Professor of Puppets: How a Lover of Open Borders Has Gone from “Let Them in!” to “Kick Them Out!”

It’s called a “RoboRoach” and it’s one of the horriblest things I’ve ever seen. A living cockroach has an electronic board mounted on its back and connected to its nervous system. The ethical imbeciles responsible for this miniature abomination proclaimed, with appropriately autistic enthusiasm, that you will be able to “Control a living insect from your smartphone!” They added: “This is the world’s first commercially available cyborg!”

The repulsive RoboRoach

It’s the “living” bit that’s important, of course. That’s what gives the ethical imbeciles their thrill: the thought of destroying the autonomy of another living creature and “controlling” it. Now, I don’t think insects are fully conscious, have free will, or can suffer in any true sense. But even if that’s so and even if this kind of experimentation were always confined to insects, it would still be wrong and still be repulsive. But it won’t be confined to insects, of course. The same psychology that thrills to the thought of controlling a cockroach “from your smartphone!” thrills even more to the thought of controlling a living cat or living dog or – and now we reach orgasmic level — living human. The Jewish poet Heine (1797–1856) said that Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen – “Where they burn books, they will in the end burn people too.” He was right. And I’m right when I say that, where they implant neuro-controllers in cockroaches, they will sooner or later implant neuro-controllers in people too.[i]

It’s satire now, but lots of people want to make it reality: a neuro-controlled and auto-vaxxed transwoman in 2030

Millions of us would enjoy having control over another human like that. Maybe most of us would, if we could. But the average person would only enjoy the sadism of it, the antinomian thrill of committing evil and, in theological terms, defiling the imago Dei.[ii] More frightening, in some ways, are those who would think it good and right and proper to implant neuro-controllers in human brains. For example, Britain currently has a Labour government full of leftists who would happily stamp out racism and sexism and Islamophobia like that. George Orwell explored that kind of leftist psychology in his dystopian dark comedy Nineteen Eighty-Four, where scientists working for IngSoc — “English Socialism” — have begun to directly control the human brain. Orwell’s novel was published in 1949, but the desire to destroy autonomy and directly control other humans is much older than that. In Doctor Faustus (1592), Christopher Marlowe put it into the mouth of a character who stole a book of magic and gloated: “Now will I make all the maidens in our parish dance at my pleasure, stark naked, before me.”

The World’s Worst Wheedlers

But direct control of brains is much, much older than the human desire to achieve it. Millions of years older, in fact. As I described in “How to Cure a White Zombie,” very simple parasites can directly manipulate the brains of much more complex hosts. The “RoboRoach” has natural analogs in those cockroaches controlled by the Emerald cockroach wasp, Ampulex compressa, which stings a cockroach with paralyzing neurotoxin, feeds off its body-fluid, then guides it to a burrow where the wasp’s larvae can feed on it. I argued in “Verbal Venom” that parasitic or predatory manipulation has also evolved among human beings. But it doesn’t involve us injecting neuro-chemicals into each other’s brains. Instead, it involves injecting something that can be just as potent: words. English has a wonderful little verb that describes manipulation-by-verbal-injection. Where wasps inject, we humans wheedle. Insects don’t use language, so wasps can’t wheedle cockroaches into acting against their own interests. But humans can certainly wheedle other humans into doing that. And who are the World’s Worst Wheedlers? I think Kevin MacDonald has answered that question by explaining and exploring the The Culture of Critique created by Jews like Marx, Freud and Boas to wage war on Whites and the West. Rather as the biology of cockroaches is vulnerable to the literal venom of Ampulex compressa, so the psychology of Whites is vulnerable to the verbal venom of Jews.

Emerald cockroach wasp with paralyzed cockroach (image from Wikipedia)

MacDonald has described how The Culture of Critique depends on charismatic Jewish gurus who recruit and control a group of fanatical disciples who spread the ideas of the guru. Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud and Franz Boas were all like that. So, in descending order of fame and importance, have been Leon Trotsky, Yigael Gluckstein and Frank Furedi: Karl begat Leon, Leon begat Yigael, and Yigael begat Frank. In other words, the sociologist Frank Furedi was the charismatic Jewish guru who led a Trotskyist sect that descended from the Trotskyist sect led by the charismatic Jewish guru Yigael Gluckstein. As I described in my article “Frank Furedi Fights for Freedom,” Yigael’s sect was called the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and Frank’s sect was called the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP).

