David Cronenberg’s latest movie gives us his view of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his pupil, Carl Jung, and even more centrally it tells the story of the affair between Jung and his patient, Sabina Spielrein. It is set in Vienna in the early years of the 20th century.
The battle between Freud and Jung is fairly well known. Jung was the heir apparent of the psychoanalytic dynasty founded by Freud. But he began to go astray because Freud demanded a strictly sexual explanation for all neurosis. Jung wanted to incorporate more; he rejected the orthodoxy.
For Freud everything boiled down to sex. All conflicts in the psyche were rooted in early sexual experiences. Jung challenged this core concept, telling Sabina that there must be “another hinge to the universe.” In the words of Sabina, Jung did not want his patients to simply understand why they were the way they were but to become whom they might have been.
Jung is an idealist but Freud sees him as a threat to psychoanalysis because of what he considers his mysticism and mumbo-jumbo. He dismisses Jung’s approach as simply replacing one delusion with another. You then have to ask yourself why he chose Jung to carry on his work. The usual explanation is because he needed a non-Jew to cross the bridge to the European society in which he lived, as the world of psychoanalysis was understood at the time to be Jewish.
Freud took great pains to ensure that a non-Jew, Jung, would be the head of his psychoanalytic movement—a move that infuriated his Jewish colleagues in Vienna, but one that was clearly intended to deemphasize the very large overrepresentation of Jews in the movement during this period. To persuade his Jewish colleagues of the need for Jung to head the society, he argued, “Most of you are Jews, and therefore you are incompetent to win friends for the new teaching. Jews must be content with the modest role of preparing the ground. It is absolutely essential that I should form ties in the world of science” (in Gay 1988, 218). As Yerushalmi (1991, 41) notes, “To put it very crudely, Freud needed a goy, and not just any goy but one of genuine intellectual stature and influence.” Later, when the movement was reconstituted after World War I, another gentile, the sycophantic and submissive Ernest Jones, became president of the International Psychoanalytic Association. (From Chapter 4 of The Culture of Critique)
Jung is a very devout student of the father figure Freud, but when he goes in search of other theories and explanations, his very search is portrayed as part of his own psychopathology. Jung had the naïve belief that psychoanalysis was a real science where the idea was to keep searching for new ideas and honing old ones rather than simply accepting Freudian dogma. This idea plays throughout the film and though not landed on too heavily, it is developed as the underlying theme. Jung, it is pointed out, is an Aryan. From the standpoint of the film (and Freudian orthodoxy), the very fact that he cannot see what Freud considers the scientific basis of psychoanalytic theory is portrayed as a by-product of his repressed German Protestant culture. His very search for an ideal is a flight from sex, or a flight from seeing life as it is, or a flight from the pragmatic. His two antagonists are Jewish: Sabina is a Russian Jewess and Freud a German Jew.
At one point Jung counters Freud’s suggestion that Sabina had been arrested at the anal stage of development by saying that she was quite the opposite: disorganized, emotionally generous and quite idealistic. Freud dismisses these characteristics as “a Russian thing” — as a German Jew he would have looked down on Russian culture. We do seem to be seeing the world from Freud’s perspective in the film. Freud is the watcher and so are we as we see the others through his eyes. Psychoanalysis as the art of watching.
In Civilization and its Discontents, Freud theorized that those discontents arise from its suppression of sex. In repressing your sexuality you become distorted and the family, particularly the patriarchal family inflicts this on the individual. But according to Freud, the Jews managed to avoid all this. The Jewish religion “formed their [the Jews’] character for good through the disdaining of magic and mysticism and encouraging them to progress in spirituality and sublimations. The people, happy in their conviction of possessing the truth, overcome by the consciousness of being the chosen, came to value highly all intellectual and ethical achievements” (Freud 1939, 109). In contrast, “The Christian religion did not keep to the lofty heights of spirituality to which the Jewish religion had soared” (Freud, 1939, 112).
Jung’s essential failure was that was that he was an Aryan, a Swiss one at that, and a product Christianity. He has a perfectly lovely wife to whom he is loyal, a beautiful home provided by her money, and beautiful children. Jung’s wealth is underscored while it is pointed out to the audience that Freud bears the financial burden of supporting a large family. Jung’s is a life without passion, an “inauthentic life,” as it would be called in the psychobabble of the age to come. He has the exterior wealth but not the interior richness, the latter seen as typical of Jews. This sense of psychological superiority is, of course, a favorite theme of the Jewish world view, which we have all seen depicted time and again. What is interesting in the film is that although Jung will critique Freud’s theory, Freud criticizes Jung’s character. Freud’s character remains above reproach.
An interesting side character is Otto Gross, who exemplifies the socially destructive tendencies of psychoanalysis as a radical critique of European society. Gross was also a cocaine addict, possibly introduced to the drug by Freud, a user himself, though no mention is made of that in the film. “Never repress anything”, Gross tells Jung. Jung tries to counter this saying, “You don’t find it necessary to exercise some restraint in the interest of the smooth functioning of the society?” But you can see he is being swayed. “And make myself ill?” Gross responds—a comment illustrating the psychoanalytic idea that repressing sexuality would lead to neurosis or worse. “I should have thought that some form of sexual repression would be necessary in any rational society.” is Jung’s answer.
Gross is dismissive of patriarchy and obviously hates his own father who has had him committed to a psychiatric hospital for what today might be termed a lifestyle choice. Gross is an addict of cocaine as well as sex, never passing up an opportunity for the latter. At the end of the film we are told that he dies of starvation in 1920; apparently due to following his own advice too closely. Cocaine can become a lot more compelling than food.
The film tells the story of Jung’s rebellion from his father-figure Freud, which would be interpreted by psychoanalysts as verifying Freud’s central thesis—the son wanting to murder the father and possess the mother.
But Jung wants to possess not his mother but the beautiful, fragile, neurasthenic Sabina. Keira Knightly, who plays the role, looks as though she could be of Sephardic descent. Sabina’s anxiety attacks make her seem almost birdlike as she arches her back to avoid her tormentor— her father who had beat her regularly. Her catharsis comes when she blurts out that “It excited her.” Her masochism is revealed.
Jung is her analyst and we are told that he cures her. But we are also shown a few scenes where she gets aroused as Jung beats her. The image hits the bull’s-eye — the brutal Aryan beating the poor Jew.
He leaves her and goes back to his persona, that of Herr Doctor. Only when she is safely out of the way, married and pregnant, does he admit to his feelings for her. And he tells her that it was through their relationship that he really sees himself, presumably as an inauthentic and brutal Aryan.
Viggo Mortensen draws long and slowly on his pipe and says very little in the quintessential psychoanalytic style as Father Freud. Occasionally sardonic, ever watchful, he is well aware of Jung’s affair, although of course, Jung, as a typical hypocritical Christian, denies it. But the canny Jew sees through him.
Michael Fassbinder who plays Jung is German himself. His character is not all bad. The power of suggestion in the film is more subtle. But you are still presented with the stereotypical racist depiction of a Germanic male. There are several interesting things about his depiction of Jung. He goes into a rant about Sabina at one point, saying that she had calculatedly gone about seducing him. Does she feign an interest in opera, Wagner specifically, the German composer so favored by the Nazis? Is he right to trust her or to distrust her? How can we know? She did in fact initiate the relationship so he is not completely wrong in his suspicions. He does take an interest in her studies as a psychoanalyst. But then again, is he sincere?
Masochist that she may have been, she is strong enough to get even with him. She sends out a series of letters about the relationship after he has ended it. She forces him to confess to his Father Confessor, Sigmund Freud and admit to the relationship which he had tried to pass off as a friendship. She knows him well enough to know he will do it. Perhaps the Christian experience with the confessional predisposes him to confess all.
But it wins him no grace.
Jung is more than ready to share his dreams with Freud and have them analyzed. In one scene on the boat going to America he does so, and sits patiently as Freud dissects what he sees in the dream. But when Jung asks Freud to discuss his dream of the night before, Freud says that he would not do so because he would lose his authority. It’s a telling moment. And the as they approach New York Harbor, Freud makes his famous remark, “Do you think they know, we’re on our way, bringing them the plague?” The new religion as a plague of self-conscious destruction—which indeed it was.
In one of the last scenes of The Dangerous Method Sabina has come to see Freud. She argues Jung’s position, although Freud points out that in general she agrees with him (Freud). But in fact her view is quite the opposite. She believes that “true sexuality” demands the destruction of the ego, the opposite of what Freud believes. The following is the content of their conversation.
Freud: I thought he (Jung) would be able to work and carry on after I was gone. I didn’t bargain for all that second rate mysticism and self-aggrandizing shamanism. Nor did I realize that he could be so brutal and sanctimonious.
Spielrein: He was trying to find some way forward so that we don’t have to tell our patients that this is why you are the way you are. He wants to be able to say, ‘We can show you what it is you might become’.
F: Playing God in other words. We have no right to do that. The world is as it is. Understanding and accepting it is the way to survive. What good can we do if our aim is simply to replace one delusion with another?
S: Look, I agree with you.
F: I see that in the major areas of dispute between him and myself, you agree with me. Understanding the basic areas of dispute is not enough.
S: I thought you had no dispute with him.
F. Are you still in love with him?
S: That does not matter. It is not why I took up his cause. If you two do not find some way to co-exist, it will hold back the cause of psychoanalysis, perhaps indefinitely.
F: Scientific relations will be maintained, of course. I will be seeing Jung at the editorial meeting in Munich in September. . . . . I am afraid that your mystical union with the blond Siegfried was bound to be doomed. Do not put your trust in Aryans. What you and I are, Fraulein, are Jews and Jews we will always be.
As the credits roll at the end of the film, the audience is told what happened to each character. Sabina Spielrein returned to Russia and had a successful career as an analyst before being shot by the Germans. Freud had to leave Vienna and move to London because of the rise of National Socialism, and Jung became one of the most renowned psychologists of the 20th century, living a long life. The evil Nazi theme is underscored here one last time by Director Cronenberg. And are we to think that Jung’s success was due to the destruction of his former mentor and ultimate rival?
This is the same director that depicted the Russian mafia as composed of Christians, going so far as to show mafia hit men with tattoos of crosses on their backs in the film Eastern Promises. And he would never mention that the Russia to which Sabina Spielrein returned was one in which Russian Christians were being systematically murdered by the largely Jewish Bolsheviks in power. The bias is as predictable as heat in July.
The film appears to be a study of a conflict between the two titans of psychoanalysis. But the conflict is more than between two individual points of view. It is a conflict rooted in two cultures which do not view the world through the same lens. No doubt we will continue to hear Jewish complaints and accusations about Christianity. The following quote underscores even more clearly the culture war between Christianity and Judaism:
The Jew … is not content merely to destroy Christianity, but he preaches the gospel of Judaism; he not only assails the Catholic or the Protestant faith, but he incites to the unbelief, and then imposes on those whose faith he has undermined his own conception of the world, of morality and of life. He is engaged in his historic mission, the annihilation of the religion of Christ. (Benard Lazare, Antisemitism: It’s History and Causes, Translated by Britons Publishing Co., London (1967), p. 158; my emphasis)
It is well known that Freud was hostile to Christian civilization, seeing himself as Hannibal leading the Semitic armies against Rome. As Lazare would doubtless agree, Freud’s theory was a way of undermining Christian conceptions of the world, of morality, and of life.
Psychoanalysis has been relegated to the intellectual fringes of academic psychology and psychiatry. Indeed, psychoanalysis is widely seen as the greatest scientific fraud of the 20th century. But movies like this present psychoanalysis as emanating from brilliant Jews trying to make the world a better place for everyone. They function to reassure educated audiences that Jewish concerns and Jewish attitudes are at the very center of our culture. And by that measure, they succeed admirably.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
From the article:
Gross was also a cocaine addict, possibly introduced to the drug by Freud, a user himself, though no mention is made of that in the film.
A few years ago I read a book titled Cocaine: A Biography.
From what I remember, Freud was not only a user, he was instrumental in cocaine’s growing popularity. A significant percentage of the book was about him.
And back then, cocaine was pure — it was legal (I think) and 100% pure. Today it is virtually impossible to find any cocaine that is relatively pure — even if you are rich and some kind of celebrity. The book said that by the time cocaine reaches America (or other countries outside of South America) it has already been cut in half.
I think the book said that cocaine bought on America’s streets contains an average of 25% cocaine.
Christians could profit immensely by thinking like Jews.
Christian mumbo jumbo about angels ,devils , heaven & hell , even the Jesus story ——- all make believe.
Most intellectual Jews & others are Atheists whereas dumbed down Christians ( Jews for Jesus) are so stunted with their ridiculous beliefs that it is sad.
Is it any wonder Jews can look down on Christians so easily.
@Richard:
Richard
February 16, 2012 – 6:40 pm
I think the book said that cocaine bought on America’s streets contains an average of 25% cocaine.
Richard -if that -ignorance about illegal drugs is widespread .
BTW — Prescription Drugs Kill 300 Percent More Americans than Illegal Drugs do !!
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/
@Neville:
There are many intelligent, wise Christians.
Interesting, this is the first comment on the movie that points out this bias. It is hardly noticed because today the Freudian approach as described in the review is widespread and commonly accepted, while Freud’s more specific theories and dogmas such as the Oedipus complex are rather put in the museum. I haven’t seen the movie yet, though.
Psychoanalysis wasn’t a fraud altogether, there were true and valuable insights into the human mind. It turned into an orthodox church or sect, and Jewish writer Karl Kraus famously called it “The very disease whose cure it professes itself to be.” One gets really this impression when watching old Woody Allen movies.
Nonetheless, there was indeed a touch of genius on Freud, who described basic concepts of how the human psyche worked, and he has many predecessors like Kierkegaard or Nietzsche. For example, the psychology of the Puritan hypocrite as we see today in his anti-racist, PC-incarnation can be very clearly analyzed and seen through Freudian terms of repression and projection: the type that persecutes in others what he dare not or cannot see in himself. Everybody who has dealt with severe neurotics or borderline personalities knows what I am talking here.
Freud should also be discerned from disciples like Gross or Reich: Freud didn’t believe at all in the benevolence of what was being (unconsciously! that is important and has often been misunderstood) “oppressed”, on the contrary. His later writings such as “Civilisation and its Discontents” are rather dark, pessimistic and socially conservative: to him, man remained an animal whose dark impulses had to be tamed, even though he stayed a tamed and domesticated animal. But that was the lesser evil. He didnt believe that sexual liberation would bring universal happiness. He was a pessimist and a stoic and thought happiness was all too rare for the wretched human animal.
At the same time his teachings certainly were able to subvert the very civilisation he still saw as necessary. Any spritual transcendence, any sort of idealism will be dragged down and denounced as an illusion by this “dangerous method”, as there is nothing beyond sex and death in his cosmos. He was always very much a 19th century materialist.
One could argue that it was Jung that transcended the Freudian reductionism and materialism to something far broader, he really “aryanized” Freud’s basics, combining them with highly original findings of his own. He also was quite conscious of this and believed in differences of the collective unconsciousness of racial and cultural groups. He wrote about Wotan as an archetype of the Germanic psyche and in his later years approached more and more a mystical christianity, which he saw appropriate for the Western mind. (He admired Eastern mysticism and teaching a lot, but believed it mostly unfit for Western people.) He thought that Freudian school therapy could work on Jews, but non-Jews would need different approaches, as their soul had a different structure. (He btw briefly sympathised with National socialism as well.) Jung would neutralize the destructive and deconstructive aspects of psychoanalysis, the trappings of the “this is nothing but…” He was a religious thinker and a mystic, disguised as a psychiatrist. I highly recommend his fascinating and inspiring work, read his (ghost written by a disciple) autobiography for starters.
Great review! So when are the WNs going to start making movies?
Freud indeed has been relegated to the fringes if one bothers to pick up a college Psychology 101 textbook. I just wonder though if most of Freud’s ravings were a result of his use of cocaine or did he actually believe the non-sense he wrote.
Sadly his being a drug addict and BS artist has been sanitized by academia and most people still hold a positive opinion of this charlatan.
But his nephew Edward Bernay’s had a much more successful career as the originator of PR and modern advertising-propaganda. So much so that Goebbels considered him his mentor. He was also the man who turned America’s women into smokers. What a evil SOB. And like Freud he had a deep seated contempt of Western society and felt that it’s citizens should be manipulated from cradle to grave.
HYPERLINKThe real Carl Jung was better-looking and the real Freud was worse-looking. Keira Knightly looks NOTHING like Sabina Spielrein.
Jung seemed to be more influenced by Paganism and the Pagan elements that persisted within Christianity (e.g. in alchemy) than by Christianity per se. Jung’s archetypes seem to be a resurrection of Plato’s Theory of Ideas.
I think depth-psychology is essentially a field of the humanities rather than a physical science anyway. Thoughts and ideas do not have a physical existence, and if you are dealing with them as thoughts and ideas, you are not doing “science” in the sense that physics or biology is a science. Freud’s impulse to reduce all appetites and all idealism to one appetite, sex, seems just as arbitrary as saying that all the five senses are really just different forms of hearing. Jung’s return to the traditional view that there were a variety of appetites and even higher impulses, and even things beyond our ability to know, was well justified.
Overall an enjoyable read but I was displeased with the reference to the term inauthenticity as “psychobabble.” Authenticity and inauthenticity are legitimate concepts. Are you living a life in which you make choices that take account of your own innermost desires and imperatives, or are you simply following orders or going along with the crowd all your life? That is the matter of authenticity.
@Neville:
Those Jews are not so much atheists as haters of Christians and Christianity. For Jews, “Separation of church and state” is strictly for White Christian countries, not for Israel.
In Israel:
1. All marriages are by rabbis or clrergymen — there is no civil marriage in Israel. (No rabbi in Israel performs “same sex marriage”)
2. All municipalities have official rabbis whose salaries and expenses are paid by the state (tax payers).
3. The Haredim (orthodox Jews) are not required to work, are not required to serve in the military, and their huge number of children are educated and supported by the state.
4. It is illegal for a Jew to marry a non-Jew in Israel.
And there are no complaints about all that from the ADL!
Jews do this in Israel because they know that the very cohesion of their society centers on the religious. That is also true in Christian countries, and that is precisely why the Jews work so doggedly and relentlessly to destroy the Christian Faith in youth and to generally marginalize and even demonize Christians and Christianity.
You could say that religion is the science of overcoming our conditioning to relative world to the realization of that which created and expresses as the phenomenal world of time and space, cause and effect, existence and non-existence etc. Though some of the greatest saints and sages are not of the Christian tradition, some are; Padre Pio, St Therese of Lisieux, Solanus Casey, Gemma Galgani and many others. Such great ones have been produced by the Catholic, Orthodox as well as the Proterstant traditions.
But one things Whites could learn from Jews. Even if Jews are not religious, they still would not trash and drag through the mud fellow Jews who are religious, as you have just done, Neville, to fellow Christian European ethnic people.
@thm:
Well said!
Freud: “What you and I are, Fraulein, are Jews and Jews we will always be.”
Well, that’s what it boils down it, the essence of it all. It’s nice that a “sophisticated art house” type film dealing with the strange, complex psycho-babble of Freuds “science” can end with such a clear, straightforward message.
No matter how hard they try to “educate” us, “enlighten” us, “make us better” etc. We will never “get it.” They will always be jews, and a true understanding between jews and the rest of us in unattainable. A great testimony to this is the fact that, as others have noted, psychoanalysis has been proven to be BS, and is indeed today a fringe movement not taken seriously. The goyim don’t get it, just too stupid. Their lack of understanding must be rooted in something sexual.
Classic endling line for a film. I could see the same basic idea “we are jews and we always will be” in all kinds of film settings. I could see it being said in a conversation between two jews at Masada, two inmates at Auschwitz, two IDF soldiers on the dusty desert battlefield, etc.
It must get awfully lonely, being the chosen “light unto the nations” and ruling the world.
Jewish psychology is their attempt at understanding themselves, and then projecting it onto us. Hence things like The Authoritian Personality, which in no way describes Europeans but describes Jews quite accurately.
“According to this view, the authoritarian needs to maintain control and prove superiority over others is rooted in a worldview populated by enemies and empty of equality, empathy, and mutual benefit.”
Does that not perfectly summarize the tribe’s psychology? The Authoritarian Personality is a great help to us, because it offers us a great look into how they think.
Apart from evolutionary psychology the only other psychological model that makes any sense is the Greek one, with the intellect essentially “driving” the will. All this talk of ids, egos, and selves in nonsense.
@Neville:
We tried the atheistic way with Communism and you see what a bloody hell that created. No thanks.
As far as being like Jews, that means adopting the ways of a greedy, aggressive, xenophobic semitic tribe whose main goal is to enrich themselves and acquire power regardless of the long term consequences of that behavior. The only difference between them and the Muslims, is that the Muslims are up front about it, while the Jews play pretend civilized Westerner.
