The Beginning of the Present
by Revilo P. Oliver
IF YOU SEEK comprehension of the events of today, do not expect to learn anything from current news: it will be only more of the same. If you have in mind a fairly adequate outline of the history of our race from the Greeks to our century, you may give special attention to the crucial periods in which Americans were prepared for plundering by their inveterate enemies: 1908-1914, 1916-1920, 1932-1941. First-class periodicals addressed to literate and educated readers, which were still published in each of those periods, will be your surest guide, but you may wish to glance occasionally at newspapers of the period to see how far the pablum of the populace was seasoned with ideology or reason.
The dean of honest historians who have dealt with the second of those periods, James J. Martin, has continued, in his recently published book, the studies that form part of his invaluable The Saga of Hog Island (Colorado Springs, Ralph Myles, 1977). The new book, An American Adventure in Bookburning (ibid., 1989), examines what may seem at first sight a relatively minor event, the publication by the Secretary of War in 1918 of a list of books that were to be removed form the libraries provided for American soldiers and sequestered or destroyed. The compiler of the index of prohibited books was so incompetent or negligent hat he ignorantly misspelled some of the names of the purportedly pro-German authors and the titles of their books.
Professor Martin identifies the books listed in what must have been a haphazard compilation, and conjectures why each book was included and why books that more cogently presented the German position were overlooked. We are left, of course, with some unanswerable questions. When a book that in no way favors Germany but was ardently pro-Irish was included in the list, was the feckless compiler ignorant of what was the subject of the book, or did he use a pretext to ban a book that could not have been correctly denounced without arousing the mercurial ire of the numerous Irishmen in the United States?
Some books on the American Index librorum prohibitorum are now deservedly forgotten; some I have not read. A few are still relevant.
Graf Ernst zu Raventlow’s The Vampire of the Continent is brilliant and scathing, but essentially accurate in its statement of the historical facts of the official British policy of maintaining a “balance of power” among continental European nations, a policy that our historians have almost unanimously regarded with the tender sympathies of Anglophiles, but which naturally appeared to Germans in a quite different light and which they interpreted accordingly.
Frank Harris’s England or Germany is now preserved by the literary reputation of its talented and flagrantly unconventional author, but contains significant observations on the issue that is its subject.
I have not read E.F. Henderson’s Germany’s Fighting Machine, but obviously the author of the statement quoted by Professor Martin, that the British alliance with Russia against Germany was “the most monumental act of folly in modern history,” had a keenly lucid mind, and I hope for time to learn what else he had to say in that concise book and other works.
How Diplomats Make War, written and published by Francis Nielson while he was still a member of the British Parliament, is a fundamental work of historiography by an eminent writer, and will always be a basic work on the origins of what is called the First World War. It has been reprinted several times since 1915, and I hear that a new reprint of it is now in preparation.
The most enduring importance attaches to several books by David Starr Jordan, an eminent biologist who, for a quarter of a century, 1891-1916, presided over Stanford University, for in that now far-off age men of intellectual integrity and distinction could become the presidents of colleges and universities. Having a truly scientific mind, he studied and objectively examined the biological effects of modern warfare, i.e., the “democratic” warfare with mass armies that was one of the innovations for which “Liberals” admire the French Revolution and openly or secretly delight in all the slaughter it caused. (1)
(footnote 1. “Democracy,” the syphilis of nations, represents the theoretical dominance of the proletariat, the lowest and least valuable part of the population, and the actual dominance of the criminals who manipulate the brutish herd. All “democracies” are really ochlocracies, and are such lovers of peace that they periodically launch bloody jihads to destroy superior cultures, hypocritically pretending they want only to kill everyone who does not love their proletarian squalor as much as they do. Jews naturally love “democracy,” both for the infinite loot it brings them and for the destruction, degradation, and suffering it inflicts on the goyim whom they plunder and hate. The French Revolution, having murdered the best part of the French nation and almost exterminated the Nordic component, attacked other nations to spread its idealistic ordure and invented conscription to form mass armies. The blessings of “democracy” as opposed to monarchy may be shown by a simple statistic. In 1704, during the reign of Queen Anne, the British Army and Navy decided the War of the Spanish Succession and fate of Europe at a cost of less than 5000 dead, of whom about 2000 fell in the four major actions, including the Battle of Blenheim, which was so bloody, by contemporary standards, that all England was shocked. In 1914 and 1918, Britain, enjoying the blessings of an incipient “democracy,” sacrificed the lives of 200,000 young men every year.)