Metallica’s meisterwerk: the mighty Master of Puppets (1986)

But in some ways you could say that RCP stands for “RoboRoach Communist Party,” because to me Frank Furedi’s control over the brains of his disciples strongly resembles the control over a “living insect” promised in that repulsive advert. The American heavy-metal band Metallica once released an album called Master of Puppets (1986), which explored the politics and social norms whereby humans are manipulated and controlled into waging war or becoming addicted to drugs and so on. Inspired by that album, I’ll call Frank Furedi a Professor of Puppets and salute his almost uncanny ability to manipulate and control his gentile disciples. He’s equipped them with a thoroughly Jewish set of instincts and ideas. For example, Frank has a typically Jewish attitude to animal welfare[iii]. He doesn’t think it’s important. Accordingly, his gentile puppets don’t think it’s important either. They wouldn’t find the RoboRoach repulsive. No, I think they’d celebrate the RoboRoach as a brave early step towards Man’s full and glorious control of brute creation and all lower life.

Professor of Puppets Frank Furedi, a former lecturer in sociology at the University of Kent (image from Infogalactic)

This is because the Professor and his puppets are Promethean in the typically Marxist way described by Leszek Kołakowski in his magisterial Main Currents of Marxism, vol. 1 (1978): “Salvation, for Marx, is man’s salvation of himself; not the work of God or Nature, but that of a collective Prometheus who, in principle, is capable of achieving absolute command over the world he lives in.” The arrogant and misguided Prometheanism of the Professor and his puppets helps explain why I’m very glad that the RCP never rode revolution to power in the United Kingdom. If it had, I am certain that Professor and puppets would have done their best to reproduce the horrors of the early Soviet Union, where resentful, revenge-thirsty minorities like Jews, Georgians and Latvians took revenge on the Russian Orthodox majority in an orgy of torture and mass murder.

Libertarian in 2015: “Let Them In!”

In Britain, only the controlling role of Jews in revolutionary Marxism remained the same: the resentful minorities and revenge-worthy majority were different. The revenge-worthy majority were White Protestants and the Jew Frank Furedi, for example, recruited minorities like the Irish Catholic Brendan O’Neill, who deeply resented the racist treatment of his Irish father in London, and the Indian Muslim Kenan Malik, who deeply resented the racist bullying he suffered at school. I think the resentment of O’Neill and Malik is perfectly understandable (“There but for the grace of God go I”). But I’m still very glad that neither O’Neill nor Malik got the chance to translate that resentment into revenge, serving as ministers in an all-powerful revolutionary regime. All the same, O’Neill and Malik have done their best to harm the White Protestant English using Third-World proxies. The RCP campaigned hard for the “rejection of all controls on immigration.” Long after the RCP was disbanded, Brendan O’Neill was still arguing for open borders. In 2015, he issued a stirring call for Britain to “Let Them In” at RoboRoach HQ, the Spiked Online web-magazine:

We shouldn’t demonise or infantilise African migrants. We should welcome them. … We shouldn’t pity these migrants; we should admire them, for using guile, gumption and perseverance to come here. They’re precisely the kind of people sluggish Europe needs more of, an antidote to our students who can’t even clap without having a mental breakdown and our new generation who think that being told to ‘get on your bike’ to look for a job is tantamount to abuse. Let’s relax the borders and let them in to try their luck in our countries and see how they fare. If we do that, we’ll put the traffickers out of business, end the deaths in the Mediterranean, and, more importantly, do our part to enable the aspirations of human beings who have committed no crime other than wanting to [KMac comments: to escape their shithole countries and] realise their potential in our towns, our cities, alongside us. (“Let Them In,” Spiked Online, 21st April 2015)

But that was ten years ago and, as the Romans wisely noted, Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis – “Times are changed and we are changed with them.” Where once Brendan O’RoboRoach waxed lyrical in support of open borders, he now lists that very support among the three worst examples of the “cranky shite” urged upon sane folk by the woke left: “transwomen are women, open the borders, Israel is bad.” Indeed, in 2025 Brendan is loudly proclaiming that a certain class of “migrants” simply “shouldn’t be allowed in Britain.” That’s right: we shouldn’t admire this class of migrants or celebrate their “guile, gumption and perseverance.” We shouldn’t welcome them as an “antidote” to “sluggish Europe” or “enable” their “aspirations … to realize their potential.” Not at all. Far from enabling, we should exclude.

Libertarian in 2025: “Kick Them Out!”

That’s what Brendan thinks now. But what exactly is the class of migrants that Brendan wants to exclude not just from Britain but from the whole of the West? Well, it’s those migrants who espouse “hate” towards a group already present in and ornamenting the West. Let’s ask what this migrant-menaced group might be. Is it perhaps women, who have suffered horrendously from the misogyny and rape-culture of migrants? Consider Brendan’s own ancestral land of Ireland, where the White woman Ashling Murphy was brutally murdered by the Gypsy migrant Jozef Puška (as you’d expect, the BBC calls him a “Slovak national”). Consider Brendan’s birthplace of England, where a migrant from Sudan raped and shattered the skull of another White woman and a migrant from Jamaica, Delroy Easton Grant, sexually assaulted scores or even hundreds of elderly White women.

