Majorityrights Central > Category: Books

This is a continuation and conclusion of my essay begun yesterday on the illuminating thought of R. E. Prindle.  And the question was: What were Freud’s reasons for wanting to destroy the concept of morality?

“Freud was severely emasculated in both his individual ego and in his group ego. He was in fact a practicing homosexual…. His group, the Jews, was and is a severely emasculated people. They have been since they walked away from Ur.” SOV1

Freud was fond of telling the story of his father and his hat. It seems that Mr. Freud related a story to Sigmund, or Sigismund as he was known then (his Hebrew name significantly was Solomon) of how when he was a young man walking down the street proudly wearing his new hat, a gentile knocked the hat from his head into the gutter, snarling, “Go get your hat, Jew.”

When Sigmund asked breathlessly what his father did, expecting a heroic response, the old gentleman laconically replied: “I stepped into the gutter and picked up my hat,” severely disappointing the young boy.

“Since Freud told and retold this story we may be forgiven for believing it had a profound effect on his young conscious and subconscious minds and possibly his “unconscious” too. On the one hand he may have been so ashamed of his father’s reaction that he shared his emasculation encapsulating it in his subconscious as a fixation. It is possible that this story either made or contributed to his homosexuality. On the other hand we know for a fact that it inflamed his group ego with an ardent desire for revenge against the gentiles.” SOV1

Freud’s father came from an area of the Pale known as Galicia. This area is very close to the homeland of the ecstatic variant of Judaism known as Hasidism, and in fact his father was a Hasid. The Hasid sect arose out of the period of the last great Jewish “Messiah”, Sabbatai Zevi. [or Shabbatai Zvi, etc.] SOV1

The Jews realized the true danger to their religious mental projection was Science. There was no religious argument effective against Science.  They would have to take a different approach. “That approach was to appropriate a science with mumbo jumbo then slowly eviscerate the science of its content while supposedly making it moral or in other words subservient to Jewish religious beliefs.  This required both bold assertions while suppressing discussion or channeling it so that it could be controlled.” DOERBA

“The date selected for the revolution was the period 1913-1928.” Born in 1856, in 1913 Sigmund Freud was fifty-seven years old. Freud was militantly Jewish. “He hated Europeans and the European culture.  There is no question but that he intended to replace it with the Jewish culture.  At what point he decided to manipulate the emerging science isn’t clear but probably by the time he began attending B’nai B’rith meetings in 1895.” DOERBA

”Freud defamed predecessors, mentors, and rivals while organizing psychoanalysis to exclude any opinion but his own….  He organized and controlled the magazines and publishing houses, while he controlled and convened the international congresses.  Following the Jewish Cultural model, no dissent was allowed - there is no freedom of expression in the Jewish Culture - if you refused discipline you were merely expelled.  Once expelled you were defamed and rendered inconsequential.  Marginalized in today’s terms.  The only analyst to survive this treatment was C. J. Jung who had an awful lot going for him.  I can’t think of another dissident who has survived to the present.” DOERBA

Prindle believes that Freud coordinated his research with the needs of the scheduled Jewish revolution. “By 1910 he had his theories in close to final form.  From 1915 on, especially after 1917 he was no longer developing his ideas but organizing them for use by the Revolution…. Thus his concepts of the unconscious and sex were tailored to upset the morality of European civilization.  His promulgated notions were meant to confuse and obfuscate.  When one combines Freud’s interpretation of the unconscious, sex and emasculation, all of which were worked out by 1915, one has in fact a potent weapon of psychological warfare ...

By the advent of the Russian Revolution then, through his association with B’nai B’rith Freud had prepared the Jewish cadres for some particularly dirty work….As the Russian Revolution marked the first great success of the Jewish Revolution, Freud now began to manipulate his scientific knowledge of hypnotism and psychology to confuse and obfuscate the minds of the EuroAmerican cultures while keeping his Culture’s mind focused on the work ahead.” DOERBA

Prindle believes the study of the French Revolution was the role of the men of B’nai “B’rith to which Freud was privy. “Little details pop up in his writing. In his 1914 On The History Of The Psychoanalytic Movement , he lets drop a line that the progress of the French Revolution had been charted and understood ... His role as the psychoanalyst would be to prepare the minds of the revolutionaries for the slaughtering to come while he probably also assisted in the damage control applications for the inevitable reaction when the Europeans had realized what the Jews had done”. DOERBA

“Sometime after I wrote the first part of Something Of Value (see erbzine.com) I read David Bakan’s Freud And The Jewish Mystical Tradition: By David Bakan. (London: Bailey Bros. & Swinfen; New York: Schocken Books. 1965. Pp. 326. xxi.)]

“While Freud rejected Rabbinical religious Judaism he was deeply immersed in the Jewish mystical tradition of the Zohar and Kabbalah. Thus one can discount his claim to be an ‘atheistic’ Jew.  Or atheism has a more specific meaning for him.”  FAHU

[ Kabbalah (or cabala) is a medieval and modern system of Jewish theosophy, mysticism and thaumaturgy marked by belief in creation through emanation and a cipher method of interpreting Scripture.]

