general powers within National Socialist government. Since the education system does not naturally lend itself to being a monopoly, because it must have different influences within it. Then what would occur is that under a National Socialist state each type of education would fall under a different power's governance, but each would include tutors from the non-governing powers. So in our example the vocational school with more emphasis on physical rather than cultural and spiritual education would be governed by the Military, but its cultural education element would be undertaken by tutors assigned by the State with its spiritual education element being undertaken by tutors assigned by the Church. The general curriculum is decided by agreement of the three powers with each of them designing the curriculum for their separate type of education, which is subject to approval from the leader.

This system, which we have just generally described, allows the curriculum to be uniform, to be applied in the best interests of the nation and prevent any infighting between these general powers in the nation. It also allows individual children to be educated in the best way possible for their talents and skills while providing the nation with the necessary components of the moral community that Plato assigned as the goal. It also points out the error of Luther's mechanistic conception of National Socialist education in so far as the system outlined shows itself to be both organic and evolutionary allowing for change but at the same time acting in the nation's interest without giving too much influence to one general power over it. We cannot talk in abstract theories as Luther tends to, but rather we must ground our theory in practical policy for flights of fancy, however well intentioned, do not serve the national interest unless they are found in novels.

In Conclusion

We may state on the basis of our above that Luther's article, 'Plato and the National Socialist Ideal', suffers from a number of defects and errors, which can summarise as his use of mechanistic rather than organic philosophy. In so far as although he pays lipservice to the hierarchy of the sciences he does not apply it to his article. Another error he makes is that of superficially discussing points, assuming his meaning to self-evident, and while it is normal to try not to belabour a point too much: it is also important not to let important issues go unexplained in an article.

We should also point out that Luther also tends to assign too much authority to Plato and could be argued to be using Plato as a borderline fallacy of authority. In so far as Luther often uses Plato to back up his ideas rather than using his own thought independent of Plato. Another point of criticism, which I have not mentioned in my response, is that Luther only uses Plato's 'Republic' and not Plato's other works, which would have provided some further elucidation of his points. However as I am informed that another reply to Luther from the perspective of Plato's meaning in 'Republic' will be written in due course I will not go into this further.

All this considered however Luther's article shows in its conception the basis of an intellectually interesting comparison between the 'Republic' that Plato wrote of and the National Socialist conception of the state that I have described briefly and in part above. We must therefore commend Luther for starting a debate that is both intellectually interesting and important as it allows us to see that proto-National Socialist states may arguably have been formulated for as long as Aryans in any meaningful form have existing on this planet.

15 August 2009

Plato And The National Socialist Ideal

It has been said before that the National Socialist Weltanschauung is a spirit embedded deeply in the roots of our folk. To the reader this might appear to be a statement akin to the fictional tales told by film makers, or a romantic notion invested entirely in a desire to justify National Socialism. But permit me this slight moment of reflection, wherein I will attempt to show the parallels between Plato's "Republic" and National Socialism.

When describing his perfect community, during a discussion regarding the rewards of a moral society as opposed to that of an immoral society. Plato makes some startling revelations, that demonstrates not only the intellectual depth of this man, but also his inherent Aryan spirit, the Weltanschauung (world view) which resides within us all. In showing this I will formulate the key focal points of Plato's republic into different sections, and examine them in parallel with that of National Socialism.

The Role Of Each Man In The Society

In discussing the role of each man in the community, Plato quite aptly remarked that, one could never be an expert at more than one profession, that people are inherently suited for different kinds of occupation since each has a different nature [1] . It is with reason that I state this to be an apt description of the role of each man in the society:

National Socialism celebrates the inequality of man as something unique and natural to the order of society. It recognizes that each of us are biologically limited in our abilities, and implores us to strive to be the best we can be within those limitations. People more suited for their respective tasks should indeed be championed to take up these tasks and fulfill the role in society that had been gifted to him. We cannot all strive to be Physicists or Scientists, which is what society today purports we believe. It might sound good on the face of it, and it is this "noble" suggestion that most of us eventually succumb to, however, when we look a little deeper into the matter, the sheer fallacy of such a suggestion becomes easily exposed, if at once we consider society as a whole and what is needed for it to function. If we had all been equal and equally capable of these tasks, had only mere environment been generous to us, then society would at once lose the threads that bind it together and succumb.

It is not our environment which determines what it is we are capable of and what we aren't, it is our biological make up. It determines through hereditary traits whether we are to be more capable than another or less capable, of course it is true that education plays a part in our intelligence...The role it plays however is secondary to the role of biology. If we can explain it in another way, which would be more sensible as well as irrefutable : Our biological selection also determines our physical make up and because of this we can't all run equally fast, regardless of how much time we spend practicing and doing the laps. Some are just more gifted than others..it is their natural calling.

This of course is not to suggest that we should all be accepting of mediocrity, or not strive at all to improve ourselves to the fullest extent of our abilities. Rather that we embrace fully that quality which is gifted to us, and which naturally separates us from the rest. If each man embraced that gift which is natural to him, far more good can be brought for society and it's advancement. Why strive to be "similar" when being unique is such a more rewarding sense of being? I could never understand why people would desire being stale and similar.

Education

To Plato one of the important aspects of a moral community, is its education in terms of how it deals with educating the youth as well as the adult participants in the community. Plato states that:
"Education consists of cultural studies of the mind and of exercise of the body" [2] he continues further to state that "Cultural studies should be before physical studies" [3]

While it is a given that both exercise and cultural studies should be an integral part of an education system, I can't help but disagree with Plato on the latter part of this statement. It makes more sense to have them done simultaneously, purely because a healthy mind requires a healthy and fit body. Exercise provides the body with the healthy blood flow required in order to function properly. A well trained body, therefor gives the mind the necessary oxygen it needs to function healthy and clearer.

Now that we have dealt with the relevance of education and physical training, it's important for us to deal with the more important points Plato raises in his discussion regarding the education of the Society:

Plato argues that it is necessary for the educative material as well as publicized material to be regulated. And if found to be lacking, removed on the basis that it undermines the development of the student and subverts the society as a whole.[4] I am sure that most people would consider this in some way or another as undermining the "freedom" of speech and of expression. However, when we consider that this is already done, especially where the education of the youth is concerned there is little point in delving into reactionary responses. Before judgments are passed on this particular matter, consider the following question posed to you, the reader :

Are materials that deal on the basis of "race, creed, nationality, sex or sexual preferences" not undermined as a focal point of studies in our education systems today?

The reason is not because it lacks any scholarly validation, on the contrary, the reason is simply that it goes against the grain of the Governmental doctrine. Equality preaches that there are no distinctions between man in anyway shape or form, whether racial or otherwise. Any suggestion even the slightest hint that it is a baseless ideology, ends in the teacher immediately being muzzled, expelled from the school and replaced with one who is more willing to toe the doctrinal lines.

In this instance it is perceive as being "contrary to the interest of society", on the basis that it is "deemed offensive material". Whilst we're on the subject of mentioning the "offensive" nature of material, let's examine this preposterous nature of such a claim:

There can be nothing more ridiculous than to formulate laws on the basis of an emotional state that can neither be confirmed nor denied, since it is a personal condition of both the accuser and of the accused. You may find offensive what I deem to be perfectly legitimate and likewise the same way I could deem offensive what you deem perfectly legitimate...I ask then, how is it sensible for such ridiculous laws to determine what is right and what is wrong? especially in the academic field where inquiry is the soul of knowledge.

Is the willful neglect of biological studies that is at the core of inquiry into the origin of man and it's differences, good for society?

Certainly not, it's effects are harmful despite it being viewed as "having good intentions", therein lies the difference between Plato's regulation of harmful material, and that of the current ruling body:

Whilst Plato's intentions were purely for the advancement and upliftment of society and so too the intentions of our State, the same cannot be said for Democracy as a whole, on the grounds that it does not seek advancement, but rather it seeks to drag every one down to a standard that's below their capacity for the sake of maintaining the illusions of equality, and thereby perpetuating the most immoral conditions for a society. Democracy seems to take on a sort of child like envious position when it concerns the morality of it's people. If "we can't all be equally good, then conditions would be so that we are all equally guilty of immoral actions", it doesn't matter if these actions are equal in depravity, rather that neither one can judge another as we're all guilty of some form of ill-behavior. It further does this undermining of societal advancement through quota systems. Systems that replace the able individuals with individuals who are perceived to be "just as able" based on paper, but never quite so. Then of course there is the numbing of the education system to such a docile state, where students nowadays find it difficult to master even the language they speak at home!

Now as a supplement to this section on education, I will present Plato's views on further education for the youth.

The Raising And Development Of Children

Although there are several ideals mentioned by Plato in the chapter titled "Woman, Children and Warfare" that aren't feasible when looked at in context of the modern era, he does make some valid points that are still applicable to it. We'll start by listing the more feasible idea's and then explore the less feasible ones in due course.

Plato considers the sharing aspect of a community to be an important part of it's continued existence, he argues that, if each considers the other a brother, sister, father or mother, then they'd all feel the pain and the joy of every citizen in the community.[5] It does have validation, if we consider that biologically our racially homogeneous society are linked together. However, where Plato errs is by arguing that the parental biological bonds between parent and child should be "blurred", that is to say no child should know his biological parents and no mother either, this he argues, to foster a genuine feeling of "brother hood" to all citizens of the community.[6] This is contra the interests of our natural biological basis upon which our entire Weltanschauung rests. And because of this, the latter aspect must be dismissed entirely, since the biological bond between parent and child, is an important aspect of childhood growth.

Instead we'll suggest that the sentiment of brotherhood be fostered by other means, perhaps educational and societal.

One of the more important aspects of the childhood life, is the warfare aspect of it, Plato argues that it is important for the children to accompany their parents to war as much as possible, and to act as apprentices, so they may fully grow to understand their duties to the Community.[7]

We are much aware of the changes and the modernizing of institutions for apprenticeship such as the Military schools. We therefor do not suggest they actually accompany parents to warfare, rather that Military schooling would serve the purpose of educating and introducing the child to what is expected of him as a citizen of the Country.

To determine the proper age for Military schooling is a difficult task, and one where most will likely be in disagreement with each other. In our opinion, it's recommend to start from the age of 12 - 18, as this would provide those who prefer Military service with an already furnished entry point into the Military. Furthermore, the years from 12 to 18 would allow the child to have developed the necessary social skills required of a child. Given that he would acquire these in his first 12 years of normal schooling.

It is important we feel, to allow the child to attain the proper structural discipline needed for everyday adult life, and this a military school will provide them.

The Life and Duties of a Guardian

The Guardians of society, in Plato's view are those individuals who bear the following characteristics:

1)The Intellectual elite and have proven themselves competent for the duty.

2) Who care for the community and intertwine their fates with that of the community.

3) A selection of men that are willing to give their entire lives in the service of that community.

