A Polity of Castrati

May 31, 2011

Soprano Nation

by Fred Reed

(Editor’s Note: I, too, am one of these knuckle-dragging testosterone-transport systems. After reading Fred’s column, think about secession. I contend that secession will not occur until AFTER the economic collapse. America could very rapidly degenerate into an 18th century scenario. That could mean that a huge number of the femgals Fred talks about…in addition to the feminized males that lack even Boy Scout preparedness…will die of starvation, disease and crime. That will be the historic legacy of feminism.)

“All of the world’s problems are products of the male ego,” said a swaggering bulldagger she-cop in Law and Order the other night. Average gringa. Actually, only some of the world’s problems, as for example wars, are products of the male ego.

Of course, a curmudgeonly male—though I don’t know any of these—might respond, “Woman, everything that keeps you and your sisters from squatting in caves and crushing lice is a product of the male brain.”

Which is true.

It is curious: Women seem to have no idea how profoundly they depend on men, and not just to fix thingy-whiches that make cars go. The pattern is that men invent and women use. Men invented cars, and women learned to drive them, usually without having the foggiest idea of how they work. Men also invented refrigerators, television, aircraft, hair-dryers, and tampons. Since women with few exceptions do not think technically unless they have to, they are unaware of the inordinate amount of inspired brainwork that led over millennia to computational fluid dynamics, band theory, the double helix, and TCP/IP.

We hear much triumphalism from women these days about the “male malaise,” the poor performance of boys in class, their depression and inattention in school, their declining presence in the universities. Why are these thing happening?

It is not that girls are doing better. They have always been dutiful, have pasted pictures neatly into projects, and have done their homework on time. Rather the boys have gone downhill. Why?

Much of it I think results from the relentless imposition of female values on all of society. Once, boys were boys and girls were girls. Now all must be girls, or nearly so.

This matters. Males value freedom over security; women, security over freedom. Men love venturing into the wild, whether in Silicon Valley or unexplored jungles, if any; women do not. Men are fiercely competitive; women, concerned with order and comity. Men are physical, enjoying, even needing, rough sports; women are not. To a man of my generation the country today is unbearably controlled, restricted, safe, and feminized.

This ought to be worrisome, even to women. When men are free, they prosper. Time and again, bright males drop out of college and found Google, Microsoft, Dell, Yahoo, FaceBook, Intel. They go at it with single-minded determination and not a whole lot of humility. This balls-to-the-wall ethos, wing it and see what happens, screw the PhD, eighteen-hour days of frantic programming on Jolt Cola and Cheetos, we’ll slit the competition’s throat with this new app—this is guy stuff. Men like these have made life comfortable enough that feminists have time to complain. Constantly.

The qualities that make life bearable for males have been squeezed out of society by angry women. In the schools, dodgeball is violence, and must be replaced by a cooperative game led by a caring adult. If a third-grader draws a soldier, he is led out of school in hand-cuffs. If he is bored to suicide by some witless gal from a “teacher’s college,” he is drugged. This compulsory niceness is sheer female passive-aggression against males. It works.

The anger of women is real, easily noticed in the frequent snotty remarks and the portrayal on television of men as boobs and louts. Yes, there are among women exceptions and degrees. The anger remains. Why?

I suspect that that the reason is the abrogation of the implicit no-compete clause that once existed between the sexes. In the past, boys were certain things and did certain things; girls were other things and did other things. The girls didn’t drag race against the boys, or think of challenging them at basketball. A girl would try to be valedictorian, but she saw herself as competing against other contenders, not the male sex.

Then came femlib. Women now explicitly saw themselves going head-to-head against men as a sex. It wasn’t a wise fight to pick. Women of ability went into all manner of fields and performed well, as doctors, dentists, editors, reporters, and so on. But it wasn’t enough. Since they were competing not as individuals but as a sex, it was crucial to them that women equal men arithmetically in everything. They couldn’t.

In sports it was hopeless. If there is an Olympic sport other than perhaps nymphette gymnastics or synchronized swimming in which women best men, I am unaware of it. NASCAR would dearly love to have female drivers to encourage women to buy tickets,but it can’t find any who amount to anything; Formula One is worse.