In dealing with the Jews and in respect of the role religions play, this article has a completely different view.
http://www.jbcampbellextremismonline.com/
Fender…..’The Authoritian Personality, which in no way describes Europeans but describes Jews quite accurately’
What about Germans and that they started the 2 Biggest Wars?
Notice they didnt have an Ugly Freud!
And did you know Freud, the no talent painter was his Nephew?
Painter Lucian Freud, Sigmund Freud’s nephew, died
newsinabox.net/…/painter-lucian-freud-sigmund-freud-s-nephew-die…
Jul 22, 2011 – Painter Lucian Freud died at 88 years old in his home London and the news was given by his advocate, Diana Rawstro…………………………………………..
@90404:
Germans did not start World War I, and WW2 was nothing more than an extension of the first war. But even if Germans had “started: two wars then it in no way defines the European race- as a whole- as “authoritarian.” If anything we’re the exact opposite.
@Iranian for Aryans:
“So when are the WNs going to start making movies?”
Check out Arnold Fanck’s mountain films from the 20s and 30s. Also, the two Russian gangster films Brother and Brother 2 (not exactly White nationalist, but the main character openly dislikes Jews and buys weapons from a Nazi).
@90404:
Germans are a disciplined people and that might include indeed a streak of autoritarianism, though the “typical German” of the Hollywood stereotype is more a description of Prussian militarism than that of your average Kraut. It is this stereotype that the Jews saw as central to Nazism, projected on all peoples of European descent and then pathologized and sought to destroy. The idea that the short period of only 12 years Nazi rule is typical not only of all Germans but of all White Christian peoples and that at any time “it might happen again” and therefore has to be combated by all means, is typical of the extreme paranoia of this pathological Tribe that is wont to project its own inner vices on the outer world. Thus they are destructive out of paranoid “self-defense”. But what do you want, destroying goyim is “good for the Jews” anyway.
Thanks to Penelope Thorton for reviewing this movie. Like many others on TOO, I do not really watch most modern movies — virtually none. So it’s good that she watched and reviewed this movie in order for us to know what kind of entertainment (and propaganda) Whites are consuming.
These days the so-called mental health care sector seems to favor treating patients with drugs, not psychoanalysis.
It’s a huge business.
The field of psychology seems to be one of the favorite tools of anti-Whites, and I agree with the commenters above who think that much of it is nonsense.
We live in evil times, so it makes sense that a lot of people have serious mental problems. It’s ironic that Freud’s ideas have probably created much more mental problems and suffering than they have solved or alleviated.
Have a good day (or evening), all.
@thm: You pointed out: “3. The Haredim (orthodox Jews) are not required to work, are not required to serve in the military, and their huge number of children are educated and supported by the state. (of Israel)”
I knew a jewish colonel who hated the haredim mightily because of their exemption from military service, and them getting taxpayer money for their 6 or 7 kids. Their high birthrate infuriated him, too. It should delight us. In another twenty to thirty years, they will start to dominate judaism, and create massive internal jewish stresses. They look so foreign with their beards and uncut, curly sideburns, black hats and dress like garments that they fit in about as well as devout Muslims. Their treatment of women is so misogynistic it makes the most strict male chauvinist look like a feminazi. They are so racist against blacks they could start a KKKK. (Kosher Ku Klux Klan™) Once they become the majority, no amount of PR in the world will make them likeable, and they are too stubborn to change. It could mean jewish civil war!!
@Richard:
Yes, thank you to Penelope Thornton for watching, or maybe enduring, this film. I have not been to a movie theater in about 10 years, so I do agree with Richard that it is good to know what kind of propaganda our people are ingesting in entertainment form.
As for modern psychology and the pill industry, well, another big score for jewish ingenuity. You’ve got a huge amount of the population drugged up for “treatment” for a multitude of supposed disorders. Prozac has become like aspirin. It’s almost passe to be on Prozac, it’s so 90s! All the kids that are on something for ADHD, get em started young.
Had a bad day? Must be depressed, better get on something. Psychiatrists have such as easy job. It’s mostly pill pushing, and speaking in a soothing voice. Most people cant afford 200 dollars or whatever for a 1 hour therapy session. Just go in for a quick “medical” appointment to get the script. Happiness in a small plastic bottle. At a steep price though.
So, the jews have further weakened a good size portion of an already fairly pacified White population, and are raking in HUGE bucks doing it. Sure, they do a similar thing by aggressively marketing other things, like alcohol. But these drugs have that competitive edge of “being good for you.” After all, its a drug that requires a prescription, so its serious.
I am aware that many people have legitimate mental health problems. But when I see the latest “happy pill” being advertised on TV, it just gives me the feeling of seeing new culture of weakness and excuses. Maybe even a kind of victimhood. “Not my fault I have XYZ disorder, I HAVE to take these pills to get better. Dr. Kaplan said so. He’s a doctor, how could I not trust him?”
@Hadding Scott:
This seems to describe Otto Gross to a T, Mr. Scott.
As do most people who are not filthy rich or single or both and who hope by this difficult, painful sacrifice of the bulk of their terrestrial life to gain a few hours a week or a month to be a force for good among family and friends.
“Authenticity and inauthenticity” may, as you say, be “legitimate concepts” rather than “psychobabble,” but they are also morally and intellectually hollow concepts. They are a waste of time.
@Franklin Ryckaert: Excellent comments; thank you. My sole, very minor disagreement concerns Hollywood’s stereotyping of Germans as embodying “a description of Prussian militarism.” I think you might agree that it could even more fairly be called a caricature of Prussian militarism.
FRESH OFF THE E PRESS…
O THOSE ‘IMPRESSIONABLE TEENS’…INDOCTRINATED DECADE AFTER DECADE…………………………
audio clip making the rounds (scroll down to listen) of pro-Israel blogs, purporting to reveal a University of Pennsylvania professor apparently suggesting that fellow teachers insert a boycott Israel message into their courses, even in courses not connected to Middle East politics.
The audio clip was taped at the National Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Conference earlier this month at the University of Pennsylvania about which The Blaze reported.
Israel National News reports:
In a breakout session of the “Academic Boycott of Israel” initiative, Amy Kaplan, professor of English at the University of Pennsylvania spoke about how teachers can most effectively demonize Israel in every classroom as well as the “positive aspects” of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
A member of the audience asked Kaplan how teachers could incorporate ways of de-legitimizing Israel “especially, I guess, when the course is not dealing directly with material that has to do with Palestine?”
She answered:
“Well I don’t know how you can, how you can address the issue if you’re not dealing with a course that has no content or relationship to it…but I know that, I mean, you can make courses that have content.”
“…you can teach a course on which you included prison as a really, really big thing, not only in the political life of Palestinians, but also in their literature and in their poetry. So that will be kind of an ideal way – you take a thematic course, and you bring in themes from this issue.”
Kaplan offered specific texts that could be used to drive home the point:
“…And, literature is a really great way to teach students about what’s going on, students who think they know they have an ideological line, a political line, and then they read, you know, they read Darwish, they read, you know, The Pessoptimist and it opens up a whole new world.”
Mahmoud Darwish was an influential Palestinian poet and PLO member who became a national symbol for many Palestinians. Kaplan was presumably referring to the book “The Secret Life of Saeed: The Pessoptimist,” by Emile Habiby whose Amazon description reads:
Saeed is the comic hero, the luckless fool, whose tale tells of aggression and resistance, terror and heroism, reason and loyalty that typify the hardships and struggles of Arabs in Israel…The author’s own anger and sorrow at Palestine’s tragedy and his acquaintance with the absurdities of Israeli politics (he was once a member of Israel’s parliament himself) are here transmuted into satire both biting and funny.
The pro-Israel blogger Elder of Ziyon who originally posted the audio of Prof. Kaplan on YouTube wrote:
Here we have a professor at an Ivy League university explicitly calling on like-minded educators to shoehorn hate of Israel into every one of their classes.
For these academics, college is not about teaching but it is merely a platform for them to spout their political views at their captive audience.
Kaplan, from UPenn’s English department, teaches classes including “Contact and Conflict: Literatures of Palestine and Israel,” “19th Century US Imperialism,” and “The Vietnam War in Literature and Film.” She is also a signatory to the pro-Palestinian “U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel” which calls for boycotting Israeli universities and academics, including those who support the Palestinian cause.
Kaplan’s right to free speech is protected under the First Amendment. However, is the English department presenting alternate points of view to balance out Kaplan’s one-sided presentation? How are impressionable 18 and 19-year-old students supposed to discern the complexities of the Israel-Palestinian conflict if only one side of the story is presented?
Kaplan who is on leave this semester did not respond to an e-mail message requesting comment.*
Does Kaplan have a valid point on the merits of threading Palestinian talking-points into university lesson plans or is it just a veiled effort at indoctrination? Listen to the audio and decide:
@Pierre de Craon: I talk about living in such a way that you “take account of your innermost desires and imperatives” and you reduce that to recklessly yielding to every whim.
Obviously I am not going to be able to say anything that makes sense to you if you are going to reduce it to a caricature every time.
It may be true that “most people who are not filthy rich or single or both” live inauthentic lives, but that does not invalidate the concept. The conformist and status-obsessed middle class is certainly the greatest concentration of inauthenticity. Resigning to poverty brings a certain freedom.
@Hadding Scott: I am sorry for failing yet again to meet your standard of appropriate responsiveness to your ideas. Or could it be that you’re just preternaturally thin-skinned? Whatever the answer, “authenticity” and “inauthenticity” may be, as you say, valid concepts, but to assume, as you seem to, that a valid concept is automatically a valuable one is itself either a species of psychobabble or something worse—something, alas, yet to be named. I might also add that it is virtually impossible to credit the seriousness of a soi-disant thinker who regards such a recklessly loose turn of phrase as “take account of your innermost desires and imperatives” as sufficient to the load he clearly expects it to bear. He (viz., you) owes readers more—and better.
Have a deeply authentic day, Mr. Scott.
An important part of regenerating White consciousness is to not be drawn into Jewish quibbling and controversies. The hook, the hook! Get them off the stage. Ignore them. Do not read their books and articles, skip their movies and turn off the TV. They have no relevance unless we, the majority, lend an ear.
Freud was silly. He should not be taken seriously. He is unworthy of discussion. If he and his nonsense is brought up, giggle.
Relegate Jews to the shtetl. They only leave it to destroy. They choose to live apart, respect that choice by living apart from them.
The conflict between the Jew Freud and the Aryan Jung is perhaps symbolic of the entire struggle between these two peoples. On the one hand you find materialism, sensuality, pathology, stealth and deception, on the other hand idealism, trancendentalism, health and honesty.
A great part of Freud’s sick pseudo science is merely a projection of his own pathologies (Eudipous complex, latent homosexuality, “anal stage” etc., etc.) and that of his co-tribals, who constituted the majority of his clients, rather than an adequate description of the psychodynamics of European man.
Freud tried to use Jung as a front goy to introduce his own destructive “system” into European culture for which he felt perhaps a greater hatred than the Phoenician Hannibal felt for Rome. Freud is only one name in a long row of Jewish intellectuals who intended to “bring the plague” to Western civilization. Fortunately Freud is now almost forgotten while the work of Jung is still appreciated. We do not need the “contributions” of these people who only hate us and want to destroy us. It will take a major effort to excise their influence from our culture as they have entrenched themselves literally everywhere and the public at large is still unaware of their detructiveness.
In short we need a critique of the culture of critique and that preferably in a popularized form.
Absolutely correct, thm
Neville,
As a French researcher of Jews and Judaism, Herve Ryssen, says, Jewishness is not simply a religious identity, it is an ethnic identity. One doesn’t stop being Jewish by becoming, as you call it, “intellectual” or secular. One is born Jewish and remains Jewish even if one doesn’t practise Judaism.
Christian mumbo jumbo are harmless stories compared to filth, chauvinism and immorality expressed in the Talmud.
@Pierre de Craon: That’s quite a scene you’re putting on there, Monsieur de Craon.
Since you are still not getting it, let me just make it unmistakable how you distorted my meaning. In the first place, the expression “taking account” already indicates a rational process. I said that authenticity means living in a way that takes account of one’s own deepest impulses. You interpreted this to mean failing to take account of anything else.
I find it hard to understand why somebody would object so bitterly to a concept such as authenticity.
@Petronius: If their is any truth to psychoanalysis it is that : having a good yak about feelings of shame lift the burden of psychological defences that an individual builds up to protect their feelings of self worth and therefore survival from being overwhelmed by the self punishment (think sorry wounds) that an individual might inflict upon themselves to appease the imaginary society (inculcated by mother or father and buttressed by friends and neighbours) that their existence appeals to as a natural human ‘tribal’ evolutionary social control mechanism .
The rest of Fraude was the result of a hustlers personality and cocaine addiction. Just another intellectual con artist in a long long line .
@Hadding Scott: “Resigning to poverty brings a certain freedom.” I demur from the use of poverty to denote a life of favorable adjustment to reduced financial circumstances, as common colloquial usage ignores the concept in context of consecrated religious life.
But as to the statement itself? I congratulate you — no irony express nor implied — for telling a subversive truth (something on the order of Beyond Good and Evil #87, “Tethered Heart…”, that only becomes obvious from the inside).
@fender: Well said Fender . Its the classic con of accusing other people of being guilty of exactly the thing you are engaged in ! Beware the innocent !
It is a more complex form of the bird feigning a broken wing to distract predators from the nest . Though in our context its really camouflage as a sophisticated attack strategy by pathologizing the European peoples by this self promoting and tribal promoted cuckoo .
This movie sound like its really a spit in your face number that the “intellectual” goyem have now becomes socialised to accept (and the pandering movie shows reviews will prove me correct ) . Show trials worked wonders in the USSR and the Jews have proved that this old chestnut is still a valuable tool in shame control the very selfish , very cowardly , very very sheepish “intellectual” , i said “”Intellectual”’ goyem . The bogans won’t be watching this movie . Hollywood has dumbed down , trained and catered for them too !
I saw a fascination thing on Australian TV the other day called “Who do you think you are .” that looks at TV celebrities , hereditary history ; with the Celeb taking the viewer on an investigators journey into their ancestors past . Anyway … this Female Cook , thought she had Jewish anscestory , and when she discovered (in Germany ) that it was definitely not true (and she was shocked and disappointed) , from that point on , one could see that she was suffering a crisis of personality ‘confidence’ the proud demeanour and smug look evaporated . She went from cocky and happy to uncertain and humble ! I laughed ( naughty of me ) . There she was thinking she was the relations to a ‘Musical Family’ of sacrosanct victims to suddenly being thrown into the group of shameful nazi’s . Musical subtext to me !
A fitting outcome for these bootlicking ‘ ever so polite and self interested , turn a blind eye when it suits , cause everybody else does it [why me ! ] and whats a greed humble little nobody like me to do anyway …HaHaHa [ as long as i get a big slice of the pie] ) ” goyem and its is just a ‘shame’ that more pack animals can’t be educate with such a succinct parable .
And when they all get picked off and finally look around and see they are exposed then at a point too late (for their children) they are scrambling over the corrupt refuse of what was the accent of the West . Its not faiirrrr , they whine ; you dumb goyem ….. Have I said to much ? I haven’t said enough !
It is ironic that when one goes to the Phillipines or other third world holes in SEAsia , the nobodies are all keen to claim to have Chinese ancestry . This Celebs parable just shows how totally the Jews have invaded and undermined the European people with the HollyHoaz bs zionist ruse .
@Neville:
St. Augustine and Aquianas are dumb? CS Lewis?
Your views are like that of a typical SWPL liberal – no one but an ignorant person – like Richard Dawkins – would make the sort of comment you just made. Ironically, it’s usually combined with a little chest beating about how clever you are for being an atheist.
They don’t, they are actually fearful, jealous. That is why they look at the beauty of say, western Christian art and try degrade and ‘critique’ it .
@Richard:
and most of the time, a healthy daily walk, and a teaspoon of cod liver oil will do the trick for depression.
Some advocate meditation – in the eastern sense, but what’s sort of comical is they ignore the effects Christianity and prayer – in the western sense – on ones overall outlook and mental health.
Our bleak, dark post modern world gives you a couple of choices: you’re just following you DNA , and every aspect of human behavior can be explained by evolution – which has largely replaced the previous ‘everything can be explained by freud’ – both were meant to demoralize western man and create a sense of hopelessness. Then they wonder why people are depressed?
@pessimist: Freud indeed was a fraud and charlatan – as was Boaz and Stephen J. Gould .. but their lies have been remarkably effective in helping dismantle western civilization – and that, i think is the more important thing to the people who disseminated their ideas.
@Marianne:
They are ‘stories’ that helped temper and civilize the west. You either have no understanding of positive influence of Christianity on the west, or are deliberately ignorant of it. I suspect the latter, as it has been quietly airbrushed out of most history books by the secular left.
@Pierre de Craon:
:)
I’m glad to read a few good, balanced comments on both Freud and Carl Jung. Freud had brought into the consciousness the idea of analysis and looking at the inner forces that drive the psyche. That part was good. My favorite, however, has always been Carl Jung, with his ideas of the collective unconscious and archetypes, and glad to read he won out. I always sort of felt there was a connection between Jung’s ideas to that of the English scientist Rupert Sheldrake’s theories about morphic resonance and the morphic field ( HYPERLINK ). This in turn I see a connection to Princeton University’s Institute of Noetic Sciences ( HYPERLINK ). Not that there’s a direct link between all, but ideas build upon ideas. And I think it was due to Carl Jung’s brilliant ‘taking it up a notch’ and refusing to stick to the Judaic formula.
@tadzio:” An important part of regenerating White consciousness is to not be drawn into Jewish quibbling and controversies. The hook, the hook! Get them off the stage. Ignore them. Do not read their books and articles, skip their movies and turn off the TV. They have no relevance unless we, the majority, lend an ear.”
Brilliant advice.The kosher spigot has to be in “off” position permanently , lest we become like a fun-club that gets together to bitch and gossip about Our Kosher Team..Now we are learning finer details of jewish orthodoxy as if we signed up for a course in judeocentrism.Kevin McDonald vivisected it so penetratingly that we could and should go on ,refitting our great ship ,rather than analyse the barnacles.Sweet friends: do you want to be chroniclers of our demise or robust Builders of Brilliant Whiteness?
Wasn’t Freud if anything an expert on the interpretation of dreams? question for Kevin.
Well, yes. He wrote a book with that title. And some dreams certainly fit his wish fulfillment idea. But a lot of it is burdened by the rest of his theory which is awful.
@Iranian for Aryans:
“So when are the WNs going to start making movies?”
There is a little energy stirring in England, where we had An Education, with the first Jewish villain in a long time, and recently The Woman in Black under the Hammer Horror label with a little subliminal holocaust-questioning imagery – recently opened in the USA.
Iranian for Aryans: “So when are the WNs going to start making movies?”
We have the material and the talent for D2DVD (direct-to-DVD) production right now – but not the equipment, the actors, and the production funding. This is a hugely unexploited frontier for the white advocacy movement but appeals to pursue it generally falls upon deaf ears. That an occasionally mainstream/semi-mainstream movie portrays “a bad Jew” is not WN cinema, by the way. Thinking so is misguided.
http://i1141.photobucket.com/albums/n593/heartlandphotos/AnimatedHBTDBookcover.gif
@ Lancashire Lad
I recently saw ‘The Woman in Black’. I enjoyed it, but I didn’t detect the “subliminal holocaust-questioning imagery” you mentioned. Could you explain what you meant by that please?
Christians could profit immensely by thinking like Jews.
Whites could profit immensely by thinking. . .
@me:
Daily walking is a great idea; good for the body, mind and spirit, especially if you can find a natural setting.
Exercise and sunshine are very important for good mental health. Same goes for having a good social network of family and friends. And eating whole, natural foods instead of processed “junk” foods also helps.
I agree with you that so many things about our modern world are demoralizing.
The rest of my comment is for anyone who is reading.
I had serious mental problems for many years. Today, I’m pretty much healed. I still experience suffering. But it’s a different kind of suffering.
Christ deserves the credit. My progress happened gradually, over a few years. But it’s a solid progress, not something that will slip away. And the person I am now is lightyears away from the person I used to be. I used to be overwhelmed with hopelessness and a sort of fear of hope. And a fear of many different things. My mind rarely had peace during the day. I was always trying to escape somehow. I have a lot of peace now.
C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity helped me understand some of the basics of Christianity. It’s relatively easy to read and understand. If anyone is interested in learning more about the essence of Christianity, that’s the book I recommend. Since it is still a very popular book, your local library probably carries it.
I’m a big proponent of sexual morality, chastity. I like this quote from a Mormon president in 1938:
“Chastity is fundamental to our life and to our civilization. If the race becomes unchaste, it will perish. Immorality has been basic to the destruction of mighty nations of the past; it will bring to dust the mighty nations of the present…”
Please forgive any undeserved or unnecessary preachiness in my comment. Have a good weekend, all.