4) And refuses to partake in practices that are harmful to their community.[8]

The effort by Plato to determine who and what characteristics these Guardians should have is no different at all to the effort National Socialism undertakes to ensure such Guardians for their society. The difference between the two is slight but significant all the same, and not only in name..we have a slightly more complex system. Albeit similar in intention, it logically as time progressed evolved as thought and complexity of thoughts progressed. National Socialism's "Guardians" or the "Elite" of the society is the "SS", but it is not quite so simplified:

While Plato's "Guardian" was relegated to a single member of the community, the SS is a protectionist branch that reaches out to the racial elite of a society. And in doing so it is the elite of every branch of society. From farmers to poets, musicians to Intellectuals. Each member of society is charged with a moral code to adhere to, but the SS man more so than most. He is the moral compass that guides society, the individual who is charged with upholding and never wavering his moral righteousness for anything. Quite similar to the requirements Plato listed for his Guardians, he is charged to never do practices that is harmful to his community.

When today we consider that the influential people of our society are often seen doing the most incomprehensible acts, and considering the consequences these have on our children and on our society as a whole. There is much to be said for such a system, which seeks to actively improve both the biological and the intellectual moral life of the folk.

I am sure the question begs "how does it improve the biological life of the folk?":

The answer is quite simple, an SS man is charged with the responsibility to marry a wife who is either his equal in attributes and qualities or his better, in this sense I do not argue in favor of the principle of equality, since it clearly would contradict the position of our Weltanschauung. Rather, that the attributes and qualities i.e. Racial, Moral, and Spiritual qualities is to be similar or higher than that of the partner, this is to continue to ensure the strive for perfection. While we do recognize that perfection is unattainable, it is the beauty of the struggle for it which we celebrate. As mentioned before, there is no need to accept mediocrity simply because we are human and ipso facto imperfect.

There had never existed such a great anesthetic to our people, whom in spirit strived for improvement in every aspect of our lives, for exploration on the basis of increasing our knowledge, than to suggest we ought to be satisfied with being "imperfect" to suggest that accepting mediocrity is a sign of true virtue.


The Philosopher King And The Fuehrer

Inspecting the "Political systems" Plato concluded that an Aristocracy based on the intellectual caste of society, was the best political system in which a society could be ruled. And the perfect ruler for this Intellectual-Aristocracy was the Philosopher King, giving his explanation for this Plato states the following :

"Unless communities have philosopher kings or current kings practice philosophy with enough integrity there will be no end to societal problems".[9]

There are several attributes Plato uses to describe this Philosopher king, but none more striking than the unequivocal statement that the Philosopher king is one who uses personal power for the good of the Community, rather than for self satisfactory reasons, and this we ourselves envision for our Leader. Plato places high value on the Leader being a man of philosophical thought or a philosophical nature, and not because it is something he himself had been, but rather because a man of philosophical thought is a lover of knowledge, and in being a lover of knowledge so as well a lover of morality.

It's hard to imagine that a lover of morality could be easily swayed away and toward the path of immorality, that he could act and use his power for his own good rather than for the good of the Folk and of the Nation. If only because he removes such devices and temptations from his immediate presence.

The principle of a Leader who devotes his life in the service of his folk and of his nation, is certainly not a new one, but definitely one that is based within the natural laws. That Democracy is not the nature of our people, is evidenced by the simple truth that, despite the power of the President being limited by the power of congress, we as people still solely hold responsible the man elected into office. Anger is directed at the President himself for the failures and shortcomings, rather than toward the entire Democratic system under the auspices of the current "regime". This clearly shows our inherit steer toward a Monarchical form of rule.


Unlike the Democratic system we reside in today. We know that our Leader could hardly afford himself such a luxury as to hide behind others, for he is indeed the sole man responsible for the operation of the Nation. I am sure that most here would consider those of his advisers equally responsible but, unlike Republicanism under a Democratic system, he can ill afford hiding behind the ones he appointed as overseers of the tasks, this is a luxury extended only to the Democratic system.

And because he can ill afford to hide behind a poor choice of advisers, he naturally has to appoint himself advisers that are the best suited for the task rather than those who are popular. The incompetent are at his mercy, and easily replaceable. An incompetent Democratically elected regime lasts for four years, eight years if he manages to swindle the folk a second term.

Being popular in the minds of others necessitates one wear a mask to hide his true intentions, to tell the people what they want to hear rather than what is. This is the fallacy of "Majority Rule".


Notes:

[1] Rep., 370B
[2] Rep., 376E
[3] Rep., 377B
[4] Rep., 377D
[5] Rep., 462B - 462D
[6] Rep,. 457D
[7] Rep,. 467A
[8] Rep,. 412D - 412E
[9] Rep,. 474D

14 August 2009

Revilo Oliver's Forgotten Commentary on Homosexuality

The following lengthy excerpt is a contribution written by the late Professor Revilo Oliver as a commentary for an anti-Communist book written by a journalist by the name of Frederick Seelig. The book, 'Destroy the Accuser: Federal Homo Power Exposed...' (1966, 1st Edition, Freedom Press: Miami), would not ordinarily be worthy of notice, but Oliver's commentary (pp. 139-164) in it is of a inestiminable value, because it addresses a subject that few on the radical right have addressed in cogent, rather than in hysteric or histrionic, terms. That subject is homosexuality and Oliver's particular focus is on the social implications of it and its role in Ancient Greece. Both of which are hotly disputed topics and Oliver's work brings some interesting perspectives to the debate, which would otherwise have been buried due to the obscurity of the work in which they were contained.

I have typed the entire of the contribution out by hand below. As far as I am aware this contribution to the radical conservative literature on the subject of homosexuality and its implications has never been reproduced anywhere else, but in its original format in Seelig's book and was only referred to in passing by Oliver himself in later articles on homosexuality that appeared in 'Liberty Bell' until his death. Hence I have the pleasure to present this contribution to the world once again and allow important and informed discussions to be undertaken about homosexuality and the problems and threats that it has posed in the past and continues to pose at the present time.


Commentary

By Dr. Revilo P. Oliver

The appalling story told by Mr. Seelig in the foregoing pages is much more than a personal tragedy that must excite sympathy and pity in every human heart. It is a story that is terrible in the full sense of that word: it should strike terror into the heart of every American who hopes that his children will not regret having been born.

As America's most eminent journalist suggests in his introduction to the present book, Mr Seelig's account should be verified in every particular by diligent and intrepid investigators. But such verification could only confirm what we all know - or would know, if we paid attention to the evidence that has been accumulating for decades.

Mr. Seelig's narrative confronts us with two facts that cannot be denied, and to which it would be cowardly and disastrous to close our eyes. Those fact are, of course, the ever-increasing perversion of law and judicial process in our country and the epidemic sexual perversion that has brought us to the verge of moral imbecility.

The perversion of law - that is to say, the use of pseudo-legal processes to protect the guilty by destroying the witnesses to their guilt - is both common and notorious. It is so notorious that one can only wonder at the fatuous apathy of a public that does nothing about it because each individual believes that he personally can escape if he, like a rabbit, runs away and silently hides himself in the weeds. In New York City not long ago some forty persons watched from their windows for half an hour while a lone marauder attacked and murdered a woman in the street outside - watched and did nothing, did not even telephone the police, because each was "afraid to become involved". There have been many incidents like that. The craven spectators belong to a new form of life now prolific in the United States, but it requires no learning to see that oversized rabbits, although able to stand on their hind legs, to jabber, and to vote, are a species that is biologically unfit to survive.

The most notorious and ominous instance if the perversion of law occurred more than twenty years ago, and it has not yet excited the alarm and indignation that such outrages necessarily arouse in nations that are viable. The obscene and tragic farce called the "Sedition Trial" began in 1942 and ended only in 1947. It was an act of Soviet-style terrorism carried out to intimidate Americans. Thirty men and women from all over the country, most of whom had never even heard of one another and who in common only outspoken criticism of the Communist Conspiracy, were hauled to Washington in hand-cuffs and leg-irons, imprisoned in cells kept dark so they could not read, and subjected to the most fantastic trial for "conspiracy" every conducted outside the Soviet Union. The actual trial, based on pretenses so transparent that they cannot have been intended to deceive any intelligent man, was staged in 1944 by the infamous E. E. Eicher, a protege of Felix Frankfurter and Chief Justice of the District Court of the District of Columbia, in open collusion with an incredible Assistant Attorney, Oetje J. Rogge, another protege of Frankfurter and a long-time admirer of the Bolsheviks, whose part in the persecution earned him the distinction of being the personal guest of Stalin in the Kremlin a few years later. The scoff-law judge, Eicher, repeatedly and flagrantly violated the Constitution of the United States, innumerable laws, and the elementary principles of equality and justice on which all laws are based. But the vicious creature that lawlessly presided over a federal court did not succeed in doing the job for which he had been appointed. He died while articles of impeachment for malfeasance in office were in preparation and before he could be brought to trial in the Senate. His sudden death, reportedly from natural causes, averted an investigation and exposure that our enemies in Washington were desperately eager to prevent. The absurd case - ludicrous but for the suffering and irreparable loss inflicted on the hapless defendants and even their attorneys - finally came before an honest judge in 1946 and was dismissed as a "travesty on justice." But the criminal elements in what is called our "Justice Department," in an effort to distress their intended victims as much as possible, persisted until the case was finally terminated by order of the Court of Appeals on the last of July, 1947. (1)

A more recent incident, which to a considerable extent parallels Mr. Seelig's experience, was the kidnapping of General Edwin A. Walker in Oxford, Mississippi, on October 1, 1962. That crime, although evidently planned with care by the gangsters, was not a complete success, and the main outlines of the story, at least, are now known to everyone. General Walker, a great American and one of our most distinguished military men, had, at great personal sacrifice and with categorical rejection of the bribes offered to him, resigned from the Army so that he could not be silenced by the traitors and international vermin who had taken over "our" Department of Defense. the first attempt to silence him thereafter appears to have been well planned; up to a certain point, everything functioned with the precision of clockwork. In Oxford, Mississippi, one of the professional liars employed by the Associated Press concocted a vicious libel which that "news" service distributed throughout the country. (2) Then goons, many of them recruited from penitentiaries and all holding appointments as U.S. Marshals. went into action under the supervision of one Nicholas Katzenbach, who was on the spot as personal representative of Robert ("Bobby Sox") Kennedy, then Attorney General of the United States. General Walker's automobile was illegally stopped on a public highway, and, without warrant or charge of any kind, he was taken before a U.S. Commissioner, who, after practicing shameless deceit on the General, assuring him that he would be released on bond, fixed the bond at the fantastic sum of one hundred thousand dollars. This was evidently a miscalculation, for a bond of twice that amount became available as soon as the General's friends and relatives were notified, and, to avoid accpetance of that bond, it was necessary for the responsible official of "our" government to go into hiding and to use other dodges until the second stage of the kidnapping was carried out.