Intellectually things were not so stark. Bright women abounded, and it was easy—thank god, think bright guys—to find women who were smarter than almost all men. Yet it remained that males outperformed females by a large margin on the SAT math section and by a lesser margin, but still a margin, on the verbal. The imbalance occurred on GREs, National Merit, and tests of IQ. Worse, at higher and higher ranges of intelligence, the men outnumbered the women by larger and larger amounts. This is settled science among psychometricians. It is also the glass ceiling. It was, further, the impetus behind affirmative action.

Affirmative action theoretically was intended to give the under-performing classes initial entry, after which they were expected, or said to be expected, to catch up. In fact it quickly became the equivalent of a golf handicap on the able.

Since affirmative action is patronage exchanged for votes, and unrelated to ability, we began to see female ambulance crew who, though perfectly good medically, could not carry stretchers. There were—are—female fire-persons who can neither carry the unconscious nor handle hoses.

Women had found that they could get by political means what they could not on their merits. While many women could compete at most levels on their ability, not enough could do it to produce the desired arithmetic equality. Ah, but women are the backbone of a consumerist society, the buyers, the shoppers. Thus television began pitching ads to women, and telling women what they seem to want to hear, namely that men are dull-witted slugs. Cop shows became populated by unsmiling pistol-toting robo-dyke detectives who confused chronic PMS with manhood. While surveys show that women know less about politics than do men, they vote in larger numbers, and thus could demand special preference. Here we are.

It isn’t going to stop. The country daily becomes more authoritarian, watched, feminized, regulated, and pervaded by disguised hostility that seeks to avenge itself on others. Advancement today depends on race, creed, color, sex, and national origin instead of an ability and drive. In the schools boys will continue to be drugged, repressed, and made into puerile eunuchs.

The question becomes: Where is this leading? What does feminization accomplish? What can we expect of a nation run by and for women?

Fewer wars, just possibly. Declining international competitiveness as schools focus on therapy instead of integration of hyperbolic functions. Miserable little boys gagging down totalitarian niceness and Ritalin. Young men who see no point in going to fifth-rate universities rigged against them. And boredom. Oh god, the boredom.

©Fred Reed
www.FredOnEverything.net


Memorial Day 2011: How About A New Meaning?

May 30, 2011

by Russell Longcore

(Editor’s Note: I wrote this for Memorial Day 2009, and this update is more true today.)

The Memorial Day 2011 weekend is upon us. Many will use this weekend as the first short vacation of summer. Picnics, boating, traveling, family gatherings, and dedication to enjoyable activities are the rule this weekend.

But Memorial Day is meant to honor the men and women who died in military service to the United States of America. Formerly known as “Decoration Day,” it was first established in 1868 to decorate the graves of the Civil War (War of Northern Aggression) dead.

This weekend, there will be memorial services and parades across America in town squares, churches and at cemeteries. Flowers will be strewn and American flags will be in grand display. Politicians will walk the route, and military veterans will don old uniforms and walk with them. Twenty-one gun salutes and taps will echo among the headstones. Impassioned speeches will be delivered to patriotic crowds on the goodness of America and the honor and bravery of the fallen soldiers and sailors.

And Americans will be remembering all the wrong things.

How about a reality check?

Those who fought and died (over 364,000) in Lincoln’s Army died invading another sovereign nation, the Confederate States of America. The CSA, who lost over 139,000 soldiers, was defending itself from the aggression of a foreign nation. It would have been no different morally if the Northern Army would have invaded Canada. So, Northern mourners should remember the shame of the North, not just that their loved ones died in battle. And Southerners should forever laud their sons who valiantly died in an attempt to thwart a foreign invasion and protect their homeland.

The 3,500-plus military personnel who fought and died in the Spanish-American War of 1898 died invading Cuba and the Philippines against Spain. Last time I checked, neither country was a state of the Union and did not require defense from a foreign aggressor. The war was perpetrated by the McKinley Administration and an expansionist Congress, assisted by Theodore Roosevelt and fomented by propaganda in the Hearst newspapers.

The American war dead of World War I (1914-1918), numbering over 116,000, died fighting a war between European nations. America had absolutely no business becoming involved, but as George Washington predicted, our treaty obligations dragged us into war.

World War II (1941-1945) devoured over 407,000 American military personnel. President Franklin D. Roosevelt baited the Japanese into attacking us, and after they did, Congress (in its last constitutional act of war) declared war. FDR was itching to get into the war, and got his way. Once again, treaties and war-hungry politicians cost this nation its sons and daughters.