Professor Martin lists three of the great biologist’s works. Their subject is indicated by the title of the first, which, I am ashamed to say, I have not yet read: Blood of a Nation: A Study of the Decay of Races Through the Survival of the Unfit (San Francisco, Carlisle & Co., 1912); it is now quite rare. The other two I read many years ago, and I can recommend them to everyone who is willing to think about the world in which he lives and in which his unfortunate children will have to live and die. War’s Aftermath (Boston, Houghton, 1914) is a study of three Southern counties in 1865 to show in detail the genetic consequences of the War for Independence that was forced on the South by Northern criminals and mobs crazed with righteousness. War and the Breed: The Relation of War to the Downfall of Nations (Boston, Unitarian Association, 1915; abridged reprint, Washington, D.C., Cliveden Press, 1988) examines the results of the first year of the First World War, with special attention to the many young officers, the very flower of British manhood, who were killed in action and died childless, leaving the nation permanently impoverished genetically. There are photographs of many of them to attest the racial strain they represented.
Professor Jordan, then Chancellor of Stanford, which was then a real university, was denounced as guilty of the awful crime of being “pro-German,” because dispassionate and scientific studies of the consequences of “democratic” war might abate the ardor of the peace-loving Americans, who were out on the war-path, brandishing their tomahawks and yelling for blood.
The “bookburning” ordered by the Secretary of War may seem to you to have not been without pragmatic justification. It was only reasonable not to place sobering books before the young men who had been, or would be, shipped to Europe to fight in an idiotic war in which many of them would be killed or maimed for life.
The list, however, serves to introduce a far more important subject which Professor Martin adumbrates in the closing pages of his text and on which much information is given in the thirty-one pages of closely-set notes that precede the sardonic “Beginner’s Manual for Apprentice Book-Burners,” written in 1954 and here reprinted from an obscure periodical, that concludes the volume.
Books that gave reasonable accounts of the war in Europe or were written in German were sequestered or destroyed in public libraries, and Federal thugs raided the offices of many publishers and destroyed the stocks of books that dissented from the government’s official lies. But this, too, was merely a phase of a much larger subject, a study in psychopathology and racial decay.
Woodrow Wilson was a crack-brained college professor whom the Jews selected and trained, leading him about “like a poodle on a string,” as they boasted to Colonel Dall, and teaching him tricks, and then installed in the Presidency by the simple expedient of playing on the vanity and ambition of Theodore Roosevelt. (2) He was first elected in 1912, and through him the invaders began the devastation of the American nation by inducing the boobs to give all their money to usurers and to enslave their posterity with the White Slave Act. (3) In 1916 the foolish Americans re-elected him on the grounds that “he kept us out of the war,” and one month after taking office he proclaimed, as planned, a holy war, a “war to end wars.”
(footnote 2. Unlike his successors, Wilson, whom Rabelais would have called a grand verbocinateur and who may have believed some part of what he said, was not wholly evil. He is known to have performed some generous acts; his Jewish masters had to use blackmail to force him to appoint the first Sheeny to the Supreme Court; his lapse into insanity in 1919 is plausibly attributed to remorse following a belated perception of the purposes for which he had been used; and after his recovery he is said to have candidly lamented, “I have ruined my country.”)
(footnote 3. The Marxist Amendment, which, in effect, destroyed what was left of the American Constitution, was proposed by a corrupt Congress in 1909, but it took time to corrupt enough state legislatures to procure its ratification, which was complete only in February 1913, just in time for the Jews’ fantoche and the corrupt Congress elected with him to begin fastening the chains of bondage on the American boobs, who had thrown away their birthright.)
