Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Evil over Good


1066: The Year of the Conquest, David Howarth, Penguin books, London, 1977.

I have read the above book several times and although it is not a scholarly book it is a enjoyable read. When it first came out some reviewers got rather upset over the books treatment of William. It is amazing to me that the story of Edward's alleged offering of the throne to William is taken seriously. It is plain nonsense. To review the facts.

1, Edward had neither the right nor the power to dispose of the English throne in this fashion without the express consent of the Witan, (a type of Parliament).

2, A few years after he allegedly made this offer he invited back to England a Son of Edmund "Ironside" named Edward with the apparent intention of making him his heir. This Edward died shortly after arriving in England in 1057 C.E., and it appears that his son Edgar was being groomed for the crown and would probably have succeeded Edward the Confessor if he had been of age. As it is Edgar was acclaimed as King after Harold's death at Hastings.

The whole story of Harold's "Oath" is also a lot of bull. Even if it is true, given the circumstances it was not binding and in fact being clearly coerced worthless in any sense. William was a winner and as such historians have spent centuries praising him while ignoring the disastrous effects of the conquest on the English people for the generation unfortunate enough to be conquered. There seems little doubt that the conquest both devastated England, diminished and impoverished the population. To say nothing of cultural damage. But then we know that the Conquest was a good thing because of long term benefits. So I guess it is alright to sacrifice past generations for our benefit?

This book is a reminder that the fact something happened doesn't mean that it was right or good. It is a pity that historians frequently forget that.

See also:

The Anglo-Saxon, Chronicle, Editor, Swanton, Michael, Phoenix Press, London, 1996.

Wood, Michael, In Search of England, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1999.

Pierre Cloutier

Thursday, June 04, 2009

“Red” Rosa’s Prophecy

Rosa Luxemburg

In 1918 the Polish revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg penned a short pamphlet called The Russian Revolution, that outlined her views on the then happening Russian Revolution. I have previously mentioned her in a post about the Russian Revolution and here I want to discuss Rosa Luxemburg’s critique.

Rosa Luxemburg was born in a very assimilated Jewish family near the then border of Russian Poland in 1871.1

Rosa Luxemburg became involved in radical politics in Poland and strikes. And in the mid 1890’s began writing on Marxist theory. She was always a very radical thinker. Rosa Luxemburg did not believe in any sort of compromise with the “Capitalist” system.

For example she consistently opposed the “Revisionism” of the German Social Democratic Party that, in her opinion, fatally compromised with the status-quo. She was also a suspicious of and opposed to Nationalist movements believing them a snare and a diversion from the real struggle against “Capitalism”.

In 1898 she married a German by the name of Gustav Lübeck and moved to Germany, where she spent most of the remainder of her life.2 Rosa Luxemburg wrote various books on Marxist theory including The Accumulation of Capital, that sought to explain Imperialism and its effects.3

In 1914 she opposed Germany’s entry into World War I, and violently denounced what she saw as the treason of the German Social Democrats in supporting the war. Rosa Luxemburg left the party in disgust. Rosa Luxemburg was jailed for this during which time she wrote many letters, and articles.

Rosa Luxemburg was released in October of 1918 and with Karl Liebknecht founded the Spartakist party. In In January 1919, against her advice the Spartakists rose in revolt. The revolt was crushed and Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht were killed and their bodies dumped into a canal.4

As a thinker Rosa Luxemburg was an all too typical Marxist dogmatician of the time period with the usual superficial appeals to science and objectivity. Both of which this sort of thinking conspictiously lacked.

However unlike the case of Lenin and many others, Rosa Luxemburg had a great distrust of the idea of the “masses” being led around by the noses by a “enlightened” elite. Rosa Luxemburg believed both in the spontaneous action of the “masses” and in democratic control of politics and politicians. This was even more the case in that although Rosa Luxemburg had little use for either “bourgeois” Parliamentary democracy of “Bourgeois” freedom of the press. In both cases she thought that the solution was in one case a massive extension and deepening of democracy and in the other a similar massive extension and deepening of press freedom.5 Which was radically different from Lenin’s solution which was to abolish both and replace them by dictatorship and censorship / press control.6

In the fall of 1918 Rosa Luxemburg wrote her pamphlet The Russian Revolution. What we have is an uncompleted rough draft that Rosa Luxemburg’s death prevented her from revising and completing. It was published after her death. Since the Spartakist party that she founded was the germ of the German Communist party, there were periodic attempts to suppress and generally ignore this work which was considered rather embarrassing to the party hacks in awe of Lenin and later Stalin.7

It is important to remember that because of Rosa Luxemburg’s disputes with the intellectual leading lights of the German Social Democratic party that Rosa Luxemburg’s attitude was strongly coloured by her strong antipathy to the leadership of the Social Democrats and to those she perceived as their allies. The result was that because the German Social Democrats had in her eyes betrayed the cause of the “masses” by supporting the war she instantly disallowed their reaction that revolution was premature in Russia given that the economic and social forces were not conducive to a “Proletariat” revolution and the best that could be hoped for would be “Bourgeois” “Capitalist” revolution. Thus Rosa Luxemburg states:
In this, the Russian Revolution has but confirmed the basic lesson of every great revolution, the law of its being, which degrees: either the revolution must advance at rapid, stormy and resolute tempo, break down all barriers with an iron hand and place its goals ever further ahead, or it is quite soon thrown backwards behind its feeble point of departure and suppressed by counter revolution. To stand still, to mark time on one spot, to be contented with the first goal it happens to reach, is never possible in revolution.8
Of course it turns out that both the Russian Mensheviks and the leadership of the German Social Democratic party were right. Russia was indeed not in a position to have a “Marxist” style revolution. What Rosa Luxemburg forgot in both her enthusiasm for revolutionary activity and antipathy to the old guard leadership of the “Revisionist” Social Democratic parties, due to their support for their various countries in World War I, was that Revolutions frequently go too far. Finally from a strictly “Marxist” perspective the bottom line was that agricultural, autocratic Russia with its backward economy and social structures, poorly developed public institutions, with a huge peasantry and a small working class (proletariat) was one of the last places on earth for a “Marxist” social revolution to be successful. "Capitalism" the supposed precursor to “Socialism” was poorly developed in Russia. The Marxist critics of the Russian Revolution were merely being Marxists when they said a Marxist revolution in Russia was a Utopian illusion.9

Some of the points in Rosa Luxemburg’s essay seem both rather doctrinaire and short sighted. For example in her section on Bolshevik land policy she critiques the policy of the Bolsheviks in allowing the seizure of large landed estates and the subsequent division of the land among the peasantry. Rosa Luxemburg argues that this has created a large class of middle and “rich” peasants who will be enemies of the revolution. Rosa Luxemburg contends that the Bolsheviks should have nationalized the large landed estates and had the state run them. Aside from being dogmatic Rosa Luxemburg seems not to know that the Bolsheviks did not give the land to the peasants but merely ratified peasant seizure of the land. Any attempt to seize back or disallow the seizure would have been both counter productive and futile. Further Rosa Luxemburg does not seem to know that the source of peasant antagonism to the regime was not just simple greed for profit but the break down of industry in the period after the Bolshevik Revolution that left little with which to buy peasant produce so of course the peasants would not sell. Further the reckless policies of “War Communism”, which included road blocks and battalions of armed men going into the country side and seizing peasant produce was another, very real, source of peasant antipathy to the regime.10