The “police action” in Korea (1950-1953) started by the United Nations cost America over 54,000 military deaths. A cease fire was negotiated in 1953 which continues to this day. No constitutionally-declared war. No defense of American borders.

The Vietnam War (1958-1975) cost over 58,000 American lives. No declared war, no Vietcong in American streets trying to take over our nation. Finally some Americans protest a war! The US military gets its ass whooped and runs for home.

On 24 April, 1980, President Jimmy Carter sent a strike force into Iran to rescue the 52 American hostages held by Iran since 4 November 1979. The mission was a complete cluster fornication, and 8 men died.

In 1983 President Ronald Reagan sent 1,200 troops into Lebanon as “peace-keepers.” 220 Marines and 9 other servicemen are now resting in peace. No constitutionally-declared war. No constitutional justification.

In April 1986, President Ronald Reagan ordered air strikes in Libya against President Mohammar Ghadhafi. Ghadhafi lived…2 American airmen died.

The invasion of Grenada (October to December, 1983) cost 19 American lives. 10,000 American troops joined forces with about 300 terrifying shock troops from Caribbean islands like Antigua, St. Kitts, Dominica and Saint Lucia to liberate Grenada. Yes, that last sentence was sarcasm. The struggle led to the deposition and execution of Grenada’s Prime Minister Maurice Bishop. Anyone find a declaration of war or reason for America’s involvement….anyone? Bueller?

On May 12, 1987, the frigate USS Stark was attacked by an Iraqi missile while in the Persian Gulf. Thirty five sailors died in the blast. The Persian Gulf is not the territorial waters of the USA, is it?

Gulf War I (8-90 to 2-91) costs another 378 deaths as the USA protects its oil interests in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. None of the other neighbors of Iraq consider this worth a fight without the arm-twisting of President George H.W. Bush, especially since Kuwait formerly belonged to Iraq. Our Congress passes “resolutions” subordinating their constitutional authority to declare war to Bush, and he took it seriously. Still, no defense of America was involved here.

Panama was invaded by US military forces on December 20, 1989 under the order of President George H.W. Bush. Twenty four American military personnel died in the invasion. Bush said that protecting 35,000 Americans in Panama was cause for the invasion, as well as “defending democracy and human rights” in Panama. General Manuel Noriega was captured and tried on drug charges, ending up in a Miami prison.

The Bosnian War (1992-1995) was prosecuted by President Bill Clinton in conjunction with the United Nations. He sent over 20,000 troops to Bosnia, and there were no official American casualties. Still, where is the declaration of war? Why are our troops deployed outside of the United States? Were the Serbs attacking Cleveland?

In September 1994, President Bill Clinton sent US troops into Haiti to restore the regime of ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristede. It cost 4 American lives.

The USS Cole was docked at the port of Aden, Yemen, on 12 October 2000 when it was attacked by suicide bombers. Seventeen sailors died in the incident. The Gulf of Aden is not part of the territorial waters of the USA, is it?

War in Iraq and Afghanistan (2001-present) was started on a web of lies by President George W. Bush and his minions. It continues bolstered by more lies. Once again, no constitutional declaration of war, no honorable reason for our military to be in either country has ever been found. So far, over 5,500 military personnel have been killed and over 35,000 have been wounded. The totals are actually much higher, since the Defense Department does not count combat deaths that occur after a wounded soldier leaves Iraq or Afghanistan, or the hundreds of suicides of both active duty and veteran personnel.

I may have missed some obscure deployment of troops in that history lesson. But I think the message rings loud and clear. In case you may have missed the overwhelming ringing sound, here is what it means.

Except for the Congressional declaration of war in 1941, which started our involvement in WWII, no other military action since the CSA defense of 1865 has been a lawful use of military force. And, when you consider that America had no business fighting in WWII, our involvement should be considered immoral.

So, over 1,147,000 American sons and daughters have fought and died in military actions that can be considered both immoral and unlawful.

Please do not misunderstand me here. I do not suggest that the surviving families of dead military personnel should not mourn the loss of their sons and daughters. Surely the loss of a child, husband, father, mother, friend or loved one should be mourned.

