Setting the Record Straight on Another Churchill Myth

/27 Comments/in /by

Churchill’s Headmaster: The ‘Sadist’ who Nearly Saved the British Empire
By Edward Dutton
Melbourne: Manticore Press, 2019

There will never be enough men of outstanding virtue to satisfy the human need for heroes, and one fertile source of the counterfeits necessary to make up the difference, as Ed Dutton points out, is wartime leaders:

There is a tendency to make sense of a devastated world by hero-worshipping the leader and also by finding some means of justifying all of the suffering, meaning that it was essential that the prosecutor of the war was beyond reproach. It has been found that the more people invest in something, the more they need to convince themselves that they have done the right thing. This is why people can react in such an irrational way if it is demonstrated to them that someone whom they admire — who is central, to some degree, to the way in which they structure the world — is simply not who they thought they were. They cannot cope with the fact that they have been duped.

In my youth, Winston Churchill regularly alternated with Jesus Christ as winner of an annual poll concerning the ‘greatest man who ever lived.’ We had a bust of him in our home. He is England’s national hero, and as Ed Dutton writes, many of the countless biographies of him ‘are nothing more than hagiographies that rehash and exaggerate the adulation for him in earlier hagiographies.’

Yet for those willing to listen, it is not hard to collect damning evidence against Churchill. As First Lord of the Admiralty during World War I, he was in charge of the disastrous Gallipoli Campaign, which led to 140,000 unnecessary allied deaths. As Chancellor of the Exchequer, he kept Britain on the Gold Standard, making industry uncompetitive and prolonging the Depression. Most seriously, he did not ‘stand up to Nazi aggression’ in 1940 as the usual story goes, but did all he could to force Hitler into a war with Britain that Hitler wished to avoid. It was Churchill who ordered the bombing of nonmilitary targets in Germany—including Dresden—merely to kill as many German civilians as possible and demoralize the survivors. At war’s end, he agreed not only to hand Eastern Europe over to Stalin but also to the forcible repatriation of all Soviet citizens who managed to escape to the West: the shameful episode known as ‘Operation Keelhaul.’

Much of Churchill’s voluminous writing amounted to attempts to justify or downplay his mistakes, something he acknowledged himself with the famous quip: ‘History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.’ His personal shortcomings were also considerable, including alcoholism, chronic gambling and a constant tendency to live beyond his means and scrounge off others. Dutton writes of Churchill as having

a fantastic sense of entitlement, dishonesty, untrustworthiness, and not caring about the suffering of others. [He] took his country into an avoidable war, bankrupted it, and so lost that country its Empire and left it too exhausted to defend itself. This commenced the process of mass immigration from developing countries which … led to many difficulties, such as rising distrust, Islamic terrorism, and the destruction of other traditions vital to holding the country together.

In the present work, Dutton focuses on one relatively minor biographical myth about Churchill, but the result is a useful illustration of how such myths begin, spread, and are gradually embellished until they entirely overwhelm the historical reality. Read more

Rosemary’s Baby: A Valuable Rosetta Stone

/42 Comments/in /by

In some important cases, contemporary JEM (Jewish Esoteric Moralization) appears in an especially concise and comprehensive form providing for us, as it were, a “Rosetta stone” more rich in insight than a larger body of JEM. The 1968 film Rosemary’s Baby and the 1967 book from which it was adapted are such works.

The Plot of Rosemary’s Baby runs as follows. Rosemary (Mia Farrow) is a woman living in New York City with her actor husband, Guy Woodhouse (John Cassavetes). Her husband, Guy Woodhouse, a Protestant, is by degrees more sophisticated. In the end, though, he’s your typical oblivious, vain, career-oriented actor. The two are interested in living in an upscale apartment building called the Bramford. Though a swanky setting, the building has a past shrouded in mystery and occult bloodshed.

Indeed, during the early 20th century it is said to have been the base of operations for a notorious coven of witches headed by the Arch-Warlock Adrian Marcato. Among these witches are included the Trench Sisters who “cooked and ate several young children.”  Also, the building is a bit out of their price range.

