Posts Tagged ‘Refugees’

How Did Plutocracy Create The Refugee Problem?

December 20, 2017

There is a massive refugee problem, and Europe is the paradise that is supposed to solve it. However, Europe is also a paradise of a different type, that of the Paradise Papers. Both notions are related. The present refugee crisis is different from, say, immigration to the US or Australia in the past. Or even whatever was seen at the height of colonialism’s most horrible horrors. Now, refugees trying to reach Europe are ready to risk life, limb, and even their own children (sometimes they even send the children ahead, as if it were the only way to save them, although they know all too well all the abuse and mayhem laying in wait). On the face of it, the despair of refugees was not as great, even when they were fleeing the Nazis, at the onset of World War Two, when the Nazis were warming up to their ever greater horrors.

In short, the answer is obvious: all what is happening now, even the evolution of science and education, is a province of plutocracy. Through their enormous influence on so-called (“elected“) “representatives”  worldwide, plutocrats, including not just Trump, but Putin and Xi, have made the planet into their masterwork. As I explained for many years, the root of the problem is more than multigenerational, it dates from the evolution of human nature. But the growth of the power of civilization has turned something that just collapsed civilizations into something that is destroying the biosphere itself, even before civilization has been established on any other planet.

Meanwhile, the left, misled even by Marx (who didn’t see the most extreme danger posed by the banking system), has been barking up the wrong trees: “capitalism”, colonialism, nationalism, even racism, didn’t constitute the worst of one is confronting there, the Dark Side of man, that obscurantism leveraged by the power of civilization.

Fighting sexism, radically, would be a better start than all the preceding isms, on the way to fighting obscurantism (a work I will use as a rough equivalent of the “Dark Side” from now on, as one does not go without the other).


Through The Alps Darkly:.

The scene is eerie: in the middle of the snowy night, white French local guides meet African refugees in a forest. Everybody is bundled in ten inch thick winter clothing and headlamps. The French talk to the Africans, in French, telling them they shouldn’t be afraid, they are not gendarmerie. Gendarmes would bring back the migrants to Italy (under a hare-brained EU law). The Africans speak perfect French. “Humanitarian” organizations in Italy have provided them with mountain gear.

After hours of efforts braving extreme cold, deep snow, cliffs and avalanches across a pass which is closed in winter, the Africans are understandably not keen to be driven back to balmy Italy. Some get killed during the traverse, falling off cliffs. The French gendarmerie then has to take enormous risks to extract them from precarious perches in which they have crashed.

In summer, the Névache valley is a paradise. Still migrants fall off cliffs in the middle of the night, as they try to avoid military patrols. In that alpine valley next to where I often reside, in the first ten months of 2017, 1,600 illegal immigrants went through, and were intercepted, and thus registered by authorities (most were not). Most of them were not. Out of the 1,600 who got official help, 900 were children. The Alps are dangerous. In winter, even through the Col de Léchelle pass, temperatures regularly dip to minus twenty (Fahrenheit or Centigrade). Snow is meters deep. Wolves, although illegally shot at by French authorities, roam. Migrants fall off cliffs, others freeze. 

Lower two-thirds of the wild and splendid Névache Valley. Migrants come from the right, and go the left. Most of the death and mayhem happen just in the forested pass lurking on the right.  The valley, by then endowed with roads and trains,  extends downstream 300 kilometers to the sea, zigzagging under the different name of “Durance”. Hannibal, escaping a Roman army in hot pursuit, probably used it, taking the Montgenevre pass just to the left, into Italy, and suffering his heavy losses from the local Allobroges (not the Romans). I have run and climbed all over the place, including the big (still) glaciated mountains in the distance.

The Italians are so happy to say goodbye to those French speakers from Africa, they give them free train tickets to travel along the Italian boot to next to the mountainous French border, well guarded by the Alps and the gendarmerie (Italy is, rightly, furious to see an enormous flow of refugees from Africa, and the rest of Europe doing nothing about it… although France makes war there, in half a dozen countries, enough to prevent a general takeover by Salafist madmen, and in spite of a lack of financial support from the rest of the EU).

I have a vested interest in the subject, having been brought up in Africa, and believing that French-speaking people living in Africa (my category in childhood) have a right to go to France, if and when they can make a living there.

Now, of course, cynics come and point out that there are not enough jobs in Europe. Curiously, though, they are, or used to be, lots of jobs in countries with high immigration, such as Great Britain post-Thatcher, or the USA under Obama-Trump… Or for that matter, in the France of the “Trente Glorieuses” (the 30 years of French economic ascent, reconstructing the country after 1945). On the face of it, there is high immigration to places with a future, and that means places with jobs.

So one needs to step back. Consider for example the San Francisco Bay Area. It used to have government built low-income housing. That was before Clinton style “Democrats” Post World War Two,  took power, and decided that anything short of the elite was just to be amused with fables. By contrast, the US government, under Democrat Truman and Republican Eisenhower, engaged in what would now be viewed as “Marxist” policies, far to the left of the worst proposed by Bernie Sanders.


Why Were There Quality Jobs In The Thirty Glorious Years, And Not Now? Guns!

Answer, short version: because power is at the point of the gun, said Mao, In 1945, twenty million angry young men, trained to kill, infused with spirits of democracy, civilization, wanted nice jobs, so got them.

In one place local authorities tried to stop demobilized soldiers with legitimate grievances: Algeria, on May 8, 1945. Bad idea. Result: a blood bath, and then decades of uncivil war (and an ongoing dictatorship).

The correct answer was not to do what happened more or less accidentally in Algeria, but for the authorities to bend over backwards. Nobody could stop the potentially angry young men: they were the army.