That was carried with the exemplary efficiency in less than three hours. In Washington, a person of Russian origins named Kantor, who calls himself Charles E. Smith and holds office as Chief Psychiatrist of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and was therefore another of Bobby Kennedy's subordinates, dutifully decided that General Walker was probably insane. This man of science later testified that he was able to make this diagnosis at a distance of a thousand miles in a few minutes by simply reading the lies disseminated by the Associated Press. He may, however, have applied the definition devised by Dr. Brock Chisholm, the protege of Alger Hiss and head of the so-called World Health Organisation that was founded under Hiss's patronage to lead the agitation for "mental health." Dr. Chisholm officially holds that "mental health" depends on "eradication of the concept of right and wrong," whence it follows, of course, that anyone who thinks there is a difference between good and evil is obviously insane. Armed with this opinion from "Dr. Smith," one James V. Bennett, holidng office as U.S. Director of Prisons, telegraphed orders to the Marshals in Oxford, who hustled General Walker aboard a plane which at once took off for an unknown destination. It was probably hoped that the destination could be kept secret until the kidnappers had transported their victim across three state lines (3) to the concentration camp in Spingfield, Missouri, that official known as a Federal Medical Prison. Mr. Seelig, in a part of his story not included in the present book, says that even before the General's arrival, word went around among the prisoners, of whom he was one, that the "mental health experts" in charge were gloating over the prospect of having a distinguished American to torture.

General Walker was stripped of his clothing, thrown into a concrete dungeon, and had his food served to him on the floor - a nice detail which is, in itself, a sufficient index to the mentality of "mental health experts." (4) The General, however, was too prominent. By midnight, the place where was being held captive was known. His attorney, General Clyde J. Watts, flew to Springfield at once. Almost simultaneously, Americans all over the country, informed by telephone of what had happened, deluged the prison office with telegrams that indicated, in one way or another, that the prison office would be held responsible for the General's safety. It would have been impossible either to murder the General quietly or to destroy his mind by means of drugs or surgery without arousing national indignation. The Department of Justice made an attempt to hold him for ransom - the ransom demanded being a pledge that he would not tell the public what had happened. When this deal was rejected, the General was released without ransom on the sixth day after he was kidnapped. The plot thus ended in a fizzle, but Katzenbach was later rewarded for his part in it by being made head of the Department of Justice. (5)

There have been many other instances of lawless violence perpetrated by persons who hold office through election or appointment and believe that their status as employees of the American people entitles them to abduct or kill Americans. A case that closely parallels Mr. Seelig's was that of Mr. Fletcher Bartholomew, who, while "on loan" from his employers (General Mills in Minneapolis) to Radio Free Europe, a crypto-Communist propaganda station secretly operated by "our" Central Intelligence Agency in Munich, Germany, noticed how many homosexual degenerates were on the staff of the radio station. Not knowing what rules in Washington, Mr. Bartholomew through it his duty to report his observations to the Consul-General of the United States in Munich and to the home office of the Central Intelligence Agency. Accordingly, on July 28, 1956, he was lured into an Army hospital by an Army chaplain and there assaulted by thugs, including a creature who held a commission as Captain in the U.S. Army. Mr Bartholomew was overpowered by his assailants, strapped to a bed, and reduced to unconsciousness with hypodermic injections. Bound and kept under drugs, he was flown to the United States for incarceration as a "mental patient" in a hospital in which he could have promptly died of a "heart attack." The plan miscarried, however, because Mrs. Bartholomew refused to be tricked or intimidated, and, when an honourable employee in the office of Radio Free Europe disclosed what had been done to her husband, was able to obtain the support of persons with some influence in the United States. The victim was therefore released. Two years later, in Novemeber and December, 1958, the shocking story was made public in a series of radio broadcasts by Fulton Lewis, Jr.

A somewhat similar crime was committed by the Department of Agriculture when an honest attorney first came on evidence of the thefts being committed by little Billie Sol Estes. The attorney, N. Battle Hales, was lured to the office of the Secretary of Agriculture, where he was detained by an administrative assistant while a goon squas was sent to destroy his files. His secretary, Mary Kimbrough Jones, a well-bred lady of fifty-one, tried to protect Mr. Hales' files and would have been a witness to their confiscation. The Federal ganagsters accordingly kidnapped her and hustled her to a "mental health" prison for disposal. An influential and courageous Congressman learned of the crime and intervened in time. The lady was not killed, but her health was for a time broken by the brutality to which she was subjected before her release could be procured. (6)

Many victims of such crimes have had no one to help them. Governmental outrages have become commonplace, and the general public, apparently lost in stupor, seems not to care. When it was disclosed in the 'Congressional Record' (May 4, 1964) that the Attorney General of the United States had tampered with a Grand Jury by sending cases of whiskey and prostitutes (including female Marshals) to the jurors' rooms, everyone seemed to think that that was just normal. The recent disclosure that blackmailers employed by the Federal government are supplied at our expense with trucks that match those used by local telephone comapnies so that they can with greater ease violate Federal and State laws and tap the telephones of decent Americans whom the ruling Maffia wishes to harrass (see 'Counterattack', January 28, 1966) - that disclosure, I predict, will stir scarcely a ripple of interest. If people remain indifferent while their scoff-law rulers wave a net of tyranny about them and their posterity, they cannot pretend to be morally superior to African savages who sold their own children into slavery for a scrap of copper wire or a bit of red cloth.

No one thus far has dared openly to advocate criminal perversion of the law and ostensibly legal authority, and even the most zealous Socialists, if they cannot deny the facts, take refuge in equivocation and sophistry, pretending that each outrage was the result of a "mistake" or "misunderstanding." Most of us can still recognise evil as evil, and will brook no argument that it is "social good."

The other perversion with which we are confronted by Mr. Seelig's tragic story is not so easily understood. Homosexuality is a disgusting and, in some of its aspects, recondite subject, nad even the most concise summary of what is known about it would reach the dimensions of a treatise and require the use of languages other than English. There are, furthermore, many reasons why even the most conservative Americans may not recognize it as an evil or may underestimate it.

The American Republic was founded to maximize personal liberty by shackling government, which, as Washington said, is like fire: it is necessary for civilized life, but is devastating whenever it is not kept strictly confined and under control. Our tradition of freedom is still so strong that many American conservatives - especially those who call themselves "libertarians" - believe that police powers should not be used against sexual perverts or persons addicted to the use of opium, cocaine and other hallucinatory drugs. This view, of course, is predicated on the assumption that such vices harm only the individuals who voluntarily practice them - an assumption that is negated by both human history and the social realities of the present.

Men of our race naturally view with contempt the creatures who, through anatomically male, find a perverse and incomprehensible satisfaction in sexual relations with one another. And it is only natural to regard what we despise as ineffectual and therefore harmless, except, perhaps, to weaklings. This instinctive attitude is confirmed by the reasoned arguments of what is now called "Social Darwinism," a term that is inappropriate since it suggest that the doctrine is of recent origin. Ever since men have reflected on the nature of civilised society, it has been obvious that the human race produces inferior human beings that are, culturally and socially, waste products, so that that the health of a high civilisation, like that of a large city, depends on the provision of an adequate sewerage system. That is something for which every rational political theory has had to make provision, not only in the West, but in other civilisations. (7) It can be argued, therefore, that society should not attempt to check such vices as homosexuality and addiction to narcotics, since the more freely persons with such tendencies are allowed to indulge them, the less likely they are to leave offspring. In this way, it is hoped, society will eventually be improved by elimination of the unfit. What this theory overlooks, apart from the practical difficulties that we need not enumerate, is that morality is not simply hereditary. Although there are born criminals, it is very unlikely that there are persons who are born with such innate qualities that they cannot be made criminals during their formative years by education, degrading assocations, and insidious solicitation. Even if we grant that the faculty is hereditary, we must number moral integrity, like the ability to see or life itself, among the things that man can easily destroy, but never create.

Christianity, aside from a few bizarre but strangely recurrent heresies, has always used Sodom and Gomorrah as examples of what is justly abominated by both God and man. But it is the tragedy of our time that Christianity no longer provides the social cohesion that made our modern world possible. For a considerable part of our population, including a very influential part of it, the faith of our fathers has become a primitive myth, explicitly or tacitly rejected by those who would think in scientific or practical terms. More important than the number of agnostics and atheists, however, is the fact that the Christian churches have been invaded, and many have been captured, by so-called "modernists," who in their pulpits cynically exploit what they privately regard as superstition, and, by peddling the sentimental hokum called "the social gospel," pervert and destroy the very foundations of the Christianity in whose name they profess to speak. They are the worthy successors of the priests of Cybele that Apuleius described in the eighth book of his 'Metamorphoses', and it is not remarkable that they, instead of expounding the Christian doctrine concerning homosexuality, use their pulpits to defend or even commend a vice of which some, at least, have a more than theoretical knowledge.

Sexual desire, although no so strong a force as hunger, greed, or vanity, is undoubtedly a biological force in every human being, and this fact has made it throughout history a favourite means of manipulating and exploiting men and women. It has been used for that purposes by witch-doctors and shamans of every age, including our own. When Sigmund Freud crawled from the sewers of Vienna with the discovery that persons not so degenerate as he were "sick" and needed to be cured by sexual magic, he founded an extremely profitable racket. In an age of waning religion, the notion that sex is virtually the whole of human life and the only source of happiness fascinated the credulous; and, to an extent seldom equalled in the most orgiatsic cults of barbarism, the indulgence of the sexual appetite has become the religion of our contemporaries. The cult has, of course, been propagated enthusiastically by the disciples of John Dewey, who have made the public schools an instrument for promoting "democracy" by injecting into the tender minds of children the belief that life is merely a series of animal satisfactions. As a result, our nation is now suffering from an erotic monomania that ominously resembles the sexual frenzy that swept over France immediately before the insane blood-bath that is euphemistically called the French Revolution. In this context, homosexuality seems to be but one aspect of a much larger problem - an aspect which, since it is particularly repulsive, it is easy to ignore.


Finally, many Americans still regard homosexuality as a moral and social problem that has little relation to politics and to our most immediate and terrible danger, the Bolshevik takeover which, despite all the protests and activity of belatedly awakened Americans in recent years, seems to be progressing with the methodical velocity of an irresistible Juggernaut. In fact, very few saw a connection between the two evils before the publication of R. G. Waldeck's concise and excellent article, ''Homosexual International," in 'Human Events', September 29, 1960. It was only then that people began to notice that, in the Western world, the lairs of treason are invariably also the nesting-grounds of degenerates.

Perverts are disgusting, but you cannot afford to ignore them. Mr. Seelig's story will give you some indication of the power that those furtive and foul creatures have attained over you - and there are a thousand pieces of evidence to confirm that estimate.