Nevertheless, despite the caveats of their concerned friend “Hutch” (Maurice Evans), they move in.  Shortly thereafter they meet the Castevets, an eccentric older couple living in the adjacent unit. Odd happenings steadily occur from there. As the film reveals, the Castevets, Minnie (Ruth Gordon) and Roman (Sidney Blackmer), are ostensibly “Satanists,” the heirs of the Marcato Cult. Their interest in the young couple is with Rosemary’s womb.

Eventually Rosemary finds herself drugged and raped by a serpentine humanoid during what appears to be a “Satanic” ritual. It is clear she’s been sold out by her careerist husband Guy Woodhouse who effectively bartered her off to the Castevets in exchange for valuable contacts in the theater world. On the other hand, it was Rosemary’s desire for social status that pushed Guy to live in the otherwise unaffordable Bramford.

Finally, at the end of the film, Rosemary gives birth to a devil child who is given the name “Adrian” doubtlessly in honor of Adrian Marcato. Readers should understand that this film depicts the Semitic Bride Gathering Cult of Judaism, particularly as it is aided by the assisting intermediary cult of Christianity. Here youthful Aryan stock is used to continue and maintain a more racially aged Jewry. Below is the evidence.

Esoterically, the setting of the Bramford is the Catholic Church. In fact, in Ira Levin’s book, it is even indicated that the building is owned by the Catholic Church. Yet the clues are multiple. Read more

From Stolen Cakes to Swinging Machetes: The Sick Joke of Third-World Enrichment

/31 Comments/in /by

George Orwell wasn’t a saint and wasn’t infallible. But he got some big things right. Animal Farm (1945) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) are classics of political satire, analysis and prophecy. Orwell also got some small things right. For example, in his pioneering essay on “Boys’ Weeklies,” he said that a magazine called The Magnet had “a really first-rate character in the fat boy, Billy Bunter.”

Myopic and mocked

Billy Bunter is indeed one of the great comic characters of English literature. He was launched in 1908 by an astonishingly prolific author called Charles Hamilton (1876-1961) (writing as Frank Richards), but today his stories have something that his creator and early readers could never have foreseen: a thrill of the forbidden. The stories are very politically incorrect. Bunter is a myopic, morbidly obese schoolboy who is mocked for his greed, dishonesty, selfishness, stupidity and sloth. And worse than mocked: as Orwell said, “boots and canes are constantly thudding” against “his tight trousers.” Here is a typical encounter between Bunter and his fellow schoolboys:

[A]t that moment Nugent opened the cupboard to lift out the cake. There was no cake to be lifted out. Nugent stared at the spot where a cake had been, and where now only a sea of crumbs met the view. …

“Bunter, you podgy pirate!” exclaimed Harry Wharton. … “Where’s that cake?”

“How should I know? I never even looked into the cupboard, and I never saw any cake when I looked in, either—”

“Scrag him!”

“Boot him!”

“I-I-I say, you fellows, it wasn’t me,” yelled Bunter. “I-I expect you put it somewhere else. It wasn’t there when I ate it—I mean, when I didn’t eat it—If you think I scoffed that cake, I can jolly well say—whoooop! Whoooop! Yarooooh!” (Bunter Comes for Christmas, 1959)

Frank Richards’ “first rate character” Billy Bunter

It’s not sophisticated humour, but Charles Hamilton was a skilful writer and entertained millions of readers for many decades. I particularly like Bunter’s self-refuting denials: “The cake wasn’t there when I ate it.” Bunter is stupid, so he exposes himself even as he indignantly exculpates himself.

A newspaper that refutes itself

But you don’t need to go to old children’s literature to find self-refuting denials and self-exposing exculpators. The British newspaper known as the Guardian supposedly exists on a far higher intellectual and literary plane than the Magnet, but its pages are full of Bunteresque self-exposure. For example, in May 2019 it ran an indignant story about Black criminals being deported to Jamaica. I think the headline was Bunteresque: “‘Things are so bad even the police are scared’: deportees live in fear in Jamaica.”