So is it “migrants who hate” women who “shouldn’t be allowed in Britain” or Ireland? No, Brendan hasn’t called for anything like that. What about “migrants who hate” homosexuals? In Brendan’s ancestral land of Ireland an Iraqi-Kurdish migrant called Yousef Palani, driven by “hatred of and prejudice towards homosexual men,” murdered and decapitated two homosexuals in 2022. In England, a similarly hate-driven Libyan migrant called Khairi Saadallah murdered three homosexual men in 2020. But again, no, Brendan hasn’t proclaimed that “Migrants who hate” homosexuals “shouldn’t be allowed in Britain.” Let’s try for third time lucky. What about “migrants who hate” Ahmadis? They’re the peaceful Muslim sect that believes in “Love for All, Hatred for None” and is horrendously persecuted by other Muslims. In 2016, an Ahmadi Muslim named Asad Shah was brutally murdered on British soil by a migrant from Pakistan who objected to Asad Shah’s free speech on the topic of prophethood. Despite long and loudly professing his love of free speech, Brendan O’Neill has never condemned or even mentioned the murder of Asad Shah. But has he perhaps now repaired his most grievous fault and proclaimed that “Migrants who hate” Ahmadis “shouldn’t be allowed in Britain”?

The special group that really matters

Nope. It’s third time unlucky. Brendan has never proclaimed that women, homosexuals or Ahmadis must be protected from migrants who hate them. Members of all three of those groups have suffered death and serious injury in Britain from hate-driven migrants, but Brendan hasn’t demanded the exclusion or expulsion of such migrants. Instead, Brendan has been exercised on behalf of another and very special group that hasn’t, to date, suffered death or serious injury from migrants in Britain. Here’s what he had to say in the Spectator in March 2025:

Migrants who hate Jews shouldn’t be allowed in Britain

If you’re a foreigner who hates Jews, should you be allowed to move to Britain? For me it’s a no-brainer: absolutely not. The safety and dignity of Britain’s Jews count for infinitely more than the ‘rights’ of a racist migrant. Does the Labour government agree? Does it agree that overseas anti-Semites are not welcome here? We are about to find out.

There are disturbing reports emerging that a man from Gaza with very iffy views has arrived in Britain. He goes by the name Abu Wadee. He is said to be an ‘influencer’ with a substantial following on social media. Last week he reportedly posted a video of himself sporting a keffiyeh while crammed onto a dinghy in the English Channel. ‘Thank God, we arrived in Britain’, the video caption said.

… [A]ccording to the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism (CAA) he has a track record of spouting vile views – including calling for the slaughter of all Jewish people. The CAA has pored over Wadee’s alleged social-media output. He would seem to be a keen supporter of Hamas and a self-proclaimed member of the so-called ‘Tyre-Burning Unit’, a militant gaggle of extremists known for hurling firebombs at Israelis manning the Gaza border. He is also alleged to have posed with AK-47s, leading even the Independent to wonder out loud if an ‘alleged Palestinian gunman’ has just slipped into Britain.

It’s his seeming Jew hatred that is most chilling. He is alleged to have posted a video in which he says, ‘Oh Allah, punish the Jews and those who support them …’. We must find a final solution for these people, he reportedly said: ‘Oh Allah, kill them all and do not leave a single one of them.’

Kill them all. If the CAA is right and Wadee really did express such genocidal hatred for Jews, then he must be removed from the country immediately. No delays, no legal hold-ups. If a newcomer to these shores, especially an illegal one, is found to harbour an apocalyptic loathing for the Jewish people, then he must be expelled from these lands, instantly and permanently. … The Wadee scandal shines a harsh light on Britain’s border crisis. Who exactly is coming here? And what foul, regressive ideologies are they bringing with them? It is so clear now that having porous borders doesn’t only corrode our national sovereignty but our national security too. It is a scandal that virulent forms of anti-Semitism may have leaked from the Middle East into modern Britain courtesy of officialdom’s failure to police our frontiers.

We need to get real about immigration from those benighted parts of the world where anti-Semitism flourishes. For me, that was the most alarming thing about that judge’s decision last month to let a family from Gaza settle in Britain under the Ukrainian refugee scheme. … Many on the ‘anti-racist’ left cheered that judge’s decision. Clearly virtue-signalling now takes precedence over cool-headed analysis. But what is the price of their ‘virtue’? It is potentially the endangerment of Britain’s Jews as more people with unenlightened attitudes arrive on our shores.