The cause of the dark perversion of human instincts is obscure. Homosexuality is found among many tribes of savages, but that fact has little relevance here. Civilization is by definition the process whereby human beings repress and prevent the conduct and behaviour that is characteristic of savages.

The most common explanation of homosexuality in societies that can be called civilized is that advanced by the great traveller and enthological observer, Sir Richard Burton, in the commentary appended to his famous translation of the 'Thousand and One Nights'. For Sir Richard, the prime cause is geographic and racial. He speaks of the Sotadic Zone, that is to say, the Near East, which is dominated by the Semitic and Hamitic peoples among whom the vice is inveterate and taken for granted, toegther with the adjacent areas of Mediterranean bason that those peoples occupy or have penetrated and influenced. It is true that among those inhabitants of the Sotadic Zone, homosexuality is regarded as normal, and Sir Richard believed that was the consequence of certain anatomical peculiarities that are generally found in males and females of those races. Other observers, especially those who, during the French occupation, observed behaviour in the Jewish and Moslem quarters of cities in North Africa, believe that anatomical differences are much less important than the prevalent custom of subjecting infants to sexual abuse by adults and of sanctioning among children in their earliest years an animal-like and perverse sexuality of which most Americans would believe children of three to ten years physiologically incapable. For some highly unpleasant details, see 'The Cradle of Erotica' by Allen Edwardes and R. E. L. Masters (New York, Julian Press, 1963).

Whatever the reason, homosexuality is normal in the Sotadic Zone. (8) That merely means that we shall have to restrict our inquiry to Western man, who seems naturally to regard the perversion with instinctive abhorrence.

That does not mean that the problem can be reduced to simple racial terms. For one thing,we know virtually nothing about our ancestors in the stages of savagery and barbarism through which we assume that they must have passed. The nearest we can come to them, perhaps, is by considering the Germanic tribes who lived on the borders of the Roman Empire, which they later overran and sacked, and then occupied. Homosexuality was not unknown among those tribes, but they disapproved of it, and they signified their disapproval by simply hanging perverts from the nearest tribe or, preferably, sinking them in mud under a weight of stones, if a swamp was conventiently available. In recent years, archaeologists have recovered quite a number of such bodies from peat bogs in which they were preserved. Those tribes were, of course, pagans, and I insist on that detail because the persons who distort history to poison our culture will assure you that disapproval of homosexuality is something peculiar to Christianity.

Among the Greeks, the extraordinarily gifted people who were the real creators of our civilization, homosexuality appears to have been an alien corruption. It was unknown in the Homeric epics, although in later times perverts, who are incapable of understanding masculine friendship and always seek any pretext to justify themselves, tried to read homosexual implications into the comradeship of Archilles and Patroclus. The aetiological myths all suggest a foreign origin: one states that the vice was invented by Laius in Thebes (where there was a pre-Greek Semitic element), and another claims that it originated in Crete (where the Mycenean Greeks ruled a native population of undetermined origin) - and we know that centuries later, as Aristotle ('Pol.', II, 10, 9 = 1271a) remarked with astonishment, on that island homosexuality was permitted by law, perhaps as a means of avoiding overpopulation.

At Athens, homosexuality appears to have been rare before the demoralizing Pelopennesian War, and certainly did not receive any kind of general sanction until long thereafter. It was forbidden by one of Solon's laws, which was still enforced as late as 346 B.C., when one of the most prominent Athenian politicians, Timarchus, was prosecuted under that law and was probably convicted, although one account says that he committed suicide before the jury had brought in its verdict. Plato has himself been suspected, not without reason, of homosexuality, but it is noteworthy that when he elabourated a model constitution for a city-state, he absolutely forbade ('Leg.', VIII, 8, = 841d) sexual relations between males.

At Sparta, where, we are told, paederasty flourished early, it was forbidden, under the same penalty as incest, by a law attributed to Lycurgus that was still in force int he time of Xenophon ('De rep. Lac.', 2, 13). It would be tedious to make the rounds of the other Greek states, or to try and determine at what time and under what influences the old legislation and the attitudes that seem to have been natively Greek were made obsolete by tolerance and corruption. We may all suspect that first tolernce and finally the vogue of homosexuality had much to do with the decline of the Greek world, but we cannot prove that, for we cannot show what Greek history, turbulent with internecine, and, in the end, suicidal wars,w ould have been without that factor. (9)

The Romans, to whom we owe more than to the Greeks, felt Western man's natural abhorrence of homosexuality. Although degenerates were doubtless born from time to time, the contempt universally felt for perverts probably sufficed to restrain their tendencies, and when it did not, the stern ethos of the nation made short work of them. As late as 125 B.C., when the old paternal authority had been greatly restricted, a Roman of the old school, Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus, who had held the highest offices in the Roman Republic, peremptorily put his own son to death for homosexuality. Such as the unflinching moral code that made the Roman's great. It was only after Rome had become a dominant power in the world by decisively defeating the Carthaginians (202 B.C.), the Maedonians (197), and the Seleucid Empire (188), and had suffered a great influx of aliens, including Orientals, that we see the beginning of moral decay.

In 186 B.C., just two years after the Roman legions had shattered the power of the richest and most populous empire of the Hellenistic Age, the Roman Senate, by a still extant decree, tired to suppress the Bacchanalian rites of a cult that, originating in Asia Minor, had reached Rome by way of Etruria, and used the traditional "freedom of worship" as a cover for nocturnal orgies of promiscuity and perversion. Investigation disclosed that the alien "religion" was really a secret conspiracy that worked systematically to seduce and corrupt adolescent boys and girls, and practiced, in addition to sexual profligacy, such associated arts as the forging of wills and murder by poison. And, significantly, a majority of the physiologically male members of the Bacchanalian conspiracy were homosexuals, although the cult made avialable to them a copious supply of young and libidinous women ready and eager for anything. (For a full account, see Livy, XXXIX, 8-19). All that sounds quite modern, doesn't it?

In 186 B.C., therefore, we have the first clear instance in recorded history of a clandestine conspiracy engaged in a revolt against civilization by using sex to entice adolescents into a life of depravity and crime - evidently for the sheer pleasure of dragging human beings down to the moral nihilism in which the conspirators find a strange satisfaction. And homosexuality was a major part of a phenomenon that was to be repeated over and over again in the subsequent history of Western civilization.

In 186 B.C., intelligent Romans had to face a truth that few Americans are willing to face today: perverts are formidable, not because they practice a disgusting vice among themselves, nut because they are driven by a demonic urge to corrupt and defile all mankind, to propagate not only perversion but every form of crime. From 186 B.C. to 1966 A.D. the evidence constantly indicates that for many degenerates the physical pleasure that they derive from their perversion is quite secondary to the pleasure they derive from ensnaring and degrading children and adolescents who would otherwise become decent men and women.

At Rome, the repression of the Bacchanalians checked the infection for a time, but not permanently. In 149 B.C. or thereabouts the Romans enacted the Lex Scantina de stupro cum masculo, which provided a heavy penalty for perversion. As everyone knows, such laws cannot prevent; they can only discourage, and their most important force is expression of the standards of the society that enacts them. Rome, however, was suffering from creeping moral paralysis that the Senate and conservative magistrates to the very end of the Republic sought to combat by such measures as the expulsion of subversive aliens (which was only temporary, since they, aided by wealth and influence, began to filter back almost at once) and measures to limit the spread of Oriental cults.

The Lex Scantina remained on the books; there were prosecutions under it as late as the Second Century after Christ and perhaps later. But the feeling that had inspired it was gradually eroded, and although homosexuality was never officially legalized, as has now been done in the State of Illinois and will probably be done in our entire nation as soon as Earl Warren gets around to it, the law became virtually a dead letter. Before the end of the Republic, Roman writers who wanted to be thought "intellectual" and "sophisticated," imitating the literary fashions of Alexandria, which was the New York of the ancient world, did not hestitate to confess - perhaps falsely in some cases, that they were paederasts. And, paralleling what happens in the United States today, one of Cicero's correspondents thought it was a delightful joke when a homosexual pervert was prosecuted under the Lex Scantina before a presiding judge who was himself a pervert. Such a society is fit only for despotism, and despotism was, of course what the Romans got - a despotism under which the old Roman families quickly died out and were replaced with descendents of their slaves.

We may take our leave of the Romans by reminding ourselves that the Emperor Nero, after murdering his mother in 59 A.D. and his first wife soon thereafter, officially and with all legal and religious ceremony married one of his slave boys, whom he had castrated for the purpose, and also posed himself as a timid and blushing bride when he was, with equal solemnity, married to a lusty slave whom he had emancipated to have as a husband. It is not quite certain whether these auspicious nuptials were solemnized before or after he kicked his second wife to death, but it is clear that Nero was as free of prejudices as progressive educators are trying to make our children. The imperial animal was finally eliminated by the Army, but the really significant thing is that his youthful zest, exhibited in these and hundred other exploits of equal charm, made him a symbol of "democracy," and that he was so beloved by a large part of the populace that for decades after his death the Empire was disturbed by imposters who, claiming to be Nero, had no difficulty attracting a large and enthusiastic following and flourished until regular troops were sent to put them down. A Great Society always knows its own.


I cannot pretend to trace the history of homosexuality in the Western world. Before the inevitable fall of the Roman Empire, Christianity, which explicitly identifies homosexuality as an offense against God, became the established religion, and when the worm-eaten fabric of the Empire collapsed, its territory in Western Europe was occupied by fresh and vigorous peoples, and since many of them were Germanic they brought with them an instinctive repugnance towards perversion that reenforced the teachings of the Church. As a generalization, therefore, we may say that in the Western world, from the fall of the Roman Empire to the time of the French Revolution, homosexuality was forbidden and punished by very stringent laws, both ecclesiastical and civil. And those laws were enforced, even against persons of high rank. In England, for example, Lord Audley, Earl of Castlehaven, was convicted of sodomy and executed in 1631. As late as 1810, at least, a commissioned officer in the British Army and an enlisted man were executed for the same offense. That may have been the last time the death penalty was enforced. In the same year, the person caught by the police in a raid on a homosexual brothel in London were merely sentenced to the pillory, but that was not exactly light punishment since an indignant populace saw to it that they returned to prison looking more like heaps of garbage than human beings.