Instead of impeaching the jabberwocky and hustling him off in a strait-jacket, the pacificistic Americans became insane with blood-lust and righteousness. The Jews, of course, cracked their journalistic and other whips over the dumb brutes, and, as we all know, righteousness is far more hallucinatory than hashish, peyotl, or a tincture of Amanita Muscaria, but just the same, the fatuity and sudden reversal of American sentiment in four months presents a problem in the morbid psychologie des foules (pardon the pun) that has appalling implications.
The only thing among other mammals comparable as a mass movement to the American rush to holy war is a horde of lemmings racing for the precipice from which they will plunge to their death in the sea. For a parallel in mindless ferocity, one has to imagine a horde of starving Tyrannosauri reges at the end of the Mesozoic Era.
The grim antics of Americans during their fit of righteousness in 1917-1918 have been recorded, usually with proper embarrassment, in various books. I will give here only one example, of which I was told by an eye-witness.
In a small town in the south central part of the country there was a young man who, like many others, enjoyed playing and experimenting with wireless telegraphy and had assembled an apparatus with which he could communicate in Morse code with other amateurs within a circle of three or four hundred miles. A mob was with great difficulty prevented from hanging him. They had dragged him to an improvised gallows before their ardor was restrained by a few sane men, at considerable risk to themselves.
The process that went on in the consciousness of the patriots was apparently the following: (1) The young man was Italian; (2) therefore he must be a Roman Catholic and thus (3) a devotee and agent of the Pope, who (4) was the Antichrist and (5) must, therefore, be in communication with Satan incarnate, the Kaiser. Hence it was obvious that (6) the youngster must be transmitting to the Vatican, for relay to Berlin, the vital military secrets to be discovered in a town of about twelve thousand in which the only industry was a blacksmith shop.
That incident was merely typical of the mental or glandular processes of the bellicose peace-lovers throughout the country, with only insignificant variations conforming to local conditions in other towns and cities.
There were innumerable incidents like that, but the subject is one that calls for the masterly summation of crucial evidence that is evinced in the two volumes of Professor Martin’s authoritative and unsurpassed American Liberalism and World Politics, 1931-1941 (New York, Devin-Adair, 1964). From such a calmly objective precis of the essential facts, you would draw for yourself the inescapable conclusions, applying the rule of cui bono?
What happened is clear. The race of barbarians who are conquering the world by deceit, relying, perhaps, on the promise of their ferocious god (Exodus, 23, 27-30) to destroy every nation they infiltrate, first infected the minds of our race with a Judaeo-Communist religion, and then, when our native intelligence was beginning to recover from the disease, perpetuated it, superficially disguised in the Marxian Reformation, thus keeping their victims crazed with one or the other form of righteousness. At the opening of the Twentieth Century they were at last ready to begin the final drive of their dupes to eventual extinction, and they had at their disposal, for timely use, the nation that had righteously ruined itself, mentally and spiritually, in 1861-1865.
We shall here notice only one aspect of the delirium tremens that was induced in 1917: It effectively abolished a rational conception of patriotism, that is to say, a nation’s natural and necessary devotion to its own preservation and advancement.
The boobs embarked on their holy war not only knowing, but boasting, that the war would not bring the slightest advantage to the United States, but would instead squander their resources and the lives of their young men to impose their own meddlesome righteousness on European nations. (4) A rational patriotism was evinced only by the few Americans who felt a concern for the welfare of their own nation and tried as best they could to prevent the epidemic of madness and its consequences, but the crazed imbeciles inverted the meaning of words and stigmatized intelligently patriotic Americans as “unpatriotic.”