In another chapter Rosa Luxemburg criticises the nationality policy of the Bolsheviks, especially the idea the different ethnic groups of the Russian Empire have a right to self determination. Like so many Marxists Rosa Luxemburg believed that nationalism was a type of false consciousness and that the “proletariat” had no country but only their “class interests”, and that Nationalism was basically reactionary. Interestingly Rosa Luxemburg took the statements of the Bolshevik about self determination seriously, when in actuality it was in reality different. That the Bolsheviks intended to use nationalism for their own ends and once the “proletariat” (i.e., the Bolsheviks seize power), self determination becomes nothing more than quaint cultural rights and real self determination becomes “bourgeois” and “reactionary”. Rosa was so welded to the dogmatic idea of the “class interests” of the “workers” / “proletariat” that she had no real conception of the power or basis of nationalism. This is probably at least partially based on the assimilated, secular upbringing she had. It left her with little feel for particular, national, ethnic or religious interests. For example she never felt any particular link or understanding of the particular interests of the Jews living in Czarist Russia.11

However it is the above mentioned chapter that Rosa Luxemburg’s fundamental criticisms of the Bolsheviks begin. For example:
While they showed quite cool contempt for the Constituent Assembly, universal suffrage, freedom of the press and assemblage, in short, for the whole apparatus of the basic democratic liberties of the people which, taken all together, constituted the “right to self determination” inside Russia, treated the right of self determination of peoples as a jewel of democratic policy for the sake of which all practical considerations of real criticism had to be stilled.12.
It is painfully clear that Rosa Luxemburg does not approve of the particular acts enumerated.

In another chapter13 Rosa Luxemburg discusses the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly in January of 1918. After making the rather the rather obvious point that before and during the overthrow of the Provisional Government in October of 1917 the Bolsheviks made much to do about the Provisional Government delaying the Constituent Assembly. Further the Bolsheviks made this one of the reasons for their overthrowing the government in October of 1917. The Bolsheviks, (i.e., Lenin and Trotsky gave has reasons the “fact” that the situation had changed decisively and that the assembly was out of date. Rosa Luxemburg writes about this “reason”:
All this is very fine and quite convincing. But one can’t help but wondering how such clever people as Lenin and Trotsky failed to arrive at the conclusion that follows immediately from the above facts.

...
…then it follows automatically that the outgrown and therefore still-born Constituent Assembly should have been annulled, and without delay, new elections to a new constituent Assembly should have been arranged.14
Rosa Luxemburg then deals with Trotsky’s objections to representative institutions, that they only reflect passing moods, and are not attuned to the pace of events or what is really going on. Of course it is painfully obvious that Trotsky is simply using this as an excuse to eliminate representative institutions that might impede single party rule. Rosa Luxemburg denies this:

Yet how all historical experience contradicts this! Experience demonstrates quite the contrary: namely, that the living fluid of the popular mood continuously flows around the representative bodies, penetrates them, guides them.



It is precisely the revolution that which creates by its glowing heat that delicate, vibrant, sensitive political atmosphere in which the waves of popular feeling, the pulse of popular life, work for the moment on the representative bodies in most wonderful fashion.15
Rosa Luxemburg concludes:

To be sure, every democratic institution has its limits and shortcomings, things which it doubtless shares with all other human institutions. But the remedy which Trotsky and Lenin have found, the elimination of democracy as such, is worse than the disease it was supposed to cure; for it stops up the very living source from which alone can come the correction of all innate shortcomings of social institutions. That source is the active, untrammelled, energetic political life of the broadest masses of the people.16
In another chapter17 Rosa Luxemburg criticises the Bolshevik policy of restricting the right to vote to those who work with their own hands and eliminating the right to vote for members of “hostile classes”. Rosa Luxemburg considers those policies wrong headed and counter productive. Rosa Luxemburg writes:

For those attacks (on democratic rights), the arguments of Trotsky cited above, on the cumbersome nature of democratic electoral bodies, are far from satisfactory. On the other hand, it is a well-known and indisputable fact that without a free and untrammelled press, without the unlimited right of association and assemblage, the rule of the broad mass of the people is unthinkable.18
The next chapter,19 The Problem of Dictatorship, is basically a short masterpiece of political analysis which damns the entire Communist, Marxist-Leninist experiment right at birth.

Rosa Luxemburg accuses the Bolsheviks of denying the “masses” the experience that is necessary for them to exercise political power just when such experience is in fact most necessary. In one outstanding passage Rosa Luxemburg talks about freedom:

Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of one party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently. Not because of any fanatical concept of “justice” but because all that is instructive, wholesome and purifying in political freedom depends on this essential characteristic, and its effectiveness vanishes when “freedom” becomes a special privilege.20
Thus does Rosa Luxemburg damn both one party states and severe restrictions of press freedom in such states.

Rosa Luxemburg further states:

The tacit assumption underlying the Lenin-Trotsky theory of the dictatorship is this: that the socialist transformation is something for which a ready-made formula lies completed in the pocket of the revolutionary party, which needs only to be carried out energetically in practice. This is, unfortunately – or perhaps fortunately – not the case.21
This being the case Rosa Luxemburg contends that public control and freedom is absolutely necessary in order to work things out. Lack of public input will only make things vastly more difficult. For Rosa Luxemburg the Lenin / Trotsky idea of “Socialism” is that it can “be decreed from behind a few official desks by a dozen intellectuals.”22

Regarding Lenin’s methods Rosa Luxemburg states

But he is completely mistaken in the means he employs. Decree, dictatorial force of the factory overseer, draconic penalties, rule by terror – all these things are but palliatives. The only way to a rebirth is the school of public life itself, the most unlimited, the broadest democracy and public opinion. It is rule by terror which demoralizes.23
In this uncannily prophetic passage Rosa Luxemburg sees the future all to clearly:

When all this is eliminated, what really remains? In place of the representative bodies created by general popular elections, Lenin and Trotsky have laid down the soviets as the only true representation of the laboring masses. But with the repression of political life in the land as a whole, life in the soviets must also become more and more crippled. Without general elections, without un-restricted freedom of press and assembly, without a free struggle of opinion, life dies out in every public institution, becomes a mere semblance of life, in which only the bureaucracy remains as the active element. Public life gradually falls asleep, a few dozen party leaders of inexhaustible energy and boundless experience direct and rule. Among them, in reality only a dozen outstanding heads do the leading and an elite of the working class is invited from time to time to meetings where they are to applaud the speeches of the leaders, and to approve proposed resolutions unanimously – at bottom, then, a clique affair – a dictatorship, to be sure, not the dictatorship of the proletariat, however, but only the dictatorship of a handful of politicians, that is a dictatorship in the bourgeois sense, in the sense of the rule of the Jacobins (the postponement of the Soviet Congress from three-month periods to six-month period!) Yes, we can go even further: such conditions must inevitably cause a brutalization of public life: attempted assassinations, shooting of hostages, etc. (Lenin’s speech on discipline and corruption.)24
Thus within the first year of the Bolshevik’s taking power a very radical thinker, very sympathetic to the Bolshevik’s goals, saw where their methods were leading and uncannily saw the future of the Leninist style of political party and a pattern that was to be, with monotonous regularity, duplicated around the globe for the next 60+ years.

After this the final chapters of Rosa Luxemburg’s pamphlet are a bit of a let down. However Rosa does have a few pertinent things to say about the use of terror to deal with corruption and social breakdown.

Indeed, every persistent regime of martial law leads invariably to arbitrariness, and every form of arbitrariness tends to deprave society.