Of course, during the fourteen centuries covered by our generalization the laws and the social standards they represented were frequently violated. That is mere what we should expect, since violations could normally be detected only when the violators themselves advertised their offenses. But there were many corrupting influences at work. It would take pages to list them, but it should be noted that some of the most important were anti-Christian movements disguised as Christian heresies or as occult "science." As everyone knows, a common English term for sodomists is bugger, which is derived from the French bougre, which in turn comes from a slurred pronunciation of Bulgar. The reference is to a sect of heretics, more properly called Bogomils, who held Manichaean doctrines, a few of which, such as denial of the divine birth of Christ and insistence on social and racial equality, are now held by leaders of the National Council of Churches. The Bogomils, who were notorious buggers, were transported from Asia Minor to Bulgaria by the Byzantine Empire, and from their new home they sent streams of zealous missionaries both eastward into what is now Russia and westward into Europe, where, from the Tenth to the Fourteenth Centuries, they planted various local heresies, notably the Patareni in northern Italy and the Albigenses in southern France. One need not believe that all members of the latter sects adopted the sexual practices of the evangelists, but the Bogomil missionaries must have exerted a very considerable influence. Againm along the shifting boundaries of Europe and especially during the Crusades Europeans came into contact with the Semitic peoples among whom homosexuality is accepted as normal, and one result was that the powerful order of Knights Templar, who held strongholds and rich fiefs throughout Europe until they were suppressed, were not only noted as homosexuals but evidently made sexual perversion a part of their ritual. (10) Throughout the Middle Ages and even in the Renaissance systems of magic, including necromancy and most of alchemy, derived from the Kabbalah, were peddled throughout Europe, partly by enthusiasts who were victims of their own (often drug-induced) hallucinations, but principally, we may be sure, by "intellectuals" who had found a convenient means of exploiting the credulity of wealthy suckers. From such occultism it was an easy and natural progress to witchcraft and Satanism, and, as two examples - the infamous Gilles de Rais, Marechel de France in the Fifteenth Century, and the notorious Aleister Crowley in the Twentieth (11) - will suffice to remind us, the worship of evil has always included the practice of homosexuality as an emphatic repudiation of the prejudices that prevent normal men from joyously wallowing in every kind of filthy self-debasement and disgusting crime.


There were other influences, less spectacular but equally insidious. No one can deny that some perverts have a high degree of intellectual ability, including literary talents - one could, for example, compile a very large anthology of well-written poems from homosexuals from Straton of Sardis (Second Century) to Walt Whitman, Oscar Wilde, and Paul Verlaine; and many of our contemporaries attribute high literary merit to the novels of Andre Gide, who is the foremost apologist for homosexuality in our time, and to the morbid maunderings of Marcel Proust, who slightly disguised his activities by giving his boy-friends feminine names. I can here mention only two men of letters of the Fifteenth Century in Italy, where, perhaps because the population was so heterogeneous, the perversion seems to have been especially common. Antonio Beccadelli, better known as Panormita, in the collection of obscene poems entitled 'Hermaphroditus', describes paederasty in terms which suggest that it was, like addiction to opium or hashish, a pleasurable habit that could not be broken - but it is uncertain whether he was writing a description or propaganda. More significant are the confessions of Pacificus Maximus in his 'Hecatelegium': as a child he was sent to a grammar school in which the headmaster, a secret and enthusiastic paederast, insisted on freeing his pupils from their inhibitionss so that he could have fun with them. In the Fifteenth Century, parents were evidently as negligent or as awed by educational experts as they are today, and I regret to report that the progressive headmaster was not hanged. In fact, he seems to have flourished. And there were many like him.

Perhaps the most important factor of all was one that the new science of genetics has only partly explained: biological degeneration. Here is an example. Louis XIV of France, although he brought on France such evils as highly centralized government and military defeats, was undoubtably a man. He had, however, a brother, who was almost certainly legitimate, Philippe, Duc d'Orleans, who always wore women's underclothing and was only with difficulty restrained from appearing at court in skirts. This engaging creature was, as protocl required, married to an English princess, but became furiously jealous of his legal wife because he thought her attractive to men whom he wanted to love him. So important a personage as the King's brother naturally had no lack of ambitious courtiers willing to use him as a mistress, and we are not astonished to find him - or, to be more precise, it - engaged in scabrous political intrigues and suspected of having instigated several secret assassinations. Louis disliked Philippe, but he was not enough of a Roman to purge his own family, nor was he enough of a Christian to feel effective concern at harm done to others. The royal pervert was like an open sore on the body of France when that nation was dominant in Europe. No one can estimate how much harm was done by the conspicuous creature, not merely in spreading perversion, but in exicitng every kind of demoralization, including contempt for the whole society and even the religion that permitted so despicable a being to hold rank next to the very highest and to receive honor and flattery, however hypocritical.

We must always bear in mind the fact that homosexuality is commonly associated with perversion of all the faculties and instincts normal to Western men. One example of many is Enrique Impotente, who was King of Castile from 1454 to 1474. It is significant, I think, that this pathological specimen, who admitted that he could not stand women and had his queen impregnated by an obliging courtier, had an olfatory sense such that he considered the odor of burning leather the most delicious smell in the whole world, with the possible exception of the aroma emanating from the skull of a long-dead horse. It is probably not a coincidence that he had a tender-heart for criminals, preventing the execution of murderers and other malefactors whenever he learned of their crimes in time to pardon them, and recruiting those who had distinguished themselves by the number of the sadistic ferocity of their murders into his own bodyguard, which was otherwise composed of imported Moslems. Like the modern "Liberal," however, Enrique had a heart that was tender only for criminals and felt no compassion for decent people. When Enrique "farmed out" the extremely lucrative privilege of apportioning and collecting taxes (for a percentage) to a wealthy usurer, Rabbi Josef of Segovia, and one of the latter's colleagues, he authorized those remarkable officials to put to death without even a hearing any citizen who was remiss in paying whatever they chose to demand as taxes. Enriqu was also, of course, a pacifist, although he was cunning enough to reach to a secret understanding with Spain's enemies and then declare a fake war as a pretext for extorting more taxes from his suffering people. Enrique, who was also an expert at inflating currency and debasing the coinage by adulterating the silver, had many other progressive ideas. He undoubtably knew what he was doing when he placed his twelve-year-old half-brother, whom he later poisoned, under a tutor who was a notorious pervert and who is said to have been successful in that branch of education, although there is some doubt that the boy had manhood enough to defend his sister, Isabella, a few years later when Enrique tried to make her promiscuous at the age of fourteen. Whatever hereditary taints account for Enrique, they evidently did not reach his half-sister, who eventually succeeded him on the throne and through whose courage and ability the Kingdom of Castile became the Kingdom of Spain.

The foregoing comments are not a history of perverson, nor are they intended to show (what it would be obviously impossible to prove) that all homosexuals are inhuman monsters. But for at least twenty-two centuries in the Western world, homosexuality has consistently been a factor in the repudiation of all morality and hence civilization itself, which is obviously impossible without a general and instinctively accepted moral code. It is not a question of individuals who indulge in private practices that we consider loathesome and that are, in Christian terms, offenses against the Creator. What we must consider is a species that derives joy from the corruption of our children to its own level and seems to be driven by an urge to destroy us. As the author of the article in 'Human Events' that I cited above concisely puts it, the members of the Homosexual International "constitute a world-wide conspiracy against society." And that conspiracy is in our time a subsidiary or ally of the International Communist Conspiracy, not because homosexuals are subject to blackmail, as charitable people are inclined to suppose, but because their instincts lead them to the same frenzied hatred of Western civilization.

That - I repeat - is not to say that all homosexuals are sadists. Of the literary men whom I mentioned above, Wilde seems to have had no criminal tendencies; Verlaine, it is true, tried to kill his lover, Rimbaud (who had participated in the Communist outbreak in Paris in 1870), but he probably had good reason; Gide eventually become "disillusioned" with the Communists and even criticized his former pals; and Proust was virtually a hermit.

It is entirely possible, even probable, that there are more than a few secret homosexuals who have no desire or impulse to destroy mankind, and we should all explicitly recognize that probability. Furthermore, it would be wrong to claim that the more violent homosexuals are all Communists. One thinks, for example, of two wealthy and brilliant undergraduates in the University of Chicago named Loeb and and Leopold, who are still remembered because in Chicago in the 1920's they kidnapped and killed a young boy of their own race and social circle just for the perverted fun of killing him. One thinks also of their contemporary, Fritz Haarman, another distinguished homosexual who attracted some attention in Germany when it was discovered that for many years he had had been disposing of his boy-friends, as soon as he became tired of them, by tearing their throats open with his teeth and then grinding them up for sausage, which he sold in a delicatessen. There is no indication that Loeb, Leopold, or Haarman were affiliated with the Communist Conspiracy, although they certainly had the right instincts for leadership in the international revolution.

We must all face the unpleasant fact that homosexuality is usually associated (either as cause or effect - it would be hard to say which) with sadism, (12) and that sadism in turn, when it does not find an outlet in acts of brutal violence, inspires the passion for "equality" and "social justice" that masquerades as "idealism" and is accepted as such by unsuspecting persons who do not see that the only purpose of these "idealists" is to incite the violence and brutality that will give them a vicarious delight even if they have no opportunity to participate in it personally. (13) The very word sadism, by which we designate the lust to inflict pain and degradation on others, is derived from the name of an infamous pervert, the "Marquis" de Sade, author of what are probably the vilest books ever written, who was precisely what we should should expect: a great apostle of the doctrine that all men are born equal ("La nature nous a fait naitre tous egaux"), a vociferous advocate of what his successors call "economic democracy," and a close associate and collaborator of Marat, Robespierre, and other blood-thirsty leaders of the French Revolution. De Sade's career is merely typical: he was twice condemned to death for atrocious crimes of the kind to which he has given his name, but the sentences, unfortunately, were not carried out; he was in prison in 1790, when he released by fellow idealists to participate in the "struggle for human rights," and, in addition to orating about egalite and fraternite, he personally had lots of fun for thirteen years until Napoleon came to power and sent him back to prison. Also typical of the born agitator is the undergraduate at the University of Chicago who in his diary deplored his "inability to control society" and to "run the world." He determined to make reprisals for the social injustuice of which he was thus a victim, commenting "Since I have devoted more time to psychology, it should be easy... I shall attack human nature to my fullest extent." (14) He could have had a brilliant career as an "intellectual" undermining civilized society in the name of "brotherhood" and "the underprivileged," but the pervert was so impatient that he commited three murders and was eventually caught.