@Ward Kendall: Indeed, as a perceptive TOO observer noted, the fact that the villains in Drive (2011) are overtly Jewish is merely an indicator of how much the community oozes confidence. Crypsis is now an optional. ☺
Into the mix of German devilishness, add stupidity. Don’t be sparing, either.
http://www.fpp.co.uk/ActionReport/AR14/chamberpic.html
@protorenaissance:
I share your desire to begin to form a movement that consists of more than a retrospective. Never the less, I still find value in these articles.
Reading the thoughtful comments I am struck by the complete absence of the word character. Perhaps Freud’s most lasting damage it that done to the notion that despite human failings, and even with the help of God, one of the goals of the good life is to be active agents in the formation of our own character.
We are more than our failings or DNA or even our authentic desires – to a large extent we are what we make of ourselves. Is this concept completely lost?
@Alice Teller: Exactly.We come to the world like a box of paints and it is overwhelmingly up to our own consciousness to paint something coheseve,meaningful,even original and ascending.Freud ,prompted by his own size of humanity found that all he could do with his paints is to make pissuar drawings.Even eroticism is more complex than that,Freud!
@Alice;
I think you’ve hit on something. Character is a word that is not used anymore and for a reason. It implies that we must become responsible if we are to live. But although psychoanalysis may have been discredited intellectually, it still has a hold on this culture. Certainly the idea of releasing your pain is not exclusive to Freudian analysis it’s part of the language. Have yourself a good cry; vent your spleen being two examples. I think where the excessive influence of psychiatry shows itself it that we’ve become a culture of narcissistic whiners. We all have “issues”.
I want to better explain what I meant by the inauthentic remark. It is the Jewish cultural perspective that depicts Christian society and culture as inherently inauthentic, i.e. repressed, not fully expressive. It would seem that as long as you can release it, you’re fine. Emotions need to be released, but then what? This view sees the psyche as a garbage pit. Christian culture was extraordinarily expressive. The Jews just didn’t like what is expressed.
And that is why I find Jung far more interesting than Freud. Freud was a terrible reductionist as well as being very hostile to Christianity and Germans and the West. But yes it is terribly important to live authentically. Something I find impossible in a politically correct society. PC is a mental straitjacket. And nobody in a strait jacket can live period. How can you live authentically in a society that hates you
Kevin, can you elaborate?
It seems to me that getting into someone’s inner world is really an act of invasion. How can there be a standard interpretation of dreams?
We’ve had the incarcerations of Bobby Sands, Nelson Mandela given the hagiography treatment; when will we get the Günter Deckert, Pedro Varela, and Ernst Zündel stories in celluloid?
Reading the thoughtful comments I am struck by the complete absence of the word character
I recall reading years ago (40) the gestalt psychologist Frederick “Fritz” Perls. A snide comment about people who have “character”. . . Why do I remember this after four decades? He practiced on Goys up at Esalen (Big Sur, California- too good for those people- too beautiful for nature-haters). Here a must see video of “therapy” of Goy-girl Gloria (Perls actually died in 1970):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lKXTLFVZJc&feature=related
Dr. Perls wrote a book entitled In and Out of the Garbage Pail: Only a jew would. . .
I haven’t seen this movie, and from the review I don’t get a sense of how Carl Jung was depicted in the story line. Was he subliminally shown to be somehow of a lesser mind to Freud? Is there a negative slant given to Carl Jung and his ideas?
The review suggests to me the movie is actually a subliminal sort of expose of the Jews, especially the ending where Freud says ‘we are Jews and Jews we will ever be’. This movie will be viewed by Goyim alike. I guess everything hinges on who the director is, or rather maybe the producer of the movie. But not having seen the movie myself, I can’t tell one way or another what was the subliminal message: that Jews are great, or an expose of the Jews via a positive treatment of Carl Jung?
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=tin+foil+hat&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=577&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=Iw98WmsrRIdx-M:&imgrefurl=http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2011/09/14/eu-under-tinfoilhat-protection-no-greek-default-no-euro-exit/&docid=tUCyETeh6yna2M&imgurl=http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/tin-foil-hat.jpg&w=600&h=450&ei=jgo_T_DQBObaiQKC2J2YDA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=0&sig=100097011203816101876&page=1&tbnh=151&tbnw=196&start=0&ndsp=10&ved=0CE8QrQMwAQ&tx=103&ty=104
Wilhelm Reich was part of the same entourage: Orgone Accumulator http://www.orgonics.com/whatisor.htm
@TabuLa Raza:
Classic! I love the way he announces in advance that he is going to manipulate her and then insists that it is all her imagination. Perhaps the saddest part was her continued attempt to impose humanity on him.
@Vlad Writes: The more I think about it, the more I believe the Israeli state will prove to be the greatest single error of contemporary Jewish strategy. The diaspora was, and is, a far more formidable social structure than the Jewish state. Jewish socialism would have had far more crippling effects on the quality of life in Israel, had it not been for the sturdy US crutch. Still, their future structural problems may only mean that hosts are squeezed ever more viciously, so I’m resisting schadenfreude.
Here’s another real winner: http://mnmarxist.blogspot.com/
@blue rose:
As I looked at the film, the character of Jung is under the microscope, or under analysis if you will, in the story. It is his ideas which are ridiculed by Freud; his affair and ill treatment of Sabina that the film exposes.
Quite clearly Freud dismisses Jung’s “mystcism” and in fact, ends the relationship with him.
Freud’s character is not so revealed as suits an analyst, since they’re the ones doing the analyzing- a favorite jewish occupation. . .
as in the video above. Fritz Perls is telling this girl what’s wrong with her- she’s not authentic, of course. I like her pluck.
@Trenchant: You make a good point, they may foist their troubles onto us, the permanent underclass of white taxpayers.
@TabuLa Raza:
That was a fascinating video with Fritz Perls and Gloria. Early on I recalled a book I read “In and Out the Garbage Pail” and a quick google showed it was written by Perls. Another “Games People Play” came up written by Eric Berne.
OK: Analysis -
Gestalt therapy has its validity. Perls handled and directed the patient well, by making her aware of non-verbal cues. He pushed her buttons to provoke a reaction, and Gloria showed a good push-back in her defense. I don’t know much about Gestalt therapy, but it was clear Gloria had issues with authority figures, i.e. her father and her husband. It seemed to me the gestalt of dealing with authoritative male figures left Gloria always on the losing end and feeling frustrated. This is not unreasonable. I don’t know if there had been a follow up session. A good follow up session would be examining Gloria’s issues with authoritative male figures, i.e. her father and husband. I don’t know if Gestalt therapy goes there, or always centers on the patient’s personal idiosyncrasies and finding out what these things ‘mean’ to the patient. If so, Gestalt therapy would not provide answers to what brought Gloria to a psychoanalyst in the first place.
Overall Perls did well, stayed focused, and led the session, though where therapy begins and where sadism begins sometimes I’m not sure. I don’t want to say Perls was being sadistic in the end, but there was too much clinical critique of behavior. But perhaps Gestalt therapy deals with more the breaking up of the old psyche in order to reach deep into the patient and get the patient seeing themselves as an integrated whole after many sessions.
The mention of something Perls said that you recall reading concerning ‘character’ which you perceived as an attack on ‘character’ (which I sense intuitively the possibility), I don’t know what he said since you didn’t mention what it was. However, having ‘character’ is well and good, in fact best, but here is something written by Carl Jung that gives an insight into something that high-minded people with ‘character’ ofttimes snub:
“Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing from experimental psychology. He would be better advised to abandon exact science, put away his scholar’s gown, bid farewell to his study, and wander with human heart throught the world. There in the horrors of prisons, lunatic asylums and hospitals, in drab suburban pubs, in brothels and gambling-hells, in the salons of the elegant, the Stock Exchanges, socialist meetings, churches, revivalist gatherings and ecstatic sects, through love and hate, through the experience of passion in every form in his own body, he would reap richer stores of knowledge than text-books a foot thick could give him, and he will know how to doctor the sick with a real knowledge of the human soul. ” — Carl Jung
Jesus said :
Douay-Rheims Bible
Jesus hearing this, saith to them: They that are well have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. For I came not to call the just, but sinners.
Sometimes people with ‘character’ sometimes don’t understand.
@Penelope:
Freud’s character is not so revealed as suits an analyst, since they’re the ones doing the analyzing- a favorite jewish occupation. . .
Ah, I see. Another Jewish propaganda piece of a movie that lauds the Jews at the end. They *really do* have some chutzpah, don’t they? No shame at all, lauding themselves as the only ones that know everything, and therefore can manipulate the Goyim without compunction. I see why Edward Bernays, the father of Public Relations, saw the masses as ‘stupid’ and ‘dumb’ and paved the way for their manipulation big time.
Fascinating movie review. I’d like to see more of this at TOO. Thanks!
@Ward Kendall:
http://i1141.photobucket.com/albums/n593/heartlandphotos/AnimatedHBTDBookcover.gif
omg YOU wrote a book too, along with Farnham O’Reilly ! I read the good reviews it got, and I’ll buy that one also (and probably find myself on the FBI watch list. So let them watch). Wish they could be put in movie form, but I imagine they would never get passed the PC censors.
@Trenchant: Apparently Israel has a sub culture of really crazy religious zealots that are breeding like rabbits, don’t work and get welfare for their whole life. Not only is this an economic problem, but Israel has at least 100 nuclear weapons. So we will have an increasingly bat sh*t crazy population that has atomic weapons. Yes, they’ve always been a little nuts, but this growing group is truly insane.
This is a very powerful and insightful article. However, this statement, “Perhaps the Christian experience with the confessional predisposes him [i.e., Jung] to confess all,” is probably inaccurate, as Jung was a Protestant and may well have never even been inside a confessional.
From my own daily experiences with dreams, it couldn’t be more obvious that dreams mirror and dramatize what is going on inside the psyche. The Old Testament’s emphasis on God communicating with human beings in dreams may have been an unconscious inspiration for Freud. (Daniel the prophet interpreting the King’s dream is but one example.) What Freud seems to have missed is the fact that dreams are in themselves therapeutic, whether interpreted or not! My personal belief is that the correct interpretation of dreams is not at all esoteric, requiring a specialist; rather, the meanings of dreams are basically self-evident.
Blue Rose: “omg YOU wrote a book too, along with Farnham O’Reilly ! I read the good reviews it got, and I’ll buy that one also Bl(and probably find myself on the FBI watch list. So let them watch). Wish they could be put in movie form, but I imagine they would never get passed the PC censors.”
Thanks for that response, Bluerose. It certainly made my evening. I hope you enjoy the read!
PS: Your screen name is very evocative.
@J.J. WHALEN:
Weren’t most of Freud’s most famous cases his fellow Jews?
@Ward Kendall:
PS: Your screen name is very evocative.
I like to think it’s emblematic of the female psyche, along the lines of Greek myths on Aphrodite coupled with the Greek myths about Hermaphrodites — twin souls kind of thing. Something Carl Jung himself seemed to have understood — his concept of the anima and the animus.
@blue rose: Take an hour to page through the archives, blue rose. There have been fine essay reviews dating from as far back as the earliest days of this site, about five years ago. Recent ones written by Edmund Connelly are especially noteworthy, as was one, on The Help, written last year by Ms. Thornton. Given that that film was about as broad and obvious a target as an essayist could ever hope to be offered, her review of it, while fine, was less a guide to her own qualities as a critic than the present one is. Here, where she is dealing with a film made to a higher standard of crypsis—inevitably, of course, since the message of The Help couldn’t have plainer had it been painted blue—the skill at dissection and decryption that she exhibits does her great credit and marks her out as someone to pay attention to.
@protorenaissance: I, too, am fed up with the Jews trying to make themselves like somebody who profoundly matter. They are obsessed with trying to make us believe they are great and important while trying to make us have a sorry opinion of ourselves.
Since Jews control the film industry we are stuck with them imposing their self absorption in our face decade after decade. And we are stuck – endlessly – with them trying to make us feel like the dreges at the bottom of the barrel.
There can be only one great race, you know – the Jews. How nice it would be to take a vacation from all that Jewish greatness. We are so tired of it. But they keep tooting that horn. They own the horn.
@Pierre de Craon:
I had already read ‘glowing reviews’ of The Help from a liberal Christian email list (I think it’s liberal Catholic) that I subscribe to. I like to know how the opposition thinks, especially after the sacred Catholic altars were thrown into dumpsters and replaced by pic-nic tables, and other ‘alterations’ were made. After reading their review, I knew I could cross off The Help as nothing more than another multi-culti propaganda movie.
crypsis . Good word, derivative of the ‘cryptocracy’ that Michael Hoffman writes about.
@Pierre de Craon:
Nope. I am wrong. I think the ezine is basically run by liberal Mormons. They feature liberal rabbis, and the entire spectrum of Liberal thought, including Catholic. But articles written by Liberal Mormons seem to predominate. They have a comment section, but one has to go through loops to comment:
http://www.religiondispatches.org/
Psychoanalysis has been rejected as non-science, but its ideas and thinking in general are still etched into our society. It can be seen through the sex fixation which dominates our popular culture. Some examples of the “Freudian” thinking that you typically hear from people who are obsessed with this culture:
- If you’re frustrated, angry or discontent with something, you “need to get laid”(neurosis => repressed sexuality).
- If you object to homosexuality or other perversions, and express disgust, then you are “homophobic” or otherwise repressing a desire to live out these same perversions.
- If you attack or criticize women, then you have a penis-complex(small penis) and are “misogynic”.
- If you’re a female and raised in a conservative environment, then you’re a ticking sex-bomb just waiting to release your repressed sexual desires on the world.
- If a man gets jealous, then he is often seen as oppressing a woman’s sexuality.
- Etc. etc.
What this kind of thinking has in common is that it’s almost always related to certain politically correct, or cultural marxist themes: women, sex, homosexuality, family, lifestyle, etc., and the central idea is always that there is something deeply, psychologically wrong with the person who objects to the politically correct dogma. So not only has this Jewish way of thinking influenced science and psychology(all psychology essentially originates with Freud), but it has also influenced the way the common man thinks and interprets the world.
@Trenchant:
@Jason Speaks:
Gentlemen: I have come to think in the past few years that the leaders of international Jewry arrived at Trenchant’s conclusion at least a generation ago and perhaps as long as forty years ago, though whether or not they came to it for Jason’s reason (which I too have wondered about) I wouldn’t hazard a guess. My instinct, though, is to assume that their eyes are ever on bigger obstacles and bigger prizes.
I haven’t a scholar’s knowledge either of Herzl and other nineteenth-century Zionist theorists or of Jabotinsky, Weizmann, and others of the generation that followed the original Zionists, but what I do know of them all leads me to think that they might truly have desired to establish a state to which the world’s Jews would flock. Any such notion was a thing of the past perhaps as early as 1950, however, by which time it had become evident even to rabidly Zionist Diaspora Jews that most of their Tribe’s parasite members had no taste for a life in a place where host-candidates were at a distinct premium.
Thus, at some point—in the seventies perhaps—there was made, I think, a conscious decision to reimagine Israel and its role, a decision motivated by practical exigencies but still completely congruent with the Jews’ deep-seated passion for intrigue and deception. No longer was Israel actually to be the sole or even the primary focus of Jewish life and of the Jews’ worldwide intrigues, though that illusion, that crypsis, would be maintained. Rather, it was to become a sort of mercantile landmark—a storefront—that would peddle Jewry’s wares, many of them plundered from their Gentile hosts, and in so doing enrich both the peddlers and their Diaspora suppliers with the profits that any retail outlet looks to generate. In this scenario, the ever-expanding cohort of layabout Haredim, albeit an annoyance to the shopkeepers, becomes merely a tediously inevitable cost of doing business.
Of course, having Israel serve clandestinely as a totem—a cabalistic, occult object—fits in perfectly with the cultic psychology of Jews and Judaism, which is itself a totemism. It also fits in, sad to say, with the opinion (rather, the fear) of many contributors to and commenters on this site that a certain segment of the Jewish population—how large I have no clue—truly aims at nothing less than world domination.
In short, Trenchant, I suspect that, with regard to Israel itself, the Tribe was taking a long view of developments, especially ones that were or could become obstacles, well before you or I were cognizant of their existence. Since Jews were the creators of modern socialism, they know full well that it is a system that betters the lives of only the parasitic elite—themselves—at the expense of an ever more coercively drained host population—us. Thus, keeping the reins in their hands requires close attention to detail. As Poe pointed out 170 years ago, more chess games are lost through inattention than through insufficiency of intellect.
@Pierre de Craon: I think the Elders are also quite happy fomenting anti-semitism in Europe via the wilful opening of the gates to Islamic immigrants. The older diaspora rediscovers its group identity through the very real and justified fear of the influx of haters, but is too old and tired for any Aliyah. Better just to batten down and send money to Israel. The young, with family and prospects, sees the risks of staying in Eurabia and decamps to the safety of Israel. No money, but young blood for the army and economy.
Dear me,
It was nor I who called these stories “mumbo jumbo”. What I wrote was a reply to someone’s comment who called them “mumbo jumbo”. So please, don’t give me moral lessons.
Moreover, I know all too well what influence Christianity had on civilization. I come from an Eastern European country and in Eastern Europe, thank God, we don’t teach the multi-culti rubbish and other filth at schools, at least not yet. We have a lot of respect for both Christianity, national identity and other traditional values.
Something snapped in me today, it came about from reading an article about the sacking of Pat Buchanan. I realized that when Pat Buchanan is silenced, it means they have completely taken over. It was the proverbial straw.. They run the show. I am sure many here have realized this long ago, but today it finally dawned on me. There is no weeding them out, it’s too late. There are only two alternatives, the first I find unpalatable. The second, let them sleep in the bed they made, this one and the other one over in Palestine that will unravel soon enough. The question is, where do we create the ‘new homeland’? The Northwest Quadrant? It seems like it would be the best option, include Alaska. Lets just remember, we need nukes, without them, we get “Quadaffied” or “Sadamed”. Sad to think that it took me this long to see the light, but I have seen it. We need to create the a European, Christian Republic. Only white, only Christian…period…no guest workers….
America is lost, it has become a Zionist vassal, trying to win it back is a an enormous waste of time. The trick is doing it as peacefully, swiftly and efficiently as possible, so at the conclusion, we have enough firepower to maintain our borders and remove the unwanted.
Imagine a place that was white, Christian, free, with real money, energy sufficient, at peace with the world, with no debt, and the most minimalist government know to human history….
There are a few key players that need to sign on, but I am betting that it won’t be to difficult to get them to agree.
If I am saying something terribly obvious that is already in motion, please point me in the right direction.
@Jens: I quite agree. The “doctrine” of psychoanalysis may have been formally discarded, but all of its postulates and assumptions remain and, as you say, have become culturally embedded. Another case of revolution within the forms.
@Richard:
As so often happens here, you have put your finger on the essential issue. Has anyone ever become a better person by following the advice of Freud? Or have they merely received permission to spread the misery as widely as possible?
Someone dear to me was afflicted with mental illness. She reached out to Jesus and hung on for dear life. She was not cured, but her adherence to the genuine message of the Gospels, gave her a valid and trusted guide to actions, even when her own mind seemed unreliable. The positive result, not only her own life, but in the lives of those around her, was that she continued to be a force for good, despite her problems.
This is in stark contrast to those who consider their problems to be an excuse to control all around them, or to inflict others with suffering far greater than their own. The damage done to both individuals and society is visible all around us.
@Penelope:
I am not sure I have a good understanding of your concept of authenticity, but I do think that the disappearance of reliance on character formation has been catastrophic for us. Not only because we no longer accept responsibility for ourselves, but also because we are blinded to our own ability to be more than passive victims of the forces around us.
@Trenchant:
I think they are skating on very thin ice today. If Israel gives in to their own worst impulses and attacks Iran, they will be unable to escape the wrath of the world. Americans are war weary, and are all too well aware of the fact that no one is suggesting the obvious answer to the Middle East tensions, which is to demand the entire area become nuke free.
Any response to an attack on Iran will be directed at the USA and everyone, including American Jews, understands that well.
@Alice Teller:
@ Alice
I don’t have a ‘concept’ of authenticity per se. To be authentic just means to be honest in your emotions and actions with yourself an others. Integrity pops into my head.
Freud demonized an entire culture telling us it was inauthentic. As a result, we turned on ourselves.
Strength of character is indeed important but at the same time your character can become hardened.
I agree that we’ve raised several generations on pseudo revolution and narcicissm and character formation has been relegated to the past.
Someone used a great phrase “revolution within the forms in the blog.
@ blue rose
In the Fritz Perls video, I wonder whose projection is it?
@Penelope:
Forgive me if I placed undue emphasis on the issue of authenticity. Based on the posts, it seemed to be a concept that holds more fright than the simple word would imply. Another example of the ways in which our very language has been corrupted.
@Jens:
Great comment.
Kevin, you’ve got the wrong video up at the top right, this is the one you should have, WHY didn’t you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW6mwMYhSPs&feature=related
@blue rose:
Douay-Rheims Bible
Jesus hearing this, saith to them: They that are well have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. For I came not to call the just, but sinners.