(footnote 4. A precedent for this folly had been established in 1898. The only morally justified war ever fought by the United States was the Mexican War of 1846-1848. The attack on Spain in 1898 was publicly promoted as a righteous itch to interfere with Spain’s government of her own colonial territory; that could have been shabbily justified as expedient hypocrisy, had the war actually been fought for a national advantage, i.e., the annexation of Cuba for the defence of the United States and to provide new territory for settlement and exploitation by Americans. The obvious reasons for taking Cuba from Spain had been stated in the Ostend Manifesto of 1854, inspired by President Pierce, who was an intelligent and relatively honest man, but also a weakling; the howling of the crazed Abolitionists daunted him, and he disavowed the one act of true statesmanship that would have entitled him to the grateful remembrance of posterity. The result of American aggression on Spain in 1898 was to leave the nation burdened with the Philippine Islands, of which it could make no use unless it embarked on a policy of colonial expansion in the Orient, which would have been contrary to American interests. The annexation of Puerto Rico as a sop to the minority of intelligent Americans was no compensation for the fatal failure to annex and occupy Cuba.)
In 1917 ‘patriotism’ came paradoxically to mean treason — for it was nothing less than treason to undermine our nation by squandering its wealth and the irreplaceable genetic heritage in the blood of its young men in a chimerical effort to impose a crack-brained righteousness on other nations. And ‘patriotism’ came also to mean fanatical and tyrannical repression of Americans who were sufficiently intelligent to have a rational regard for the welfare of their own nation. That was the first outbreak of the infectious brain-disease that produces delusions about ‘One World.’
Considering only this one aspect of the madness of 1917, we may again ask cui bono? If you need help in answering that question, you may note one recent incident.
Martha’s Vineyard, the pleasant island off the southern coast of Massachusetts, (5) once an American summer-resort, has been overrun by wealthy members of the predatory race and their stooges, who are naturally jostling the remaining Americans, using the procedure described by Samuel Roth in Jews Must Live. (6)
(footnote 5. The wild grapes that were abundant on the island when it was discovered account for ‘Vineyard,’ but the Martha who was said to own it has not been identified. There are, of course, various implausible guesses.)
(footnote 6. New York, Golden Hind Press, 1934; abridged reprint available from Liberty Bell Publications, $5.00 + postage.)
A gentleman on the island, David Wayfield, whom readers of Christian News will remember for his excellent reports of the trial by which the Jews’ shabbat goyim in Canada persecuted Ernst Zündel, has organized Veterans Against Brainwashing (P.O. Box 699, Vineyard Haven, Massachusetts, 02568). He has equipped a station wagon with a display of “Banned Books,” the books that are effectively kept from the American public by the Jewish censorship, and thus Mr. Wayfield exhibits to passers-by the works of authentic history and ethnology that Americans are clandestinely prevented from seeing. (Oppressive regulations decreed by parasitic bureaucrats prevent him from selling copies on the spot.)
One day one of our biped afflictions emerged from his lavishly luxurious estate with two of his females and inspected with horror the display of Banned Books. As he and his companions turned away, he imprudently exclaimed, “We need a war!”
Of course, they need a war. They need another holy war, not only to send their American serfs to devastate another part of the world, but to incite another orgy of the treason called ‘patriotism’ to silence the tiny minority of thinking Americans left in their New Canaan. In their enthusiasm for the “war effort,” the boobs, crazed again with righteousness, will be delighted to see it made a crime, punishable perhaps by death, to doubt the Holohoax or any other lie the Masters of Deceit choose to tell their victims. Possession of a book the World Conquerors have banned will be sufficient proof of unrighteousness, and an intensive search of all dwellings by Federal Marshals will obviously be needed to “preserve our freedom” by identifying all persons who are so irreligious and “unpatriotic” as not to worship God’s Own.
The barbarians need a war. Whether or not bumbling old Ronnie was charged with the task and failed to deliver, Bushy, who is taxing his serfs to import another horde of Sheenies (by agreement with Gorbachev, who is doubtless glad to be rid of them) to reënforce the many millions already here, will probably deliver the war, neatly wrapped up in ideals, before long, and the boobs will yell applause.
Only one more holy war is needed to put the denizens of the North American Canaan in the place to which they are destined — and which they will have earned by their own efforts. The witless Aryans will whimper, and it is even possible that some of them will belatedly have the spirit to emulate the Semites in the old Canaan, who are now trying to resist.
Today the Palestinians; tomorrow the Americans.
* * *
Source: Liberty Bell magazine, October 1989