The GI Bill made even higher education free for those trained killers brainwashed into the ideal of defending democracy. In the USA alone, it meant more than ten million GIs, who needed jobs, and were well versed in the art of killing those animated by Satan-Pluto). Millions of GIs took advantage. Others went into extremely well paid industrial jobs: they could afford a good house, a good car, a good homemaker wife, and good children receiving a good education.

Republican president Eisenhower rose the upper margin rate to 93% in 1953. Yes ninety-three percent. Meanwhile he ordered the construction of a PUBLIC (no tolls!) freeway system (the famous “interstates”). Now, even in California (under “Democratic” control for decades), tolls are introduced (and fees are so massive in California “public” higher education that they can compare to average family income).

The Republican platform of 1956 would be condemned by today’s so-called “Democrats” as “Marxist“. Well, it worked for all. Thus not for plutocrats.

Here is the core of the 1956 Republican Platform:

* Assistance to low-income communities

* Protect Social Security

* Provide asylum for refugees

* Extend Minimum wage

* Improve unemployment benefits to cover more people

* Strengthen labor laws so workers can join unions

* Equal pay regardless of sex

During the “30 glorious ones”, high density housing was built for the lower classes. Throughout the “West”. Come the eighties and nineties, after a decade or two to wilful neglect, it was demolished for being “ugly”… From Paris to San Francisco.

Fast forward indeed to the 1980s: B actor Reagan, one of these ignorant puppets plutocrats love, playing the role of “president”, reduced enormously the taxes on the wealthiest. He paid for this by closing down lunatic asylum. No doubt, as himself a lunatic, he felt that his kind should be able to roam free. Meanwhile, cities such as San Francisco, or the Paris Metropolitan area, decided that low-income housing was an eyesore, and literally demolished with high explosives, said housing, imploding thousands of homes. Why should ugly dwellings mar the views of the truly rich and their servants? Let them live in the street.

In San Francisco, high school teachers may have to live in their cars: they certainly can’t afford rents. The greater Bay Area has eight million inhabitants. Those who want to live in a normal room, have to drive hours a day to their jobs. University professors in the South Bay have been known to live in their cars. But hell, why not? Who would want Kremlin agent, multibillionaire Yuri Milner, to pay his fair share of taxes? Milner is the god of many an intellectual nowadays, as those giving crumbs to them, reach divine status among the pigeons.


The Post Colonialist order of global plutocracy enabled the creation of tax heavens for the wealthiest, all over the world:

The “Paradise Papers” show clearly that laws are devised for the wealthiest to escape taxation. Something totally unsurprising: top politicians, when they graduate, turn into propagandists of the wealthiest, making them appear to be just like the friendly chap next door, although, to the wisest, they should look just like common chimpos pulling tricks.

Even though they are required to pay very little tax to start with, .001% of the richest people avoid at least 30% of the tax they owe. But of course the corruption goes much deeper than that: the entire system, from education to death taxes, is rigged so that the wealthiest get all the power and life support, and the rest barely enough to survive. Banks lend to the wealthiest, the art market is rigged as bitcoin for the wealthiest, when the wealthiest thieves get caught, they negotiate deals, and often just shrug away, suggesting the state may want to change its laws instead: Apple has been doing the latter for decades. Apple, the wealthiest company by market cap, said to the US, the mightiest country: change. And Apple may finally gets its wish, under King Trump I. If the law was hard and nothing but the law, all the C level officers of Apple would have long been under judicial supervision

0.01% of  the world’s population owe more than 50% of the wealth… And 99.99% of the power. Money is just the tip of the lever. Corruption and financial crimes have reached higher levels than ever. Plutocrats don’t want just wealth, they want power, and they want power not just for their own selfish comfort, but because they enjoy hurting others. In the latest, plutocrats plan to assassinate the biosphere (Glencore, mentioned below, became famous as a coal company; now it owns mines in Congo, and even the national parks they sit in; to make sure of that, Glencore employs… judges, no less! Thus, if one comes too close to a Glencore mine in Congo, just looking, even if accompanied by national park officers, one can be arrested… and “judged”, on the spot. Read on for more savory details on Glencore, as revealed by the “Paradise Papers”).

146 countries of which 100 are doing an automatic exchange of banking data. But, once again, the poor put their money in banks, the rich, in art.

Paradoxically, the OECD has progressed more in taxing wealth than the European Union. That’s an indicator of the fact that the 20,000 lobbyists active around the European Parliament work hard. So do the 6,000 lobbyists helping to draw the Trump tax reform.


The “Colonial” rule was not just “colonial”, most often it came with an administration implementing the rule of law; bad for red-blooded plutocrats:

So empires were not just “colonial”. They were colonial, plus administrative. Sometimes 100% colonial and 0% administrative, as in English colonial America (colons did whatever they wanted). Sometimes 99.99% administrative, and .01% colonial (as in Senegal, the case I am intimately familiar with). When the administrative policy was to implement holocaust, or genocide, mass atrocities resulted, as intended (consider Australia and Canada, even in the 1960s, when they forcefully separated some Native populations from their children). There were no limits to how nasty European colonialists could be: contemplate New England cities paying for scalps of Natives. Or the US government doing all it could to exterminate the Indians, in the Nineteenth with bullets and the Twentieth centuries, with alcohol, while claiming it didn’t. Or think Congo, with the pluto in chief, king of the Belgians, on a rampage.