Sometimes people with ‘character’ sometimes don’t understand.
Yeah, basically, the all knowing Jesus said that the Jews are sick f’ers. Thanks Jesus, like we did not know that already. haha.
You talk about the inmates running the asylum.
@Penelope:
@ blue rose
In the Fritz Perls video, I wonder whose projection is it?
You mean who’s projection is/was it…was it Perls projecting onto Gloria? If that’s what you meant, yes and no, I guess. Thinking about that video last night, I felt I wasn’t really satisfied how he led the session. But I have to bear in mind, as far as I know, the aims of Gestalt therapy are different from Freudian. Therefore Gestalt therapists lead a session differently than what was once considered ‘classical Freudian’.
Since to me it was obvious (unless I was ‘projecting) that Gloria had issues with male authority figures, she should seek out a different therapist other than Gestalt. Perls seemed to be oblivious to her mentioning of her father and husband (to be sure he was not oblivious to what she said though). Gestalt therapy seems a better fit for those who don’t really have many neurosis or complexes (have gone to the root of those they did have via different therapeutic approaches), but who want a more in-depth analysis into their own inner selves, like becoming more aware of non-verbal cues, stuff like that.
I don’t know. Maybe I’m ‘projecting’ everything I’m typing now.
James Clayton @ 9:21
TinyURL was created!
The following URL:
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=tin+foil+
hat&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=577&gbv=2&tbm=isc
h&tbnid=Iw98WmsrRIdx-M:&imgrefurl=http:/
/www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2011/09/14/eu
-under-tinfoilhat-protection-no-greek-de
fault-no-euro-exit/&docid=tUCyETeh6yna2M
&imgurl=http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com
/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/tin-foil-hat
.jpg&w=600&h=450&ei=jgo_T_DQBObaiQKC2J2Y
DA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=0&sig=100097011203
816101876&page=1&tbnh=151&tbnw=196&start
=0&ndsp=10&ved=0CE8QrQMwAQ&tx=103&ty=104
has a length of 480 characters and resulted in the following TinyURL which has a length of 26 characters:
http://tinyurl.com/6llwzyp
@blue rose:
@blue rose
If I understand the idea behind Gestalt correctly, it’s all in the moment, what you are is obvious at the present moment, you don’t need to go back into history.
So just watch the interaction. What I see is a “therapist” frustrating everything this woman tries to say or do. He is in the position of authority, and is constantly putting her in the hotseat, and she sees this. She’s smart and she is rebelling _I think- not from male authority figues so much as from this controlling man who never reveals himself. If he did they would have a human relationship.
We are all flawed so i wonder about anyone who plays the role of shrink. Maybe only God can play God.
Just my thoughts on it.
@Trenchant: Is this actually happening? I don’t follow events in Israel closely, but I was under the perhaps mistaken impression that, aside from the ballooning population of ultraorthodox sable-wearing layabouts, there was a small but steady and measurable reverse-aliyah going on. I.e., Diaspora, here I come!
@Helvena:
FYI, apparently that video was actually done back in October 2011 – not that long ago, but about four months prior to what that video might suggest. So, it’s not like this broadcast aired and then a week later he was fired.
Michael Scheuer is great though, he is one of the best sources of information. Here is the original video from Oct 2011, you can see it’s the same.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftIFudfnvgg
It has become fashionable to attack Freud ad hominem and to dismiss categorically psychoanalysis as a hoax. Frederick Crews has made a career of debunking Freud in the Jewish-dominated New York Review of Books. Ask yourself why organized Jewry, which since the mid-1960′s has had almost complete control of Western culture, permits this… Although this film is arguably a sympathetic portrayal of Freud, it’s not exactly a Hollywood blockbuster. The bigger picture is that psychoanalysis has been marginalized in academic psychology and psychiatry since the 1970′s–despite the fact that these fields are totally dominated by Jews. I’d argue that from the point of view of Jewish elites, psychoanalysis has served its sociopolitical purpose (destabilizing traditional Western culture to facilitate Jewish takeover) and must now be defanged and marginalized, lest the goyim turn its radical critique of the ignoble forces underlying human behavior against the elite Jews themselves and their newly promulgated dogma–Zionism, the Holocaust, Anti-Semitism as psychopathology, racial egalitarianism, globalization, etc. . .
Clinical psychoanalysis and psychotherapy is basically radical critical self-scrutiny that aims at promoting awareness of and then dispelling “maladaptive” beliefs, whether externally derived (such as political or religious beliefs) or internally derived (such as neurotic beliefs). For some individuals, especially those who have been traumatized, it can be enormously helpful. Because what is deemed “maladaptive” will depend on the therapist’s judgment, in the hands of a hostile ethnic group, psychoanalysis can no doubt be harmful. A White Nationalist psychoanalyst might be in a position to help his WN patients; a Jewish psychoanalyst would almost certainly pathologize his White Nationalist patients and see his task as freeing them from their maladaptive antisemitism, racism, religiosity, and nativism.
At a sociological level, Jewish cultural warriors (and their often unwitting followers) have used psychoanalytic concepts to harm Whites by promoting a hyper-individualism and libertinism that has destabilized family, church, and state. But its past misuse does not mean psychoanalysis has no utility now and in the future for ethnically conscious Whites interested in freeing themselves and their kind from the Judeocentric dogma that now constitutes Western culture. In fact, whatever you think of its clinical utility or its conceptual coherence, psychoanalysis has proven itself an effective sociopolitical weapon and should be added to the armamentarium of opponents of the Jewish Establishment. Nothing drives them so mad as to be shown that they are engaging in projection of their own aggression onto non-Jews.
If you dismiss the part of psychoanalysis that is valid (either in the sense that it is based on truth or in the sense that it works), you leave yourself wide open to attacks based on manipulating unconscious belief, i.e. war by way of deception. It would be like dismissing the utility of antivirus software because you believed a Jew founded the computer security industry and was also involved in hacking the Pentagon out of loyalty to Israel.
The larger point is that individual Jews, despite in many cases being driven by ethnic interests, have made enormous contributions to science. Are we going to roll back to Newtonian physics because of Jewish contributions to relativity and quantum theory? I am not saying that they are indispensible, nor even that we are better off with them than without them, but give the Devil his due–and don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
@Petronius: Excellent, balanced appraisal.
@Petronius: It’s also worth pointing out that Freud’s “Moses and Monotheism” posited that the Hebrews were never enslaved in Egypt and that Moses was actually an Egyptian aristocrat (possibly the Pharoah Akhenaton or one of his followers). He took quite a bit of flak for that from his co-ethnics!
@Robert:
I think that many of us have had that last straw moment. The problem is, not enough. One day, some small thing happens, and one simply says, hell no, enough.
The tough part is, that any change which is sufficiently radical is going to require more than passion. It will need, above all, numbers, then imagination, discipline, intelligence and real sacrifice. No a short order.
The good news is that a the system fails, and all the warts begin to show, more and more people will be forced by circumstances to face the reality that we see. I have seen shocking changes in my lifetime. I hope to see more.
@Alice Teller: I take it that your words “shocking changes” include witnessing certain hopelessly delusional liberal Whites coming to their senses, resulting from harsh realities slapping them in the face.
@Adeimantus:
I don’t have much hope for the hopelessly delusional, of any variety. I do have hope for ordinary people who have just been trying to get along and play by the rules as they face the increasingly scarce days that must lay ahead. Far too many people have sacrificed to send their kids to college, only for them to return home, loaded with debt, lucky to get jobs waiting tables. I have some hope for all the women who now face a lonely and poor old age. Above all, I have faith in the truth. How long can any society continue based on a system of lies that we must at affirm daily.
@Dr. Faust: Good points, I totally agree. The Jewish critique of gentile culture could easily be interpreted as a case of projection in itself.
We should never dismiss an idea completely just because it’s Jewish, but I think there are some very apparent differences between European and Jewish science. In fact, the latter tends to not be science at all, but rather metaphysics. There are some parts of Freud’s “science” that have been verified scientifically though. Such as the three part division of the mind. But, not very surprising perhaps, Freud got this idea from a German(ethnic) physiologist named Ernst von Brücke.
@Penelope:
If I understand the idea behind Gestalt correctly, it’s all in the moment, what you are is obvious at the present moment, you don’t need to go back into history.
Yes. You expressed the idea much more concisely than I could.
So just watch the interaction. What I see is a “therapist” frustrating everything this woman tries to say or do. _I think- not from male authority figues so much as from this controlling man who never reveals himself. If he did they would have a human relationship.
Absolutely that’s what I saw also. In fact to Gloria, Perls was yet another example of how she is not able to get passed ‘male authority figures’. Her expressing her frustrations by feelings of ‘wanting to crawl up in a corner’ were the result, not only in dealing with her father and husband, but also with Perls. Perls indeed was controlling (even a tad sadistic, enjoying watching her squirm and twitch, just as many male authority figures are wont to do as it is. The ones with sadistic tendencies, that is. Because underling this gestalt is a core sadism. At least that’s my observation. But in a psychoanalytic session, what Perls did — though trying to stick to the concept of Gestalt — he could then have explored just a little about Gloria’s feelings what brought her there, then perhaps suggested Gestalt was the wrong therapeutic approach for her and perhaps suggesting another approach with a different therapist. All in all, I had to wonder just why this video was made with Gloria. Perls analysis of Gloria at the end of the session fell flat. Something was wrong.
We are all flawed so i wonder about anyone who plays the role of shrink. Maybe only God can play God.
Here I have to disagree in part. True, Perls the Jew, was playing God. But psychoanalysis itself is not ‘playing God’. It’s a useful tool to help people with psychological problems, no matter what the source.
One of the main things I marvel at about the ancients is what was inscribed in the pronaos (forecourt) of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, as testified to according to the Greek periegetic (travelogue) writer Pausanias: “Know thyself”. Imagine the ancients knowing THAT! The Oracle at Delphi was always a woman, by the way (reminds me of the Hebrew ‘Shekinah’ and the Christian Holy Spirit — both thought of as female).
The idyllic groves and streets of Atlantean ancient Greece, with its wise philosophers discussing the nature of the Universe and how humans fit into it, what constitutes a moral life, and everything else they thought of, and ancient Greece’s stunning, balanced and symmetrical architecture — all these ancient marvels — and the words ‘Know Thyself’ inscribed in the forecourt of the Temple of Apollo, is nothing short of a great mystery, an (Atlantean) Golden Thread that has woven its way down to the present day ( HYPERLINK .
Never fear — Jesus Christ is part of it — the Christ Consciousness that is manifesting.
@Dr. Faust: Excellent points.
@Jason Speaks, got it. Thanks for the catch. I should have been more suspicious given it was an Alex Jones video. I didn’t care for the 9/11 tacked on the end.
Having noticed a pattern to the use of the word “authenticity” among writers and philosophers, I would concur with Hadding that it is a valid notion – and while Hadding focuses on its being “guided by innermost desires and imperatives”, the notion of authenticity that I have detected as recurring in “existentialist” writing, which seems a central notion to that school of thought, and validly so, is these sorts of self directed motives being set within a way of life, such that they are not acted on impulsively, but accord in relaxed social expanse and vision of the full way of life. I.e. authenticity is a distinctly human way of life, taking into account protracted patterns, more than than momentary or sheer personal interests – while it would have those as a median gauge of relevance, it is contrary to animal struggle and impulse.
@90404:
wrong. jews started both wars. look past the public indoctrination system and it’s propaganda.
@Neville:
“The beginning of all wisdom is the knowledge of God.”
and
“The fool hath said in his heart ‘there is no God’ . “
@daniel: You’ve distorted what I said about authenticity and then criticized a fault that exists only in your distorted account of what I said.
I said:
You reduced that to this:
You said:
You’ve eliminated the element of deliberation that I included, which is exactly the same distortion that Pierre de Craon committed.
@daniel: Also, I would suggest that you check carefully and make sure that you got the wording right especially when you are going to put words in quotation marks. If you attribute what is supposed to be an exact quote to somebody without making any effort to get the words right, it is recklessness that more or less amounts to lying.
It was not an exact quote that I put in quotation marks Hadding, but not a lie – sorry about that (but note that you would not apoogize for far worse, and gratuitous insults). Moreover, I didn’t say what you had said wasn’t true. Indeed, you make what you’ve said more clear by adding your emphasis on deliberation – but I was adding a dimension of social expanse to the concept of authenticity as I have gathered from the literature, one that is significant and therefore I sought to provide it, in addition, in a non-conflictual way – because I agree that authenticity is a valid concept. I guess that is what I get for trying to be nice to you.
I am sorry to read some of the comments and realize that many here do not know that psychonanlysis was disavowed during the 90′s and myriads,myriads of papers published with double blind groups proved the placebo effect as useful as the entire “theory” itself…a blockbuster book by then was The End of Science from Scientific American editor squandered practically all the literature published on psychoanalysis and later published a book on the neuroscience area dismistifying and further reducing to rubbles the subject…but..to be clear lets “analyze” one major achievement as the well known trilogy ..Ego,Superego and Id mirroring the instances where our conscious persona(Ego0 is split betweenthe tension arising from our education(super ego0 and our instincts(Id)…one must feel astonished for the re clothing of a greek old theme as the tension of the opposites build upon pairs…which clearly was its intensive use logically and metaphoracally by Freud…other displaced plagiarism on philosophy can be found abounding his books…and the centrality on the impulses of sex play much the other way reflecting Freud’s own problems…other inetresting point it is his political ambition by trying fiercely to debunk the intelectual power of the western society that he saw as his own sexual problems haunting his own intelectual prowess…and what remains from Freud is utterly his fine writings and paradoxically his misleading(at least for himself) jealousy on others artistic skills ..for a very bad Psychiatrist he was a great writer…I am not going to advance this already extensive criticism…but his ridiculous posturing of the primeval killing of the Alpha male ancestor and our own civilization as a byproduct attempting to heal that primeval sin by the building up the first civil societies based on contract among those first assassins is laughable ate least…it reeminds me again of the central problem that jewish had with Moses and his been slaughtered by them according to mr Bloom…and finally the only part of his productive and totally flawed theories is the idea on the desire of self destrution that everyone has…that cannot be…and again here there is the low life thinker using half of the story to depict the inherent struggle that exists in nature in order to flow…and that is the real thing….
I think most know that psycho-analysis has been largely discredited.
All in all, I had to wonder just why this video was made with Gloria
It seems there were two other videos made the same day with Gloria- one with Carl Rogers, and the other with Albert Ellis. For comparison purposes.
The Jewish critique of gentile culture could easily be interpreted as a case of projection in itself Dr. Perls had a near monomania about projection. “Almost everything people say is projection” or words to that effect. Perhaps “almost everything joos say is projection” is closer to truth.
My adult life has been destroyed by the medical monopoly and “licensed psychotherapy.” It started in 1965. I was attending Long Beach State (when it was called Long Beach State). I was in Dr. Segelhorst’s lower division micro economics
class. Out of nowhere my heart started pounding with a vengeance- I thought heart attack- I’m going to die right here. This happened three times. I was too paralyzed to ask for help. I then walked down to the campus health center. Diagnosis- anxiety attack! Of course, what else?
Strange, extremely disturbing symptoms appeared. I was getting up and walking out on the street in the middle of the night. One Sunday morning I had to call my young buddy Mark- he drove me down to Little Company of Mary Hospital. Diagnosis? Anxiety! No surprise there. They gave me some tranks. I related these events to my father. As soon as I said “lightheaded” he snapped his fingers and said PSYCHOSOMATIC! Bernie Rivo, the jooish Doctor from across the street, had claimed (asserted) that “85% of illness is psychosomatic.” Father was seeing a joo psychologist (licensed!) name Mark Freeman up on Little Santa Monica Blvd.
I took his next appointment. Thus begin the journey into talk “therapy”.
Nothing really helped I left CSCLB in 1969 with 24 hours toward MBA, too sick to finish the degree. I read two major books in 1970- The Primal Scream by joo Dr. Art Janov, and Low Blood Sugar and You (by Goy C. Fredericks). Had severe conflicts with parents, tore up the house one night, threatened to kill them, and so on. My own views wobbled between the blood sugar issue and the psychology view.
“Therapy” ended with a 2 week stay at a Neuropsychiatrick “Hospital” (money factory) 1979. By this time the family inheritance was blown. . .I wonder where the money went. . .
Of course, the problem never was mental. How many different syndromes can produce a “lightheaded” symptom? The medical bastards to this day barely recognize hypoglycemia, still calling it a “fad from the seventies.” It is more involved than simple low blood sugar- there are metabolic rates, genetics,and so on. So I still feel like I have a hangover most of the time, even thought I stopped drinking 20 years ago. Why don’t I go to the doctor? Don’t ask. . .
The medical monopoly with its connection to drug companies (via government) is ten times more corrupt than one can imagine. THEY WANT PEOPLE TO BE SICK.
There is one word that best describes the joo: Kibitzer. A kibitzer is one who offers unsolicited opinions at a card game. Like a “therapist”. Like Greenspan and Bernanke. Like talk show host Ira Fistel who said “I hate anything that has a right answer.”
Definition: JOO- ONE WHO FEELS HE DESERVES RICHES FOR HIS HOLY OPINION. Dr. Kissinger, what do you think about. . .et cetera
IMHO psychotherapy is an absolute fraud. See book “Therapy’s Delusions” for a discussion of the “appalling results.” Of course see T. Szasz. Remember EST (Jack Rosenberg) and others from the seventies.
http://www.amazon.com/Therapys-Delusions-Unconscious-Exploitation-Walking/dp/0684835843
@Hadding Scott:
May I suggest that you guys in the WN movement have been playing so rough with each other that you don’t recognize a friend when they come along? I think that many here see and admire qualities in you that could be of real value to our people. Perhaps you could consider that some comments may be more like those of a coach than a critic.
@TabuLa Raza:
The medical monopoly with its connection to drug companies (via government) is ten times more corrupt than one can imagine. THEY WANT PEOPLE TO BE SICK.
There is a lot of truth in your comment.
Without sick people, they would not have a paycheck.
However I have met some good doctors. They are very selfless and genuinely caring.
One example is a local doctor who spoke to our local paper warning patients that doctors sometimes put them (the patients) through unnecessary tests and operations (in order to make money.) I admired him for having the courage to say that.
Anyway, I have met some very selfless, hardworking doctors.
Freud was probably correct in some offshoot perspective, about Jewish mind. Jews are ALWAYS at the forefront of sexual ‘humor’ and seem to use it WAY MORE than most European stock. They seem to love potty ‘humor’ way too much as well, which is, anal, as they say. I mean, I am reading (this webblog) which would have NOTHING remotely to do with sex, and the weird potty humor gets injected, I look more closely at the authors name, and yup you guessed it… Probably has to do with lack of dominance in competing culture, so its a natural drive to help with achieving dominance, hence the Jewish control of the pornography industry, etc…
@Alice Teller:You are preaching to the choir. What annoys me is that some of these people have a habit of using invalid, emotion-driven rhetoric while being careless about facts, and I think they must have at least an inkling of what they are doing. If you try to correct them nicely they just dig in their heels. This comes from the same people over and over again. If I don’t have much patience with it at this point it’s because I don’t see why I should.
@TabuLa Raza:
It seems there were two other videos made the same day with Gloria- one with Carl Rogers, and the other with Albert Ellis. For comparison purposes.
Oh I see. Thanks for the information. It would be interesting to see the videos of Rogers and Ellis just for the sake of comparison.
I took a look at the link to ‘Therapy’s Delusions’ and read the Editorial Description. It looks to me like the authors are delusional:
“The authors insist that because we have learned so much about the brain, the psyche is irrelevant in the treatment of psychological difficulties.
“Written by a journalist and a sociologist, Therapy’s Delusions attempts to prove that the concept of an unconscious is a delusion and that psychodynamic therapy is therefore a fraud.”
Some posters say that the concept of psychoanalysis has been ‘debunked’. So what are they teaching these days in the Depts. of Psychiatry and Psychology?
I agree that in a sense psychoanalysis has been given a black eye with the advent of “recovered memory therapy”, which is more like ‘false memory syndrome’ where a ‘therapist’ implants false memories into the patient’s mind, often used on children as when there were those flurries of accusations against teachers long ago, and something about a satanic underground where children were used. It’s all very bizarre. Which is not to say that there aren’t some pedophile teachers, as there certainly are. ‘Therapists’ that implant thoughts and call it ‘recovered memory’ and such might well be CIA operatives. It’s all very deep, but in the beginning I was learning about mostly how mind control works and who were the originators of it. Someone in Canada who has an institute. I forget the name, but he was an outright sadist. Something about he once gave LSD to an elephant to see what happened. I expect his followers might well be among those ‘therapists’ and their ‘recovered memory therapy’.