I am not diminishing the dead’s courage, bravery, sacrifice or valor. I do not minimize their love of country, love of liberty and sense of duty.

What I am saying is that the REASONS that they died do not stand scrutiny. The REASONS they were deployed outside our shores were illegitimate and founded in lies. The REASONS for ALL military action, save the defensive actions of the Confederate States of America, were in fact illegal, immoral and unlawful.

They were deceived into military service, where politicians used their feelings of patriotism and trust as weapons against them, and their bodies as cannon fodder.

I do not hold the dead entirely at fault. Did they not come from our own homes, churches and schools, where this false sense of patriotism was taught from the cradle onward? We who are alive and remain are the ones most guilty. We did not teach our children how to discern truth from lies. We failed to teach them to question ALL authority. We neglected to infuse in them a love for individual liberty and love for the rule of law.

Therefore, here in the Memorial Day weekend of 2011, may we at long last accept the tragic truth that more than a million of our children gave their lives as sacrificial lambs on the blood-soaked altar of the God of the State? May we finally accept that additional hundreds of thousands were maimed and disabled on the same altar? Truly, they did not die to protect the American homeland. They did not die to protect our freedoms. They did not die defending “the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic”…words found in their Oath of Service.

They died in vain. They died for nothing.

That is what we should mourn this weekend.

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Lunatic Fringe

May 29, 2011

Rated PG-13: All Ages, Parental Guidance Suggested.

by Russell Longcore

Thursday, for no apparent reason, and apropos of nothing, I remembered a song from the early 80s entitled “Lunatic Fringe.” The song was performed by Red Rider, a Canadian band. I always thought this was done by Pink Floyd.

So I found a video of it at Youtube, which is shown below. And I’ve posted the lyrics with comments.

I do not think that the songwriter intended my interpretation. I think he was trying to say something about the kook, tin-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists, the John Birchers, the white supremacists, etc. But in the ensuing 30 years since this song was recorded, the world has turned upside down. The kooks were right all along.

In 2011, the lunatic fringe is Washington…the international banksters…the “one worlders”…the Skull and Bones crowd…the Bilderberg Group…greenies…the Council on Foreign Relations…the International Monetary Fund…Wall Street. There are perhaps only a few thousand psychopathic tyrants trying to control 6 billion people worldwide. THEY are the ones with the insane ideas. THEY are the ones who keep trying to make socialism work long after it has failed. THEY are the ones who steal and counterfeit. THEY are the ones responsible for over 200 million people dead in the last 100 years of human history through wars, starvation and privation.

Here are the lyrics with comment.

Lunatic fringe – I know you’re out there (the power brokers worldwide)
You’re in hiding, and you hold your meetings (CFR, Bilderberg, IMF, Group of 8, Dem/Rep presidential conventions)
I can hear you coming, and I know what you’re after (New World Order)
We’re wise to you this time we won’t let you kill the laughter (Liberty)

Lunatic fringe – in the twilight’s last gleaming (just before the global collapse)
This is open season, but you won’t get too far (martial law)
’cause you got to blame someone for your own confusion (Keynesianism)
we’re all on guard this time against the final solution (One World Government)

We can hear you coming no, you’re not going to win this time
we can hear you coming not gonna win
we can hear the footsteps out along the walkway
we can hear the footsteps out along the walkway

Lunatic fringe, we all know you’re out there
Can you feel the resistance? (Secession, militias, The Rise of the 3 Percenters)
Can you feel the thunder? (Armed Resistance & 4th Generation Warfare)

Enjoy the music. Follow the lyrics. Learn about the Three Percent.

Secession is the Hope For Mankind. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Prosecute John Murphy

May 28, 2011

by Daniel Miller, President
Texas Nationalist Movement

This week John Murphy of the Department of Justice issued a threat to the Texas Senate that amounted to a blockade of our airports. For those of you who are unaware of this situation, the basics of it are as follows:

Texas Representative David Simpson introduced a bill in the Texas House during this session that specifically addressed the criminal nature of airport pat-downs by the TSA. Although their violation of the privacy of Texans by the touching and groping of genitals during these pat-downs is already a crime under Texas law, Representative Simpson felt that the TSA procedures needed to be singled out for their particular heinous nature.

The bill soared through the House committee and passed with almost no opposition from either party on the floor. The bill was then transmitted to the Texas Senate for consideration and a vote.