Against this, [corruption, social breakdown] draconian measures of terror are powerless. On the contrary, they cause still further corruption. The only anti-toxin: the idealism and social activity of the masses, unlimited political freedom.25
In the last chapter26 Rosa Luxemburg attacks her “revisionist” enemies in the German Social Democratic party and the Bolsheviks. It is fascinating to record that her idea of the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” is not rule by a cast of politicians but “class” rule by workers which “…means in the broadest public form on the basis of the most active, unlimited participation of the mass of the people, of unlimited democracy.”27

Rosa Luxemburg then deals with Lenin and Trotsky’s attacks on “Bourgeois” democracy and agrees with them but says that does not mean eliminating democracy altogether but to create real or “Socialist” democracy. For Rosa Luxemburg Democracy:

…it [democracy] does not come as some sort of Christmas present for the worthy people who, in the interim, have loyally supported a handful of socialist dictators. Socialist democracy begins simultaneously with the beginnings of the destruction of class rule and the construction of socialism.


But this dictatorship [i.e., the class rule of the “Proletariat”] must be the work of the class and not of a little leading minority in the name of that class -...28
Rosa Luxemburg then proceeds to attack the Social Democrats for being partially responsible for what happened in Russia and also mentions that the rather disastrous external situation did not help the Bolsheviks very much. Rosa Luxemburg does mention that she is worried the Bolsheviks may:

Make a virtue of necessity and want to freeze into a complete theoretical system all the tactics forced upon them by those fatal circumstances, and want to recommend them to the international proletariat as a model of socialist tactics.29
That is exactly what happened. For the next 60+ years Moscow sought to mold every so called Marxist-Leninist (Communist) party in precisely this way with disastrous effects all over the world.

The last page and half are a sort of backhanded hymn to the Bolsheviks for having dared to try a “Socialist” revolution, and given Rosa Luxemburg’s antipathy to both “Revisionism” and “Capitalism” not a surprise but still in the context of the work as a whole it is faint praise indeed.

Rosa Luxemburg’s Pamphlet was basically ignored by all save a few radical leftists and was an embarrassment to her former colleagues in the Spartakist party who help found the Communist party of Germany which was slavishly submissive to Russia. It is hard to believe that Rosa Luxemburg would have had much truck with the Soviet Union and given her then formidable international reputation probably very fortunate for Soviet efforts to create Communist parties in Western Europe that she was murdered in 1919, by a right wing death squad. It was so much better to have her as a dead martyr than eloquent opponent.

As for the cogency of her prophecies. They were all too accurate. Much of the history of the twentieth century was a bloody working out of the Bolshevik “mistake”. If Rosa Luxemburg was in many ways a dogmatic thinker in this instance she saw without blinkers and what she saw appalled her.

1. See Wikipedia, article, Rosa Luxemburg, Here

2. IBID.

3. A copy can be found at the Rosa Luxemburg, Internet Archive, Here

4. See Footnote 1.

5. IBID.

6. See Farber, Samuel, Before Stalinism, Verso, London, 1990, pp. 19-61 & 90-112.

7. Luxemburg, Rosa, The Russian Revolution and Leninism or Marxism?, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1961, pp. 15-24. A copy can be found at the Rosa Luxenburg, Internet Archive, Here

8. IBID. p. 36.

9. See Ulam, Adam B., The Bolsheviks, Collier Books, New York, 1965, pp. 343-381, Leonhard, Wolfgang, Three Faces of Marxism, Paragon Books, New York, 1970, pp. 47-94, Kolakowski, Leszek, Main Currents of Marxism: 2. The Golden Age, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1978, pp. 332-336.

10, See Luxemburg, pp. 41-46. See also Figes, Orlando, A People's Tragedy, Penguin Books, New York, 1996, pp. 608-630.

11. Luxemburg, pp. 47-56, See also Leonhard, pp. 60-62, Kolakowski, pp. 88-94, 398-405.

12. Luxemburg, p. 48.

13. IBID. 57-62.

14. IBID. p. 59.

15. IBID. pp. 60-61.

16. IBID. p. 62.

17. IBID. pp. 63-67.

18. IBID. pp. 66-67.

19. IBID. pp. 68-72.

20. IBID. p. 69.

21. IBID. p. 69.

22. IBID. p. 71.

23. IBID. p. 71.

24. IBID. p. 72-73.

25. IBID. pp. 74-75.

26. IBID. pp. 76-80.

27. IBID. pp. 76-77.

28. IBID. pp. 77-78.

29. IBID. p. 79.
Pierre Cloutier

Saturday, May 30, 2009

The Turner Diaries

or

“The Joy of Genocide”

Cover of Book
Introduction:

The Turner Diaries, was catapulted into belated fame by the Oklahoma City tragedy of the mass murder of 165 people by Timothy McVeigh. Most of the focus of attention on The Turner Diaries, has been on its paranoid view of the American Federal government, and its vision of a terrorist war against the Federal government by bombing Federal office buildings using such things as trucks filled with fertiliser as bombs. What usually escapes attention is the book’s genocidal racism.

The book is in fact among other things a primer in mass-murder. The book is not about eliminating, overthrowing a wicked government but about the extermination of “enemies”, the reason for the revolt is in fact a mere precedent, excuse, for the real aim; mass-murder on a planetary scale.

This essay is devoted to looking at the genocidal aspects of The Turner Diaries, which are not incidental to the plot but its central focus.

Summary:

The book takes the form of a published diary of a Mr. Turner who was a member of an organisation dedicated to overthrowing the wicked Jewish controlled government (the “System”) of the USA and saving “Whites”, (my quotation marks), from oppression and restoring their rightful domination of the planet and exterminating “sub-humans”.

The diary is being published about a century after Turner’s death, when all that he desired has been accomplished, as a monument to his “courage”.

This type of literary device has been used many times; two examples are Jack London’s The Iron Heel, and Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale.

In The Turner Diaries, the organisation revolts after the government confiscates people’s guns. Mr. Turner takes part in various attacks, is captured by the enemy, is involved in taking over Los Angeles and helps atone for his capture by a suicide bombing of the Pentagon. The afterward then describes the “White” conquest of the planet.

This highly repellent stew describes, although the author would deny it, the conquest of the earth by self-made “sub-humans”.

Heroes:

Mr. Turner is not the “Hero” of the Novel the real “Hero” is the “Organisation” and it’s spiritual founder Adolf Hitler, who Mr. Turner greatly admires and whose Nazi party is the basis for the “Organisation” and whose ideology is Nazi also. The author of The Turner Diaries, was William Luther Pierce, (died 2002) who published it under the name Andrew Macdonald. Mr. Pierce was a died in the wool extreme racist who worked with the American Nazi party, and was the leader of the white seperatist National Alliance organization. He later founded the Cosmotheism a racist religion.1

Precedent:

The excuse for the “Revolution” is the confiscation of Guns by the Federal government from “White” citizens. Of course this is an unacceptable provocation. Blacks and others take advantage of this to rape, pillage and ravage. The precedent is called the “Cohen Act”. To quote our author:
As more and more details of the raids leaked out, public restlessness grew. One of the details which bothered people was that the raiders had, for the most part, exempted Black neighborhoods from the searches. The explanation given at first for this was that since "racists" were the ones primarily suspected of harboring firearms, there was relatively little need to search Black homes.

The peculiar logic of this explanation broke down when it turned out that a number of persons who could hardly be considered either "racists" or "fascists" had been caught up in the raids. Among them were two prominent liberal newspaper columnists who had earlier been in the forefront of the antigun crusade, four Negro Congressmen (they lived in White neighborhoods), and an embarrassingly large number of government officials.2
What is interesting is that our “hero” Mr. Turner whines repeatedly about this horrible violation of his and other “White” peoples rights. In light of what his group is planning and in fact implements this is a mere precedent, and a pretty example of bold faced hypocrisy amounting to lying. The rest of the American Constitution is scrapped by Turner and his fellow followers. Free expression, voting, due process, democracy etc., are unimportant and irrelevant. And of course denial of guns to “White” people is the only thing violating the American Constitution worth a damn. Although The Turner Diaries does not say so explicitly it is obvious that the author believes and so does the organization that only “White” people should have guns. Obviously this is what is called a “mere precedent”, an “excuse” to carry out the real aim of the organization - mass murder.