@Alice Teller:
There is a greater need for civil discourse in WN, however, that will not come about by training the current troublemakers, in my opinion. It will only come about by attracting normal people to WN. I am not really a fan of Pierce and Rockwell, but they both recognized the problem long ago. WN makes virtually no inroads into the normal middle class White community – in fact, WN tend to have contempt for the middle class. Pierce described many of the followers of WN as “losers”. He was right.
Rockwell also stated the reason he dressed up in N*zi garb was partly to shock people and get attention (he believed it was the only way to get his message out), which often had the effect of attracting borderline individuals. My impression is that he thought he could “prime the pump” of WN with these social outcasts and later discard them when WN was up and running.
I believe this is a fundamental error. It runs the risk of making WN a borderline freak show that frightens off normal functioning White people. I believe that instead of making use of these questionable people, WN becomes bogged down in the problems they cause and tainted by their behavior. And I do not believe it is possible to teach them table manners, as it were. A look at the history of leaders in WN reveal more problems than churlish email exchanges – there are killers, robbers, sex offenders and other sundry criminals in the history of WN at the activist level.
This is why I question the policy of accepting any and all who vaguely call themselves pro-White or just anti-Jewish, regardless of their behavior. And it’s also why I question articles and styles of presentation that offer a gateway to such people here at TOO.
I suppose that none of us would be here if we didn’t have a contrary streak in us. That alone does not explain the extent of sheer unproductive behavior. I am not suggesting that we must self-censor in the PC manner, but to recognize where our own best interests lie.
There are genuine misunderstandings here, but also it seems to be impossible to get through one set of comments without someone dripping venom about some subset of whites.
I am unable to discern how this advances our cause at all.
Apart from drugs, I think the most common forms of psychotherapy today fall under the heading of cognitive-behavioral therapy. The focus is on getting a particular behavior or emotion under control directly rather than plumbing the depths of the soul to find some root-problem in the distant past.
I think the theory that people’s lives are permanently warped by minor childhood traumas is probably based on an assumption that people’s psyches are more fragile than they really are, except maybe in cases where the child underwent something really extreme (which have been much more common among Jews in the 19th century, e.g. Sabina Spielrein and her father, than among the general population today).
Also, a lot of what distorts the directions of people’s lives has nothing to do with trauma or unraveling some knot in the psyche, but is simply based on what they were taught. For solving that kind of problem a priest or some other educated authority figure could be just as helpful as somebody trained in psychotherapy.
@Alice Teller:
I just don’t think we are dealing with contrary personalities. I think we are dealing with truly borderline people. Seriously, do a Google search on the people around William Pierce and George Lincoln Rockwell. It’s not pretty. More than a few have been rightfully imprisoned. Rockwell himself spoke of the homosexuals in his organization, which he believed he had “reformed”. There are quite literally murderers and sex offenders in abnormally high numbers around them.
And when you get down to the level of the Aryan Nations types, you are dealing with pure gang members. him him himagain, in my opinion these are not merely unruly or “honorary” grizzled men who haven’t quite learned how to behave properly – rather they are truly borderline personalities who can be dangerous to be around.
The WN movement has always been full of strife. The main reason the movement attracts so many losers is because the non-losers usually have incomes, houses, wives and jobs they do not want to lose. Hopefully much of this will change when the dollar collapses and the cowards don’t have any material wealth to protect anymore. It was probably no coincidence that the national socialists succeeded in Germany at that particular time.
@Jason Speaks:
I must defer to you Jason. It is truly an area I know little of. Do you have any sense of the proportions? What is to be done?
@Jens:
Is that really the way you divide the white world? Is there nothing you can see in a man who is busy taking care of his own family other than cowardliness?
@Hadding Scott:
Ah Cognitive Behavior Disorder. Thanks. So it’s good — psychoanalysis, as such, is progressing. Sometimes it does have to do with going back into one’s childhood, but overall I have noticed a trend towards a more Holistic approach. Under the subheading (at your link) ‘Approaches and Systems’:
Relaxation, mindfulness and distraction techniques are also commonly included.
Mindfulness is mostly what Zen Buddhism is about, I think, and I like the inclusion of Oriental approaches like this, including a system of ‘centering, like learning Tai Chi or Chi Gong. Relaxation techniques in the Holistic approach also include meditation, candles, color therapy, aromatherapy, sound therapy.
Also, a lot of what distorts the directions of people’s lives has nothing to do with trauma or unraveling some knot in the psyche, but is simply based on what they were taught. For solving that kind of problem a priest or some other educated authority figure could be just as helpful as somebody trained in psychotherapy.
True enough for probably the most superficial of problems, but I guess I agree. Priests are good.
@Alice Teller: Don’t defer to Jason.
Half of what he said in his penultimate post was a regurgitation of what I said in the comments section of “Anxiety about a Northwest Homeland” where I was explaining how he had not properly understood George Lincoln Rockwell.
Jason Speaks makes these long posts where he presumes to tell us all how we should conduct ourselves but meanwhile he is not well informed.
@Alice Teller:
Is that really the way you divide the white world? Is there nothing you can see in a man who is busy taking care of his own family other than cowardliness?
To be fair, I don’t think that is quite what Jens was getting at. I felt he or she meant one of the major drawbacks to WN getting anywhere is those that have theirs won’t join up because they have too much to lose. So rather than look deeper into what their children’s and grandchildren’s future holds, they’d just as soon root for their favorite football team, go out for a nice time, stuff like that. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, just that they don’t care to be diverted from living the good life and living it up. These are not interested in any of the problems, that is, until it touches home.
I tend to agree with David Duke that the influence of Alex Jones and that kind of negative, fearful, conspiracy-focused thinking is probably our worst problems, and it’s precisely these patriotards as Peter Schaenk called them that are most likely to fret over the image of WN, because they are full of inhibitions about this and that.
@blue rose:
Psychoanalysis is really a brand-name more or less, a synonym for Freudian psychology. When Jung broke away from Freud he had to invent his own brandname, Analytical Psychology. So, when you are talking about cognitive-behavioral therapy, you are certainly no longer talking about psychoanalysis in the proper sense at all.
@Hadding Scott:
So, when you are talking about cognitive-behavioral therapy, you are certainly no longer talking about psychoanalysis in the proper sense at all.
All the better! So, what started out as psychoanalysis has moved towards Cognitive Behavior Therapy, which has already manifested as moving towards Holism, because it is already being practiced.
@Alice Teller:
You certainly don’t have to defer to me, or anyone else for that matter, because I don’t have any special knowledge, just the information that is available to anyone who cares to research it. I’ll provide a link to a picture of George Lincoln Rockwell and some of his followers below that should give you a quick and dirty impression of what the group was about.
And yes, Jens statement is fairly typical of some hard-core white nationalist. They tend to have contempt for middle-class people – that is people who have normal loving relationships, friendships, gainful employment, no police record. What most of us would see as loving fathers and husbands who take care of their children, they insist on seeing as “cowards” and “bourgeois sellouts”. As you might imagine, this gets in the way of recruiting large numbers of people who might be positively disposed to White Advocacy.
As Jens suggested, the only strategy WN of that type offer is to wait for a total collapse of all civilization and hope that virtually every middle-class white person is facing starvation – then they believe white people will listen to them! To me, this is a confession that they have no real strategy going forward.
I will concede however, that middle-class whites have indeed been too afraid to confront difficult realities. Far too many adhere to a comfortable conservatism that doesn’t make many demands nor require rethinking difficult issues. Almost all conservatives insist that race is not a crucial issue, at least in their official pronouncements. On this score, the Left is more honest than the Right; the Left openly says they will change the demographics of the country and therefore change our politics, culture and social structure.
So I understand the frustration of people like Jen, but I believe we need to appeal to as many normal white middle-class people as we can. Below is the link to George Lincoln Rockwell that I mentioned earlier and you can see how he might attract a few misfits – WN continues to attract them:
http://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/6f/00/0000006f_medium.jpeg
@Alice Teller: I didn’t say that, did I? The best way to take care of your child is to secure its future. I can’t think of a better way to do that than being a white nationalist. But being a WN also means you have to sacrifice. No war has ever been won behind a keyboard.
I think there are a lot of intelligent people in the movement, but somehow it seems to be the working-class “loser” who takes most of the heat, i.e. is willing to express and fight for his opinions in public.
That’s my European perspective, anyway. Maybe it’s different in the U.S.
@blue rose:
The whole theory is different. Behaviorism was started by John B. Watson in the USA in 1913, completely independent of whatever Freud was doing in Europe at the time. The Wikipedia article on cognitive therapy says that it is rooted in ancient Stoic doctrine.
@Jason Speaks:
HYPERLINK Is that all you got? I’ve always found those uniforms to be quite fetching. Of course, if I ever met a real life N*zi, I might be a bit freaked out.
@Hadding Scott:
The Wikipedia article on cognitive therapy says that it is rooted in ancient Stoic doctrine.
Interesting. I didn’t know that. And having its roots in Stoic doctrine. Thanks. I guess that was in the wiki link you posted, but I didn’t scroll that far down. I’ll read the entire wiki article.
But something is moving forward nevertheless, because I like what I see in the Holistic approach these days.
Thanks for the information. I’ll check out wiki.
@Jason Speaks:
That photograph from 45-50 years ago surely offers the correct explanation of why we are not making better headway now. Brilliant.
Psychoanalysis, cognitive behaviorial therapy and behaviorism are quite different. Psychoanalysis deals with unconscious thoughts, CBT deals with conscious thoughts. Behaviourism discards thoughts as a mere epiphenomenon and only deals with behaviour, or at least holds that behaviour is the only thing that can be observed and measured in a scientific way.
@Alice Teller:
This is another crown jewel of earlier White Nationalists, his name is James Mason. This is a video tape interview, just the first 2 or 3 minutes will tell you what you need to know. He was fascinated by Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler specifically because they were edgy figures. He wanted a taste of the “forbidden” as he called it. He actually carried on correspondence with Charles Manson, and took his advice on how to shape his particular party.
He dropped out of school around 14 or 15 and was in rebellion against the school system. This is just the type of person who is attracted to WN. I’m afraid he is much of WN, including its leadership. This is a major problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2erqIDm7mE&feature=related
So while White Nationalism and/or White Advocacy are both legitimate and morally desirable, the same cannot be said of many White Nationalists.
@Jens:
My understanding from a course that I took a few years ago is that behavioral therapy as generally practiced these days is not strict behaviorism, but at its core it’s based on that.
@Hadding Scott:
I believe you posted another picture of Lincoln and his cronies all decked out in N*zi regalia just the other day. You were referencing him as someone that should have some legitimacy, openly, in the WN movement. So we get this dance of WNist who claim it is illegitimate to talk about all these failed leaders from the past, yet they reference them all the time (Lincoln, Peirce, etc.).
People like Harold Covington are reincarnated versions of these past figures (I believe you are currently at war with Harold Covington.) Like many of the previous incarnations, I believe Harold Covington has interesting things to say, but it is so littered with ethnic slurs and hateful speech against most white middle-class people, along with profanity, that it is destined to inhabit nothing more than a tiny ghetto.
@Jason Speaks:
James Mason is the fringe of the fringe of the fringe. Yet this is what Jason Speaks wants to present as typical, and he wants to say that WN can’t succeed because of this.
Jason Speaks, do you REALLY expect to be taken seriously while representing James Mason as emblematic of WN? Are you COMPLETELY out of your gourd?
@Hadding Scott: Maybe so, but in CBT the general approach is to deal with the person’s conscious thoughts. For instance, if a person suffers from a fear of spiders, the therapist will try to deal with the fear by restructuring his thoughts by, for instance, explaining that most spiders are not dangerous, that the risk of being bitten is low etc. etc. To a behaviourist it’s simply a matter of genes + environment = behaviour, and the only remedy is to change the environment. Behaviorism is more suited to explain and treat animal behavior, IMO.
@Jason Speaks: I think we need to make a distinction between real white nationalists with issues and the Hollywood-type of nazis you are referring to here. Simply having a swastika tattoo or shouting sieg heil, does not make anyone a national socialist. The Aryan Brotherhood are a bunch of criminals who use nazi symbolism. That’s it.
@blue rose:
I’m not denying that N*zis had style! That picture is only a quick reference. He was an intelligent man but he decided to use shocking imagery and words to gain attention and apparently enjoyed surrounding himself with some freakish outcasts.
But yes, being seen in N*zi regalia is all that is needed to completely and totally discredited a person in the United States or Europe. Period. By the way, you would probably be treated quite well by an actual German N*zi. It’s the lowbrow neo-N*zi type of today that you would NOT want to meet. I doubt real German national socialists from the Hitler era would want anything to do with them.
John
February 19, 2012 – 12:12 pm | Permalink
@90404:
wrong. jews started both wars. look past the public indoctrination system and it’s propaganda. …………………….
MAYBE BUT CHRISTIANS AND AGNOSTICS FOUGHT THEM.
I READ JOOS ARE 10X LESS LIKELY TO ENLIST IN US MILITARY TODAY…SMART GUYS THAT THEY ARE.
@Jason Speaks:
You really do like to zero in on the superficial. “Regalia” was not the point of the photo of Rockwell that I posted. The point of it was that he was sitting in the front row of a huge crowd of Blacks, and that he was there to speak to them as an unabashed representative of White interests, based on the premise that there is some significant overlap of Black interests and White interests.
I think I would be entitled to give credit to Aristotle for certain things without necessarily endorsing his physics or his astronomy as the final word in those fields. Likewise I think it’s legitimate to give George Lincoln Rockwell credit for being right about some things. I am not thereby undertaking an obligation to support everything that George Lincoln Rockwell said or did if I give him credit for something. Everybody EXCEPT YOU, I think, understands this.
The argument with which you are YET AGAIN trying to paint me as a hypocrite is just ridiculous on its face. Don’t you get bored and disgusted with yourself for spouting such idiocy?
Thank you, I am indeed very perplexed by this issue. If I understand you all to be saying. The issue is one of motivation, do we act out of hatred for whomever we believe is most at fault or do we act out of love for ourselves, our heritage, and our future.
I honestly don’t know if this forum is to find a smart way forum or a postmortem. Somedays i would settle for an Irish wake.
We must find a way to atract the most people from all classes while drawing the line on acceptability. What measure will we use? Are we so out of habit in ordering our own lives that we must tolerate clearly destructive behavior? If we can’t solve this one, then our only hope for an impact on the future is to document why the movement failed.
@Hadding Scott:
I wasn’t really accusing you of hypocrisy. I just think a significant number of people in WN are strangely tone deaf to how their arguments sound. They claim to understand that mistakes have been made in the past, but they don’t act like it.
It may be true that George Lincoln Rockwell said some interesting things, but I’m not aware of anything he added that was unique or crucial. Therefore, why take on the huge social stigma such a person? After all, Charles Manson said some interesting things in his life too, but would you suggest any political party ever quote him or refer to him?
Quoting Aristotle is one thing, quoting Charles Manson is quite another. In the public mind, George Lincoln Rockwell is closer to Manson than Aristotle.
I truly get the impression you guys are blind to some pretty obvious public relations realities. Quoting Aristotle, even though he had some bad ideas on astronomy, is not the same thing as quoting a flaming N*zi screaming about n*ggers with a swastika in the background.
Again, in the public mind there is little moral difference between George Lincoln Rockwell, William Pierce, Charles Manson, and Jack the Ripper. It’s not quite fair, but it is a social reality that a political organization must take into account.
@Alice Teller:
My two cents is this: attract the white middle class and the white working class, along with whatever wealthy support we can find.
@Jason Speaks:
I am sure that there is some overlap between reality as it is, and reality as Jason Speaks says it is, but it’s not very big.
People magazine did a piece on Dr. William Pierce in 1996 that, despite an inimical title and some of the usual obligatory anti-hate rhetoric (which most White people I think automatically filter out), presented him in a way that was not entirely negative.
In my view Jason Speaks you are a negative alarmist.
@Jason Speaks:
Wow that’s just about everybody, isn’t it? Attract all classes of White people! Brilliant plan! Why didn’t anybody else think of that?
@Hadding Scott:
Hadding, that was not a positive piece in People, it was a hit piece. It smeared him and failed to mention anything that would make the average white person want to associate with it. I truly think there is an almost autistic level of tone deafness on this issue among “White Nationalists”.
Well, it is a better idea than trying to attract those few who want to treat Hitler as if he were beyond reproach – instead of what he is: a fart in the elevator of White nationalism.
@Jason Speaks: I didn’t say that it People’s article about Dr. Pierce was “positive.” I said that it wasn’t entirely negative.
What did Dr. Pierce do that was so terrible according to the article? It’s that he wrote a novel presenting a “vision of an all-White America.” Certainly many White readers upon learning that this was what was meant by “hate book” did not perceive it as particularly negative.
At the same time, it includes some very nice human touches. It even ends with this:
For anybody seeing the pictures that accompanied the original article, especially one with Dr. Pierce sitting facing his wife at a table, there is even more positive about it.
The point is that it does not portray Dr. Pierce as equivalent to Charles Manson or Jack the Ripper. You are out of your mind if you are going to maintain that.
@Hadding Scott:
I’m saying in the public mind, Pierce is outside the morally acceptable. Nobody wants to be associated with him,especially no public figure. Now, much of that is not fair, it is obviously heightened by a smear campaign that has gone on for decades. But it remains true and his novel is inextricably wound up in it. This is the key passage that disqualifies him in the minds of virtually all Americans:
… The Turner Diaries, which details the overthrow of the U.S. government by a group of racist, anti-Semitic militiamen, has long been a bible for antigovernment terrorist groups and is considered by the FBI to have been the inspiration for Timothy McVeigh’s alleged bombing in Oklahoma City.
Passages like that stigmatize him. Now, it did say a few nice words at the end, but I believe they were meant in irony. The writer was saying, in effect, isn’t it bizarre that such a hateful man lives in such a peaceful environment and his wife speaks of love.
I understand you have an admiration for the man, but you cannot be blind to how he is reviled by the public.
@Jason Speaks:
You don’t know the public mind. You don’t even know the TOO mind. You assert that things are unwelcome here that are in fact perfectly welcome.
I doubt that any public figure even wants to be associated with Pat Buchanan, much less Jared Taylor, and Kevin MacDonald with his carefully researched books about Jews is completely off the scale.
This fixation of yours on what is acceptable to established public figures is crippling. If you are that much of a moral coward I suggest you keep it to yourself instead of trying to contaminate others.
@Hadding Scott:
Oh, I think people make a distinction between someone like Kevin MacDonald and William Pierce. The objective facts are just too heavily in MacDonald’s favor – he has written PhD level books on evolutionary psychology, Western culture, and Jewish behavior. In addition, Kevin MacDonald has been quoted by world-class scholars such as David Wilson Sloan in popular science books for the general public. This automatically gives him more credibility on these issues (even though Pierce did PhD level work in physics, it’s a different field). Now, I do worry that MacDonald will burn up his credibility by associating with edgy characters, but I think his work itself will always stand.
And there is a difference between Pat Buchanan and William Pierce as well. Pat can still be interviewed on major news programs for extended periods of time. Pierce never got close to that. We could continue forever, but there are all sorts of metrics in which Buchanan, MacDonald and even Jared Taylor command more social legitimacy than Pierce did. I mean let’s get serious, I don’t recall Pierce hosting crossfire on CNN or appearing on the McLaughlin group. It’s just a fact.
I don’t think you recognize just how far beyond the realm of acceptable ( I mean to white people) these characters like Pierce and George Lincoln Rockwell really are. They generally did more harm than good.
If I thought Pierce or Rockwell had ever said anything particularly interesting or unique that we needed to hold onto, then perhaps bearing the weight of all their creepiness would be worth it. But I just don’t see it. The case for white advocacy and a concern for the survival of the white race has been made much better by others – and without the baggage of swastikas in the background or “let’s kill ‘em all” novels.
In fact, if those gentlemen had been born 30 or 40 years later, they might have taken a completely different tact and would themselves refuse to bear the cross of failed WN leaders from the past.
@Jason Speaks:
Jason….you often speak sense so my intention is to be measured. There is no sense in trying to create a one-size-fits-all WN movement. Why are you dissing past WN people? They did what they could…in the event the forces ranged against them were too massive and their own people too taken in.
Why are you fighting Hadding? He represents a strand of evolution whose time may come given different circumstances in the future.
Your strand may be different *if* you choose to do more than talk in comments sections. Or else, that will have been your strand…that you were one of the anonymous people who tried to help in some way by commenting. Nothing wrong in that. But is that all you do?
It may be that some of the really important strands will have to come from outside the WN movement. I mean by, and from, WN’s who cannot be connected to white nationalism. This is because, some of the [often dominant] views and attitudes exhibited within the movement may make certain types of strategy impossible, given the forces ranged against us.
@Mickey Meadows:
I’m not really an egalitarian. I just can’t treat every WN like a brother. I don’t see Rockwell as some good intentioned guy who, golly Gee whiz, just picked up some swastikas and some weak willed homosexual followers and drove around in a bus with hate written all over. Really? I think they did more harm than good, I think they gave aid and comfort to the enemy, I agree with Ward they actually set us back many years, perhaps decades.