In the meantime, the social networking wizards in the US Department of Justice “blogged” about the bill and whined that it was wrong for a state to pass a law regulating the Federal Government and its agents.

However, despite the whining of the DOJ, the bill had support in the Texas Senate and looked as though it was on its way to passage before the session ended. After all, who wants to be seen as legitimizing sexual assault even if it is by the Federal Government?

Then it happened. What would be described as an “act of war” had it been done to the United States was laid squarely at the feet of a Vichy Texas Senator and a Lieutenant Governor with Federal aspirations.

Fearing passage of this bill, John Murphy of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District fired off a warning letter to Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and Speaker of the House Joe Straus. The warning – kill the bill or we’ll shut down ALL air travel in Texas.

This threat would have emboldened previous generations of Texas who would have hoisted the “Come And Take It” flag over the capitol and stationed DPS and Texas Rangers at the airports “just in case”. However, the current occupants of the top leadership in the Texas Legislature began to sweat like a chihuahua trying to excrete a peach pit.

In a fit of “what do we do now?” Dewhurst found a willing accomplice in State Senator Kirk Watson. Always quick to prove that is the most loyal lapdog of the “powers that be” he locked arms with Dewhurst as they tip-toed through the tulips of the Texas Senate communicating the threat and finding twelve others that would skip along with them.

With this threat and the reaction of the tip-toe twelve, the bill was dead.

Attempts to resurrect it in the eleventh hour were fruitless.

Of course this is only one reason among many that we need to secede from the Union. However, there is something that Texas should do immediately.

You see, I am an avid reader of the Texas statutes. As such, something about this rang a bell for me. I knew that I had read at one time that threatening a public servant was a crime.

It is.

In the Texas Penal Code are two statutes that apply. The first:

Sec. 36.06. OBSTRUCTION OR RETALIATION. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm another by an unlawful act:

(1) in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of another as a:

(A) public servant, witness, prospective witness, or informant; or

(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree unless the victim of the offense was harmed or threatened because of the victim’s service or status as a juror, in which event the offense is a felony of the second degree.

The second:

Sec. 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER. (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:

(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty; or

(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the coercion is a threat to commit a felony, in which event it is a felony of the third degree.

The questions that have to be answered:

Did John Murphy threaten to harm anyone?

Of course he threatened harm. His threat was to close down air travel in Texas. The harms are obviously economic but even more than that. He threatened to deny us the right to freely travel using the method that we feel is most expedient. Yep. He threatened to harm us.

Was it the threat of an unlawful act?

It was definitely unlawful. First, the Department of Justice does not regulate air travel. However, he might have been speaking on behalf of someone else. Regardless, this threat was unlawful under Federal law. Title 42 of the United States code makes it unlawful for a Federal agent or employee to deny a person their civil rights. That includes the right to travel and the right to vote and have a republican form of government. His actions directly impacted my right and the right of all Texans to have a republican form of government. Was the threat unlawful? Check.

Was the threat for the purpose of coercing behavior from the Texas Senate?

You bet. Unfortunately for Texas, it worked. He told them specifically what needed to be done through the ultimatum.

Where do we go from here?

It’s simple for me. I’m going to continue organizing the people that want Texas independence and we are going to take Texas back from thugs like John Murphy and from collaborators like Kirk Watson and David Dewhurst. And I’m going to do it in a way that they can’t stop. Poltically. Economically. Culturally. We will build our numbers and we will secure Texas independence. This is the path that must be taken. It’s one that I walk every day so nothing will change in this regard.

However, I do intend to add two additional items to my task list. As soon as I finish typing this, I’m going to file a criminal complaint with the Attorney General’s Office against John Murphy. Next, I’m calling my attorney to file a Title 42 Federal lawsuit against John Murphy for violating my right to enjoy a republican form of government.

You do what you wish, however I suggest that you join the Texas Nationalist Movement now. Otherwise, this is only going to get worse.

Daniel Miller is President of the Texas Nationalist Movement. Join today.


If Not Now, Then When?