As an example of breath taking hypocrisy what about the following:
For a second thing, I am sure now that we were overoptimistic in our judgment of the mood of the public. What we mistook as general resentment against the System's abrogation of civil rights during the Gun Raids was more a passing wave of uneasiness resulting from all the commotion involved in the mass arrests.3
Considering that the “Organization” was plotting genocidal mass murder this self righteous concern about civil rights is breathtaking.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that some, Blacks, Jews and Hispanics etc., (i.e., the author’s “non-whites”), would not want their guns confiscated by the government. But since neither the author nor the organization have the slightest interest in using this as anything but an excuse that is irrelevant.

Ideology:

The diaries fictional author refers to the anniversary of the birth of that great “hero”, (the revolution starts 110 years after the birth of Adolf Hitler), and the ideology of the organisation is pure Nazism An infatuation with “race” and “blood” purity. Like in Adolf Hitler’s paranoid fantasies, in these diaries Jews control everything and of course are evil “sub-humans” meriting only total annihilation. There are for example such coded references to Jews as:
Indeed, we are already slaves. We have allowed a diabolically clever, alien minority to put chains on our souls and our minds. These spiritual chains are a truer mark of slavery than the iron chains which are yet to come.

Why didn't we rebel 35 years ago, when they took our schools away from us and began converting them into racially mixed jungles? Why didn't we throw them all out of the country 50 years ago, instead of letting them use us as cannon fodder in their war to subjugate Europe?4
Of course a long list of other “races”, Africans, Indians, Chinese, merit complete extermination right down to the last man, women and child and the “organization” carries out its extermination with panting, orgasmic joy.

Our Author says about the goal of the “Organization”:
But one thing which is quite clear is that much more than our freedom is at stake. If the Organization fails in its task now, everything will be lost-our history, our heritage, all the blood and sacrifices and upward striving of countless thousands of years.

The Enemy we are fighting fully intends to destroy the racial basis of our existence. No excuse for our failure will have any meaning, for there will be only a swarming horde of indifferent, mulatto zombies to hear it.

There will be no White men to remember us-either to blame us for our weakness or to forgive us for our folly.

If we fail, God's great Experiment will come to an end, and this planet will once again, as it did millions of years ago, move through the ether devoid of higher man.5
It is fascinating to record that the above, especially the last line, is a paraphrase of lines from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.6

The author’s sexual and anti-semitic and racial obsessions are revealed clearly in the following passages:
In other words, rape has been reduced to the status of a punch in the nose. In cases where no physical injury can be proved, it is now virtually impossible to obtain a prosecution or even an arrest.

The result of this judicial mischief has been that the incidence of rape has zoomed to the point that the legal statisticians have recently estimated that one out of every two American women can expect to be raped at least once in her lifetime. In many of our big cities, of course, the statistics are much worse.

The women's-lib groups have greeted this development with dismay. It isn't exactly what they had in mind when they began agitating for "equality" two decades ago. At least, there's dismay among the rank and file of such groups; I have a suspicion that their leaders, most of whom are Jewesses, had this outcome in mind from the beginning.

Black civil rights spokesmen, on the other hand, have had only praise for the Supreme Court's decision. Rape laws, they said, are "racist," because a disproportionately large number of Blacks have been charged under them.

Nowadays gangs of Black thugs hang around parking lots and school playgrounds and roam the corridors of office buildings and apartment complexes, looking for any attractive, unescorted White girl and knowing that punishment, either from the disarmed citizenry or the handcuffed police, is extremely unlikely. Gang rapes in school classrooms have become an especially popular new sport.7
Another example of the anti-semitic hysteria of our author is the following:
The subsequent interrogation sessions were worse-much worse. Because a public "show trial" was planned for me, presumably in the Adolf Eichmann manner, Rubin avoided the eye-gouging and finger-cutting, which would have disfigured me, but the things he did were fully as painful. (Note to the reader: Adolf Eichmann was a middle-level German official during World War II. Fifteen years after the war, in 39 BNE, he was kidnapped in South America by Jews, flown to Israel, and made the central figure in an elaborately staged, two-year propaganda campaign to evoke sympathy from the non-Jewish world for Israel, the only haven for "persecuted" Jews. After fiendish torture, Eichmann was displayed in a soundproof glass cage during a four-month show trial in which he was condemned to death for "crimes against the Jewish people.")8
The above is a tissue of lies. Eichmann for one thing was not tortured at all although this is a familiar lie from Neo-Nazi circles.9 But this passage reveals with great clarity the racist, anti-semitic hysteria of our author.

The take over of Los Angles:

The organisation takes over Los Angles by means of a terrorist campaign, as their first base. During this takeover they set up Ghettos for Blacks and when Blacks and others protest this they respond with terror. The organisation rounds up the Jewish population of Los Angeles, takes it local canyons and ravines and murders them. Since the Jewish population of los Angles is c. 200,000 we are talking about mass murder on an impressive scale. The murders being described are similar, probably deliberately, to the slaughter at Babi-Yar in Russia, 1941, during World War II. There 30,000 people were murdered in a few days in a ravine near Kiev. In this case our fictional diary writer celebrates this massacre, with a few words about how they had to do it. No doubt our “hero” finds mass murder a turn-on.

How about the following from our hero:
Coming through the mountains just north of Los Angeles we encountered a long column of marchers, heavily guarded by GI's and Organization personnel. As we drove slowly past, I observed the prisoners closely, trying to decide what they were. They didn't seem to be Blacks or Chicanos, and yet only a few of them appeared to be Whites. Many of the faces were distinctly Jewish, while others had features or hair suggesting a Negroid taint. The head of the column turned off the main roadway into a little-used ranger trail which disappeared into a boulder-strewn canyon, while the tail stretched for several miles back toward the city. There may have been as many as 50,000 marchers, representing all ages and both sexes, just in the portion of the column we passed.

...
Back at HQ I inquired about the strange column. No one was sure, although the consensus was that they were the Jews and the mixed breeds of too light a hue to be included with the evacuees who were sent east. I remember now something which puzzled me a few days ago: the separation of the very light Blacks-the almost Whites, the octoroons and quadroons, the unclassifiable mongrels from various Asian and southern climes-from the others during the concentration and evacuation operations.
And I think I now understand. The clearly distinguishable nonwhite are the ones we want to increase the racial pressure on the Whites outside California. The presence of more almost-White mongrels would merely confuse the issue-and there is always the danger that they will later "pass" as White. Better to deal with them now, as soon as we get our hands on them. I have a suspicion their trip into that canyon north of here will be a one-way affair!10
Another passage:

If they were non-Whites-and that included all the Jews and everyone who even looked like he had a bit of non-White ancestry - they were shoved into hastily formed columns and started on their no-return march to the canyon in the foothills north of the city. The slightest resistance, any attempt at back talk, or any lagging brought a swift bullet.

The Whites, on the other hand, were, in nearly all cases, hanged on the spot. One of the two types of pre-printed placards was hung on the victim's chest, his hands were quickly taped behind his back, a rope was thrown over a convenient limb or signpost with the other end knotted around his neck, and he was then hauled clear of the ground with no further ado and left dancing on air while the soldiers went to the next name on their list.