Homosexuality is only one of several factors in the Decline of the West, but it is an important one. As is well known - at least since the publication of Anatoli Granovsky's 'I Was an N.K.V.D Agent' (New York, Devin-Adair, 1962) - the Communist Conspiracy maintains in Russia two training schools for sexual athletes. The graduates of one college are heterosexual experts and specialize in the capture and manipulation of promiscuous females who, through wealth or marriage, hold positions of political power or influence in Western Europe or the United States. The graduates of the other school, which may be the more important, are perverts trained to attract perverts. The agents thus trained are, of course, a part of the elaborate mechanism by which the Bolsheviks now control and paralyze civilized nations. But the Conspiracy is thus exploiting a condition that it has helped create. It is undoubtedly true that the international vermin have been working for centuries, with the secrecy and patience of termites, to destroy Western civilization by eating away all its culture from art and music to science and philosophy; and they have worked above all to destroy morality, the foundation on which all civilization must rest. That much is certain. The only question is how much of our present plight is the reslt of the termites' work and thus reparable, if we still have the will and strength to act in time, and how much is the result of natural rot, through biological deterioration or human unwillingness to bear for long the burden of high civilization, and therefore inevitable. And that is a question that I see no means of answering precision and certainty. (15)

Confronted, as we are, by cunning, indisious, and implacable enemies in our midst, we dare not disregard the ever increasing prevalence of homosexuality in our society. As R. G. Waldeck summarized it in 'Human Events', "the (homosexual) conspiracy has spread all over the globe; has penetrated all classes; operates in armies and prisons; has infiltrated into the press, the movies, and the cabinets; and it all but dominates the arts, literature, theater, music and TV."

So long as the degenerates were furtive and discreet, the American public had no conception of their number and power. To be sure, ever since Franklin Roosevelt let his great horde of traitors and degenerates into our capital, everyone who knew anything about the operations of Washington knew that perverts held important posts, and after the Acting Secretary of State, Sumner Welles, was beaten by one of his Negro "husbands" in a fit of jealousy, people began to suspect that there was more than wit to the Washingtonian humor (16) that took it for granted that "our" State Department was dominated by perverts. But even so, most Americans, with their habitual optimism, encouraged by the silence of the newspapers and magazines, liked to believe that the infection was more or less confined to that one department of government or, at least, was not very widespread. And, of course, ever since the establishment of Roosevelt's conception of the Presidency as an office to be used to impose a totalitarian dictatorship on the American boobs and to beat them into slavery to "world government," the great and illegal powers of that office that have been used to protect perverts. In 1950, for example, an investigating committee under the Chairmanship of Senator Hoey (see Senate Document 241, Eighty-first Congress) ascertained that there were at least seven thousand perverts in positions of importance in all agencies and departments of the Federal government (including, nota bene, the Department of Justice), but the testimony was suppressed by an Executive Order from the White House, in open and flagrant violation of the Constitution, and the Senate of the United States, a once august body, supinely submitted to that usurpation.

The general public had little comprehension of such matters until the perverts, with arrogant confidence that they - or to be more precise, their Bolshevik masters and protetcors - already had the Western world by the throat, began to advertise themselves and to claim openly their "civil rights" as a "minority group" comparable to Jews and Negroes. This concerted crawling out from the woodwork seems to have begun in 1951 with the establishment of the "World Federation for the Rights of Man" and the publication in West (yes!) Germany of a magazine for perverts, Die Insil. (By this time, of course, every Western country, including the United States, has a number of periodicals published in its own language and specifically addressed to perverts.) Even so, most Americans were astonished, or even shocked, when the President of the Washington chapter of a league of "male" perverts, the Mattachine Society, (17) under oath before a Congressional Committee, testified that there were a quarter of a million homosexuals in Washington, and that at least two hundred thousand and probably more were employed in the Federal government. There was, perhaps, some slight additional shock at the discovery that the Mattachines' head was seconding by Professor M. H. Freedman of the Law School of George Washington University. (Alas, poor George! He was not a "fellow of infinite jest," but I fear that his gorge would rise, if he knew that Freedmans were capering under his name.) Prof. Freedman, a choice fruit from the hothouse of Harvard University, refused to state under oath whether or not he was a Mattachine, but appeared on behalf of the hoary old American Civil Liberties Union to argue that associated perverts have a right to pose as a "charitable" organization and solicit contributions from the public to disseminate propaganda for perversion. It was that impudent solicitation that in the District of Columbia that brought the matter before the Congressional Committee of which the Honorable John Dowdy of Texas was chairman, and so led to the published hearings on House Resolution 5990 in August, 1963, and January, 1964. Congressman Dowdy is a Democrat, but I need not add that the Democratic Administation in Washington used every resource of the United States Treasury to prevent his re-election in Novemeber, 1964.

The perverts became even bolder when, on May 29, June 26, and July 31, 1965, they threw a line of pickets around the White House, the Pentagon, and the Civil Service Commission to "protest" against "discrimination." Most of the pickets, including clergymen, (18) wore trousers; a few wore skirts. There was no medical examination to determine to what sex, if any, they belonged. Their banners claimed that - despite the 'discreaminashion' of which they complained - there were a quarter of a million of them esconsed in the Federal government's bureaucracy, another quarter of a million snugged down in the Armed Services, and a total of 15,000,000 of them in the United States, all, presumably, ready to vote for their heart's desire. The first figure is probably correct; the second probably counts former members of the Armed Services, including the many direct commissions directly ordered by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt; and the third is undoubtedly an exaggeration for purposes of political blackmail, since the organized perverts, who have long maintained secret slush funds to elect secret perverts to high political office, especially in California, came partly into the open in 1964 with the establishment of a "Society for Individual Rights" (more commonly designated as SIR - fawncy that!) for the avowed purpose of establishing "a homosexual voting bloc as a political factor to be reckoned with."

"Fifteen million" is certainly an exaggeration, but there seems to be no way of determining how gross an exaggeration it is. (19) If, for example, we deducted ninety per-cent for enthusiasm and political purposes, would a figure of 1,500,00 be too high or too low? Perhaps the latter, but one can only guess. We certainly must not underestimate the efficiency of the perverts in their "missionary activities." (20) Many of them carry on such activities compulsively, and many of them in comparatively high positions take risks that no sane man would take - and do so for no conceivable reason other than an urge to make converts. When, for example, the reactor of the wealthiest church in a large town was finally arrested because, after repeated warnings, he persisted in hanging around the gates of an Air-force training school to accost young recruits and offer them homosexual fun, we cannot suppose that His Reverence was just lonely. He belonged to a club or circle of fellow perverts, and the only explanation is that he felt a call to spread a gosepl that he found much more attractive than the New Testament, a Book which he was accustomed to mention on Sundays. When the managing editor of a daily newspaper, long known as a leader in a little clique of his kind, tries to drug and rape a young plain-clothes police-recruit for his cult, although he, of all people, should have been aware of the risk he was taking. Most incidents of this kind are "hushed up" by political and other pressures so that they are seldom known outside of the community in which they occur and provide a subject for amused comment, but occasionally, since "liberal" censorship of our press is not yet complete, some typical episodes become more widely known. For example, the United Press in a dispatch from Philadelphia on October 21, 1965, noted that the Professor of Sociology (and head of the department) in a well-known college had overplayed his luck in his avocation of riding street cars to pick up young boys and entice them to his apartment in which, after plying them with alcohol, he could help them overcome their inhibitions. Of course, the Big Brain could have found plenty of partners - including juveniles - without the slightest risk of arrest, had he been so minded. In England, according to a Reuters despatch from London, April 30, 1965, a slight stir was occasioned when Baron Moynihan, who had been chairman of Britain's Liberal Party, was arrested by the police while he, in the capacity of a "male" prostitute, was accosting men on the streets of London and soliciting business at bargain rates. (21) His Lordship, we may be sure, lacked neither money (he had amassed a fortune as a stockbroker) nor safe opportunities. What sent him into the streets was the same powerful compulsion that led to the several arrests of a far more powerful and influential individual, Walter Jenkins, who was Lyndon Johnson's closest assistant until Abe Fortas, now Justice of the Supreme Court, failed in a strenuous attempt to keep news of the arrest entirely out of the press. (22) So far as I know, however, the really significant detail in that affair was noted only by 'American Opinion' (July-August, 1965, p. 79), which commented:

"The degenerate's strange urge to practice perversion in public... should not be overlooked in forming an estimate of the creatures. Like Jenkins, many of the perverts in the highest levels of our government have been arrested several times for such offenses. They draw some of the largest salaries paid in this country, and no one can argue that they cannot afford a dollar for a cab-ride home or three dollars for a room in a cheap motel, where, under the laws of the District of Columbia, they would be immune to arrest. Instead, some strange compulsion drives these creatures to practice their perversions in public parks and in public buildings, such as the Y.M.C.A., where they are subject to arrest when caught in the act."

Part of that compulsion, no doubt, is missionary zeal.

The assiduous "missionary activities" of the perverts would be much less successful, if the way for them had not been prepared by concerted propaganda designed to benumb the normal American's abhorrence of perverts and to prepare adolescents for degrading debauchery. In recent years this propaganda has increasingly included an open apology for, and laudation of, homosexuality, but the most effective form is still the "panel discussion" of sham controversy carefully rigged so that the audience or the readers will be left with the impression that they must be "open minded" and "tolerant." The propagandists need not be perverts themselves, and it is likely that many or most of them are not. It is a basic axiom of subversives, formulated by Adam Weishaupt when he organized the conspiracy of the Illuminati in 1776 and reaffirmed by his successors, including Lenin, that the best way to destroy a nation is to undermine its morality. And that, of course, is what the secret and implacable enemies of our civilization have been doing for centuries.

The propaganda comes over every medium of communication. If you are one of the few who read the testimony taken by the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security, you will not be astonished that the radio stations operated by the Communist-infested Pacifica Foundation try to "educate" the American public on the joys of Bolshevism, addiction to marijuana, and homsexuality. (23) Given the power of homosexuals in the cinema and televison, as stated in the article in 'Human Events' from which I quoted above, one may be sure that few opportunities for subtle propaganda, including, no doubt, the devices that Vance Packard described in 'The Hidden Persuaders', are overlooked. In some parts of the United States, at least, that hoary old bulwark of subversion, the American Civil Liberties Unuon, sponsors public lectures on the delights of perversion to "promote understanding." The mumbo-jumbo of our fashionable witch-doctors is accepted as "scientific" by those who know nothing about scientific method. For example, Dr. Albert Ellis, formerly director of the New Jersey State Hospital and now one of the brightest blossoms in the great pansy-bed called the State Department, in his best-known book, 'The American Sexual Tragedy', opined that all men who are not homosexuals are "fetishistic" and suffer from the delusion that women are more fun - and hence must be treated as "victims of psychiatric illness." It is quite possible that there are people who believe Doc Ellis - he's got a college degree, hasn't he? More effective, however, are the many tomes of "sexology" that are not so blatant and merely take it for granted that homosexuality is a "problem" to be solved in terms of what is the most fun, while they tacitly or explicitly ignore as irrelevant such old-fashioned considerations as right and wrong, good and evil.