However, in many places, and more in modern times, the “colonial” administration came to prevent the worst abuses (especially against the ecology). Yes, matters were far from good in many places (for example in Algeria, all too few people of Muslim descent had access to full citizen rights, let alone high education). However in many other places, especially in Black Africa, the “colonial” system worked better for the Natives than any alternative. One real reason that France ditched her African colonies in a hurry was that having a functional French hospital every 100 kilometers, for the benefit of the Natives cost way too much money. So a withdrawal supposedly for humanitarian reasons was anything but. However the leftists saw nothing of the sort. All the “Doctors Without Borders” of the present age don’t replace a state of the art hospital every 100 kilometers. Same for schools every ten kilometers. Now African “leaders” are in charge of this, as French president Macron reminded us… But they don’t have the means. Only plutocrats have the means, and they have them because they are stealing the people blind, including the people of Africa.

But the main underlying reason for frantic decolonization of territories apparently incapable of administering themselves was to prevent the increasingly civilized administration of vast territories. Instead what US plutocrats implemented, under the guise of decolonization, was to have developing countries become a free-for all. A free for all plutocrats. (The same method was implemented in Russia itself, in the 1990s, under the cover of Harvard and its ilk; Putin was both reaction and compromise, yet still somewhat part of the worldwide Pluto system.) 


Catch Your Fishes If You Can:   

An example has been the devastation of fisheries in West Africa. This is an old problem: the CIA was completely aware of it as early as 1986. Yet later, the son of the then “socialist” president of Senegal, a rather small country, and one of the poorest, became a billionaire… probably by selling personal authorizations to fish completely illegally to corporations from rich countries such as Korea (the son went to jail later, but refused to regurgitate much, or most, of the money; the 90-year-old father is toying with the idea of a return to politics, no less). 

As the Guardian put it in : “Tackling illegal fishing in western Africa could create 300,000 jobs: If governments in western Africa could end illegal fishing by foreign commercial vessels and build up national fleets and processing industries, they could generate billions of dollars in extra wealth and create around 300,000 jobs, according to a new report (pdf).

The devastating, social, economic and human consequences of overfishing in western Africa’s coastal waters have been well documented but the report, Western Africa’s Missing Fish, by the Overseas Development Institute and Spanish investigative journalists porCausa, lays bare the extent of lost opportunities across countries including Senegal, Mauritania, Liberia, Ghana and Sierra Leone.

“The scale of the losses is enormous. Instead of jobs and development, the livelihoods of artisanal fishers are being decimated by foreign fishing fleets, which operate virtually unchecked,” says Alfonso Daniels, lead author of the report, which presents new evidence of the extent and pattern of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) in the region – a global “epicentre” of overfishing.

For the first time, researchers used detailed satellite and tracking data to analyse the two main practices of IUU fishing: the activities of reefers – large-scale commercial vessels that receive and freeze fish at sea – and the transportation of fish in large refrigerated containers that are subject to less strict reporting requirements.

In 2013, they followed reefers off the coast of western Africa and found vessels from China, Holland and South Korea operating there, with fish exported globally. Among the 35 reefers operating in the region that year, routes were consistent with the transfer of catches from fishing vessels to reefers, including inside the exclusive fishing waters of Senegal and Ivory Coast, countries that have banned ship-to-ship transfers of catches.”

The French state, at times, has helped Senegal to police its waters. But if Senegal was a formal part of a formal imperial authority France was leading militarily, this would not happen. Senegal, thanks to the French, is better defended than Sierra Leone, where foreign, illegal trawlers not only fish in the 200 nautical mile EEZ, illegally, but outright penetrate Sierra Leone’s territorial waters. Sierra Leone was given a boat to make patrols, but cannot afford to operate it.

The Guardian, as a thoroughly brainwashed member of the establishment, talks only lost jobs and revenue. But actually, fish is the main source of protein of West Africa, and its disappearance brings malnutrition, and death, to dozens of millions. If, once again, France and Britain were the guardians of the area, this would not happen.

But it does happen. So for millions of young West Africans of the most enterprising type, the best solution is to emigrate to where there jobs, health, and a future.


Better to die than having no hope, say the refugees:

Over the last decade, hundreds of thousands of refugees have probably died, trying to reach Europe. We have 33,000 confirmed names, over the last decade, but that’s just a small fraction of the total.

Surely nobody cares when people die in the middle of the desert

The systemic tragedy, that hundreds of thousands of people risk, every years, life and limb to gain entry into Europe would not have happened in the so-called “colonial era”. This should be meditated upon. What changed? When one makes this sort of remarks, smart asses proud with a pseudo-intellectual sheen roll out the phrase “racist colonialist white supremacist”. Never mind what is really said.

Colonialism better in some ways? I can’t wait for the insults. Insults are all too often hurled to prevent thinking.

Yet the situation is this: Africa used to be livable enough for Africans not to want desperately to leave it.

Some will contest this smartly, by pointing out that it was harder to leave Africa then, that’s why there was no massive immigration. However, I grew up in Africa at the time, and know it was more livable then. I lived among the Natives, and was pretty much one of them, and Africans, from the white north or the black south, and the browns in between, were not looking up to flee Africa for Europe at the time; their lives were balanced, happy, without Islamist madness and plenty enough of interesting things to do, like agriculture, fishing, cooking, talking, dancing. After nominal independence, this colonial order faded progressively away (except in Algeria or Guinea, where brutal dictatorships were imposed, with attendant mass deaths and mass emigration.)


Humanitarianism As A Cover To The Pluto Machine:

“Humanitarians” say we should help, it’s a shame we don’t. They want to save 5,000 here, 10,000 there. But how many want to come? How many hundreds of millions?

The solution is to make Africa livable.

Or Syria, or Iran.

And first, it takes military might.