The hangings and the formation of the death columns went on for about 10 hours without interruption. When the troops finished their grim work early this afternoon and began returning to their barracks, the Los Angeles area was utterly and completely pacified. The residents of neighborhoods in which we could venture safely only in a tank yesterday were trembling behind closed doors today, afraid even to be seen peering through the crack in drawn drapes. Throughout the morning there was no organized or large-scale opposition to our troops, and by this afternoon even the desire for opposition had evaporated.11
Blacks meanwhile are imprisoned in a bestial ghetto. It is of interest to note that Mr. Turner considers that their protest against this vicious denial of their rights to be an affront and unpardonable. I suppose that imprisoning guiltless people for the purpose starving them to death can be seen by some has nothing much to get upset about. Turner whines like his colleagues in the organisation about the protest. The gall of oppressors, tyrants and murderers who whine about the audacity of their victims daring to resist, can take your breath away.
Most Blacks moved along the streets leading into the designated areas a block or two ahead of the slowly advancing infantry, who made quick searches of each building as they came abreast of it. Blacks who had not already vacated the premises were roughly driven into the streets at bayonet point. If they put up any resistance at all they were shot on the spot, and the sound of this occasional gunfire helped to keep the other Blacks moving along.12
And.

Actually we have done pretty well at concentrating the Blacks. About 80 per cent of them are sealed in four small enclaves now, and I understand that the first mass convoy of them is heading east tonight.13
During all of this the Organization murders, imprisons etc., any “White” person who may oppose their murderous deeds and acts. They enact strict censorship. So much for freedom of speech. Due process disappears entirely has death squads do their ghastly business. What’s describes bears a more than coincidental similarity to the Nazi terror after Hitler’s coming to power in 1933 , and the Rohm purge of 1934, but on a vastly larger scale.

As part of the terror “Whites” who married Jews, Blacks etc., are murdered by being hung from lampposts etc. One can guess what happens to their children. No doubt these individuals in many if not all cases would have protested or acted to save their spouses. But in the eyes of our “hero” Mr. Turner they are “race traitors” deserving death. The organization obviously thinks that the Non-Jewish spouses and relatives of German Jews during the Nazi era were treated far too leniently by the Nazi government, this time it will be done “right”.

For example:
In the lighted areas one sees them everywhere. Even the street signs at intersections have been pressed into service, and at practically every street corner I passed this evening on my way to HQ there was a dangling corpse, four at every intersection. Hanging from a single overpass only about a mile from here is a group of about 30, each with an identical placard around its neck bearing the printed legend, "I betrayed my race." Two or three of that group had been decked out in academic robes before they were strung up, and the whole batch are apparently faculty members from the nearby UCLA campus.

The first thing I saw in the moonlight was the placard with its legend in large, block letters: "I defiled my race." Above the placard leered the horribly bloated, purplish face of a young woman, her eyes wide open and bulging, her mouth agape. Finally I could make out the thin, vertical line of rope disappearing into the branches above. Apparently the rope had slipped a bit or the branch to which it was tied had sagged, until the woman's feet were resting on the pavement, giving the uncanny appearance of a corpse standing upright of its own volition.

I shuddered and quickly went on my way. There are many thousands of hanging female corpses like that in this city tonight, all wearing identical placards around their necks. They are the White women who were married to or living with Blacks, with Jews, or with other non-White males.

There are also a number of men wearing the l-defiled-my-race placard, but the women easily outnumber them seven or eight to one. On the other hand, about ninety per cent of the corpses with the I-betrayed-my-race placards are men, and overall the sexes seem to be roughly balanced.14
Those who hide Jews to keep them from being murdered will also be shown no mercy. Those hiding Jews are killed, no “mercy” in sending them to prison or concentration camps, (although in Poland and in Eastern Europe people who hid Jews were shot).

And we were the ones who pasted up the proclamations from Revolutionary Command in each block, warning all citizens that henceforth any act of looting, rioting, or sabotage, or any failure to obey the command of a soldier, will result in the summary execution of the offender. The proclamations also carry a similar warning for anyone who knowingly harbors a Jew or other non- White or who willfully provides false information to or withholds information from our police units.15
Meanwhile in the Black ghettos, people are deliberately deprived of food. And our “hero” is horrified but not really surprised to find out that Blacks are preying on each other, even engaging in cannibalism. Our Mr. Turner just finds it so horrible and thinks it is scandalous that blacks treat each other so bad. Of course to Mr. Turner Blacks are only demonstrating their “sub-humanity” by acting in this way. The climax so to speak is when blacks in their hunger start to eat each other and then start to raid “White” areas to eat “Whites”. This of course is further “proof” to Mr. Turner of the “sub-human” nature of Blacks.

We also found gruesome evidence of one way in which the Blacks have solved their food shortage: cannibalism. They began by setting up barricades in one main street to stop cars driven by Whites, apparently as early as Tuesday of last week. The unfortunate Whites were dragged from their cars, taken into a nearby Black restaurant, butchered, cooked, and eaten.16
The organization doesn’t care about Blacks eating each other, but when they prey on “white” people it has to be stopped. So of course the organization stops it with considerable violence. Then shortly afterwards the Blacks are sent to areas under the control of the government. Our “hero”, Mr. Turner again whines about how badly Blacks treat each other. An example of our “hero’s” outrage:

I have been surprised to see how callous our volunteer Blacks are toward their own people. Some of the older Blacks, who haven't been able to fend for themselves, are obviously near the point of death from starvation and dehydration, yet our volunteers handle them so roughly and pack them so tightly into the cars that it makes me flinch to watch them. When one overloaded Cadillac started onto the eastbound freeway with a lurch this morning, an ancient Negro lost his grip and fell off the roof, landing headfirst on the pavement and crushing his skull like an egg. The Blacks who had just loaded the car roared with laughter; it was apparently the funniest thing they've seen in a long time.17
Unmitigated gall seems to be a trait of most if not all of the world’s great terrorist movements. The above sections demonstrates it in spades. Aside from the sickening racism of the passages describing the ghetto. Our “hero’s” whining is stomach turning. Mr. Turner and the organization he is a member off are planning to kill every Black person on earth. They have slaughtered hundreds of thousands in ravines near the city and they have instituted policies to create mass starvation. Yet Mr. Turner complains about how they treat each other!!

The model for all of this seems to be the Jewish ghettos created by the Nazi’s during World War II which were by deliberate design places of despair, starvation and disease. There too some Nazi’s used the appearance and behavior of desperate, starving people to justify considering and treating the involuntary inmates has “sub-humans”.

The rest of the USA:

The war described in the book is one long campaign of terror and murder. The tactics of the organization are ruthless. If you aren’t for us, you are against us. A strategy of encirclement, and divide and rule follows carried out with through ruthlessness, with the widespread use nuclear weapons as the organization advances “non-whites” are murdered or flee. But since the organization’s plans are for a “White world” there is safety nowhere. Those who oppose the organization from within the “White Community” are ruthlessly killed. The organization deliberately creates as much chaos as possible. When it is over about ¾ of the American population is dead.

Tens of millions perished during the first half of 1994, and the total White population of the country reached a low point of approximately 50 million by August of that year.18
In all of this our “hero” in a plane suicide bombs the pentagon, sounds like 9/11, but the editors fill in the rest of the whole sick, twisted story.

To quote the epilogue concerning events in the USA:
Then, of course, came the mopping-up period, when the last of the non-White bands were hunted down and exterminated, followed by the final purge of undesirable racial elements among the remaining White population.19
The World:

The world wide Anti-Semitic obsession of the author and his genocidal aims are clear in the following passage:

But we won't forget! That alone is enough to insure that history will not repeat itself. No matter how long it takes us and no matter to what lengths we must go, we'll demand a final settlement of the account between our two races. If the Organization survives this contest, no Jew will-anywhere. We'll go to the uttermost ends of the earth to hunt down the last of Satan's spawn.20
That “Satan’s spawn” consists in part of pregnant women, babies and young children is of course irrelevant to our “hero”.