May 27, 2011

Austin Bowed Up…The Bully Raised His Hand…Austin Cowered

By Russell D. Longcore

Texas State Representative David Simpson (R, Longview) introduced HB 1937 and HB 1938 in the current 2011 legislative session. This bill had 56 co-sponsors.The bills together make TSA airport searches in which the genitalia is touched, a criminal offense in the State of Texas. . The bill also prohibited the installation or use of full-body scanning machines in any Texas airport. Further, the bills required that the TSA must show probable cause for any search under the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.The House vote was 138-0. Good showing sofar. Then it was taken over to the Senate, where Senator Dan Patrick read it on the floor.

But wait!

The US Department of Justice sent a letter to House Speaker Joe Strauss and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, informing them that if the bill passed and was signed into law, Justice would seek an immediate judicial injunction and emergency stay against the State of Texas. Further, the DOJ threatened to cancel or prevent flights departing from Texas airports if the TSA’s actions were impeded by Texas law.

Based ONLY upon this threat, Patrick quietly withdrew the bill and will not even be brought before the Senate for a vote.

Washington just showed Austin where the bear shit in the buckwheat.

This TSA furor is a minor issue in comparison to many other issues of liberty. I am not minimizing the facts that the TSA is violating many of the Bill of Rights amendments on a daily basis. I simply want to direct your attention to the base cowardice of the Texas Legislature.

The will of the people of Texas was thwarted. At the first sign of trouble, the solons of Austin capitulated to DC. They could not even muster enough courage to LOOK like they were going to defy Washington.

If the Texas legislature cannot muster the courage to protect the people flying out of Texas airports…which is a small percentage of the population…how will they EVER find spine enough to tackle BIG issues? Issues like border control…immigration…taxation…EPA intrusion and control…oil drilling issues…and the biggest issue of all, which is whether Texas should remain a state of the Union, or secede?

Dear Readers, this event in Austin tells you everything you need to know about Texas politicians. At the first whiff of an ill wind, they kneel. As the subtitle says, the bully merely raised his hand in a threatening manner and Austin cowered in fear. This is also the best example you could get on how Austin will behave when more serious issues between Texas and DC arise.

The spirit of San Jacinto, Goliad, Gonzales and the Alamo is only found in Austin in murals and statuary. The politician’s disease of “go along to get along” has immunized them from catching a full-blown case of courage. There is no tyranny, no insult, no power grab, no Federal intrusion into Texas so foul that the politicians of Austin will not cravenly accept it.

If Austin cannot bring itself to challenge one of the three-letter Federal departments, there is no way in hell below or heaven above that Austin politicians will EVER consider secession and Texas nationhood. But we here at DumpDC don’t expect that the Texas politicians would act any other way NOW. The only thing that will change the Austin politicians is the collapse of the American economy and the hyperinflation and chaos that will follow.

So, if not now, then when? ONLY after the global economic meltdown.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong about all this. It’s happened before.

Secession is the Hope For Mankind. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


On Patriotism

May 26, 2011

Examining the Firmware of War

by Fred Reed

(Editor’s Note: This is the perfect follow-up to yesterday’s posting about psychopaths. And packs are just lower forms of tribalism, which we explored HERE.)

Patriotism is everywhere thought to be a virtue rather than a mental disorder. I don’t get it.

If I told the Rotarians or an American Legion hall that “John is a patriot,” all would approve greatly of John. If I told them that patriotism was nothing more than the loyalty to each other of dogs in a pack, they would lynch me. Patriotism, they believe, is a Good Thing.

Of course the Japanese pilots who attacked Pearl Harbor were patriots, as were the German soldiers who murdered millions in the Second World War. The men who brought down the towers in New York were patriots, though of a religious sort. Do we admire their patriotism?

Of course not. When we say “John is a patriot,” we mean “John is a reliable member of our dog pack,” nothing more. The pack instinct seems more ancient, and certainly stronger, than morality or any form of human decency. Thus, once the pack—citizenry, I meant to say—have been properly roused to a pitch of patriotism, they will, under cover of the most diaphanous pretexts, rape Nanking, bomb Hiroshima, kill the Jews or, if they are Jews, Palestinians. We are animals of the pack. We don’t admire patriotism. We admire loyalty to ourselves.