By its cumulative effect over many years, this propaganda has prepared the way for what is, so far as I know, the most shameless attempt to annex the United States to the Sotadic Zone - book that is almost incredible. Ten years ago, I am sure, and probably even five years ago, the most pessimistic observer of our rotting nation would have refused to believe that such a work could have been published in the United States, much less accorded glowing reviews and widely circulated. It is the work of a college professor, who, as still happens, is also a man of learning: that makes him the less excusable and the more dangerous. Using the pen-name of J. Z. Eglinton and the insidious title, 'Greek Love', he has written and published (New York, Oliver Layton Press, 1964) a five-hundred-page panegyric of paederasty, extolling its delights in perfervid and even eloquent terms, condemning such pervert-cliques as the Mattachine Society as timorous and reactionary, and boldly claiming that all men, being created equal, have a perfect right to seduce male children. Professor "Eglinton" believes that boys between the ages of twelve and sixteen provide the most fun, and he proves his point by recounting, in the style of a romantic novelist, the wondrous fun thus had by university professors, scout masters, graduates students, rabbis, and the like. It would be supererogatory to argue with Professor Eglinton. If you are an American and have children for whom you care, of if you are under seventy and hope that the United States will last your time, it will be obvious to you that his species and ours cannot long coexist in the same territory.

The total effects of homosexuality on our society are really incalculable. The power and activity of the filthy mass of perverts and traitors in Washington is too well-known to require comment here, but there are other effects of which we know little quantitatively that we can do no more than speculate about their social importance. Consider, for example, the distinguished clergyman (and fervent apostle of "racial equality") whose tastes are described by the experienced police-investigator, Hubert J. Badeaux, in his authoritative book, 'The Underworld of Sex' (New Orleans, privately printed and distributed only to responsible subscribers of the 'Civic Review', 1959). This Shepherd of Souls is a pervert and has, what is extremely common among his species, a passionate predilection for negro "husbands." He also maintains, as do many perverts, a wife as protective colouring. (24) He is thus able not only to enjoy the services of his black "lover," but also the added titillation of watching and participating, while his legal wife serves as a whore for his Congoid "husband." The reverend animal who delectations are described by Mr. Badeaux is by no means unique. Some observers think it is probable that similar amusements account for otherwise inexplicable enthusiasm for the "Civil Rights" movement in clerical circles, and this view is to some extent supported by the behaviour of the vermin that the Communist Conspiracy sent into Selma, Alabama, last year. (25) It must be emphasized, however, that all such explanations, given the paucity of specific and authenticated data available, can be no more than speculative.

I have commented at some length on homosexuality because that is directly relevant to Mr. Seelig's report on what he and his beloved children have suffered at the hands of organized degenerates and the vast criminal apparatus of which they are an important part. I do not mean to give the subject undue prominence and I hope the reader will remember that we are dealing with only one of the components of a complex of subversion, the various parts of which fit into one another as do the pieces of a Chinese puzzle.

There are very significant sexual perversions that are not, strictly speaking, homosexual, but in contemporary society, at least, combine with it to form part of a larger unit. For example, although most of us do not know it, we American taxpayers maintain a Whore Corps to entertain Communists and Cannibals whenever they come to Washington to haul another load of money out of our Treasury. That, of course, is merely the kind of service to "underdeveloped nations" that everyone takes for granted, but what is significant is that there are real difficulties in maintaining morale in the Whore Corps. Some of the distinguished internationalists who come to promote "world law" by taking our gold do prefer women, but only when they have been suitably prepared with a buggy-whip s that their bodies are covered with the blood that oozes or gushes from welts and wounds thus inflicted. Now although it is doubtless deplorable from a One-Worlder's point of view, it is, I think, understandable that even females who have been thoroughly emancipated from "bourgeois prejudices" and imbued with a desire for "international understanding" qual when the last bites into their flesh. In fact, it was in consequence of such weakness that many Americans received their first notice of that form of recreation. A woman, sent by "our" State Department to entertain one of our parasites in the suite we had provided for him, lost her nerve when the whip was produced as soon as she had stripped for the occasion; she ran nude through the corridors of the hotel, thus attracting some attention, although the establishment was one frequented by the creme de la creme of our governing ochlocracy. The incident was therefore reported in the press.

The press, however, has not thus far seen fit to comment on the very expensive establishments in Washington and Florida in which the more masculine members of our elite begin by slecting from a rack the jewel-handled whip that will make the female of their choice sexually attractive. Now the great-hearted humanitarians who share the "Marquis" de Sade's passion for "human equality" and related matters are not, in the aspects of their activity, homosexuals, but Americans who have not yet attained "mental health" will regard them as perverts.

Perversion, in turn, is but one phase of the erotic mania that has been cunningly introduced in our country, largely through the public schools, and is now being whetted with exasperation by the flood of pornography which, under the patronage of Earl Warren and his acolytes, is now flooding our newstands for the instruction of those children and adolescents who do not have it forcibly administered to them in their classrooms. (26)

Most of this sewage is not specifically homosexual; it is simply Sotadic, and could have as its motto the remark attributed to a notorious actress of the past generation: "Male sex? Female sex? What do I care, as long as it is sex?" In this connection, of course, one thinks of the ferret-faced Ralph Ginzberg, who edited the lush pornographic periodical called 'Eros' and now edits a possibly more pernicious thing called 'Fact' while he, having been sentenced to seven years in prison for his lewd publications, is out on bond and waiting for Comrade Earl to think up a pretext for turning him loose. It must be admitted that Ginzberg's excretions, both in themselves and because they were somewhat expensive, were probably not so poisonous as the incredibly filthy, 'The Awakening of Cindy', which was spread over the newsstands as a "paper-back" for the instruction of every schoolchild who had seventy-five percents.

According to 'Newsweek' (April 12, 1965), the author of that printed orgy of homosexuality and promiscuity was, by chance, discovered to be the Reverend Dr. Arthur Edwin Shelton, paster of the Wesley Memorial Methodist Church of Norfolk, Virginia. Readers of that report must have wondered whether the Man of God was merely trying to spread degeneracy for a fast buck or found some deeper satisfaction in his labors for his Lord.

It would require a volume, however, to treat pornography and erotic mania in our time in our time, and that, in turn, would be merely one phrase of the universal sabotage of our culture and our nation by our enemies. To discuss that, we should have to try to trace the dark history of the Communist Conspiracy.

Whether Americans have, by blind optimism and gross negligence, permitted that crafty and subtle sabotage to go too far for the nation to be preserved is a question both difficult and painful. It will be answered by the events of the next two or three years, at most. For the purposes of this commentary, however, let us assume that the completion of the Bolshevik capture of our country is averted by divine intervention or an almost equally miraculous arousal of our long dormant instinct for self-preservation.

On that assumption, what shell we able to able to do about the epidemic of homosexuality? It seems to me that four conclusions emerge from the foregoing discussion, viz.:

1) We cannot prevent by legislation the practice of homosexuality. Laws are obviously ineffectual when violations of them can be discovered only by rare accidents or in very unusual circumstances.

2) By simply enforcing the penalties now provided by law in most states, we can inhibit and hold to a minimum the perverts' compulsive "missionary activities." Furthermore, if existing laws were enforced, the control of our Federal government and deep penetration of many state governments by the combined Homosexual International and International Communist Conspiracy could be completely broken. While it would probably be impossible completely to eliminate secret perverts, they could be rendered powerless.

3) We can stop the present use of the public schools as a vast machine of demoralization designed to create the population of fellahin, brutalized and stultified beings that live without hope and without self-respect, needed as a livestock in the Socialist State of which our "Liberals" dream - and which they have almost created.

4) All our efforts will be futile, unless we succeed in doing what no nation before us has ever done - succeed in reversing the process of demoralization and decay and in recreating a national morality and morale - standards of personal conduct and self-discipline that will be accepted without debate by all Americans, except, of course, the underworld of human refuse that seems biologically inevitable, but which healthy societies know how to quarantine and render socially and politically powerless. And we must accept these standards of conduct and self-discipline with enthusiasm and pride, recognizing them as part of the superiority that is evinced in our physical power.

Is it possible that we, men of the West, members of the only race that has had the intelligence and discipline to master many of the powers of nature, are too stupid to preserve our own civilization? Is it not fantastic that we, who alone can create such intricate mechanisms as electronic computers and automated factories, should so demean ourselves as to grovel among savages in the filthy hole called the "United Nations"? That we, who have mastered the atom and hold in our hands the lightenings of nuclear power, should cower before the brutish hordes of Genghis Khan - cower in the insane act of handing our weapons to our eternal enemies? That we, alone of all races can look far into the infinite universe and can now measure with precision the vast quasi-stars (quasars) that lie at the unimaginable distance of six billion light-years, should enslave ourselves to creatures whose rudimentary minds can never truly comprehend the simple principles that we learn in childhood

Those are the question that every man must answer for himself now.

It may be, of course, that Poland's greatest poet, Zygmunt Krasinski, who lived on the frontiers of Europe more than a century ago, was prescient and prophetic when he composed an epitaph for the Christian West:

"To the errors accumulated by their forefathers they added yet others which they forefathers knew not: hesitation and timidity. And so it came to pass that they vanished from the face of the earth, and ever since their vanishing there has been a great silence."

Revilo P. Oliver,

January, 1966

Urbana, Illinois

(1) The fake "Sedition Case" is a blot on our national history, and the details, which I do not have room to mention here, deserve careful study. The most concise and lurid account is 'The Sedition Case', compiled by the Lutheran Research Society and first published in 1953. The book is now out-of-print , and although two thousand copies were said to be in the hands of various dealers when I mentioned the book in 'American Opinion' for September, 1964, the stocks have been exhausted and I do not know where a copy may now be obtained. 'A Trial on Trial' by Maximilian St. George (one of the attorneys) and Lawrence Dennis (one of the defendants), was published in Chicago in 1946, before the defendants succeeded in having the case finally adjudicated, and was therefore written with certain circumspection; I understand that some booksellers still have copies in stock. 'I Testify', by Robert Edward Edmondson (another defendant), contains a personal account of the trial, but the greater part of the book is devoted to recapitulation of the author's criticisms of the Roosevelt Administration for which the "Justice Department" sought to take vengeance. The book, which is not well organised, was published by the author in 1953 and twice reprinted, but is now extremely rare.

(2) Since General Walker survived, the attempt at character-assassination is apt to prove expensive. Impartial juries have already returned verdicts of $3,800,000 (reduced by the courts to $2,750,000) against the Associated Press and newspapers that published the malicious fiction. Many other suits are pending. For the details see 'The American Mercury', September, 1965, pp. 13-15.

(3) Since all federal employees are personally responsible for acts committed ultra vires, this has the interesting consequence that the persons primarily responsible for the kidnapping would be subject to the death penalty if the Federal statutes were enforced.

(4) This is not to be construed as an indictment of all psychiatrists. There are many who are both sane and honest, including the one who, although paid by the Federal government, later testified in court that General Walker was "functioning at the superior level of intelligence" (as, of course, everybody concerned knew throughout the affair). On the "mental health" hoax, currently being promoted by the Communist Conspiracy as a weapon of terrorism and conquest , see the excellent book by Ellen McClay, 'Bats in the Belfry', (Los Angeles, Rosewood Publishing Co., 1964; $1.75).