Let me put it this way, what possible advantage is there to ever mentioning George Lincoln Rockwell or William Pierce? What value do they add? I can point to a lot of damage, And to the stigma, and how they scare people away, but I don’t see one single positive thing.
And do a Google search about some of these people. They are not the most savory characters. Nor are their followers and defenders. I’m not kidding when I described how many murderers and sex offenders there are among them, including offenses against children. These are creeps.
Beyond that, I don’t even think they’re really pro White. I think they want attention, I think they like having a gang of sycophants they themselves call losers to cater to them. In short, they treated as a social club for personal gain and not as a serious movement that needs to gain legitimacy.
@Mickey Meadows:
I hesitate to disagree with you because so often I have had occasion to admire your voice on these pages, however, Jason does raise valid concerns. Public relations do matter, numbers matter. It is inescapably true that there are voices here that are downright ugly and vicious, others that may be mistaken or simply unwise. The sum total is, however, very damaging to us.
What purpose can be served by behaving in a way which simply confirms all of our opponents ugliest accusations? Especially when most of us have no interest at all in defending some of the early crackpots.
Are we really incapable of getting together and establishing basic standards? Or is our goal to follow the advice of the Freudians and imagine that we are healing ourselves by exerting no self- discipline, just let it all hang out? If it feels good do it?
@Jason Speaks: Your combination of stubbornness and ignorance is breathtaking. Let me just give you some names of public figures, at least as well known as scholars that may have cited Kevin MacDonald, that were associated with Dr. William Pierce.
First there was Dr. Revilo P. Oliver. Oliver was a very highly esteemed professor of classics at the University of Illinois, Urbana, and a regular book-reviewer for Classical Journal in the 1950s. He had been involved in the founding of both the John Birch Society and National Review but ended up denouncing both. Revilo Oliver was on the board of directors of the National Alliance and I know firsthand that he received a complimentary copy of each month’s National Alliance Bulletin.
There was Dr. Robert McCorkle, whom I met at the National Alliance offices. Dr. McCorkle had worked for the Smithsonian Institute and when I met him was editing Dr. Pierce’s history of the White Race, Who We Are. Dr. McCorkle left his estate to the National Alliance.
There was also a former cabinet-member, if I remember right of the Kennedy Administration, that left a large sum to the National Alliance. I do not remember any more detail about that one.
Professor Robert S. Griffin of the University of Vermont wrote a book about Dr. Pierce, The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds, that presents quite a positive picture.
This notion that only “losers” associated with Dr. William L. Pierce is a just a conceit of yours, Jason Speaks, and it’s utterly wrong. You make yourself look really really stupid.
@Hadding Scott:
I freely admit that I do not know enough about the folks you reference to have an informed opinion. I do know that you are very quick to resort to personal insults which do not help us at all. The fact that someone holds a different position on what is essentially a very minor aspect of WN history does not make them moral cowards. Why haven’t you spoken out against those in our midst who are clearly filled with sadistic fantasies?
@Alice Teller: Jason Speaks is the troublemaker here. I don’t care that you like him.
@Alice Teller: I’ve presented enough information that you should be able to discern that what Jason Speaks has been saying is bunk. It simply isn’t the case that nobody of any accomplishment would associate with Dr. Pierce because he wrote a violent novel. Why should that be a problem anyway? You ought to be irritated about the fact that Jason Speaks misled you, and if I were in your spot I would be a little embarrassed about having been taken in.
Only someone like Freud, a man from a people obsessed with sex, could have decided the sex act was the centrality of all human existence and not found it risible. It is no wonder that the traditionally minded members of different societies, persons who believe there’s more to life than copulation, find Freud such a danger to their mores.
@Hadding Scott:
Do you really not understand my point or do you simply not care? It is not about who I like, it is about our ability and willingness to develop standards of decency in our dealings with each other. You have every right to believe that I ought to be persuaded by your arguments, you do not have the right to insult and condescend to me if I do not agree that the reputation of your heroes is our primary concern.
I repeat, what purpose is served by resorting to personal insults? Are we really the most serious danger to success of the white freedom movement?
@Alice Teller: I don’t think it’s an insult to call a spade a spade. You really missed the point on that moral cowardice issue.
It has nothing to do with a point of WN history. It has to do with insisting that fear of what some people, who enjoy favor in the current establishment, might think, should be a matter of primary concern for us. That is crippling for us, and I call it moral cowardice. What more accurate term for it could there be?
You talk about “standards of decency” but in my view Jason Speaks has been extraordinarily indecent, and insulting. The willfully distorted characterization of Dr. Pierce and his organization — of which I was a member — is only the latest example.
Obviously you’re not noticing Jason Speaks’ provocations (and that’s where your own biases and sensibility comes into play), but some others do and have commented on it.
@Hadding Scott:
I have neither the time, energy or interest to monitor every exchange between you and Jason.
I don’t think anyone on this site, certainly not I, care about the opinion of the current establishment. What I do care about is the effect these exchanges have on our fellows who come here searching for truth. While the articles have real value as a diagnosis of the history of our plight, the comments section is far more likely to give them the image of us as a bunch of rude, angry, bitter and sadistic losers. I am particularly concerned about women who have been so dreadfully deceived by feminism. Is there anything, anything at all, that would make them think that the answers to their problems can be found among us?
@Alice Teller: If that’s your concern then you might want to encourage Jason Speaks to stop saying that key figures of WN like Dr. William Pierce were really insincere and only had losers as followers. I would say that this makes us look bad, in addition to being patently false.
It seems to me some here are looking for Geert Wilders or Nick Griffin, or any of the other European leaders speaking out against multi-culti, etc., to ‘lead the way’. This isn’t England or Europe. America has a different history. Frankly, what’s the difference who comes to this site? Y’all ought to be glad you do get posters as it is, what with the current PC climate.
Any intellectual White, of the sort some here ‘think’ they’d like to see commenting, would already know a priori how to interpret this site plus the posts, and would find no fault with any of it. As to some naive White who wanders in and has no clue to anything, honestly that naive White is not going to be given a different picture of anything, because frankly I have NO IDEA just what sorts of posts would suit some here anyway. America has a different history. It is what it is, and so where is the pristine, conservative U.S. White Messiah some here are looking for with ‘no connections to Pierce or Rockwell, that they can lift up to the naive White person and wanders in and say ‘follow him’?
@Hadding Scott:
Why is it that no matter what problem I pose your only answer is that it is all Jason’s fault? Does that really seem like an intellectually or morally responsible position?
@Jason Speaks:
Jason – I agree with your vision about a lot of stuff wrt what needs to happen in the future. But I just don’t see the wisdom in getting into horn-locked situations with people on matters that are emotionally dear to them, and about which they are not going to be willing to change their mind.
I don’t necessarily suggest that Hadding is wrong about something and you are right. The reverse is true of the same point. Are you willing to change your mind about those most deep and personal – and hard won – insights about what will work, what it will take to win this, and so on.
I should think people who were there have actual experiences about why things did or didn’t work, and what the distinctions are between those components that worked well and those that didn’t etc etc.
You do well by pointing out that some strategies that didn’t work then, shouldn’t be returned to now, where they’ll have less chance of working. But we have to be careful, because things do or don’t work for two sorts of reason which are (a) they are internally inconsistent or inefficient in some way or (b) they are the right idea for the wrong moment in time.
There’s no certainty that some ideas tried and failed in the past, would not work much better sometime in the future.
One way I once suggested you’d be sure to make a million dollars, would be to get all the old newspapers going back to 1800, and root through them for adverts for products that didn’t take off at the time. Among them, you’d be sure to find some products that failed because they were before their time. Or you’d get great ideas and inspirations from looking at some products, for new products no one is thinking of in teh current world.
Try it. Make a million. Then put it to work :O)
@Hadding Scott:
Hadding, I’m sure there were some decent people around Dr. Pierce. However, it was Pierce who repeatedly said there were too many “losers” in the WN movement.
The problem with disreputable characters, murderers, and sex offenders is that association with them brings contamination no matter how many other good people are around you. If it’s just one or two people that’s one thing, but when there’s a pattern of creeps that are around you or losers as Pierce called them, it is a problem. And when the gentlemen in question are decked out in swastikas and N*zi uniforms, then they have cut their own throats in terms of public relations. You are exhibiting autistic levels of tone deafness on this issue.
Pierce’s bloody murder fiction is seen as creepy by virtually all white people. Let’s put it this way: most white parents would be rightfully freaked out if their teenage son was reading the Turner diaries or had a poster George Lincoln Rockwell up on the wall.
@Hadding Scott:
You are dishonestly changing the debate. I didn’t claim that no one decent ever associated with Pierce or even Rockwell, after all there are decent people who associated with everyone including Richard Nixon, Charles Manson, and even Jeffrey Dahmer. My point, and I am not the first to say it, is that Pierce and Rockwell both had tons of weirdos around them and that many of them became convicted criminals.
@Alice Teller:
With Hadding, you get the typical acolyte of Adolf Hitler, or should I say George Lincoln Rockwell, without the politeness Hitler was known for. This is what this is all about. He calls himself a national socialist, although at least some of the people he looks up to were N*zis wearing swastikas.
So it is what it is. I regret to see TOO go down this path, because I think it is a dead end. And I think it tends to contaminate the people associated with.
@Hadding Scott:
I see nothing patriotic or genuine in Alex Jones, who is a dissimulator. His wife and children are Jewish, and he’s intolerant of any linking of 9/11 with Israel. His job is to rally non-believers in the government’s fairy story and herd them in the wrong direction. He’s quite successful in that endeavour.
@blue rose:
Pierce and Rockwell never said anything unique or crucial. I doubt that most people interested in preserving the white race ever paid much attention to them. I knew vaguely that they existed earlier, but dismissed them as clownish attention seekers.
So I don’t agree that these are figures that have any particular place in WN. I think what’s happening is that people who used to have associations with them are doing a bit of cheerleading for them in order to boost their own fortunes. So, in my opinion these are parasites who bring contamination and insist on a seat at the table of white nationalism. But it is done for reasons of personal aggrandizement, as obviously they are willing to do irreparable damage to WN by making Pierce and Rockwell a part of its “official” history and referring back to them the way conservative refer back to Reagan or Communists do to Marx.
@Mickey Meadows:
Do a search on some of the people we are talking about. Do a search about them and the people they have been around. I think you will find some creepy stuff. And I think you will find they have had bitter conflicts with other people in WN for God knows how many years.
@Jason Speaks:
Of historical movements that went on to victory and dominance, which of their major heroes did not have dark sides that in the hands of an enemy could not have been used to demonize and discredit them?
The big question here is what is the purpose of constantly fighting people such that (a) all the issues that you say you would like to take a back seat are actually brought further to the front and (b) the ability to learn from eachother and create new knowledge is seriously undermined.
Suggestion for you and Hadding. We’ve seen the areas of disagreement. Can we now see some exploration of possible agreements.
Great comment of yours on “character” – 17/2, 7:19 pm.
@Trenchant: Oops, the above was for “Penelope”
@Wiggy: Yeah, reading your comment I immediately thought of books I read years ago, Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint and Erica Jong’s Fear of Flying, but it could apply across the board. Those days I didn’t make the connection.
@Alice Teller: Why is it that no matter what problem I pose your only answer is that it is all Jason’s fault? Does that really seem like an intellectually or morally responsible position? It is absolutely the correct position when he is making false defamatory statements about key figures in our cause. I am not sure why this doesn’t bother you, but it bothers me, and I think as long as some dirtbag is saying these things — which in my view he should not be allowed to say ad nauseam like this — somebody needs to respond. What really needs to happen here is the recognition that Jason Speaks is chronically and gratuitously negative — by which I mean that he shows a disregard for facts that should be obvious upon examination — and his activities need to be curtailed so that fighting with him won’t be necessary. It would save a lot of wasted time and energy, and ugliness.
What you are doing, Alice Teller, is analogous to complaining about the noise and the mess made by firemen when the real problem is the guy that goes around setting fires.
Corrected post:
It is absolutely the correct position when he is making false defamatory statements about key figures in our cause. I am not sure why this doesn’t bother you, but it bothers me, and I think as long as some dirtbag is saying these things — which in my view he should not be allowed to say ad nauseam like this — somebody needs to respond. What really needs to happen here is the recognition that Jason Speaks is chronically and gratuitously negative — by which I mean that he shows a disregard for facts that should be obvious upon examination — and his activities need to be curtailed so that fighting with him won’t be necessary. It would save a lot of wasted time and energy, and ugliness.
What you are doing, Alice Teller, is analogous to complaining about the noise and the mess made by firemen when the real problem is the guy that goes around setting fires.
@Mickey Meadows:
I prefer not to talk to the guy at all. If he will stop with the gratuitously negative statements, you won’t see a word of response from me to anything that he says. How can you not take offense at this?
That’s Jason Speaks defaming, in particular, Dr. William Pierce, the most effective spokesman that our cause ever had, who brought many currently noteworthy people to the cause. How can you not see this as gratuitously destructive?
@Mickey Meadows:
There are some people that are not worth working with. Take this guy, Kevin Aldred Strom. He worked very closely with William Pierce. Take a look at his wikipedia page (realizing of course that wiki is biased). But look at the things this man was arrested for. You take a look at his picture. Do you want to work with him?
William Luther Pierce, named Strom editor of National Vanguard magazine and Media Director for the Alliance. Pierce also named Strom editor of the Alliance’s monthly Bulletin. This means, this guy must have been among some of the better people Pierce had to choose from.
So, I’m just saying, let’s jettison these people, no need to carry their baggage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Alfred_Strom
@Hadding Scott:
You will immediately stop accusing me of defaming anyone. I have done no such thing. I have said nothing false about Pierce. I have merely pointed stated facts which are freely available about the man and those around him.
Indeed, on this issue of whether anyone appears to have been attacking someone’s image, I notice someone calling themselves Hadding Scott has apparently spent years preoccupied with Harold Covington. There are tons of bizarre statements against him on multiple websites over many years.
I’m not a fan of Harold Covington’s idea for the Northwest, but I invite anyone to go to Covington’s site and see some of the choice posts someone going by the name Hadding Scott put on there.
@Jason Speaks:
Prepared response.
@Hadding Scott:
I find Pierce’s broadcasts to be grating myself. In fact when I first heard him I thought he was some kind of minister or leader of some Christian group. I was shocked when I found out he was once a physics professor.
@fender: You’re entitled to that subjective impression and whatever opinion you may have based on it. I don’t hold it against anybody who says that he found Dr. Pierce not to his own liking. It’s bound to happen sometimes. That’s not what I’ve criticized here.
@Jason Speaks
This is getting tiresome and going on for two days now. The more you post against Pierce, Rockwell, and Covington, the more I’m convinced I like them. Pierce especially, since he does not allow hunting on his mountain and the animals sense love, which is a true insight. Sign of a Higher Consciousness.
Are you a mole sent here to discredit all of the WN movement? A mole of the Jews, or the Republicans, or what?
If not, then please put forward who your WN heroes are, and who’s your pick for heading up a pristine WN movement, in your opinion?
@Jason Speaks:
There are some people that are not worth working with. Take this guy, Kevin Aldred Strom. …This means, this guy must have been among some of the ‘better’ people Pierce had to choose from.
Oh for crissakes. The way you described it I was expected to see a tatooed, sabre-toothed bigfoot. The ‘big problem’ you see with Strom is his N*zi connections. YET this seem to be in his favor:
Strom was a close associate of University of Illinois Classics professor and nationalist writer Revilo P. Oliver, who has been described as “one of America’s most notorious fascists” and, according to B’nai Brith Canada, was “a long time proponent of antisemitism”.
If you are a Jew, this is why you are here as a mole to discredit Strom. Because if it weren’t for ALL these WN groups, we wouldn’t be discussing the Jewish Problem. We wouldn’t have known there was a ‘problem’ with the Jews.
@blue rose:
No, I am not a “mole” and I am sick of every person who doesn’t goosestep to a certain outdated version of WN being accused of it. If those guys are your heroes, you go for it, have fun with it.
There are precious few WN “street activist” leaders from the past that are impressive to me. In the current environment, Kevin MacDonald would be at the top, but I’m not sure he would call himself a movement leader, so to speak. David Duke is someone who is one of the better leaders today. In my opinion, he is much better than Rockwell or Pierce. He may not be perfect, but he is the direction WN should go in if it wants to be taken seriously.
Of course, all the guys like Matt Parrott, Greg Johnson and Ward Kendall are good and present a very positive image. And I think guys like Jared Taylor and Peter Brimelow do good by having a foot in the mainstream world.
One of the best right now is RamZPaul – he does great comedy and satire which makes people think – even though he isn’t a political leader as such.
If you want older pro-White people, I would say guys like Madison Grant from early in the 20th century who wrote intelligent books on the issue of white survival (which I believe are available free online). There was a whole school of so-called “scientific racism” by a number of thinkers from that period, including Francis Galton. Much of what they believed is slowly being proven today.
So there are tons of great guys out there, it is just a certain strain, made up of guys like Rockwell, Pierce, Covington, etc., which doesn’t strike me well at all.
But, I sense many posters want that type of thing. I’ve tried to explain why I think it is self-limiting, why I think it should be avoided, but it’s still a free country, do what you like.
@blue rose:
I don’t understand your comment on Kevin. My concern with someone like him was the following passage from the link I sent:
In 2008 Strom pleaded guilty to possession of ten images of child pornography and was sentenced to 23 months in prison.
That was the part I was talking about. Of course, I don’t doubt WN get railroaded, but if true, I think you would agree that is not a positive thing.
@blue rose:
..if it weren’t for ALL these WN groups, we wouldn’t be discussing the Jewish Problem. We wouldn’t have known there was a ‘problem’ with the Jews.
This is not true in my opinion. I had never heard of Rockwell before and I had barely heard the name Pierce, long before I had a concern with Jewish influence. I think the world was well aware it long before those gentlemen were born.
@Jason Speaks: More flaming ignorance from Jason Speaks.
David Duke was in the NSWPP in 1970, according to Tyler Brooks, The Rise of David Duke. This supports blue rose’s suggestion that Rockwell probably contributed directly or indirectly to the evolution of David Duke’s worldview.
@Jason Speaks:
OK Francis Galton is good. Madison Grant I never heard of.
David Duke would be great, but you must understand in today’s totalitarian society — IT JUST DOESN’T MATTER. Unless you can talk David Duke into coming to TOO and become our leader.
So if the radical, self-styled N*zis still remain, and another other radical WN group still remains — it can only but help WN to stay alive one way or the other, and the message being got out.
When I first came to TOO the posts were interesting, and I presume the N*zis were posting as well. So this entire waste of two days going back and forth complaining about Rockwell, Pierce, Covington is really getting us nowhere. And if someone wants to bring up those names and say something positive or neutral, no need to fly into an hysterical rage over it.
Take it in stride, bro. Ain’t nuthin’ happenin’ yet. [just me doin' my street lingo talk]
@Jason Speaks:
n 2008 Strom pleaded guilty to possession of ten images of child pornography and was sentenced to 23 months in prison.
One of the tactics of the Left and the Right is to set people up on charges of child porn. But since Kevin Strom pled guilty I guess there was some truth to it. So? Hopefully he learned his lesson. He’s not the only one ever been brought up on child porn charges.
As to his ex-wife Kristin Kaiser who
claimed that Strom was an extremely controlling husband who forced her to abstain from meat, forbade her to wear blue jeans, and predetermined her favorite music, Mozart
all I can say about that is that Strom should have been more discerning as to a marriage partner, one who shares his ideals. People are human, and Strom is not the first husband that was ever controlling. The problem with ideologies (which includes WN) is that they become very set in their beliefs and can only think INSIDE the box. Tunnel vision, you know?
@blue rose:
The injection of Harold Covngton’s name by Jason Speaks has been gratuitous. Nobody here was talking about Harold Covngton. In fact, Jason Speaks seems to be trying to promote C-vington in a backhanded way. In the first place, he flatters him greatly by putting him in the same category as Rockwell and Pierce. Earlier this evening he even suggested that people should look at Covingtn’s blog. This nonstop whine about how WN is full of people of bad character is something for which Covngton has been notorious for years (and could hardly be more hypocritical, coming from him).
I have resisted the provocation to argue about Cvngton because I think he’s a dead dog at this point and the whole topic bores me.
It is well known that Freud was hostile to Christian civilization, seeing himself as Hannibal leading the Semitic armies against Rome.
Oddly, I had some portions of Freud’s On the Interpretation of Dreams assigned to me in an undergraduate where he talks about his identification with Hannibal, his wish to visit Rome (Hannibal only got to the walls), and the like. I say oddly because it very plainly lays out Freud’s hostility to the European world and the Christian religion. I had had my awakening before this, so perhaps it doesn’t jump out at the uninformed reader.
Has Kevin MacDonald ever been compared to Fabius Maximus? The Culture of Critique has been an unanswerable reply to Freud and his legacy, just as Fabius Maximus’ strategy could not be outdone by Hannibal.