The Guardian knows that its good-thinking readers will not draw any heretical conclusions from that self-accusing headline. Instead, they will feel angry and dismayed that vulnerable Blacks are being deported from the magic dirt of Britain to the tragic dirt of Jamaica. However, I’m a bad-thinker, so I’ll point out the obvious. If Jamaica is such a violent and lawless country, how can immigration from Jamaica be good for Britain? It can’t be, and it’s inevitable that Jamaican immigrants and their descendants will be over-represented as violent criminals in Britain. That story in the Guardian is full of Black criminals complaining about being deported to live among their own kind in a nation governed by their own culture. Read more

Balzac and the Jews

/16 Comments/in , /by

Honoré de Balzac (1799–1850) was an incredibly prolific French novelist of the first half of the nineteenth century. A pioneer of realism, he wrote 85 novels in twenty years, many comprising parts of his multifaceted examination of French society, which, invoking Dante, he dubbed La Comédie Humaine—The Human Comedy. Through carefully observing every social actor, profession, institution, and condition of French life, Balzac aimed to analyze the forces underlying the economic and social changes wrought by an emerging capitalist society—a society he believed was excessively motivated by money at the expense of traditional values.

His most famous works include Eugenie Grandet (1833), Pere Goriot (1934), Lost Illusions (1837), and Cousin Bette (1846). In developing the novels that would comprise La Comédie Humaine, Balzac hit upon the (then revolutionary) idea of using recurring characters. He wrote with great attention to detail to depict and explain their lives, and strived to present them as real people with real triumphs and frequent failures. Never fully good nor fully evil — his characters are entirely human in their desires and their behaviors. Balzac’s attention to detail and unfiltered depiction of people in society had never been seen before in literary writing. In addition to his remarkable powers of observation and prodigious memory, he had an intuitive understanding of people and their motivations which, borrowing the term from Sir Walter Scott, he called “second sight.” The French poet Baudelaire, an ardent admirer of Balzac, noted how “All his characters are endowed with the same vital flame which was burning within himself.”[1]

After working for three years as a lawyer’s apprentice, the young Balzac turned his back on the profession, finding it inhumane and tedious in its working schedule. His experiences in the law did, however, provide the basis for many plotlines in his novels which often center on legal disputes, wills and contested legacies. Turning his attention to writing, his early attempts to forge a literary career proved unsuccessful, as did later attempts to achieve success as a publisher, printer, businessman, critic, and politician. Despite experiencing dire poverty and constant rejection, Balzac continued to write, and his breakthrough came with The Chouans (1829), a novel set in the aftermath of the French Revolution. Its success encouraged him to devote himself wholeheartedly to a literary career. From this point, his life’s purpose was to achieve glory as the historian of his time, as the “secretary” of French society. In this endeavor he developed what many would regard as insane work habits.

Balzac’s energy was unbounded and his productivity astounding. His phenomenal work ethic was necessitated by a penchant for luxurious living—a tendency that constantly plunged him into debt, and led to his being hounded by creditors for most of his adult life. To evade them, he registered under pseudonyms and frequently changed his lodgings. While Balzac eventually earned decent money from his literature, his reckless spending always ensnared him in further debts: bills exist for his order of fifty-eight pairs of gloves at one time, and for similarly extravagant purchases from his fashionable tailor and jeweler in Paris. Balzac was famous for his bejeweled walking sticks, red leather upholstered library, busts of Napoleon (whom he loved), and other things of a luxurious and superfluous nature. In a letter from 1828, his publisher and friend Latouche wrote:

You haven’t changed at all. You pick out the [expensive] rue Cassini to live in and you are never there. Your heart clings to carpets, mahogany chests, sumptuously bound books, superfluous clothes and copper engravings. You chase through the whole of Paris in search of candelabra that will never shed their light on you, and yet you haven’t even got a few sous in your pockets that would enable you to visit a sick friend. Selling yourself to a carpet-maker for two years! You deserve to be put in Charenton lunatic asylum.[2] 

Read more

Featured Video Play Icon

A reminder of what’s at stake: The world we may lose

/4 Comments/in , /by

A Reminder of What a Well-Functioning White Culture Looks Like: Wagner’s Der Ring des Nibelungen

/6 Comments/in /by

Chile’s Immigration Crossroads, Part 2

/6 Comments/in /by

Go to Part 1.

The Return of Sebastián Piñera

Another enormous sign of hope was the result of the 2017 presidential election, during which center-right candidate and former president Sebastián Piñera made law and order a central issue of his campaign. In debates and interviews, he regularly toted around a graph that neatly showed the issue of rising crime:

Mr. Piñera with his Nixonian bar charts.

Many members of the media mocked Mr. Piñera’s graph, and attempted to deconstruct it throughout his campaign.