To tell us we should help, and we don’t do enough is correct. But nothing short of dismantling the Pluto order will do. Humanitarianism, as it is today, mostly give Plutos good conscience, and put them in the front row, saving the climate they assassinate a bit more everyday. It was hilarious to see, at the Paris climate conference, self-declared “philanthropists” all out to help the climate, when they machines are ravaging it. Serious: one owns a gigantic airline (Virgin’s Branson, friend and host of the PC Obamas), another enormous computer machinery using the power of many nuclear power plants (Gates), another is a gigantic financial vulture (Bloomberg), etc….

Meaning claiming we have to do small-scale humanitarianism, is like saying an engine needs oil. Yes, the Pluto machine needs the oil of humanitarianism. To look good, and work good. Yes, it feels good to help. But nothing short of dismantling the Pluto machine will be really effective. Being plutocrats’ lap dogs make us part of a dog and pony show (yes, dogs and cats site are thousands of times more popular than brainy sites, I know all too well…)


What is the main killer in the developing world? Lack of surgery!

Two million surgeons are missing in the “developing” world, for five billion people. Lack of access to basic surgical care is the number one killer in the developing world, above malaria, tuberculosis, etc. Go explain that to Bill Gates. Two millions surgeons missing. Why? Plutocrats don’t like surgeons in particular, and doctors in general (except when they need their services). In the so-called “West”, the shortage in the education of doctors had been colossal, long-lasting, and deliberate. Why? Plutocrats don’t like doctors and surgeons: doctors and surgeons are brainy and they require a lot of education, thus cash, hence taxes. Doctors and surgeons can, would, and did lead revolutions. Revolutions are bad for plutocratic business. So the plutocratic system prefers to steal doctors in the developing world, paid by developing world taxes, are needed. And if developing world people die from lack of surgical care, well, no worries, no problem, plutocrats called “philanthropes” will come visit the dying, a pretext to fly their private airplane companies, and enjoy the seven stars hotels they own, throughout the planet.

Climate? Maybe they can visit Antarctica in the full luxury of a polluting cruise ship. They will make sure to say hi to a few servants, presidents, Prime Minister and princes on the way. While hypocritically, and deliberately confusedly complaining about their colleague, financier,  and uppity servant, Vladimir Putin (and his billionaire henchmen).

Tax the wealthiest! People brandish the “Tobin tax” concept. But there is nothing new about “Tobin tax”. The idea is as old as civilization, economists just use jargon (when I told that to Krugman, he censored me, before recycling the idea for himself later). Instead, plutocrats foster “philanthropy”, the love of man, something only them can foster. But replacing taxes by NGOs is replacing justice and equality by plutocracy and abuse: it can’t work.


French Doctors On Fire, The Latest Trend:

Nothing proves this better than the sad fate of Doctors Without Borders. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). Doctors Without Borders, a Peace Nobel Laureate is a French founded international humanitarian non-governmental organization (NGO) bringing healthcare to war-torn regions and developing countries ravaged by endemic diseases. In 2015, over 30,000 personnel — mostly local doctors, nurses and other medical professionals, logistical experts, water and sanitation engineers and administrators, advised by advanced countries doctors — provided medical aid in over 70 countries.

The success of Doctors Without Borders (MSF) is enormous, so various enemies of peace have learned that, because it is a civilizationalizing force, MSF is the enemy. So what do those followers of the Dark Side do? From Afghanistan, to Syria, to Yemen, MSF is now targeted. Doctors, by the dozens, are shot like dogs,  up to 57 died in one attack. To make sure they can’t help anymore, nurses got their hands chopped off, etc.

History is formal on this: one can’t have justice if one does not have order, and the only ones roaming are the dogs of war.


Plutocrats own Africa, that’s why Africans are fleeing it, thanks PC Baby Boomers:

It is dawning on people that the sort of self-obsession Baby Boomers instituted as ultimate guidance, electing Nixon, and especially Reagan, this haughty Political Correctness of a pseudo-left, pseudo-pro-peace, is nothing but. The world imperial order of plutocracy we got is the fruit of their self-absorption and intellectual laziness.

Bill Clinton, the ultimate selfish baby Boomer posing as an empath, went all the way, even where neither Nixon and Reagan had dared: he reverted, annihilated the financial order that Franklin D Roosevelt had instituted.. And has had to institute. Clinton put financiers back at the helm, so they could take care of selves, & Clintons.

I have been saying this for decades. Now the notion is finally reaching the mainstream. Even Vox is going my way. Consider: “How the baby boomers — not millennials — screwed America. The boomers inherited a rich, dynamic country and have gradually bankrupted it.”

I will deal with that essay in a separate essay of mine, as it says, from another voice, (some of) what I have been saying for years. Actually, those US Baby Boomers screwed the entire planet, and, first of all, Africa. (Other Baby Boomers, say the European ones, are just parrots of the US ones, because the USA is the leading nation of the world, whatever whoever is saying…) Thus, all and any of the so-called solutions they have put forward are to be viewed with suspicion, to say the least: they are meant to grease The Machine of plutocratic exploitation, not replace by something just, equitable and sustainable.

Plutocrats are crafty: they hide in plain sight. Watch the Obamas bonding continually with “Prince Harry”, a corrupt guy who was just born right, and could get away with parties in Las Vegas who would send the Commons to prison. Watch Bernard Henri Levy (BHL), coming out of one of his palaces, this greatly humongously splendid humanitarian, complete with open shirt, Hemingway style. BHL followed some of my ideas (say on Libya; Humanism Is Force, Or Is Not: against ultimate evil, only ultimate force works). However, BHL made a fortune, like quite a few other top French plutocrats, by exploiting Subsaharan Africa, in a way that no competent administration of the region would have allowed.