@blue rose:
I had some acquaintance with them. Kirsten is a total dingbat. If you met her you would come to that conclusion right away. I never noticed that Kevin Strom was a “controlling” husband — it really doesn’t seem like him — but Kirsten was sickeningly clingy. What Kirsten wrote in her book is imaginative bs.
@Hadding Scott:
What Kirsten wrote in her book is imaginative bs.
I can easily believe that. Sounds like when he had is ‘child porn’ troubles, she saw which side of the bread it would best be buttered on, by writing what those against Strom would like to hear, by use of exaggeration and lies. She must have known about his political views before she married him, and she herself should have figured the marriage would not work, and not married him. Writing ‘exposes’ after the fact is so obvious and done to death. She was looking for the money.
@blue rose: You seem to be confusing two wives. The first wife, Kirsten, who supposedly wrote Bondage of Self, is a dingbat. The second wife Elisha is the one that made the criminal accusations (most of which the judge tossed out).
@Hadding Scott:
This nonstop whine about how WN is full of people of bad character is something for which Covngton has been notorious for years (and could hardly be more hypocritical, coming from him).
hehe That’s true. As I mentioned, I receive Covington’s podcasts by email when he’s done one. He’s tiresome and loud, though a good, forceful speaker. But too narrow-minded, if you ask me. But the way I see it, what does it matter what I think about Covington. He’s at least out there doing podcasts, and once in awhile I’ll listen to one.
I agree this nit-picking over head spaces involved in WN is getting boring. From what I see, TOO is not promoting the self-styled N*zis, but allows them a voice. If they have a problem with image in the public imagination — just clean it up.
Just to change the subject slightly and for a little amusement here, I’ve been watching Comedy Central where they have been show-casing black comedians. From their routines, one thing is obvious — they literally HATE whites who are pro-white race. They refuse to acknowledge that whites in any way are under attack.
That aside, last night, they had on two products of mix-race marriages, two famous black comedians named Key and Peele, very creative comedians I think, that were part of the Saturday night program called MAD-TV. They did very creative skits. One was very amusing and the man that played the N*zi in this segment looked so fine and handsome in his pristine uniform. Anyway it’s just a skit, and don’t please anyone get bent out of shape. This is just for amusement’s sake. I’m glad I found the skit at youtube:
Key & Peele: Das Negros (or Nazis in search of negros)
HYPERLINK
I have resisted the provocation to argue about Cvngton because I think he’s a dead dog at this point and the whole topic bores me.
You mean thinking that sex is All and needing cocaine to be happy?
You can’t know what you’ve not experienced. Miracles happen, signs of the Divine Efficacy. But you get the religion (and the past) that you deserve.
You sound like you’d make an excellent Jew.
God is bliss. That’s the “kingdom of heaven.” Christianity is profound bhakti-yoga. Christians get God. Your Jew Freud needed cocaine instead.
@Hadding Scott:
OH! Ok. I didn’t realize there were two wives involved. I gather he was married to this Elisha during the child porn thing? I did read the judge threw out the case… here is what it says at wiki;
On January 4, 2007, Strom was arrested in Greene County, Virginia on charges of possession of child pornography and witness tampering.[19] The Grand Jury later added the charges of receiving child pornography and of seeking to coerce a 10-year-old into a sexual relationship. At the October 2007 federal trial on charges of sexually coercing a 10-year old girl, and of witness intimidation, the judge threw out both charges due t o lack of evidence. [20]
At the plea hearing on January 14, 2008, Strom pleaded guilty to possessing computer images of child pornography and was held at Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail while awaiting sentencing.
So Strom could well have been set up, as is done when the Jews want someone taken out, but it’s his pleading guilty that made me wonder if there had been some truth to the child porn charges at least. Even if so, he’s not the first one, and a little re-education is all that would be needed there.
Well, I see I have a comment on moderation, and I’m not sure what that’s about. But thanks for the information on Elisha.
@blue rose:
Of course! If he was really innocent on that charge as he says, he should have pleaded innocent and cleared his name. I am sure that’s what Dr. Pierce would have had him do. What he did was sacrifice the future for the present, and now he’s paying for it by being treated as a pariah.
Hadding Scott and Jason Speaks
Honestly, I agree with both of you. I hope I don’t sound wishy washy by saying that. It’s true.
And it sounds like both of you have been pro-White long before I have. I feel real gratitude there. Thank you both.
I remember a couple months ago Mr. Scott’s article Our Weapon: The Truth appeared here on T.O.O.
It was one of the best articles I’ve read. So I have respect for his thoughts. Also, he’s helped me see national socialism in a new light. I appreciate what appears to be his solid dedication to… pro-White stuff.
At the same time, I share some of Jason’s concerns about image/PR.
I’m not exactly sure what the point of my comment is. (I’m not trying to stop the discussion/debate.) I want to say that I love this site and the people who come here. I love the hope found here.
The rest of this comment is not specifically for Jason or Mr. Scott.
I have concerns about the world; genetically modified food, nuclear war, a seriously sick culture, and of course the anti-White attitudes and policies.
What if paradise is as simple as perfect chastity, body and mind? I think that is a very real possibility. Sex is for procreation, for God. If all of a sudden, overnight, the world became perfectly chaste (mentally and physically) I wonder how the world would look in 10 years. Or 100 years.
I don’t struggle with sexual thoughts or desire. I’m not boasting. I just want others to know that the idea that we (especially males) are sex-obsessed animals is not really true. Or at least it does not have to be.
My love and passion for others is so much stronger now. I love White people, especially some of the beautiful families from my past. I love beautiful, healthy families.
Sometimes I get really down. Sometimes I hate this culture, and some of the people it produces. But that’s because I love beautiful, healthy White families/culture. I have real hope. Anyway, I love everyone who loves healthy White families.
@Jason Speaks:
Jason – sure…if there’s a conviction for child pornography, or much more seriously trying to coerce a child into having sexual relationship, then that person should leave the movement and the movement should leave him.
If this is not what has happened then that is a serious problem…I agree. Just guessing but one problem is presumably that accusations of pedophillia is a great way to silence someone in the current society. The other side of that coin is that a WN who is actually guilty can easily say he was set up.
The only way to deal with this sort of thing, internally, would be via examination of the actual evidence itself. The problem is, I doubt the movement is anywhere near having its own internal police. It’ll be needed though.
@Richard:
Well said Richard, and you don’t sound wishy washy at all. It’s crazy, that in the situation we are in, people can’t realize that for all the no doubt many areas on which they passionately disagree, that single overlap of being white, woken-up, aware of impending peril on white people, trumps all of the rest.
@blue rose:
I don’t think that there are any people of that description posting on TOO. Not that I’ve noticed, anyway.
What interests me is that the German National-Socialists worked out answers to many of the problems that face us today, in a variety of spheres. It is my view that we are largely in trouble because of our acceptance of the propaganda that goads us to do the antithesis of whatever they did. We can’t be racist because you-know-who was racist. We can’t criticize Jews because you-know-who did that. We must not control our borders because that’s what Hitler would do. Of course these arguments are not all equally effective, but they are all effective in some degree.
This is something that we have to get over. Otherwise we have no chance.
Strangely, most of the sensitivity to this kind of goading is on the right. Leftists and even Jews that I’ve met don’t have a problem with admitting that Hitler was in some ways effective, and they certainly don’t worry much about being called a Communist. It’s only the conservatives and “patriots” that feel they have to bend themselves out of shape to avoid such comparisons.
Unfortunately we have the influence of some people that apparently have come to WN through that patriotard path (which you can see reflected in links and indirect references to Alex Jones, the King Patriotard, who as somebody else has mentioned, is married to a Jew) and these people still retain some of the frightened inhibitions and biases that they picked up in that patriotard milieu. That milieu of the “patriots” and the “militia movement” has long been permeated with anti-racist rhetoric that I think is certainly insincere so far as many of them are concerned, but in the patriotard milieu they are required to hide their real thoughts and motives and maintain some of that behavior and attitude (along with excessive fear of conspiracies) when they overlap into WN. I just wish they’d free their own minds, stop being a frightened sneak and become candid and clear-thinking, instead of trying to goad others into becoming as hung-up as they are.
@Iranian for Aryans:
Speaking of movies/videos, I wonder if there any plans to add captions to “Minority Rule” so that the uninitiated can identify who is being interviewed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU
@Hadding Scott:
I agree.
What’s amusing (or sad, however one likes to take it) is that the average American still thinks they are living in an America they were brought up thinking they knew, when all around shows differently. A ‘Constitutionalist’ still thinks all we have to do is to get everything back to the Constitution and all will be well. They worship the Founding Fathers, when it’s obvious they were not all that wise after all, and left the USA wide open to whatever forces were able to infiltrate and embed.
So, basically, what’s to be ‘patriotic’ about, really? Their dead or horribly wounded soldiers coming back from manipulated wars?
Things are fundamentally changing. There are also those planning for ‘sustainable’ futures (the UN Agenda 21 thing). Apparently the US government is on board with that, and trying to explain what city planners do and engage them in the process, left me with a near ulcer watching that video link someone posted about it. To be sure, I’d like to wring the necks of those US ‘facilitators’ for their obnoxious ways, yet there are some parts to sustainable development I like. But the confusion and hostility of the average American sitting in the room listening to the presentation, and not comprehending why ‘sustainable development’ is a problem (world population 7 BILLION with projections to 9, things like this), and still thinking along the lines of what they were taught as children (“America is great”, etc., the Constitution is ‘the greatest document ever written in the Universe’, stuff like that). All the while not comprehending that nothing remains the same, things change, and it’s a Law of Nature.
I don’t know if I’m expressing any of this right. Sometimes I feel like the dancing lady in David Lynch’s film ‘Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me’, the one that wore the blue rose. I can only explain what I see in a ind of multidimensional way, which is usually not understood by people who think mere Logic, condescension, and other intellectual tricks, are enough to dispel the Spirit:
John 3:8 Douhay-Rheims
The wind blows where it will, and thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and where it goes: thus is every one that is born of the Spirit.
This is why those you mention are in a disarray, seeing their world crumbling about them. They think they know the Word of God, but refuse to understand the Spirit — God — Sophia/Wisdom — is not found in a box.
@Richard:
I wrote:
Sometimes I get really down. Sometimes I hate this culture, and some of the people it produces. But that’s because I love beautiful, healthy White families/culture. I have real hope. Anyway, I love everyone who loves healthy White families.
I don’t know if it’s a good thing to express things like that, the first part of my italicized comment above.
Looking back on it now, I wonder, “Does it help others?”
Maybe. Maybe to let others know that they are not alone in their suffering.
I know that in the New Testament Christ says to love your enemies, but as someone at Faith and Heritage pointed out, Christ never said to love God’s enemies. I’m not sure what to believe about that. Maybe it helps to define what exactly we mean by “love”. I’m not going to attempt to answer it in my comment here.
My point is, I’m not necessarily a guide for others. My comments are not perfect.
Sometimes I imagine a White paradise. We have technology like air-conditioning and the internet (used for good things) and nobody is obsessed with sex or fame or excessive amounts of money. People aren’t zombied out on video games or movies. If there are movies, they are beautiful and healthy. Maybe the people in this paradise enjoy sitting on a park bench and watching the trees and listening to their leaves rustle in the wind. It touches their soul, and they find bliss sharing little moments like that. They can enjoy moments like that because their days are peaceful and they are not constantly having to defend themselves from sharks. Every day is full of peace and joy. Nobody considers dulling their mind or soul with drugs or alcohol.
I am a sinner. And it seems good to admit that. I’m a sinner and I owe an apology to the whole world. I don’t ever want to pretend that I’m something better than what I am. That’s a horrible feeling.
@Richard: I always find something of value in your posts. None of us will reach perfection in this life, we are all sinners, the trick is to consistently aim in the right direction, and to help create social conditions that encourage us to do so.
I like your dream of an all white society, but it will not be perfect either. It may seem so for quite a while simply by contrast to the nightmare we live in now.
@Alice Teller:
I agree that when we secure some kind of White homeland, it will probably be far from perfect. Of course, like you mentioned, it will probably be much better than what we have now. I look at people in America and I see so much unnecessary psychological suffering, much of it caused by multiculturalism and forced integration. I like Penelope Thornton’s term “mental straitjacket” @Penelope:
I do think that it is possible to create something that, to us here on Earth now, seems very close to perfection. But that requires much more than just securing a White homeland. It requires a sincere, thorough moral regeneration. That is how I imagine it. It really is paradise. I have glimpses of it and it’s truly wonderful and glorious. But it’s a group effort. We’re all interconnected, and one person’s sins affects us all, directly or indirectly, physically or mentally, now or later. At least that it is what I believe.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on my thoughts, Mrs. Teller. They are always appreciated.
@Mickey Meadows:
I like something that you wrote a while back. About the onion. I have been experiencing something similar. The more I learn, and the more I process it and then observe the world, the more it all makes sense. It’s amazing. People often reference the movie The Matrix to describe the experience of awakening. And for most of us I figure it is a gradual thing. I’m much farther along now than a few months ago, and a few months ago I was much farther than I was a year ago.
I figure there are a lot of people who read the articles and comments (here on T.O.O.) but do not comment. And I want to thank them if they are reading this. Some people are comfortable leaving comments, others aren’t — which is understandable and not necessarily a bad thing, just as leaving comments is not necessarily a good thing. Thanks to all who come here because they care about this great cause.
Re. child porn accusations & Kevin Strom. I wonder what the severity of this really was. I mean, if someone sends me a link, I click on it and it turns out it contains child pornographic material – am I then guilty of possessing child porn? Considering how easy it is to stumble upon this stuff on the net, it just seems like the perfect weapon against dissidents. Once you’re labeled a pedophile, no one will ever listen to you again. And if that doesn’t work:
HYPERLINK
@Richard:
Richard – I agree, but for most of my life never would have believed I would ever be thinking/agreeing this sort of thing.
By nature I’m a conventional/conservative (small c) sort of person. I so bought into the mainstream and so scoffed down my nose at the conspiracy theorists. Actually I still do…but now it’s with the terrible/astonishing/unbelievable irony of someone who once believed all conspiracy theories were impossible and stupid, and then oneday came to realize that actually it turns out that all-but-one are stupid and impossible.
But that one was the biggest and most stupid and mean and impossible of them all. And while that one being true doesn’t make the others true, nor the rules of logic that condemn most of them to being false, what it has done is bring my once cherished and optimistic world view crashing down around me…and all the principles so dear to my heart with it. In that sense it is very much like the Matrix. We all want to go back sometimes. It isn’t nicer here. It’s harder. It’s lonely. It’s frightening. It brings to the door, seeping coldly through the cracks and letterbox, that cold early grave of despair impotence, bitterness, betrayal and cycnicism.
Yet we don’t go back. Or maybe we try it a few times, but it’s not the same place any more. Maybe we try to go back and find that brings those negative forces that drive people to their grave closer still than when we stand outside and look into it for what it really is.
I don’t know, but I am sure I won’t be taking the red pill or the blue one or whichever it was that chooses the Matrix. What I don’t know is whether I’ll get old looking bitterly and impotently out the winder bemoaning how when we were united we ruled the world.
There never was a hero in me…I was always a pretty selfish, cowardly, self-destructive person. I did well materially because I was good at what I did…but there wasn’t much to be said of me really. I was a bum.
This experience these last couple of years in many ways have created a new hope for me. Suddenly I am motivated to developthe sort of ideas that I am good at developing, but had given up doing for others out of resentment at never being one of the ones to benefit from their success.
Given a cause that is bigger than oneself. God…that is so much something to be thankful for. Especially for the troubled and self-sabotaging types like I most definitely am, or have been to date. Something that is bigger than you, that you love and want to protect so much that everything else becomes insignificant. That’s something to die for.
So there’s a hope and a peril from being an awake white person. The peril is real. It’s about despair and sinking into hopelessness and despondency. It’s about running away into fantasies where everything is made right. It’s about selling out for less along the way. Selling out as just an internet commenter when one knows one can do so much more.
Yet it’s also about….hope, and decency and honour and valour….gosh it’s like waking up into a star wars movie or some wonderful European fairy tale. It’s about waking up from a gray dream in which one was living and dying in obscurity somewhere in the Western world sometime in the 21st century, not caring much about the world, the world not caring about you, just wasting away really in some suburban compromise. Into a world of such intense colour and depth of history, of connection, family, ancesters, pride and glory….but most of all a world…and a people…that desperately need….you. You. Actually need you…where you could literally be the straw that that if it is there breaks the camels back, and if not a camels back not broken and a people gone. Wow. Scary, terrifiying. An honour, a privilege.
Don’t feed the beast boycott all these films, they are used to scramble minds.
@Mickey Meadows:
You have gifts and a cause you believe in. That is all a hero needs.
We’ve been in a cocoon of comfort since the end of the second war, living off of the achievements of our fathers. This is similar to parasitism- jews are not the only beneficiaries of the Keynesian spending orgy. Reality lurks, soon to break in the front door, demanding- “face me if you want life!” The fake, non-productive “careers”, soon to be over.
@Mickey Meadows:
I resonated with much of your comment.
Given a cause that is bigger than oneself. God…that is so much something to be thankful for. Especially for the troubled and self-sabotaging types like I most definitely am, or have been to date. Something that is bigger than you, that you love and want to protect so much that everything else becomes insignificant. That’s something to die for.
I don’t have children, but I suspect that this is similar. That’s how I feel about White people. I love people that I’ve never met. Almost as if total strangers are my children. If I see a beautiful family, I love them and care about them as if they are my family. Not so much in the past. But these days, definitely. I think healthy White families, especially ones with good values and good, wise, loving parents, are so beautiful — and worth dying for. That death probably won’t come in physical form, at least not in some direct, obvious way related to this cause.
I feel better than ever. I do not fear death anymore.
I was always a pretty selfish, cowardly, self-destructive person.
That was me too. I was just trying to get through life with the least amount of suffering, which is probably one of the most painful ways live life.
@Alice Teller:
Maybe there is a hero inside each one of us (I see it in you and others) and our inner heroes come to this site to exchange ideas and interact and even argue, which can be a good thing.
I really like the posts of Alice Teller. She has labored hard to point to a standard of civility here. Lots of wisdom and human sense there, and if from a pro-White woman all the more valuable. The poster Hadding Scott is obviously very knowledgeable, experienced, and intelligent. He also becomes harsh and disrespectful when responding to criticism or disagreeing. Of course, it’s a sign of caring most likely. I am often accused of the same thing, and I know that’s why overreact.
True. There is always duality in some form. I remember in my all-White society and school there were definite separations and distances between my classmates based on profession of the parents, income, and status. Those from the rich side of town (“South of Grand”) and those from the poorer sides. Also distance was seen between the Anglo Saxon and Nordic types and the Italians, etc. We found “the alien” still from among ourselves.
Yet that’s just the thing. We used to see our own diversity and had our own “types” and even “aliens” from among ourselves. Just as old TV shows with an all-White cast have, notwithstanding, all kinds of “types” from right among us. It is the more spiritual eye that can appreciate the subtle differences among one’s own people rather than lusting for extreme “diversity” and overlooking all our own nuance. And how wonderful to be a people that has to generate all its “dark” and “light,” all it’s “heroes” and “villains” — from among itself. That’s the better platform for true world-diversity and a people’s attainment.
Even though duality has always existed with us and always will (duality or “problems” are only destroyed by Divine Consciousness) — yet the White peoples must live. The world would not be an attractive place to my eye or heart without them.
I see it as a matter of pursuing naturalness. It is natural to be most attached to your own people, even if for their look alone. Lust for “diversity” is just that — lust. Have a subtle eye. Help develop your own people’s destiny and raise them to the highest station. In reality, none of the various peoples of the world wants the White race to end. With the exception of a few Jews, overwrought Blacks, and over-guilted Whites. Then even among those Jews, there would be ambivalence and they’d miss us.
@Julian Curtis Lee:
I don’t recall responding to any criticism of myself here. I’ve already explained the issue.
Sometimes in our interactions with people there comes a time when it is no longer reasonable to give the benefit of the doubt.
@Julian Curtis Lee:
Thank you for the encouragement. It is vital the we regain all the power we can, in every area we can. Civility is not merely more pleasant, it is a method of determining and living by our own standards. It is something completely beyond the abilities of Jews. The can only fake it, they have no true understanding of the concept of genuinely respecting, not dominating, impressing,or controlling those around you. I give you the Jewish mother. One of my first wake up moments was when a Jewish friend joined my extended family for a social event. I thought it was a lovely day spent with charming, funny people complete with all the usual grumps and oddballs, but all of whom were fond of each other. As we were leaving my friend thought she was commiserating with me on the horror of family gatherings. How do you stand it? They are all so blanking NICE!