Mr. Piñera promised to crack down not only on crime in general, but on illegal immigrants, drug traffickers, and human smugglers as well. Clearly aping President Trump, in 2016 Mr. Piñera said, “Chile should be open to receiving immigrants who contribute to our nation’s prosperity, but should absolutely close its borders to drug trafficking, crime, contraband, organized crime, and illegal immigration.” Doubling down, he went on to say, “Many of the criminal gangs in Chile today, such as those that specialize in identity theft, are made up of foreigners. This is a particularly grave situation for the areas [of Chile] where immigrants are a large percentage of the population.”

Chile’s presidential elections work like they do in France: if no candidate wins over 50 percent of the vote in the first round, there is a second runoff vote with only the top two vote-getters of the first round. In the first round of 2017, while there were only two right-wing candidates, there were six left-wing ones. This had the effect of forcing most of them to try and “out-left” the others. Two of the acid tests in this regard were the questions, asked by journalists and activists alike, “Is Venezuela today a dictatorship or a democracy?” and “Does what’s happening in the Araucania [where Amerindians have taken to destroying property owned by Whites, and sometimes even killing them] today constitute terrorism?” That last question was not just for the soundbite either—if labeled as terrorism, much sterner measures can be taken by the government to squelch it than they would be able to otherwise.

On the question regarding Venezuela, the leading left-wing candidate, Senator Alejandro Guillier (a former TV journalist), equivocated pathetically, saying “It is a regime that is no longer democratic,” but refusing to explicitly call it a dictatorship, and refusing say what Chilean-Venezuelan relations would look like under his Presidency. When asked about terrorism during a televised debate, he cucked. In a rambling response he conceded that the situation included “grave violence,” but not terrorism. He asked Chileans to think of the plight of the Araucanos as well, and suggested that the solution to the problem lies in more economic development targeted at Araucanos, along with more respect and understanding. Mr. Piñera, meanwhile, declared the violence and property destruction in Araucania terrorism, and condemned Venezuela’s current government unapologetically, even meeting with exiled Venezuelan officials publicly.

Alejandro Guillier and Sebastián Piñera

With so many candidates, nobody won over 50 percent of the vote in the first round, and both Mr. Piñera and Sen. Guillier went on to the second round—though Sen. Guillier was nearly bested by an opponent to his Left who made many promises about free college and student loan forgiveness. On election day, Mr. Piñera won by nearly ten points.

The regions most affected by immigration are the Metropolitana (“Metropolitan,” which is essentially just the massive capital city of Santiago), its two neighboring regions, and the regions that compose the northern third of Chile—especially Antofagasta. President Piñera carried all of these regions in the second round of voting, and all but one by a large margin. The Araucania went to President Piñera by the biggest margin of any region, with Sen. Guillier carrying only 37.6 percent of the vote there—only a bit higher than the percentage of the population that is Araucano. The two regions that neighbor Araucania went for Mr. Piñera by comfortable margins as well. Meanwhile, Sen. Guillier carried only the Whitest southern regions, all but untouched by immigration and Araucano violence terrorism, and the absentee vote, which is dominated by Leftists who fled Gen. Pinochet’s regime and never returned. (Source)

This all represents a marked change from the Sebastián Piñera of 2009–2014, during his first term as president. Back then, President Piñera was much more like Mitt Romney, and much less like Donald Trump. His talking points were all of a center-right “economism” bent, and he won the presidency in 2009 only narrowly, by three points, largely because the Left’s candidate was the decidedly uninspiring and mediocre former President Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle. Mr. Piñera’s first time in office was in many ways a “lame duck” term from start to finish. He opposed the very popular social movement to make college more affordable, and his approval rating were regularly in the 20s and 30s—lower than Gen. Pinochet’s ever were. The Economist, which largely approved of his policies, even called him “inept” and noted that this opinion was “not confined to the opposition.” I lived in Chile for part of President Piñera’s first term, and it certainly felt like the entire country hated him. I myself always thought of him as something of a doofus, a Monopoly man without any sense of social grace or political tactics.