The organization nukes several cities, and countries including Toronto, and Israel. Apparently they opposed the genocidal insanity of the organization. Eventually through the chaos that the organization generates in Europe and elsewhere it gains control of the world. In an earlier passage our “hero” expressed sympathy for the Palestinians, another exercise in hypocrisy considering what happens next.

In Europe the following happens:

The blood flowed ankle-deep in the streets of many of Europe's great cities momentarily, as the race traitors, the offspring of generations of dysgenic breeding, and hordes of Gastarbeiter [Foreign workers] met a common fate. Then the great dawn of the New Era broke over the Western world.21
The organization launches radio active weapons against India and China and devastates the most of Asia annihilating billions of people, and making the area uninhabitable for centuries. Then the “mutant” survivors are hunted down and killed.

Therefore, the Organization resorted to a combination of chemical, biological, and radiological means, on an enormous scale, to deal with the problem. Over a period of four years some 16 million square miles of the earth's surface, from the Ural Mountains to the Pacific and from the Arctic Ocean to the Indian Ocean, were effectively sterilized. Thus was the Great Eastern Waste created.

Only in the last decade have certain areas of the Waste been declared safe for colonization. Even so, they are "safe" only in the sense that the poisons sowed there a century ago have abated to the point that they are no longer a hazard to life. As everyone is aware, the bands of mutants which roam the Waste remain a real threat, and it may be another century before the last of them has been eliminated and White colonization has once again established a human presence throughout this vast area.

But it was in the year 1999, according to the chronology of the Old Era-just 110 years after the birth of the Great One [Adolf Hitler]- that the dream of a White world finally became a certainty. And it was the sacrifice of the lives of uncounted thousands of brave men and women of the Organization during the preceding years which had kept that dream alive until its realization could no longer be denied.22
During all this, from the fictional “editorial”, comments in the diaries we learn that the Puerto-Ricans were wiped out, that Uganda no longer exists and neither do Black Africans in Africa.
(Note to the reader: Uganda was a political subdivision of the continent of Africa during the Old Era, when that continent was inhabited by the Negro race. Puerto Rico was the Old Era name of the island of New Carolina. It is occupied now by the descendants of White refugees from radioactive areas of the southeastern United States, but before the race purges in the final days of the Great Revolution it was inhabited by a mongrel race of especially unsavory character.)23
In fact it is now a “White World”. The fate of American Indians, Hispanics, Latin Americans of all stripes, the Arab and Semitic peoples of the Middle East, are not mentioned but easily imagined. The fate of all those who hide individuals being hunted down, those who denounce the moral obscenity of these acts is also easy to imagine in this nightmare world.

What’s left out?

Reading The Turner Diaries, I am reminded of the passage in Orwell’s 1984, when O’Brien tells Winston that the entire future of the human race will be a boot stamping on a human face forever. In The Turner Diaries, what is next, finding new people to murder? An endless stream of justification for murder? A world society wallowing in its “Whiteness”? It sounds simply evil.

What is also left out is the child, who is killed, by the gun, the knife etc., simply for existing. In World War II those in involved in the genocide killed children sometimes by crushing their heads with their boots or hitting them against walls. In the los Angles section of the book is described the butchery of hundreds of thousands in canyons and ravines. Where is the child holding a parent’s hand, clutching a favorite toy before being murdered? The children starving to death in ghettos, dying of radiation sickness? Those being killed in un-mentioned extermination plans? The book does not mention gas chambers but that is an all too reasonable guess about how many of the “sub-humans” are killed.

Pregnant women, the old, the ill, the slow, die because they commit the crime of existing. All these humans are not worthy of any consideration. They have no rights at all, not even the right to exist. Their very existence is a crime punishable by death, by virtue of being born in the “wrong” groups. In the world of The Turner Diaries, we see cold ruthless men gloating over the murder of billions of innocents.

In 2002 the author ,William Luther Pierce, of The Turner Diaries, died so that the Earth was no longer defiled and polluted by his vile presence. I have little doubt that he continued to, until his death, to be turned on by sick fantasies of murdering pregnant women, shooting children in the head and committing mass murder. I am also in little doubt that he would have with gusto and pleasure committed such acts and I am grateful he never seems to have had the opportunity.

In the title of this review I rather flippantly referred to The Turner Diaries, having as an alternative title “The Joy of Genocide”. The point of the novel is not about the evils of an out of control federal government and how to resist it. The novel is about how a racist group could seize power in order to carry out its goal of world wide mass murder. Certainly neither resisting tyranny nor establishing freedom is the goal. The goal is to set up a tyranny in order to accomplish the main goal of the annihilation of most of the human race. It is that goal which is paramount and all else is subordinate to that goal.

It is a goal which the fictional “author”, Turner, and his fictional “editors”, relish as the expression goes “to the bone”. It is because of this that I described the members of the organization described in the novel has “self made sub-humans”. No one is born “sub-human”, but each of us can become one through the things we do. Certainly the planning and carrying out of mass genocide on a planetary scale is “sub-human” on a colossal scale. The author and the “hero” he created are indeed examples are indeed “self made sub-humans”.

Mein Kampf, was a blue print for mass murder so is The Turner Diaries.

1. See Wikipedia article The Turner Diaries, Here. See also Wikipedia article William Luther Pierce, Here .

2. The Turner Diaries, from PDF version found at Here pp. 5-6.

3. IBID, p. 6.

4. IBID, p. 22.

5. IBID, pp. 22-23.

6. A PDF of Mein Kampf, can be found at Here. The quote paraphrased is at p. 59 and goes as follows:

Should the Jew, with the aid of his Marxist creed, triumph over the people of this world, his Crown will be the funeral wreath of mankind, and this planet will once again follow its orbit through ether, without any human life on its surface, as it did millions of years ago.
7. The Turner Diaries, p. 35.

8. IBID, p.54.

9. See Arendt, Hannah, Eichmann in Jerusalem, Penguin Books, London, 1964.

10. The Turner Diaries, p. 91.

11. IBID, p. 94.

12. IBID, p. 94.

13. IBID, p. 93.

14. IBID, p. 87.

15. IBID. p. 88.

16. IBID, p. 87.

17. IBID, p. 89.

18. IBID, p. 117.

19. IBID, p. p. 117.

20. IBID, p. 112.

21. IBID, p. 118.

22. IBID, p. 118.

23. IBID, p. 94.

Pierre Cloutier

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Yesterday Sucks!!

A very amusing book that was published in 1974 was The Good Old Days – They were Terrible!, by Otto L. Bettmann.1 This book which is lavishly illustrated with period drawings shows in great detail just why in the period 1870 – 1900 life in America thoroughly sucked. For those of you tired of nostalgia for a “simpler time” or those of you bitten by the nostalgia bug this book is definitely a useful tonic and cure.

Let us talk about the days before cars. Ah yes those wonderful times before car fumes stank up the air. Think again. Cites were infested with four foot polluters, such as pigs and horses dumping their excrement all over the place. Each day one of New York’s 150,000 horses dumped 20-25 pounds of crap, which gave off a horrid stench and attracted swarms of flies. Then there were the numerous horse stables through out the cities stinking of horse urine and the before mentioned pigs added a huge quantity of foul smelling crap also. Pedestrians faced a constant battle to avoid stepping in crap. Amazingly the advent of the Car was greeted with the hope cities would be cleaner and the air better!2

A Street in New York
(All the pictures in this post come from the book)

And to speak of crap, in the “Good Old Days” there was little trash pick up so that city sidewalks and roads were clogged with rubbish, that frequently was several feet deep. Pedestrians had a great time tramping through the debris. Citizens routinely dumped trash into the street or under the myriad vehicles parked in city streets.