The pack dominates humanity. Observe that the behavior of urban gangs—the Vice Lords, Mara Salvatrucha, Los Locos Intocables, Crips, Bloods — precisely mirrors that of more formally recognized gangs, which are called “countries.” Gangs, like countries, are intensely territorial with recognized borders fiercely defended. The soldiers of gangs, like those of countries, have uniforms, usually clothing of particular colors, and they “throw signs” — make the patterns of fingers indicating their gang — and wear their hats sideways in different directions to indicate to whom their patriotism is plighted. They have generals, councils of war, and ranks paralleling the colonels and majors of national packs. They fight each other endlessly, as do countries, for territory, for control of markets, or because someone insulted someone. It makes no sense. It would be more reasonable for example to divide the market for drugs instead of killing each other. But they do it because of the pack instinct.

Packery dominates society. Across the country high schools form basketball packs and do battle on the court, while cheerleaders jump and twirl, preferably in short skirts (here we have the other major instinct) to maintain patriotic fervor in the onlookers. Cities with NFL franchises hire bulky felons from around the country to bump forcefully into the parallel felons of other cities, arousing warlike sentiments among their respective fellow dogs.

Fans. Fans.

Such is their footballian enthusiasm that they will sometimes burn their own cities in delight at victory or disturbance at loss. Without the pack instinct, football would hardly matter to them at all.

It’s everywhere. The Olympics, the World Cup, racial groups, political parties — Crips and Bloods, all.

Part of patriotism is nationalism, the political expression of having given up to the pack all independence of thought.

Patriotism is of course incompatible with morality. This is more explicit in the soldier, a patriot who agrees to kill anyone he is told to kill by the various alpha-dogs — President, Fuehrer, emperor, Duce, generals.

Is this not literally true? An adolescent enlists, never having heard of Ruritania, which is perhaps on the other side of the earth. A year later, having learned to manage the Gatlings on a helicopter gunship, he is told that Ruritania is A Grave Threat. Never having seen a Ruritanian, being unable to spell the place, not knowing where it is (you would be amazed how many veterans of Viet Nam do not know where it is) he is soon killing Ruritanians. He will shortly hate them intensely as vermin, scuttling cockroaches, rice-propelled paddy maggots, gooks, or sand niggers.

The military calls the pack instinct “unit cohesion,” and fosters it to the point that soldiers often have more loyalty to the military than to the national pack. Thus it is easy to get them to fire on their own citizens. It has not happened in the United States since perhaps Kent State (How about Waco? – Ed.), but in the past the soldiery were often used to kill striking workers. All you have to do is to get the troops to think of the murderees as another group.

If you talk to patriots, particularly to the military variety, they will usually be outraged at having their morality questioned. Here we encounter moral compartmentation, very much a characteristic of the pack. If you have several dogs, as we do, you will note that they are friendly and affectionate with the family and tussle playfully among themselves — but bark furiously at strangers and, unless they are very domesticated, will attack unknown dogs cooperatively and kill them.

Similarly the colonel next door will be honest, won’t kick your cat or steal your silverware. Should some natural disaster occur, work strenuously to save lives, at the risk of his own if need be. Yet he will consciencelessly cluster-bomb downtown Baghdad, and pride himself on having done so. A different pack, you see. It is all right to attack strange dogs.

The pack instinct, age old, limbic, atavistic, gonadal, precludes any sympathy for the sufferings of outsiders. If Dog pack A attacks intruding dog pack B to defend its territory, its members can’t afford to think, “Gosh, I’m really hurting this guy. Maybe I should stop.” You don’t defend territory by sharing it. Thus if you tell a patriot that his bombs are burning alive thousands of children, or that the embargo on Iraq killed half a million kids by dysentery because they couldn’t get chlorine to sterilize water, he won’t care. He can’t.

The same instinct governs thought about atrocities committed in wartime. In every war, every army (correctly) accuses the other side of committing atrocities. Atrocities are what armies do. Such is the elevating power of morality that soldiers feel constrained to lie about them. But patriots just don’t care. Psychologists speak of demonization and affecting numbing and such, but it’s really just that the tortured, raped, butchered and burned are members of the other pack.

I need a drink.

©Copyright 2011 Fred Reed
www.FredOnEverything.net


You Might Be A Psychopath If…

May 25, 2011

By Silver Shield

(Editor’s Note: The Silver Shield talks about psychopaths mostly at a national level. Just remember that there are psychopaths at every level. Some of the most scurrilous criminal minds in government are local and state elected officials and bureaucrats. Most men and women who strongly desire to rule over others, saying they want to be “public servants,” are psychopaths. There are almost NO exceptions. Further, secession will not be completed successfully by the same psychopaths presently in office.)