As it is, Africa is a dream come true for plutocrats: watch Glencore. That Swiss based company basically owns Congo at this point. Glencore produces rare metals and earths crucial for electronics laptops, smartphones) and electric vehicles (it started with coal, but coal is on its way out). Most of the production comes from giant mines in Katanga, next to Kolwezi. Kolwezi became famous for the lightning strike jump of the French Foreign Legion, under fire, to free more than 5,000 hostages. French troops suffered 11 dead, more than 60 europeans were assassinated, and now the region is under the control of Glencore… Thanks to somber cash payments, all the way to Congo’s President Kabila himself… As just revealed by the “Paradise Papers”.

Well, it’s paradise for the owners of the world. And if we go to hell, as the planet burns, they will chuckle, as Nero proverbially did.

Actually, although Nero was one of the worst emperors ever, I shouldn’t commit defamation, just because it sounds good. In truth, Nero was not in Rome when the fire started. Then he helped fight it, and opened the imperial palace to refugees.

Don’t expect as good a behavior from today’s plutocrats. They are much worse. Differently from Nero, they have colonized minds themselves. As events in many different countries showed recently, the Deep State extends all the way to the main companies, and all the way down, not just banks and the Justice systems, but also to Big Law, and even many NGOs.

Orwell imagined what he thought was the worst, and he came short. In his book, “1984”, gloom and doom rules. Instead what rules now is what is perceived as the best of all possible worlds, when, in reality, we are tottering on the brink of extinction, because of our insistence that we leave in a sort of democracy, when never ever before, so much mind control has been exerted by so few.

If you don’t believe me, watch Twitter, a de facto monopoly, set-up, as Google and Facebook, by the state, decide who gets published, and who gets banned. And who put Twitter in place? Not just the plutocratic servants in the White House, but tycoons associated to Putin, such as Yuri Milner.  I have said it for years. And I have disapproved of it for years.

Now, even the New York Times, which seems to have banned me for years as a conspiracy theorist, admits that I was right:


THE PARADISE PAPERS: Kremlin Cash Behind Billionaire’s Twitter and Facebook Investments


It’s a bit more than an ascent: Milner actually invested for example 250 million dollars into Twitter, when Twitter was just a start-up (I love my Twitter account, by the way). 250 million dollars of Putin’s money, that is. I have related in the past the many proofs that Putin is not just a plutocrat, it’s one of the West’s plutocrat (those who find this a bit mysterious, should read “1984” again).

“In the fall of 2010, the Russian billionaire investor Yuri Milner took the stage for a Q. and A. at a technology conference in San Francisco. Mr. Milner, whose holdings have included major stakes in Facebook and Twitter, is known for expounding on everything from the future of social media to the frontiers of space travel. But when someone asked a question that had swirled around his Silicon Valley ascent — Who were his investors? — he did not answer, turning repeatedly to the moderator with a look of incomprehension.

Now, leaked documents examined by The New York Times offer a partial answer: Behind Mr. Milner’s investments in Facebook and Twitter were hundreds of millions of dollars from the Kremlin.


This is just the surface of the horror. To understand it fully, stand in front of judges. Most of them are also part of “The Machine”. And the worst? Many of them, don’t even know it. Hope? At least one judge, a president of an Appellate Court, had to resign for gender discrimination. He is 80 years old… Another one, a Federal judge named by Reagan 32 years ago, from the supposedly “liberal” 9th circuit, also resigned for the same reason. Meanwhile judges shuffle gender discrimination cases into “arbitration” (secret courts).

They probably appear in front of Yuri Milner, great bishop of worldwide plutocracy. (Don’t worry about Milner being indicted for being an agent of Putin, most of the red-blooded agents of the US judicial system, including judges, dream to be employed in one of Milner’s companies, or one of the companies of Milner’s pals… who are roughly anybody dealing with silicon…)

So let the refugees drown and freeze: they will give our philanthropic plutocrats ruling the planet the occasion to divulge their awesome “humanitarian” streaks. We are all just to stand in awe for the streaks of their bloody footprints. And for those who really want to change the world for the better, the way is obvious: hyper criticism of the entire establishment and Deep State (something giant, which includes the judicial system and Big Law), and especially of the ideas and moods sustaining it. Help the refugees, yes. But better, attack the system.

Patrice Ayme’

Brexit Or the Madness of Plutocracy

June 22, 2016

Brexit vote tomorrow. This is a completely idiotic, immoral referendum organized by anti-Europeans (Cameron & Al.) against even more strident anti-Europeans (right wing Nazi like extremists plutocrats’ servants and hedge fund managers desirous to keep their manger in Great Britain’s archipelago of tax havens). There are trite pros and cons of BRitain EXIT referendum, all over the media. Here are mine:

  1. The fundamental mood motivating the will to exit the European Union is as ugly, violent, racist, tribal, and, to put it in one word, Nazi as it gets. The extreme right-wing fringe of the right-wing party in England launched it. For them Margaret Thatcher, who campaigned for, and ratified the Single European Act is a left-wing Marxist traitor. This was demonstrated by MP Jo Cox’s assassination by a… Nazi whose most cherished possession is a manuscript from Adolf Hitler. Even imbeciles should be able to understand that one. A Nazi assassinates in the most gory fashion the defenseless mother of two young children, just like the original, most excited Brexiters want to assassinate Europe.
  2. In particular,  full bloodied Brexiters hate the “ever closer Union” concept. They have understood no history whatsoever.
  3. So it’s hilarious how ill-informed some people are, who scream that Trump is a racist right extremist while supporting Brexit. Just like Hitler, they want to build a particular sort of Europe which hates. The head of Brexit, Nigel Farage posed in front of a flow of Muslim refugees, calling it the “Breaking Point”. It could not get any clearer. Guess what? After Farage flaunted this blatantly racist act, the pro-Brexit faction surged. How much clearer can one be?