Kemi Badenoch got a load of flak last year when she said there are too many people coming to Britain ‘who hate Israel’. But she was right. A frothing loathing for the world’s only Jewish state is a marker for bigotry and backwardness. It is very often a marker for anti-Semitism itself. Going forward, Jewish security should be made into a key goal of Britain’s immigration policy. First step: kick Wadee out. (“Migrants who hate Jews shouldn’t be allowed in Britain,” The Spectator, 8th March 2025)

It’s quite a leap from “Let Them In!” to “Kick Them Out!”, isn’t it? Not that Brendan wants to kick all migrants out, of course. Just those who “hate Jews” and are responsible for the “endangerment of Jews.” Women, homosexuals and Ahmadis haven’t simply been “endangered” by migrants in Britain, but brutally murdered, raped and injured by migrants. So why has Brendan never demanded the exclusion of migrants who hate women, homosexuals or Ahmadis? Why hasn’t he noisily proclaimed that the “safety and dignity” of Britain’s women, homosexuals and Ahmadis “count for infinitely more” than the “rights” of sexist, homophobic or Ahmadiphobic migrants? The answer is simple: Brendan hasn’t done that because he is the puppet of Frank Furedi and Frank Furedi is neither a woman, a homosexual nor an Ahmadi. Instead, Furedi is a Jew and has always pursued what he thinks, at the time, to be best for Jews. Like many other Jews, Furedi once supported open borders, so in 2015 Brendan O’Neill was calling for open borders. Since the attacks on Israel by Hamas in 2023, Furedi and a lot of other Jews have re-thought their support for non-White migration and for Muslim migration in particular. That’s why Furedi’s puppet Brendan O’Neill is now proclaiming that “Migrants who hate Jews shouldn’t be allowed in Britain.”

Surveying the professor and his puppets

Brendan has also written incessantly in support of Israel’s right to bomb the Gaza Strip to rubble in response to the brief invasion of Israel by the rapists and murderers of highly illiberal and authoritarian Hamas. But Brendan has almost entirely ignored the continuing invasion of Ireland by non-White hordes who are just as rape-friendly, murder-prone and illiberal as Hamas. In other words, Brendan is ignoring his own racial interests and championing the racial interests of Jews, who are deeply hostile to Irish Whites and to the Catholic church that was historically dominant in Ireland. As hate-thinkers like Irish Savant have often documented, anti-Irish Jews like Alan Shatter and Rebecca Solnit have been central to the Third-World invasion of Ireland. But the racially Irish Brendan O’Neill isn’t working against that invasion and for Irish interests. Instead, he’s working for Jewish interests. His behavior bears close parallels to the parasitic manipulation whereby an animal host has its nervous system subverted and begins acting against its own interests and for the interests of a parasite.

Jewish ideology at work again: the Marxist IRA refuses to defend Ireland from non-White invaders

But it’s futile to blame Frank for manipulating Brendan or Brendan for being manipulated by Frank. When I survey the Professor and his puppets, I think of a hackneyed but profound saying: “There but for the grace of God go I.” Nevertheless, it remains important to speak the truth about the professor and his puppets — and to note that Jewish manipulation of gentile hosts is characteristic of Western politics in general, not just of obscure Trotskyist sects like the SWP and RCP. The RoboRoach Communist Party doesn’t call itself “communist” or a “party” any more, but the gentile disciples of Frank Furedi are still acting like RoboRoaches under Frank’s control. Still, I think it’s a very positive sign that a Trotskyist libertarian like Brendan O’Neill has gone from “Let Them In!” to “Kick Them Out!,” from celebrating the “guile, gumption and perseverance” of Third-World migrants to acknowledging, however belatedly, that there can be good grounds for Third-World migrants to be excluded or expelled “from these lands, instantly and permanently.” Welcome to the far right, Brendan!

[i] The Spanish neuroscientist José Manuel Rodríguez Delgado (1915-2011) first experimented with the electronic control of cats, but was experimenting on humans in the end.

[ii] The imago Dei means man seen as the “image of God.” Knowingly or otherwise, sadists and some murderers are delighting in not just the pain or destruction of a human being, but also the defilement of the imago Dei.

[iii]   Here’s a relevant Jewish joke: “Question: If Tarzan and Jane were Jewish, what would Cheeta be? Answer: A fur coat.” (Cheeta is the chimpanzee companion of the gentile Tarzan and Jane.)