It did not take long after IMF Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested for sexual assault, did I hear people try to explain away his actions. Why would one of the world’s most powerful banker in the world sexually assault a 30 year housekeeper? It has to be a disease or something, right? He must be a sex addict, right? Nope, he is just a text book psychopath. Another Elitist that seeks to control others for his own power. If you think that this is another isolated event, think again these people are everywhere in power.

I have been preparing to write a huge article on this subject of the psychopath and how these social predators are a huge threat to us all. I strongly believe that recognizing these wolves in sheep’s clothing we can not only lead better personal lives, we can have a better society by not electing these predators to the power that they crave. This I feel is one of the most important subjects for people to understand, not only for their personal lives, but for our society as a whole. Once you are aware that these predators, you can prepare to keep your distance and shun them at all costs.

The psychopath in a suit is nothing like the ones that Hollywood forces on us. Axe wielding mass murderers are very rare. There is a more common psychopath that infects every level of society. Sociopaths and psychopaths show anti social behavior and an emotionless state towards the pain of others. They have an aggressive narcissism that may manifest to others as superficial charm, grandiose sense of self worth, shallow relationships, lack of remorse, and failure to accept responsibility. This personality needs constant stimulation, impulsive actions, poor behavior control and a a parasitic lifestyle. As a result they view others as a means to an end, they are sexual promiscuous and seem to excel in deception.

Most people find it incomprehensible to think that such people exist, since we tend to judge others through our our moral structure. These psychopaths do not operate like you and I do. They can commit all sorts of anti-social behavior and sleep like a baby. They lack the ability to relate to others on just about any level. What is worse that they mimic others so as to gain their trust only to feed off of their intellectual, financial, physical, intellectual, emotional or spiritual energy. They are social predators seeking to live a parasitic life off of others. They adept at manipulation and deceit and most importantly they seek control over others. This could range from an abusive relationship, a bad boss, a thieving CEO or a politician. Take a look into the mind of a psychopath.

How many times must we fall for these predators before we call them for what they are, psychopaths?

Rape a housekeeper… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to the nation about having sex with an intern… you might be a psychopath.

Having multiple public affairs while putting at risk the largest endorsements in the world… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife and have a love child with house hold staff… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife with $3,000 an hour prostitutes while prosecuting others… you might be a psychopath.

Divorce your wife while she is recovering from surgery… you might be a psychopath.

Cheat on your wife, father a love child, have a sex tape, and asking for a divorce, while your wife is dying form cancer… you might be a psychopath.

Blow a million dollar TV career on coke and hookers… you might be a psychopath.

Create financial instruments that you knew were going to blow up the housing market… you might be a psychopath.

Create a billion dollar Ponzi scheme to steal billions… you might be a psychopath.

Hide billions of losses in off the books shell corporations to pump up your stock… you might be a psychopath.

Claim that you are doing “God’s work” while your company sucks the life blood out of the company… you might be a psychopath.

Show no remorse for 500,000 dead Iraqi children… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to a nation about the real reason we are going to war… you might be a psychopath.

Lie to a nation about the real strength of the dollar… you might be a banker.

Talk about coming back as a deadly virus to eradicate over population… you might be a psychopath.

Create and fund wars to steal others natural resources… you might be a psychopath.

Help support tyrannical regimes all over the world… you might be a psychopath.

Holding up the American taxpayer to bailout your buddies… you might be a psychopath.

Perpetuating a huge lie in order to to become a carbon credit billionaire and sexually assaulting a masseuse … you might be a psychopath.

These social predators have no empathy, never take responsibility for their actions and don’t even see their victims as humans. The only systemic answer to this social predator is decentralized power like the founding fathers originally intended for us. Psychopaths seek to concentrate power to eliminate all limits to their power. The ultimate end of this concentration of Elite power is what we saw in Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia and Mao’s China. I fear that our next leader may be a psychopath who will seize total control of our lives in the disarray of a dollar collapse. I feel it is very important that we start exploring these issues and start calling these wolves in sheep’s clothing for what they are, psychopaths.

Copyright 2011 Silver Shield