    Head Of Brexit Faction, Nigel Farage, Said That, To Defeat The Muslim Refugee Flow, Britain Has To Close Her Borders With Europe. That Made His Popularity Surge


  4. The European Union as it is does not work. But if one asks US citizens whether they like the “direction of the USA”, or the US Congress, most of them say no by up to 85%. Still, no American idiot has come up to suggest a USexit referendum. There were USexit votes around 1860, and those votes brought the deadliest American conflict, which killed 3% of the US population (thsat would be ten million killed, using the US population for 2016).
  5. The British population is not the most dissatisfied by present European Union government (the so-called EC ”Commission”, a ridiculous name). The British are much more satisfied than the French, whose dissatisfaction is only surpassed by the Greeks. Still the French have not been proposed a referendum about whether they want to be in the European Union (in 2005 the French and the Dutch turned down a proposed Constitution of the EU; a more modest reform was ratified in the conventional manner). Of course they do. Why? Because the French do not confuse improving the European Union, and destroying it.

The alternative to the European Union and its “ever closer union” is war. War from “ever greater disunion” was tried before. Plutocracy would love to try it some more. War is to real plutocrats what golf is to basic oligarchs. War does not have to occur tomorrow, it’s best served cold, and starts with tariffs. (Not that tariffs cannot be justified, they can, and could be for a number of excellent reasons, some of them, like a carbon tax, approved of by the World Trade Organization). The French are much more angry against the EC than the British. But don’t throw the EU baby with the EC bath.


The crisis of refugees flooding into Europe is striking and intolerable. It has a precedent: this is exactly the problem Rome encountered, starting around 110 BCE. Consul Marius then solved the invasion by exterminating the three German tribes which were invading the Roman Republic in three battles (two of which happened next to Aix-en-Provence, and are celebrated to this day, in the names of locales). The Germans kept on trying to invade, and the situation became overwhelming when cretin Christian (sorry for the pleonasm) emperor Valens, to demonstrate his power did not wait for his nephew Gratian to come over with the Western Roman army (co-emperor Gratian was close-by, and marching in). The Goths then exterminated the Oriental Roman Army, and ended taking Rome, a generation later (410 CE).

The Renovated Roman empire led by the Franks suffered an even more severe sequence of simultaneous invasions in the Seventh and Eighth Century. In 715 CE, the Muslims were in Narbonne (an important regional capital in Rome). The Franks were the first to call themselves “Europeans”, and it is because they were “Europeans” that they won.   

Edward Gibbon (1737-1794) saw the battle of Poitier as a key turning point in European history (but so were the preceding European victory at Toulouse in 721 CE, and the European victories at  the Battle of Avignon, the Battle of Nîmes, and the Battle of the River Berre.

Headless, without armies, all its armies having been destroyed by the Franks and a subsequent, related revolt of the Berbers in 740 CE, the Caliphate based in Damascus then collapsed in civil war (750 CE) and the Franks started the reconquest of Spain, before the reign of Charlemagne, establishing the Marca Hispanica as early as 785 CE.

Here is British historian Edward Gibbon’s famous counterfactual passage from The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776-78): Had the Muslims won at Poitiers,


Could something good come out of Brexit? Yes, sure. Contrarily to what the fanatical tribal puppets of global plutocracy (whose international headquarters are Great Britain) believe, ever greater union is the way out of ALL European problems. Brexit could kick out a fifth columnist, a saboteur, and encourage the others to get together.

Those who want to divide Europe, instead of making it stronger are the real traitors. And the real enemies of freedom. To defend the borders of Europe, a European army had to march into Syria, after removing the dictator plutocrat Assad, dear to London, thanks to his assets. Anything short of this is nothing. 

For decades, stupid anti-Europeans in Britain have thought cool, smart and extremely British to declare the European Union was a “club”. Not, it’s not. Please read that again: it’s an union. Union. Get it? If you want a tax haven, go live in the British Virgin Island tax haven. The time of stealing other Europeans is near.  Actually, it has arrived. Nothing like a whiff of exasperation. After all, that’s what did the Nazis in.

Patrice Ayme’

Only Massive Imperial Force Will Save The Children

September 5, 2015

Learn From The Refugee Crisis Better, & Faster, Than In the 1930s.

Abstract: The refugees from Syria have to be let in. Simultaneously, the root of the problem has to be dealt with. And it can only be dealt with war, a war which is, first of all, to be fought on philosophical ground.

Most countries ignored the refugees in the 1930s. So doing, those countries not only condemned millions of innocents to death, they failed to learn about, and prepare the war with, the ideology of death, which was on a collision course with civilization.


A father, his wife and two sons, aged 3 and 5, fled war in Kobane. Kobane, a city in Kurdish Syria, was destroyed by strict followers of the Islamist ideology. Relative of these Kurds had made it to Canada, a gigantic expanse of rich, temperate land up north. The two little boys ended drowned, and so did their 27 year old mother.

Enough. Time To Eradicate The Cause

Enough. Time To Eradicate The Cause

Chancellor Merkel and president Hollande had talked before about obligatory quotas of acceptation of refugees among European nations. Now they are making a formal proposition. The Hungarian PM, Orban, objected that accepting all these refugees would destroy the “Christian identity” of Europe. However, millions of Christians are trying to flee the Islamists (so one cannot accused these to not be “Christians”).

The war refugees reached the Anatolian coast, 23 kilometers away from the European island of Kos, in Greece. Canada had refused them peaceful admission (they had family there). So the war refugees had to flee for their lives, in an “unlawful” manner (how can it be “unlawful” to save one’s family?) They boarded a small boat at night, manned by a local Turk. The sea was bad. Two nasty waves, and panic on board, threw the family in the sea. Only the father survived. Aylan, three years old, ended on a beach, face down, drowned to death. Here he is, in the picture above. But cameramen were there.