(5) The foregoing account is based on the summary, certified by General Walker as "a factual, accurate account," published by the American Eagle Publishing Co., Box 1560, Dallas 21, Texas (15 cents; eight copies for $1.00), and General Walker's article in 'The American Mercury', March, 1965, pp. 17-19. See also the article by Judge Robert Morris in 'The Greater Nebraskan', Christmas, 1962, pp. 9, 19-20. It may be coincidence that the next attempt to silence the General was made by a Communist assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, who missed because his intended victim happened to turn his head at the very instant the shot was fired. Oswald was assisted or supervised by a person who has not been officially identified, although it is widely believed in Dallas that there is evidence to show that this person was the Jakob Rubenstein, alias Jack Ruby, who silenced Oswald afte the assassination of President Kennedy.

(6) For a fuller account, see Clark Mollenhoff, 'Despoilers of Democracy', (New York, Doubleday, 1965), a book which deals with the comparatively few activities of our master-thugs that, through various accidents, have come to light. Mr. Mollenhoff concludes, with careful understatement, that "we are in real danger of losing the enlightened concern needed to save ourselves."

(7) For example, the Arthacastra, a political treatise composed in India sometime before 300 A.D., proposes a rather drastic solution - that an army of detectives, disguised as teachers, heretical priests, gamblers, mendicants, bandits, and the like, should act as agents provocateurs and try to induce the morally weak to commit crimes, such as burglary, in which they could be easily apprehended and for which they would be speedily executed.

(8) Since Sir Richard Burton's translation of 'The Perfumed Garden' by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Umar an-Nafzawi has been reprinted by several vendors of pornography, the reader os that version or of the anonymous French translation should be warned not to draw conclusions ex silentio. The Arabic original contains a long and enthusiastic section on homosexuality, including the abuse of young boys, that the translators thought it best to overlook. There were, of course, thoughtful Moslems who understood the consequences of such customs. The greatest of the Arabian historians, Ibn Khaldun, in his 'Muqaddama' (most easily accessible in the French translation by MacGuckin de Slane, 'Prolegomenes', Paris, 1863-68) held that homosexuality was one of the principal causes of the decline and fall of civilizations.

(9) We can list a number of coincidences between homosexuality and treason but we cannot show that one was a cause, or even a factor, in the other. And to be fair, we must record on the other side of the ledger a peculiar and inexplicable phenomenon: it seems certain that in the Greek world there were homosexuals who were men - even men of honor. We are assured (cf. Plutarch, 'Vit. Pelop.', 18) that in the Fourth Century the flower of the Theban army was, for an odd religious reason, composed of homosexuals. With his superior forces and superior strategy, Philip of Macedon won finally won at Chaeronea, but when he did, the Sacred Regiment lay dead to a man in their unbroken ranks. That is true greatness. If the story of their customs is true, there must have been in one respect a fundamental difference between their world and our own, in which perversion and treason are almost synonymous. The Honorable John Dowdy of Texas, who is in a position to be very well informed, stated bluntly, "As far as I know, all of the security risks that have deserted in the United States and have gone over to the Communists have been homosexuals." (See the hearings on House Resolution 5990, August 8, 1964, p. 17). There have been many such cases in Western nations. A typical instance in the United States is that of two "geniuses," Bernon F. Mitchell and William H. Martin, who, trained in the Universities of Washington and Illinois and Stanford, where they known to be degenerates, ensconsed themselves in positions of strategic importance in "our" National Security Agency (which, for vital reasons, should be our most secret intelligence agency) while the Director of Personnel was a scabrous alien named Maurice Klein, who had falsified his own record through perjury and forgery. Mitchell and Martin high-tailed it for Mother Russia in 1960, and it is rumored that the damge done by their treason has not yet been repaired. For a comparable incident in Britain's Military Intelligence, see 'Burgess and Maclean' by Anthony Purdy and Douglas Sutherland (New York, Doubleday, 1963); the book makes it clear that those "intellectuals" were known perverts and traitors when they were installed in Military Intelligence by degenerates in higher governmental positions who protected them for twelve years, enabled them to escape when exposure was imminent, and remained in power in the highest officies of the government of the Britain that was once Great.

(10) That much seems certain. I cannot here examine the long-debated and intricate question of the extent to which the Templars, before they were suppressed by the Pope and the Kings of France, England, Aragon, and other countries in 1307-12, were a political conspiracy, possibly derived from, or affiliated with, the Assassins.

(11) A conventiently accessible biography of Crowley is Daniel P. Mannix' 'The Beast' (New York, Ballantine, 1959).


(12) For some case-histories, see Dr. James M. Reinhardt's 'Sex Perversion and Sex Crimes', a monograph in the Police Science Series published for the use of police officers by Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois (1957).


(13) For example, many Americans are only now becoming aware of the only object of the agitiation for "Civil Rights," although that should have been obvious fifty years ago - or, at least, thirty years ago, when everyone knew that the agitation was led by such "do-gooders" as William Z. Foster, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, and Felix Frankfurter.


(14) Quoted by Dr. Reinhardt, op. cit., pp. 232 f.


(15) Some of our contemporaries, I know, deprecate or deride a "conspiratorial theory of history," and insist that all that is wrong is that our "Liberal intellectuals," who presumably are dominant just because they are the best we have, are ignorant and stupid. The only thing that is astonishing is that the persons who hold that pessimistic view argue and write so much to defend it, for if they are right, oncern for the future of the West is as futile as concern for the future of a rotting apple.


(16) Here is a specimen, c. 1944


Assistant Secretary of State: We mustn't appoint X. to that post; he's a queer.


Secretary of State: A queer? Are you sure?


Assistant Secretary of State: Of course! Why, everyone knows that he has sexual relations with his wife.


(17) The name is probably an Anglicization of the Italian, mattaccino, which means both 'a jester' (similar to a harlequin) and 'a gay ball.' In the argot of perverts in the United States, gay means homosexual. In Italian card-games, a matta is a 'joker' or 'wild' card, which can have any value at the option of the person who plays it. The 'gay bars' that are found in every sizeable city in our country are places of rendezous for perverts, but many local citizens are unaware of what the term really means.


(18) A detail oddly omitted in the daily press; see the photograph on the cover of 'The Ladder: A Lesbian Review', October, 1965.


(19) The figures for Washington, if correct, cannot be taken as representing a national percentage, since our capital has been for decades a cesspool into which vice and crime naturally drain from all over the country. Next to Washington, the highest incidence will probably be found in the very large cities, in which large masses of human refuse are nurtured and subsidized for voting purposes, and in college towns, which are apt to contain a concentration of internationalists and other advanced thinkers.


(20) This is the term used in police circles, where, of course, the perverts' strange compulsion has long been recognized; cf. Reinhardt, op. cit., p. 43. That is why our local police, although their work has been greatly hampered by the corrupt courts, criminals in positions of political power, and nincompoops who snivel over "underprivileged" dregs of society, keep an eye on known perverts: the first concern of the police is to prevent the "homos" from corrupting other people, especially the young. It is a great pity that so many Americans try so hard to avoid learning anything about the many kinds of human garbage with which their police must deal constantly; if our citizens were not so resolutely ignorant, they would know what to do whenever a "Liberal" begins his usual spiel about "equality" and "brotherhood."


(21) This choice flower of Britain's new aristocracy is now defunct, but has left a worthy heir. According to the press, the present Baron Moynihan is usually to be found in what are euphemistically termed "hot spots," where his Lordship, if sober, bangs the bongo drums while Lady Moynihan, a female of Malaysian extraction, does a belly-dance.


(22) At latest reports, dear old Walt, was flourishing in plush offices in Austin, Texas, where he was believed to be supervising the training of young thugs in the "Job Corps." He was regarded as politically the most powerful individual in Texas, since it was believed that he could (if so minded) get anything for anyone with just one telephone call to Washington D.C.


(23) The hearings, held on January 10, 11 and 25, 1963, were published in three parts under the title, "Pacifica Foundation." More significant, perhaps, than the antics of the Comrats who dodged behind the Fifth Amendment and insolently played peek-a-boo with the Committee was the testimony of the leading director of the Foundation, one Dr. Peter Odegard, Professor of Political Science in the University of California, formerly President of Reed College in Oregon, and before that Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington, when that office was held by Morgenthau and controlled by the Bolshevik agent who called himself Harry Dexter White. Professor Odegard swore that he had no faintest suspicion that there was Communist influence in the operations of the Pacifica Foundation, and if you choose to believe him, you will have before you a measure of the amount of intelligence now needed to hold a quite important office in the Federal government, the presidency of a fairly well-known college, and the headship of the Department of "Political Science" in one of the largest universities in the nation. You will then conclude that the prediction made by Lothrop Stoddard a quarter of a century ago, that our civilisation would collapse for sheer lack of brains, has already been fulfilled.


(24) This is extremely common. The self-advertised homosexual, Donald W. Cory, in 'The Homosexual in America', says that for members of the species "marriage is looked upon as a 'front,' an artificial facade... the most perfect silencer of talk which is slanderous, although truthful." Cory demands legalization of marriage between persons of his/its sex. He is modest. Earl Warren, by applying the logic of his infamous "Black Monday" decision, could simply forbid marriage between a man and a woman on the grounds that such a marriage would make perverts unhappy and make them feel inferior. Lawrence Lipton of the University of California in Los Angeles in 'The Erotic Revolution' (Los Angeles, Sherbourne Press, 1965) is principally interested in showing that he has mastered the vocabulary seen on the walls of latrines in the slums, in yelling that all morality is "obsolescent,' in whooping it up for universal promiscuity (with wife-swapping clubs for those who are so ultra-conservative as to marry at all), and a general return to the standards of savages. In passing, however, he does recommend a household which two "male" homosexuals and two "Lesbians" form a foresome, so that joy may be unconfined.


(25) On the behaviour of the mangey rats that descended on Selma to promote the Great Society, see Albert C. Persons' booklet, 'The True Selma Story' (Birmingham, Alabama, Esco Publishers, $1.00). The animals, by the way, were hired at a hundred dollars a head; see the pay check with authenticating affidavit reproduced in 'The Birmingham Independent', September 15, 1965.


(26) Pornography is a business which now grosses more than two billion dollars a year in the United States (see United Press despatch from Washington, April 18, 1965); it appears to be largely in the hands of aliens. Many of the vermin engaged in it are notorious Communists and Communist-fronters; see the articles by John Benedict in the 'American Mercury', January, 1960, pp. 3-15, and February, 1960, pp. 3-21. The vermin retaliated by driving the 'American Mercury' from the newsstands throughout the nation. See also the bulletin, "Communism and Pornography," by Captain Robert A. Winston of the U.S. Navy, author of 'The Pentagon Case'.