Yet only a few years later, after another scandal-ridden Leftist president, a wave of immigration, crime, and unrest in the Araucania, President Piñera returned to politics more as a Trumpian nationalist than a Romney-like Davos man. The results in his electoral fortunes and general popularity speak for themselves—and should serve as a lesson to the Right across the West. Having taken office only in March of this year, it is too early to tell if President Piñera will dedicate the necessary state resources, political capital, and moral courage needed to curb the immigration that candidate Piñera deplored. No matter what, he will certainly be better than Sen. Guillier, or any other Leftist, would have been. Again, like President Trump, President Piñera even shows little signs of racial consciousness here and there. During his first term as President of Chile, he once said, on camera, to the father of a small blonde child, “Congratulations, you’ve done a great thing, you’re bettering the race.”

Signs of Hope and Action Items

  • The north and northeastern border should be militarized. More walls, more patrols, more checkpoints, and more soldiers would all do well. On top of illegal immigrants, plenty of illegal drugs pour through the northern border—so more security there hits two birds with one stone—just as with increased security on America’s southern border. From east to west, Chile is a very small country, so securing the borders that do not run alongside Argentina should be no great trouble—especially given Chile’s wealth and military prowess.
  • Haitian immigration must be stopped, and recent Haitian arrivals should be incentivized to repatriate. Though still only superficially investigated, one of the main sources of the explosion of Haitian immigration is quite criminal. Haitians in Haiti are being sold, for a few hundred American dollars, fake letters from churches and charities promising housing and jobs. The Haitians then board flights for Chile, without knowing any Spanish, show these letters to customs agents, register as visitors, and disappear. The foremost company behind this is Latin American Wings, which for a time was bringing 100 Haitians to Chile a day. President Piñera should try and make things for this company as difficult as possible, while also investigating them and prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law.

Though he been in office for less than a year, Mr. Piñera is already making good on his campaign’s tough talk. His administration has taken a number of different measures to make it harder for Haitians to come to—and then stay in—Chile. While I have no evidence for it, I also get the sense that there is someone in the new government who is effectively using backchannels and technicalities to slow immigration applications generally—much like what Stephen Miller is doing in the Trump White House. Regardless, President Piñera took office in April of 2018, and every month since then has seen more Haitians in Chile leave than arrive. [Argentina next best bet for Haitians as Chile tightens immigration controls, by Frances Jenner, Argentina Reports, September 4, 2018]

  • Immigration from White and whitish countries should be given preferential treatment, under one guise or another.
  • At present, Piñera is facilitating Venezuelan immigration. While Venezuelans may not be a good enthno-linguistic fit for the United States, they are a good fit for Chile. Importantly, though not as White as Chileans, they are much Whiter than most every other large source of migration to Chile in the last few years: Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia. A 2011 census (p. 15) broke the country down racially like this: 51.6 percent “dark,” (effectively: mestizos) 43.6 percent White, 2.9 percent Black, 1.2 percent “other,” and 0.7 percent mixed Black. In a separate question, the Amerindian population was put at 2.6 percent (p. 28)—presumably encompassing a majority of the other and mixed Black responses from the first breakdown, and a small part of the “dark” as well. My instincts tell me that of the Whites, perhaps a quarter are pure or nearly pure, and the rest are high yellow castizos; the “darks” I would estimate are about half castizo and half mestizo. On the whole, it is reasonable to assume Venezuelans represent an assimilable people. Especially since those fleeing today are largely composed of the upper, Whiter, professional classes. Their already increasing number have caused no noticeable problems. All the Venezuelans I have met in Chile have been polite, hard-working, and grateful to have left a nation committing suicide-by-Marxism. Solidarity with their struggle against that ideology should also be taken into account. Communism has brought more death and poverty to Latin America than any European imperial power, and Latin Americans should help one another in escaping and defeating it wherever it sneaks into power. Moreover, Venezuelan immigrants and their descendants will be sure to vote against Socialist and Communist candidates for decades to come—which will in turn limit future Leftist attempts to make Chile swarthier. There is also an element of fairness in allowing large numbers of Venezuelans to come: During Chile’s own chaotic period from 1970 until 1990, Venezuela took in an estimated 80,000 Chileans—including literary titan Isabel Allende. In fact, so many Chileans reached Venezuela that there is now a whole community of Venezuelan-Chileans there, including the beautiful actress Ana Karina Casanova.
  • Argentina, though not as White as it used to be, is still much Whiter than Bolivia and Peru. Like Venezuela, there are economic pretenses for giving Argentina preferential immigration status that can serve as a mask for the racial reasons they should receive preferential status. Argentina and Chile, despite having a brotherly rivalry since their foundings that does occasionally heat up, also have much in common, and have traded waves of immigrants back and forth since the nineteenth century.
  • Spain, the motherland, has also been in a considerable economic rut for a decade now—which is the reason why the flow of Spanish immigrants is already steady. Spain is also inarguably Whiter than Chile, so a large stream of immigrants from there would be a demographic and genetic plus for Chile, not just roughly neutral as with Venezuela and Argentina. Of great importance is that Venezuela, Argentina, and Spain have all had lengthy periods of great prosperity and cultural excellence. Their current hard times, which Chile has certainly had its fair share of (it was the country hardest hit by the Great Depression on the planet), are almost certainly temporary. They have the necessary genetic makeup to build and sustain modern and comfortable societies. There is no evidence this is the case for Peru, Bolivia, or Haiti.
  • The current trickle of Chinese immigration should also be halted, largely for security reasons. China has designs on becoming a puppet master in Latin America to nearly the same extent as they do in Africa. The last thing Chile needs is a bright Asian fifth column in its military and intelligence agencies—as the US is steadily developing. Nor should Chile seek to set itself up with an alien Asian elite, as Peru accidentally did to itself.