In the present crisis, Germany has been the most accepting country of all for war refugees. That’s quite wise in many ways, and a significative change from German atavism. In 2015, Germany will admit 800,000 refugees, from the Middle East, much more than any European country.

In the long run, if the refugees are well integrated, they should help the German economy, which is short in workers. (That’s an important “if”; it passes by destroying first Islamist ideology, fundamental version.)

Daech (“Islamist State”) bought, sold women and young Yazidi girls calling them “cattle”. A trick women and girls used was not to wash, and smell as bad as possible, “Sara” testified in a book just published “Ils Nous Traitaient Comme Des Betes” (“they treated us as beasts”). Yazidis follow a religion several times older than Islam. So Islam hates them: as Yazidis are not “people of the book“, but “idolaters“, according to the Qur’an, they have to be killed. Hey, don’t look at me funny, just be respectful, and go read the Qur’an. Culture is nurture.).

Not that this is all about Daech: the horrendous dictatorship in Syria, that of the scion Bachar El Assad, has killed at this point around 250,000 people, displaced eight millions, and kills at a rate seven times that of Daech (according to the Syrian Human Right Watch (UK)).

When millions flee, leaving behind how they lived, risking their lives, it is an unmistakable symptom of evil rising.

On the face of it, the Islamist ideology, fundamental version, is worse than whatever was written in “Mein Kampf”. In Hitler’s book, one has to read between the lines, between the lies, and extrapolate. In the Qur’an, no need to read in between, or extrapolate anything: all sorts of categories of people, including highly speculative and non-objective ones, such as “apostates”, are condemned to all sorts of horrible death (with a preference for burning alive).

And now is Islam, fundamental version, in action: more than four million refugees, in Syria alone (OK, the dictator, Assad Junior, is officially not an Islamist, but he has the Islamist mentality, by opposition to the democratic mentality, and he is losing the war to the Islamists, whom he had craftily, or so he thought, released himself from jail!)

Yes, Islamism, like Nazism, was manipulated by an even greater force, international plutocracy gravitating around the highly leveraged banking system. But that makes the rising of war even more ominous, as it means that its causes are very deep, they have two stratigraphic layers, completely different in nature. One a form of banditry turned into a religion, the other, in the West, even worse, a form of banditry which nobody is aware of, a sort of transparency of crime.

So let’s accept the refugees from Syria, millions of them. That will be wonderful for European demography. At the same time, that can only be done by cracking down on the Islamist ideology. All and any preacher of Islam sent from overseas ought to be sent to jail for a very long time, and all and any Islamist teaching fundamentalist Islam should also do a long and hard time. This is the philosophical part: treat fundamental Islamism just like Nazism is treated in France and Germany: a criminal thought system.

At the same time, let’s not forget that, when million of refugees flee, it’s just a tripwire for infamy rising. And infamy needs to be crushed (said Voltaire).

In the 1930s, millions of Jews, and opponents of fascism, tried to flee central and southern Europe, where fascism had, using force, taken power in Italy, Germany, Spain, Hungary, etc… The USA was singularly uncooperative in helping them, accepting only a few celebrity refugees such as Einstein, Enrico Fermi (soon to direct the Manhattan project), Marlene Dietrich, etc. Cruise ships were turned around, and sent back to the Nazi Reich, and all passengers were grabbed back by the Nazis, and annihilated.

Meanwhile, France, with a territory smaller than Texas, accepted hundreds of thousands of refugees. (Compare with the 1,800 refugees from the Middle East the USA plans to admit in 2015.)

The usual “explanation” for the USA’s inhuman policy relative to the Jews and other enemies of Nazism in the 1930s, is that the USA is that the USA was “isolationist”. Sorry if I let you die along the road, or drown in the sea without throwing you a buoy, I’m isolationist.

In France, “non-assistance to person in danger” has long been a crime, very prominent in the law. A law, as applied to individuals, changes the mood of an entire society. Much difference between the USA & France comes precisely from the effect that this law, or lack thereof, has on the average person’s mind. (From health care, to incarceration madness, to fracking, etc.)

However, the more likely explanation was not “isolationism”. Instead, it is quite the opposite. The USA authorities, entangled with USA plutocracy, which was itself deeply entangled with European fascisms (in particular, Stalin’s Reich), was anxious to not have the American people guess the truth. The USA’s deep state knew the truth, and it suited it just fine: Europe was rotting, with a little help from the plutocracy of the USA, to the world’s worst dictators (Stalin, Mussolini, Stalin, Franco, Ho Chi Minh, etc.).

The solution, of course, as history revealed, was not to just accept the refugees from Nazism, but to go to war, something that the French Republic had understood first, yet could only do, once the United Kingdom had aligned itself behind France (this happened after the fall of Spain in winter 1939).

Eternal Return of the Same? Police officer talks to a Jewish person outside the kosher grocery where Amedy Coulibaly killed four people earlier in a terror attack, in Paris, Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2015.


[For those who want to know, Judaism is the oldest religion practiced today in France. By a few centuries.]

The situation is the same now: first the refugees have to be accepted, now, and massively. But, although Europe can gladly accept maybe ten or twenty million refugees (as long as they get cleansed from lethal ideologies such as Islamism), Europe cannot accept all of Africa and the Middle East. Africa and the Middle East need to be fixed.