Cleanup was haphazard and inefficient aside from being riddled with corruption, and inefficiencies. Cities routinely cut back on such “nonessential” services if they existed in any form at all.3

And if you thought it was just city life that swallowed heavily rural life also had its downside. For example cooking was a drudgery that required endlessly feeding wood into a stove that was always very hot and making everything from scratch made cooking seem an endless operation. And since the kitchen had the stove there was the endless drudgery of laundry. Without washers or dryers or modern detergents, washing required heating gallons of water on a stove and beating and rinsing clothes by hand before you hung them up to dry. You could beat the clothes by hand and use various lye soaps that very effectively chemically burned your skin and had such things has hollow logs and wooden paddles to help and of course there was repeatedly heating vast quantities of hot water for washing. After many, many hours of washing you finally finished the wash.4

Doing the Wash

Ah but was not there lots of fresh unpolluted well water. Well maybe, but then the well was usually located near the kitchen and the barn with all of its animal waste was very close. This helped to insure that well water was indeed heavily polluted and a source of disease.5

There was also the insufferable boredom of country life especially during the winter when Farms were generally almost completely isolated from each other. Sometimes people went stark raving mad from the boredom.6

Let us not talk about working conditions in any detail except to note that they were horrible. With things set at a very high pace and help for disabled workers virtually nonexistent.7

The attitude towards strikers is also of interest. In 1894 there was the Pullman strike, in which the employer managed to quite successfully portray the strikers as the bad guys. Despite the fact that in 1893 the Pullman Company had cut workers wages 5 times, the last by almost 30%! In 1892 a strike at Homestead was deliberately incited by the owner in hopes of breaking the union. The strike was violently suppressed by militiamen. In fact during this time period there were the creation of armoured units, police and planning to deal with strikers all over the place. Both media and the state was very much at the service of industry when it came to dealing with worker opposition.8

Dealing with a Strike

Regarding law and order. Well let’s just say crime was a serious problem, in both rural and urban settings. Including even the Mafia in New Orleans.9 The police were corrupt inefficient and engaged in massive protection rackets and payoffs. For example in New York City the position of a Patrolman could be bought for $100, a Captaincy for $1,500.10 An example of a Police protection racket, was the prostitution trade in New York City, were:

Police protection cost the bordello operator an initiation fee pf $300 to $500 and $30 to $50 monthly thereafter, traditionally collected by the precinct captain.11

A Contemporary Cartoon about Police Corruption

In regards to the Legal system. Lawyers were notoriously incompetent and Judges and Juries were frequently easily bought by individuals and corporations. Local City governments were routinely treated as massive treasure chests by greedy politicians and contractors who pillage city coffers regularly. Of course lynching should not be forgotten.12

As for that good healthy food of yore. Well food was actually frequently putrid, especially meat, or heavily adulterated with water, (milk) or alum (flour). Cheese and butter were frequently adulterated with soap fat, lard or unmentionables. Not surprisingly people often got sick from this fare, and if you are poor you just had to put up with it.13.

Regarding health care. Doctors were frequently quacks with Diplomas from Diploma mills aside from that many were filthy. Treatments were frequently not much different from witchcraft. Knowledge of disease was minimal so epidemic diseases frequently ran wild especially in cities. Treatment of the insane or simply mentally ill bordered and frequently crossed the boundary into sadism and inhuman cruelty. Surgery was frequently performed under incredibly unhygienic conditions. Hospitals were frequently unspeakable. Helped by Doctors prescribing opiates galore drug addiction was rampant, along with alcoholism.14

A ward in Bellevue hospital

Regarding Drug addiction these were the days of Coca wine, (made from coca leaves the source of cocaine), and Heroin, (which was sold as a cough medicine!).15
Contemporary Ads for Heroin and Coca wine

Education was hell, with poor teachers, out of control students, brutal discipline, poor funding, crowded classrooms and a bad curriculum. Including such incidents has a teacher being stoned to death by her students. Teacher’s pay was too but it mildly bad.16

To cap it off a trip to the beach was both an ordeal and frequently not worth the trouble with the beach polluted and very overcrowded, to say nothing of the cost.17


A day at the Beach

Our author concludes about this time period.

Pollution overhead, garbage underfoot, streets choked with traffic, bursting slums, crime, labor unrest, dope addiction – problems of the future in the country with a future.

...


Perhaps, indeed, our nostalgia more rightfully belonged to them as they cast a sad eye on the lowering sky and longed for the good old days.18


1. Bettmann, Otto L., Random House, New York, 1974.

2. IBID, pp. 2-3.

3. IBID, pp. 7-8.

4. IBID, pp. 48-49.

5. IBID, p. 51.

6. IBID, pp. 62-63.

7. IBID, pp. 68-69.

8. IBID, pp. 82-83.

9. IBID, p.103.

10. IBID, pp. 92-99.

11. IBID, p. 98.

12. IBID, pp. 100-105.

13. IBID, pp. 109-121.

14. IBID, pp. 135-153.

15. IBID, p. 153.

16. IBID, pp. 155-169.

17. IBID, p. 196-197.

18. IBID, p. 196.

Pierre Cloutier

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Pornography Ancient and Modern

The following Post
contains some sexually explicit images
If you might be offended
Please do not read!!

An issue guaranteed to get people’s blood boiling is the issue of pornography. This is one of those heat and little light issues. Unlike the case of a writer like the Marquis de Sade whose writings, who I have previously written a blog on, are indeed truly disturbing in that they do combine sex with horrific sadistic violence and therefore legitimately call for consideration and concern. Although not in my opinion banning. It is interesting that so called “ordinary porn”; just seems to bring out the holier than thou in people.

Of course a ‘hot button” issue like this one is exceptionally useful in keeping peoples mind off real issues and have them getting obsessed with what their neighbours are doing.

Pornography is one of those issues and it has been and is exceptionally useful in getting people’s minds off the important stuff.

Of course porn has been around a very long time and has not always caused the same level of hysteria and sheer mockish stupidity.

For example lets us look at such things as this rather interesting Herm from ancient Greece with their very erect penises and stood on street corners in many Greek cities.

A Herm

Or how about this much larger than life size penises from Delos.

Phalli at Delos

There is also this painting from Pompeii which is shall we say explicit.


Mural from Pompeii

And for you fans of the truly kinky how about a little bestiality.

The god Pan making it with a goat

The above is not my cup of tea or dare I say of much interest to any but a small minority of humans.

What is of interest is how such images did not disturb the equilibrium of Greco-Roman society. It simply never occurred to anyone that such images were problematic and disturbing. They might be refined, well done or crude and tasteless but they would not have been considered some sort existential threat to that society.

The result when these items were rediscovered was some of the most absurd stupidities by the modern guardians of morality. There is in Naples a collection of art and artefacts collected from Pompeii called The Secret Collection, which until very recently was kept locked away from regular museum goers least its pornographic and erotic images, confuse and scandalize the poor simple minded average museum visitor.1

I would think that the ancient Romans and Greeks would have laughed quite loudly at such no-nothing brainless idiocy.

Considering that Greeks and Romans considered public displays of phallic imagery as a good luck charm they would have been quite non-plussed by so many moderns getting hysterical about it.

So what really bothers moderns about porn?