My grandmother prided herself on being a woman of discriminating tastes. She thought that as a woman, part of he responsibility in life was to encourage others to discern true quality that improved life for everyone. She influenced her little world – for the good. Woman have abandoned this role and we all suffer the consequences. Does anyone really believe that Grandmother’s social sanctions were really more oppressive that the madness of hate crimes, thought police, sex crimes and government dictated rules concerning the etiquette of sexual encounters with strangers? She had the right and the ability to choose with whom she would and would not associate.
We should regain as much of it as we can. Civility is within our control. As Pierre de Craon so thoughtfully cautioned, it may take a radical religious revival to save us. I too, pray for miracles. In the meantime we can distinguish ourselves from our opponents by refusing to behave like them.
@Julian Curtis Lee:
I love your comments. Always. They contain extraordinary wisdom and insights. They/you are a bright light in a world that sometimes seems dark and evil.
I don’t want to tempt you into pride by writing this complimentary comment. I just want to express my gratitude.
@Richard:
I wrote my previous comment (above) a couple hours ago.
And just now, while visiting Hoosier Nation, I noticed that Mr. Lee is the featured guest/article.
So I thought I’d save him the potential awkwardness of promoting himself. (Not that there is necessarily anything bad about promoting oneself or a good cause.) Here is the link:
http://www.hoosiernation.us/2012/02/the-friday-show-interview-with-julian-lee/
I hope you are all reading Rich Pearson’s comments on the next thread.
Thanks. I love yours too. And Kevin for his work and this site. I want to express my gratitude for you joining into the racial family discussions also. I have my flaws. Temper & being over-critical and caustic is the worst one. Thus I recognize one type of brother-in-spirit in Hadding Scott, though he is smarter than me. However, “not caring” is not one of the flaws of he, you, or I. My difficulty is learning to express myself in a way that unites more than alienates.
I remember sitting in Libby Park in Ojai, California and observing a Jewish mother berating her grown son, who had a wife and his children present, by the playground equipment as his children played. Yipes. I thought, “How can you take that??” I felt sorry for him!
So much to write. But something brief:
Women have been tricked. But we men ourselves have a lot of fault in it. The women were always, in the more natural past, the creators and maintainers of Culture. I remember my family life. We wanted to do it the traditional way. I worked, she stayed home. But it was me who was limited, caught in a 20×20 room for 8-10 hours every day with short breaks. My wife, by contrast, had the run of the town. By the time I got home she had been many places, done many things, often with a little one in tow, and spoken to many people. Basically, she was involved with society while I labored solitarily. I was happy to do it. Now, it used to be that the Mother — who was naturally involved in society all day and not really limited to a house — evolved into something called a Matriarch. A matriarch was an imposing and respectable figure. This is a woman who graduated from simple mother hood, through this simple daily process of tending to both children and society, into a kind of mother of society. They would be involved in charities, arts, decorations, festivities — the Culture of our society. Now because there are so few mothers-into-Matriarchs, we have little culture anymore. And instead of the spacious daily realm of her house, land, and town many now labor like little chickens in factory boxes (office cubicles), still “serving the man” (because everybody has to serve somebody, just I did in my little office box). Only now, she’s serving a man who doesn’t care about her instead of the one she loves. But enough. Wars played a role in creating this, and so did continual development of society-altering technology…
I wonder how any of the above (changes with women and family) has a connection to the Freud/Jung article/movie! Perhaps Hadding or others would have insight. I have seen good marriages broken up by persons — often the wife — encouraged to express her “true feelings” and “true desires” which turned out to be transitory and anomalous to her in the wrong run. I myself have witnessed this. I can say that I lost my family partly because of feminist ideas that gathered around us, plus ideas about the inviolate legitimacy of sexual desire.
Oh, definitely. See above. And those are as perennial as the crocuses. A radical religious revival can take place with every White man and Woman from Russia west to Perth — this very night. The White mind has a predilection to Divine knowledge and religion, as the Upanishads attest, and even more our countless beautiful churches dedicated to nothing but the Divine Mystery.
tom,
yes i think most of his patients were jewish. vienna ‘s cultural climate wouldn’t tolerate a jew treating christian patients with freud’s controversial views on sexuality.
@Julian Curtis Lee:
Thank you for the kind words.
I listened to the interview after I wrote my previous comment last night.
There is sincerity and real love in what you do and say. In the interview you mentioned how your recording equipment is far from state-of-the-art, and how that does not stop you from making music from the heart in order to help White people, and how we all can tap into our inner artist/creative side in order to help this cause.
I agree. I would love to see more modern pro-White art. It can be something simple like painting a group of happy White people sitting in a cafe, talking and enjoying each other’s company. Everyone in the scene can be White, and at peace. Or maybe they are having a picnic in a beautiful, clean park; just a natural social gathering in a natural setting.
Or a painting of White parents helping and watching their baby’s first steps, maybe in some lush green grass under a beautiful sunset.
There is so much potential for good, uplifting pro-White art. Music, painting, poetry, novels, photography, videos (like your YouTube videos), movies, and maybe other things. Simple things that are accessible to the average White person (I include myself in that group.)
Anyway, I just wanted to say thanks, and also to get some of these ideas (mentioned above) out to anyone else who might be reading.
Have a good weekend, everyone.
It seems that Harvard’s Morton Prince was a counterpart to
Freud who was dramatically distinct in wishing to evade
dramatic superstructures, literary metaphors, etc., in the
study of unconcious and subconscious processes. He emphasized the patient, thorough “bottom up” accumulation of facts and conduct of research. The introduction in about 1921 or so to the second edition of his major work on the Unconscious contains comments clearly
directed toward Freud and Freud’s associates, but no names are invoked Prince, like Freud, got focused upon this subject domain from his studies in France (Charcot, Janet,
and with the use of, and explorations of , hypnosis). Prince’s
work brings forth the question of whether a parsimonious “science” of the Unconscious might have grown
to maturation in America in a way of a more clear and enduirng contribution if Freud and his following had never
existed.
@Drew: Well Freud didn’t invent the concept of the unconscious mind. Jung attributes it to Hartmann.
Freud, like Prince, and many other gifted medical students,
encountered the Unconscious/Subconscious as a focus of scientific study under the lectures and demonstrations of Charcot and of Janet, based on the use of hypnosis (Mesmerism, refined ). Prince’s deliberate rejection of adroit verbal/conceptual superstructures, was apparently an attempt to evolve a highly empirical science of treatment of
subconscious mental disorders that as a science could accumulate over time into a body of efficacious techniques and reciprocally of larger zones of contraindication. This appears to have been an approach too prosaic for Americans.
Jason Speaks Hebrew replied to Blue Rose on the “A Dangerous Method” thread and said:
February 20, 2012 – 9:22 pm
“I don’t understand your comment on Kevin. My concern with someone like him was the following passage from the link I sent:
“In 2008 Strom pleaded guilty to possession of ten images of child pornography and was sentenced to 23 months in prison.”
“That was the part I was talking about. Of course, I don’t doubt WN get railroaded, but if true, I think you would agree that is not a positive thing.”
This all happened six years after Pierce died. He died in 2002. Had this happened when Pierce was alive Strom would have been kicked out pronto.
Concerning Pierce’s reference to “losers” in the movement, he was referring to those who like to dress up in National Socialist-type uniforms and/or wear NS regalia. He was not referring to those who had ideas similar to his. You’ll see this if you ever get a hold of a copy of the National Alliance membership handbook.
=============================================================
Concerning your hero David Duke:
from Wikipedia
David Duke pleaded guilty to the felony charge of filing a false tax return under 26 U.S.C. § 7206 and mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 in December 2002.[133]
Four months later, Duke was sentenced to 15 months in prison, and he served the time in Big Spring, Texas. He was also fined US$10,000, ordered to cooperate with the Internal Revenue Service, and to pay money still owed for his 1998 taxes.
Duke pleaded guilty to what prosecutors described as a six-year scheme to dupe thousands of his followers by asking for donations. Through postal mail, Duke later appealed to his supporters that he was about to lose his house and his life savings. Prosecutors claimed that Duke raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in this campaign. Prosecutors also claimed he sold his home at a hefty profit, had multiple investment accounts, and spent much of his money gambling at casinos.[134][135][136]
Bold emphasis added.
@mark:
It’s not just the uniform-wearers. There are lots of people that seem to be more interested in excitement and drama than in practical activities that would advance the cause. He called these people hobbyists.
Dr. Pierce should have done far more of his labeling while
looking at himself directly in a clean mirror. His capacity to relate to others and understand them in any three-dimensional way, was never an impressive personal asset.
@Julian Curtis Lee:
Hi again, Mr. Lee
I decided to make my own pro-White blog. I’m not sure what exactly I will write about or feature.
It’s something I have been considering and wanting to do for a while. Your encouragement (in your interview) for others to channel their inner artist influenced my decision too.
There are no advertisements and I’m not selling anything or asking for donations. It’s just Richard writing from the heart and featuring stuff that inspires me or comforts me, stuff like that. I hope it comforts and encourages anyone who visits.
Hopefully some people will find it and bookmark it and visit once in a while.
http://richardloveswhitepeople.blogspot.com
I made it today, and there isn’t a ton of stuff on it. But hopefully it will blossom with time. I hope it’s good for anyone who visits.
Excellent! You will have influence. The way it works is that everybody “clicks” with certain people and not others. Everybody has their “audience.” You will reach people, both men and women, who relate to you and can receive your message because of your particular chemistry with them. People may come to TOO or to somebody else’s blog, and not relate, but be able to understand it from you. Everything we do matters.
Nice pics, nice feel. Just saying the term “White people” is a taboo buster, because the tacit message we’ve all grown up is: Don’t even speak about yourselves as though you exist. And of course, now they’re even trying to tell us we don’t exist. Then to say express a positive regard for them (“I love…”) is really doing some taboo busting. So these simple things make waves at this time. I call it “monkeywrenching the zeitgeist.”
JL
@Julian Lee: What gave me a pause and unpleasant gasp is the astonishing statement dear Richard makes in the heading of his Blog.Looking at close-up anatomy of women and touching oneself are according to him our greatest problems.Not losing Culture War to non-whites,not Diversity Plague nor the monstrous replacement of our Civilisation with Pollard-Madoff-Soros world-view.
Some kind of pernicious onanism ,according to Richard is debilitating us and our future.For a tense moment I was hoping he put it in as Monty Python joke, but I fear he is in earnest there.Oh,man- gather all your mental acuity and reconsider that statement.
@protorenassance:
‘unpleasant gasp’
Careful. Poor choice of words. You might put wicked thoughts into Richard’s head.
@protorenassance:
What gave me a pause and unpleasant gasp is the astonishing statement dear Richard makes in the heading of his Blog.Looking at close-up anatomy of women and touching oneself are according to him our greatest problems.Not losing Culture War to non-whites,not Diversity Plague nor the monstrous replacement of our Civilisation with Pollard-Madoff-Soros world-view.
Some kind of pernicious onanism ,according to Richard is debilitating us and our future.For a tense moment I was hoping he put it in as Monty Python joke, but I fear he is in earnest there.Oh,man- gather all your mental acuity and reconsider that statement.
Several things about your comment are less than accurate.
The statement to which you refer is not in the “heading” of my blog. It’s in one of my blog posts.
Pornography and masturbation are two of the biggest threats to White societies.
That is my belief. And your comment only strengthens it.
@blue rose:
‘unpleasant gasp’
Careful. Poor choice of words. You might put wicked thoughts into Richard’s head.
Why did you write this?
It seems unnecessarily nasty and misguided to me.
Do you realize how much pornography is freely available on the internet? Or the extreme content of it?
What are the effects of the millions of pornography videos and images?
What are the effects on the mind? The body? The spirit?
Short-term? Long-term?
On the individual? On the collective?
What are the effects on men? On women? On Whites? On non-Whites? On relationships?
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but you seem to be scoffing at something you do not understand.
@Richard:
‘unpleasant gasp’
Actually, Richard, after I posted about it being a ‘poor choice of words’, I realized I had made some sort of Freudian slip — because in my mind what I read was ‘unpleasant GRASP’.
What I found amusing was the reaction of ‘protorenassance’ doing a double-take when he looked at your website, which I’ll quote here to refresh your mind:
What gave me a pause and unpleasant gasp is the astonishing statement dear Richard makes in the heading of his Blog. Looking at close-up anatomy of women and touching oneself are according to him our greatest problems. Not losing Culture War to non-whites, not Diversity Plague nor the monstrous replacement of our Civilisation with Pollard-Madoff-Soros world-view.
Some kind of pernicious onanism, according to Richard is debilitating us and our future. For a tense moment I was hoping he put it in as Monty Python joke, …
It was amusing because that, in so many words, was my reaction when I first saw your blog site. But I misread ‘unpleasant gasp’ for ‘unpleasant GRASP’ . A Freudian slip, perhaps. My bad.
Yes, I am quite aware of how much porn is available on the internet, in porn stores, and on videos and DVDs, and how ‘sex sells’ as it’s used in advertising. And the obsession and compulsions that keep certain people on a base, carnel, and lower plane of existence by viewing it.
But I don’t need you taking the high road with me, making out I ‘don’t understand’ something. You sound like an alter ego of someone else, but we’ve had enough of that on another article, so I’ll leave it there.
Since you think a ‘pernicious onanism’ is the basic threat to everything, I suggest you never read The Song of Solomon. It’s quite spicy in parts and might cause you to touch yourself.
@blue rose:
Bluerose, in response to my previous comment, you wrote:
Since you think a ‘pernicious onanism’ is the basic threat to everything…
Here is my response.
I never used the term “pernicious onanism”. For anyone interested, here is what I wrote:
Pornography and masturbation are two of the biggest threats to White societies.
I want to address something else you wrote:
But I don’t need you taking the high road with me, making out I ‘don’t understand’ something.
I wasn’t trying to take the “high road” in my previous comment; I was merely defending myself against one of your unprovoked insults.
I stand by what I wrote.
@Richard:
Either you have dyslexia, or you are just looking for an argument over a mere comment I made to ‘protorenassance’’s comment when he looked at your website.
What I found amusing was the reaction of ‘protorenassance’ doing a double-take when he looked at your website, which I’ll quote here to refresh your memory ONCE AGAIN:
In my comment to ‘protorenassance’’s amusing comment, I merely said “Poor choice of words” in his reference to ‘unpleasant gasp’ — and that was ALL i said — wherein I afterwards made a Freudian slip by mistaking ‘gasp’ for ‘grasp’. My bad.
If you want to make a big issue of this, then go it alone, as I am not interested in cluttering up the board dealing with you (or your alter-ego) on this matter any further.
@blue rose:
Blue rose, you wrote:
and that was ALL i said…
Here is my response.
No, that wasn’t all you said. Here was your original unprovoked insult, the one I respectfully defended myself against:
‘unpleasant gasp’
Careful. Poor choice of words. You might put wicked thoughts into Richard’s head.
I want to address something else in your previous comment above:
I am not interested in cluttering up the board dealing with you (or your alter-ego) on this matter any further.
I don’t know what you mean by “alter ego”. That is the second time you have used that term.
I’m not interested in cluttering up the board, either, but I will defend myself against your unprovoked attacks.
A couple days ago, out of nowhere, you tried to insult me by asking me to listen to a Gerry Rafferty song on YouTube. I didn’t realize you were trying to insult me, so I listened to it. When I replied back to you and shared my thoughts, you asked me if I take “psychotropic drugs”. I didn’t realize you were trying to insult me until I read that comment, and I still don’t understand how that song is an insult. (As Mrs. Teller pointed out, your insult didn’t really make sense. That song was before my time.) I just listened to it once, out of kindness toward you; I didn’t study the song.
I try to get along with others, and I’m very much open to constructive criticism or disagreements, but I will defend myself against your unprovoked insults.
@Richard:
I sent the link to the Gerry Raffery video (“Straight Down the Line”) because I honestly thought you might be able to relate to the lyrics. From comments long ago with you and Mickey Meadows, there was some sort of mention of you having had a troubled past, or something like that. So I thought you might like the words to Rafferty’s song.
Everything else you are going on about is a figment of your imagination, an attempt to escalate a non-issue, to blow everything out of proportion, to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
@Richard:
So I thought you might like the words to Rafferty’s song — meaning them in relation to Jesus Christ. Just saying, in case you try to spin it again in some way.
“Jung had the naïve belief that psychoanalysis was a real science where the idea was to keep searching for new ideas and honing old ones rather than simply accepting Freudian dogma.”
Nonsense. Jung was deeply into mysticism. His main reason for deviating from orthodox Freudianism had less to do with science than occult visionary theories.
@Andrea Ostrov Letania:
“was a real science” This question is what makes Professor (Harvard) Morton Prince’s writings so interesting. While there are obvious barriers to dealing with concepts like subconscious and unconscious within the scientific method, his work and that of his collaborators certainly contains a consistent dedication to science, as far as science can serve.
By contrast, the Freudian approach appears to have had a brilliantly devised superstructure of literary metaphor and erotically saturated metaphysic that somehow captured everything (for several decades). Prince commented that his work (and that of his collaborators, of course ) regarding the subconscious and unconscious just got buried like clams by all the tidal wave that the vast Freudian superstructure engendered.
He made this comment not too long before his death in 1928.
What is history that apparently is ripe for excavation is what the work he had going ( based upon the work in France of Charcot and Janet and others )might have grown into in due
course absent the “Freudian” invasion in about 1908-12 and its beachhead and then its vast expansion in the 1920′s into
the huge heydey of post WW II. It is to paint with too broad a brush just to toss everything about psychoanlysis (synonymous with Freud ) into the scrap heap of false claims.
There is no reason at all that a slow process of peeling back
repression/suppression could not over time be for most people–mild neurotics the moreso–a way of
expediting maturation. Obviously, that need have little or nothing to do with any purported cure of mental disorder. Indeed, that is likely what made it possible for a lot of psychoanalysts to make a living in the marketplace in the 30′s,40′s,50′s and up through much of the 60′s? But none of such a process would depend upon Freud
ever having existed. None of it need be at all based on his notions or work. It is no accident that psychoanlysis has
devolved into largely a self-growth program for, say, young businessmen whose work accomplishments and income level belie their having seriious mental disorders. The strange matter in retrospect is that a solid body of American work got captivated by the Freudian invasion and its merits obscured by the promotionalism, grandiosity, and general
intellectual “show biz” of Freudianism. My own impression is that Freudianism in the rest of the world never gained the high ground anywhere that it so conpicuously did here. ?
“relegated to the intellectual fringes” “fraud”
It is really important, to slightly paraphrase Hemingway, for
us to separate the gold from the (slop). What Morton Prince,
for example, referred to as an analysis of the subconscious and unconscious is probably worthy of bringing forth now for a retrospective of “what went wrong” in the process of a Freudian tidal wave burying the sound and solid accumulation of knowledge underway by Prince and his collaborators. In crude analogy , it is as though such solid
“socialism” as the self-help formation of rural volunteer fire fighting organizations or as the self-help formation of Alcholics Anonymous were reflexively subsumed under some
Marxian metaphysic, and only those rural farmers so organized or those alcoholics redeeming themselves would realize the superstructe had nothing nothing to do with the efficacy of the efforts. Freudianism in America appears in retrospect to have been a kind of intellectual and culturl kidnapping. The elements of “psychoanalysis” that gave perhaps some workaday effiacy to the practice in the heyday
of the 1930′s-1960′s probably upon scrutiny have nothing at all to do with Freud–what’s Freudian is not real; what’s real is not Freudian. The work of Galton regarding word association, the work of Charcot and Janet and others in France, and the work in the U.S. of Prince and his cohorts would have sufficiently undergirded whatever limited efficacy psychoanalysis has had for the relief of some minor neurotic ailments but more importantly for the facilitation of maturtion and persoality integration for those with the time and money to undergo the process.
Morton Prince commended Freud’s viewpoints in certain important respects and disputed them, in others. For example, he felt Freud had greatly advanced an understanding of subconscious/unconscious processes by way of his conceptualizing repression and conflict. What appears oddly to not have happened is the sort of intellectual discussion and reasoned debate that would have moved the work of both men forward, along with others working outside of a Freudian superstrucutre–all toward the sort of synthesis and sifting that the unfettered intellectual marketplace is so capable of developing. Freudianism presented with a lot of cult-like aspects and the Freudians were not disposed to a lot of debate outside of their own circle/s. Part of the enemy in all of this may have been “us”–Nick Griffin has noted the “adolescent” characteristics of modern American culture and the penchant for doing big things in a big way right now. Both New Englander Morton Prince and the UK-born William McDougall bemoaned ( variously in the case of Freud vis a vis Prince and John B. Watson vis a vis McDougall ) the “bandwagon” penchant of Americans. The bandwagon of that time seemed to be rooted partly in Hollywood and partly in the New York chatter culture that Thomas Clayton Wolfe often portrayed with such devastating insight. The basic historic fact seems to be that a solidly emergent scientific treatment of the subconscious in America seems to have been hijacked and perverted. It appears that Prince always considered Freud’s work to have so much of merit that no wholesale condemnation of him or his work was justified.