Alberto Fujimori, President from 1990 until 2000… of Peru.

Just as cigarette packs in some countries include an obligatory picture of organs ravaged by cancer, every time presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz calls for the defunding of Planned Parenthood or Jeb Bush says that “I’m not sure we need half a billion dollars for women’s health issues” there ought to be an obligatory video of a welfare office filled with crying non-White babies. Even the dullest Cuckservative would be rattled out of his self-congratulatory moral signaling by that image and sound.

There is no reason to believe the demographic trends of abortion in America would not be largely the same in Chile. And since in Chile the lower classes are uniformly less White than the upper classes, the fact that poor women get abortions at substantially higher rates than wealthy women would make an even bigger eugenic impact in Chile than it does in large swathes of the United States. Moreover, although it sounds backwards, I suspect legalized abortion would increase the country’s birth rate. I have met dozens upon dozens of Chilean women who got knocked up in their teens or early twenties, and dropped all their life plans in order to abley raise their one child. At that age, doing so is such a drain on time and resources, and it makes it so much harder to find a serious romantic partner, that many of them never end up having another child. If instead they could get an abortion and move on with their lives, I suspect many of them would then go on to get married and have several children. High rates of teen pregnancy have plagued Chile for decades—as recently as 2009, 15 percent of new mothers were under the age of 19. Politicians are constantly coming up with silly plans to lessen this social problem (in 2014 one neighborhood in Santiago displayed a fake, 40 foot green condom to encourage teens to use contraception), but the most effective and obvious way would be to legalize abortion. President Piñera is certainly not going to make any attempt at doing this. But, if he halts immigration substantially, this will give Chile breathing room until a leftist President comes along and manages to greatly expand its legalization.

In Sum

From a strict purist Anglo-Nordic perspective, Chile is not an especially White nation. If you lumped together all the pure Amerindians, Asians, Middle Easterners, and Gypsies, the non-White population would be around 20 percent. Another ten percent are very dark mestizos. Perhaps ten percent is 95 percent White or more. The remaining 60 percent is castizo or mestizo. However, by the standards of Latin America, it is considered White—and objectively it is much Whiter than almost every other country in the region, which is evident in its many fine qualities. Chile is a great country. Though small and isolated, it has produced titans in the fields of literature, poetry, film, music, athletics, and economics. It has fought heroic wars and conquered and tamed some of the most difficult terrain on the planet: from the polar south, to the driest desert in the world in the north, to the Andes mountain range. Its historic people are physically beautiful, warm, well cultured, and impeccably literate. As with other international outposts of Europeans, from the Boers of South Africa, to the Anglos of Australia and New Zealand, to the confederados of Brazil, to the remnants of America’s historic majority still in the United States, they deserve to continue on, for themselves and their prosperity. The policy choices of the Piñera Presidency, and how vigorously those policies are enforced, may well determine their fate for the next century—let us pray they make the right choice.