The answer is quite simple. Porn shows sex. Now if it was really about issues that you would think are legitimate problems and concerns you would not see the level of hysteria over it that is indeed there.

This level has its roots in the idea that sex is dangerous and needs to be controlled and regulated and that it is a dark and mysterious force that is tainted with diabolical and evil qualities.2

I remember a series of programs called A Third Testament, (1976) narrated by Malcolm Muggeridge from the mid 70’s. In an episode about the Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy Malcolm refers to “CCC-ARNALL – PP-LEASURES!!. While saying that Malcolm squints, furrows his forehead and looks like he is having a severe migraine combined with a coronary. Like a vast number of older people Malcolm, who when he was younger indulged deeply in “carnal pleasures”, now that he was older and past all that, he thought it would be a good idea to deny other people “carnal pleasures”. No doubt having both satiated himself and gotten too old to indulge in “carnal pleasures”, it would be most satisfying for him to deny others “carnal pleasures”. The look of satisfaction that crossed his face as he talked about denying others “carnal pleasures” indicated that despite his supposed wish to help others escape being enslaved to “carnal pleasures”, that he was just has enslaved to them as ever. Only in this case being unable to enjoy them himself he would get perverted pleasure from denying others similar “pleasures”.3

It is indeed remarkable how obsessed so many of those who complain about other people being obsessed with sex are with sex. Instead they think constantly about how wicked it is for other people to have sex and how they have to be brought under control and how wicked them having sex is. Like the most sex obsessed orgiest these people never stop thinking about sex, only in this case how wicked and evil it is and how other people are having it and how they have to be stopped. Thus like Malcolm Muggeridge they writhe in prurient ecstasy at the thought of “CCC-ARNALL - PP-LEASURES!!” and think constantly and obsessively about sex.

One could go into the roots of this obsessive prurience but it is not necessary except to note that it seems to be at least partially related to a certain style of Christian values.

This notion of sex has dangerous, disgusting and prurient and this obsession with what other people are doing is behind most of the anti-pornography hysteria that exists in our society. This hysteria has lead to a seeming inability to discuss pornography in any sort of rational manner.4

Now it can easily be argued, and in my opinion obviously true, that pornography has problematic aspects.

For example. It is true that much pornography is in fact involves the use and rather unpleasant exploitation of the women, and yes sometimes at least men involved in producing it.

There is of course the issue of child porn and bestiality, which involves issues of consent and exploitation.

There is also the problem of extremely violent pornography that sexualizes, rape, sadistic, brutal degradation and humiliation, especially of women.5

Those are genuine issues of concern and certainly subject to analysis and critique. What are not reasonable are the following pieces of nonsense.

The idea that pornography is responsible for the subordination of women. A position advanced by the late Andrea Dworkin and by Catherine McKinnon. Are they seriously advancing the position that the existence of pornography is the main reason why women are oppressed? A position whose light headedness should cause it to float away and disperse.

Lets see most Muslim states especially the more religious ones prohibit most pornography and Scandinavian countries have lots of available porn. Guess which countries women have a better, socio-economic and political position in? Would it be sensible to argue that pornography caused women to have a better position in Scandinavia? Of course not but that is where this sort of logic leads us.6

Another popular idea, adopted for example by Courts in various places is the idea that pornography causes “harm”. In Canada this idea largely via Catherine A. MacKinnon, has caught on with the courts basically as a way of avoiding the old “community standards” rule which was pretty useless and the old “artistic merit” debate.7

It is ironic that the so-called anti-pornography Feminists who use this argument allow themselves to be allied to anti-pornographic so-called “Christian” groups who are quite convinced of the harm done by Feminist speech and the need to curtail, if not eliminate that form of speech.

The problem is the “harm” described is pretty nebulous and lacks concrete specifics. Finally even if it causes “harm” is that a reason to ban it? Well it can be easily shown that Hitler’s Mein Kampf caused and causes real harm. Yet it is available. So are the works of Karl Marx and of countless thinkers whose ideas were used as an excuse by some to cause mayhem.

One could of course easily list all sorts of works that incited people to resist or rebel violently; say the works of Thomas Paine? So the “harm” idea in my opinion is nothing more than the old disgust, prurient argument. I.E., “this is revolting and disgusting so of course it causes harm”. Even assuming pornography causes “harm” is that a reason to ban it, after all lots of speech causes harm and is not banned.8

It is routine among anti-pornography crusaders to demonize the makers of pornography. A favourite story is the infamous snuff film story. What is fascinating is that despite decades of efforts to track down this elusive film we have yet to find a real snuff film. I.E., a film of an actual person being killed as the “climax” of a sadistic sex scene in a porn movie. It appears that certain films have had simulated death, although even those are very hard to find, but that a bona-fide for real snuff film seems to be nonexistent. Frankly that surprises me given just how perverse and vicious humans can be. The language of disgust is generally in full flower when anti-pornographers describe the makers of pornography. It seems to do so because anti-pornographers conceive of the world in manichean terms of the sons of light against the sons of darkness. They also seem to have no desire to find out in any depth or detail how the pornography industry actually works.9

Another argument, very frequently used, is that pornography is not “speech” and hence not eligible for being protected by freedom of speech guarantees, like the Canadian Charter of Rights or the American Constitution. The argument is that the guarantees only protect “political” speech. This is an interesting argument although in the end it amounts to the usual disgust argument. I.E., “pornography disgusts me so it isn’t legitimate speech”. Well lots of speech disgusts me such as Holocaust denial bilge and Racist vomit and Stalinist excrement but I would never dream of banning it because I find it disgusting. Of course there is Gore Vidal’s answer to this point of view “Sex is politics”. In fact his point is that sex is deeply political given that it is about on the most intimate level about how we relate to each other.10

By giving pornography deep existential importance and allying it to fundamental forces of society the anti-pornographers have elevate pornography from a diversion to a fundamental cosmic principle. It is not and never was.

Perhaps the most significant development in the pornographic industry lately has been the development of cams and other recording devices that make it very easy for people to make their own pornography. Thus escaping the censor and the prurient prude. Just how are the anti-pornographers going to control and regulate that?

The Greco-Romans had it right Pornography is nothing to get your knickers in a knot about.

1. Mulas, Antonia, Eros in Antiquity, The Erotic Art Book Society, New York, 1978., pp. 9-13.

2. See Richards, Jeffrey, Sex, Dissidence and Damnation, Routledge, London, 1991, pp. 22-41, Moore, R. I., The Formation of a Persecuting Society, 2nd Edition, Blackwell Pub., London, 2007, pp. 94-116.

3. For more information on A Third Testament, see Here

4. See Footnote 2.

5. For a overview of these issues see Diamond, Sara, Pornography: Image and Reality, in Women Against Censorship, Edited by Burstyn, Varda, Douglas & McIntyre, Toronto, 1985, pp. 40-57.

6. See Dworkin, Andrea, Pornography: Men Possessing Women, Plume, New York, 1991, MacKinnon, Catherine A., Are Women Human?: And Other International Dialogues, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.

7. The main case in question as been R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452, which uses this frame work and adopted largely from Catherine A. MacKinnon’s ideas.

8. See the essays in Burstyn, Varda.

9. For more about the apparent non-existence of snuff films see Stine, Scott Aaron, The Snuff Film: The Making of an Urban Legend, Here.

10. For the view that pornography is not real speech see McKinnon, Catriona, Toleration: A Critical Introduction, Routledge, London, 2006, pp. 137-152. For the view of sex as politics see Vidal, Gore, Sex is Politics, in The Second American Revolution and other Essays 1976-1982, Random house, New York, 1982.

Pierre Cloutier