Prindle explains that the Zohar, or primary mystical book, which is attributed to the first and second century Rabbi, Simeon Ben Yohai, was reworked in twelfth century Spain by Moses de Leon and reached the Middle East after the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in the sixteenth century.  Its influence then was transmitted to the seventeenth century messiah, Sabbatai Zevi. “While Freud claimed to be scientific; Mr. Bakan relates almost all of Freud’s psychology to the Kabbalah showing Freud’s dependence on Sabbatianism and Frankism as I indicated in Something Of Value Part I.”  FAHU

Prindle contends that Freud pretended to work as a scientist while he actually was blending in a bit of science with his Jewish religious material in order to subvert the European moral order. FAHU

READ MORE...

While reading a review by E Michael Jones of Roy Schoeman’s book Salvation is from the Jews on Jones’ Culture Wars website I was taken aback by this:

“Karl Marx… wrote poetry dedicating himself to Satan as a young man, [as did] Sigmund Freud, about whom Paul Vitz (taking the lead of David Bakan) says much the same …”

I already knew that Hans Israel had proved that Freud was an inveterate liar in his Der Fall Freud: Die Geburt der Psychoanalyse aus der Lüge.  But the suggestion that Freud may have been a Satanist as well as a habitual liar looked well worth investigating.

I searched the terms “Freud”, “Satanist” and “Bakan” and I discovered that articles written by an R. E. Prindle containing these terms had appeared in an ezine dedicated to Edgar Rice Burroughs, the author of the Tarzan novels.

I was so uninformed that I did not know that Edgar Rice Burroughs had been a novelist. To me Tarzan meant comic books and movies. I had no idea that Joseph Stalin had found ERB (Edgar Rice Burroughs) sufficiently dangerous to assign Soviet agents to sabotage his writing career.

I have read five major articles by Mr. Prindle: Something of Value I, Something of Value II, Something of Value III, Freud and His Unconscious, and The Deconstruction of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America, Part 1.  I shall refer to these articles using the following abbreviations. SOV1, SOV2, SOV3, FAHU, and DOERBA.

My first appreciation of this astoundingly illuminating thinker will concentrate on Prindle’s insights about Freud and the death of the West. I hope that it will encourage others to read deeply in the Corpus Prindeliana.

To understand Freud’s role in the intentional subversion of Western civilization one has to understand the historical processes at work on the eve of the First World War. Prindle reminds us that events can have remote roots that are ignored by people too focused on the short-term and the immediate.

Now Prindle has described one stream of destructive thought that has flowed from Medieval France into the revolutionary turmoil of the world since 1789.

READ MORE...

Dr Tomislav Sunic’s new book, Homo Americanus is finally available at Amazon, price $15.99.

I will be reviewing it in the next couple of weeks.  But I can tell you now that it argues the case for equivalency between Homo sovieticus and Homo americanus in every respect save one - where the former failed the test of time the latter has succeeded, but the answer to what succeeds him may be nothing.

American readers will be challenged by this portrait of American culture and Personality.  But the honest reader will recognise its truths, and close the book a wiser man.

Charles Murray uses citation analysis to account for “human accomplishment” in his book by that name. However he failed to take into account the fundamentally important accomplishment: negative numbers.  He therefore assigns a positive value for citations which might be best viewed as a negation of human accomplishment.  Examples of such negative accomplishments might be such works as “Das Kapital” (which set political economy back a century), “Civilization and its Disconents” (which set psychology back a century), “Anthropology and Modern Life” (which set sociology back a century) and “The Genetic Basis for Evolution Change” (which set human ecology back at least a generation).  He could have avoided this fatal error of epistemology by using a truly important human accomplishment that’s over a century old: Factor analysis.

READ MORE...

Three decades ago Martin Hutchinson sat down to write a ‘coffee table’ book about the significant figures in Conservative history.  Not a remarkable ambition in itself, perhaps.  To many on the right of the Party the Heathite Corporatism of the early 1970’s looked like the end of the ideological road.  For all its allegedly free enterprise vision of ‘Selsdon Man’, Heath’s Tories had proved wholly unable to think outside the post-war economic consensus.  While direct taxes were cut to a certain extent, both major parties remained committed to a public sector vastly larger than anyone would seriously advocate now.

The eleven-year, partial and, therefore, temporary revival of the right under Margaret Thatcher still lay in the future.  It was the moment to think historically of Conservatism - and the moment no doubt, amid the sound and fury of Saltley and the three day week, to conclude that its like might not be seen on our national stage again.

READ MORE...

It is maintained that a society is free only when dissenting minorities have room to throw their weight around. As a matter of fact, a dissenting minority feels free only when it can impose its will on the majority; what it abominates most is the dissent of the majority.

Eric Hoffer, Reflection on the Human Condition

Thanks to Kevin Michael Grace, back from an entirely untoward absence.