So what to do? War. And imposing an ideology that will overwhelm Islam (it has been done before, say with Christianism,  or, in most of these places, in the… 1930s: then Islam was viewed as the Middle Ages, ignored and despised. In the 1930s, Egyptian women in bikini crowed the beaches. Not coincidentally that was before the Nazi inspired, and Nazi allied, Muslim Brotherhood was created! One could argue the Muslim Brotherhood ought to be made illegal, for the exact same reason as the related Nazism is illegal… Yes, I know, some will argue Nazism is legal in the USA; yet, not really: one can hang a Nazi flag, and that’s OK, yet, one cannot indulge in ANY Nazi act: those are called “hate crimes” and are illegal, in the USA, France, Germany, etc.),

In other words, it’s high time to re-establish and expand over much of Africa and the Middle East, the Greco-Roman empire Muhammad had explicitly planned to destroy (and made an excellent job of it). What goes around, comes around.

A fundamental aside: Greco-Roman” is a mislabel. The “Greco-Roman” empire was Greek and Roman in language, but local languages flourished too. Moreover, the empire was also British, German, Punic, Spanish, Syrian, Libyan, North African, Illyrian, even Arab, etc. Not that the Sassanid (Iranian) empire next door was not another mighty civilization.

Some will scoff that this vision is too violent, too primitive. However, violence, that is force, works, and the more hinged on basic instincts, the more it works. This is why plutocracy, and its related tools, Nazism, Islamism, Sovietism, Maoism, etc. tend to work (only plutocracy and Maoism are thriving, at this point, but the others had their time of domination). The force, and seduction, of Islam is mostly in its primitive force.

Houellebecq published his book called “Submission” (that is, Islam). Coincidentally with the Charlie-Hebdo attack. Now the Algerian writer Boualem Sansal is publishing “2084, La Fin Du Monde”, also about the takeover of the world by Islam. Houellebecq just stated that he would now have written a version of his “Submission” much more critical of Islam.


Sansal writes in French, a language mostly derived from Latin, the language spoken in Algeria 2,000 years ago. Sansal wants French to be the official language of Algeria (instead it’s the language of the genocidal invaders, Arabic, which has been adopted as official language rather than of the three pre-existing languages… which still exist! Kabyle has not yet been made an official language.)

Daech, the Islamist State, knows, as Muhammad and his successors knew, that the facts which matter most are military facts. Indeed Islam rests on only two battles. In one of these battles, the small (40,000 men) Arab army annihilated the much larger Persian field army. In the other battle, the same Arab army defeated the enormous Roman field army. In both cases the Arabs were quick to follow their victories with unprecedented massacres (to eradicate any possible resistance).

So accept the refugees: it’s the human thing to do. But prepare to eradicate the cause of the exodus. That, too, is the human thing to do. And also the wisest.

To be more human is to be intelligent enough to use the greater force. Not just an opinion. A fact. A striking fact of human evolution.

Humanity is a force which goes, ever stronger. And morality is how it’s managed.

Germany is behaving correctly, wisely by accepting 800,000 war refugees this year. But that is unsustainable, and that is not enough (the USA is accepting maybe 1,800; yes, less than two thousands).

The German Republic needs to go where Merkel did not dare to go in Mali and Libya: support militarily, massively, the French Republic, reconstituting what made the Frankish Empire into Western Civilization properly reborn in a sustainable way. And the French need to project more force at the root. However not as Obama has been doing with his war of the drones. This is a philosophical war, not a war of assassinations. Assassinations-as-policy makes it worse.

Yes it means military budgets in Europe have to shoot up. In pertticular the German one.

The unwillingness of Europe, the richest continent, to use force to re-establish a modicum of security, order and civilization in Africa and the Middle East, is entangled with its unwillingness to use force to re-establish a modicum of security, order and civilization all over, when the future is threatened, from any cause.

In Eritrea, the dictator there has been filling up the boats in Libya fleeing for Europe. Meanwhile, he lives very well from a payment system he set up for himself among the Eritrean diaspora. This has been going on for ten years. Clearly, the Eritrean dictator ought to be removed by force, because only force will work.

Fundamentally, the cause of these wars sprouting all over, is the lack of vision in the definition of civilization in the West. Both Houellebecq and Sansal have been saying this recently, and so I have, from my obscure corner. As Salman Rushdie just added, the greatest thinkers on the Internet are Justin Bieber and Kim Kardashian, and that can only leave deep thinkers with a feeling of madness and discouragement. The presidents probably consult with them, and they proudly wear the Legion of Honor (if not already, pretty soon).

Those little children drowned on beaches are there, because it’s Kim Kardashian desire which rules the minds in the West. And the more horrifying the reality, the more the Twitter generation follows Kim Kardashian’s buns obsessively.

As long as people confuse thinking and spiritual masturbation, what passes for smarts will keep on degenerating. This has moral, even military, consequences. And so it will, until war drowns everything. Yet, don’t assume the good, smarter, better equipped, and more powerful armies of civilization, always win: just ask the French generals on May 20, 1940…

Or then contemplate what happened in Syria, at the battle of Yarmouk, from August 15th, to August 20th, 636. That’s when the main Roman field army, four times larger and better trained and equipped, was annihilated by the Arab army. Why? How? Just because the Romans had been overconfident, and then impatient. Next, as a forerunner of the Islamist State they were going to establish, the Arab warriors scoured quickly all over Syria and adjoining regions to kill all and any male in age of bearing arms.

Yes, we have seen it all before. And the Romans came to believe it, only when it was too late. A century later, thrice in a row, three enormous Arab field armies would be annihilated in France (721 CE-748 CE). And then, defenseless from the annihilation of its armed forces, the Arab Caliphate in Damascus fell, never to be seen again. There is hope, but it better be clever and strong.

Force, ladies and gentlemen, there is nothing like it, and it starts with the civilized mind. And, first, to establish it.

Patrice Ayme’