In this interview given to host Lana Lokteff, Greg Johnson revisits his recent ordeal in Norway where he was arrested, detained and deported for «wrongthink».
Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957), if you don’t already know him, is worth the detour. He must be, along with Nicolas Tesla and a few others, among the most underrated scientists of all time. Not only did Reich, definitely Sigmund Freud’s most brilliant student and successor, achieve an impressive amount of successes and discoveries in the immediate fields of psychology and psychoanalysis that were his (such as on the subjects of neurosis, anxiety, sex-morality, orgasm, character, etc) but he also undertook extensive research and practice, later in his career, in the areas of medecine, physics, astrophysics and engineering. More specifically, he dedicated many years on the subject of cancer, as he was looking to understand its causes and possibly even maybe to find a cure. He made extensive experiments in that direction using the discovery of Orgone Energy, with « bions » administered via a syringe, and with the Orgone Energy Accumulator (a box made out of wood and metal in which patients were standing) to try to alleviate at least some of the suffering of his patients. On topics of natural science, he worked on aurora borealis as a manifestation of Orgone Energy present in the sky and on the links it has with nuclear energy. He also completed the circle that made him akin with the Ancients, as he engineered and crafted himself the tools and technology necessary for his experiments, from the Cloudbuster (a cannon for fertilizing clouds), the Orgone Energy Accumulator, to the bion formula and other things.
The circumstances surrounding his death, like in the case of so many great characters, are both tragic and unclear. After having managed to survive the rise of Nazism in both Germany and Norway by escaping at the last minute (he emigrated to the U.S. in 1939) the powers of this world finally got to him where he expected them the least, the United States of America. Starting in 1947, the FDA began a propaganda campaign against Reich that lasted for years. In 1954, an Injunction was filed against him using the excuse of Orgone Energy. The Judge decreed that all Orgone Energy Accumulator and all related material should be destroyed. The burning of books that became the law of the land under the Nazis was continuing here at home in North America, as if the Inquisition was still going on. As his appeals were all denied, he was incarcerated in 1957 and died of heart failure later that year. Heart failure being a signature of the Underground Reich when it is time to get rid of somebody who is in the way, his death will always look to me rather like an execution. But, according to more recent research undertaken on the matter by James DeMeo, PhD, a specialist on Reich and Orgone energy, Communist agents seemed to have played a key role, along with other people. Please take the time to get more acquianted with this great scientist.
This lecture by Dave Emory takes a look at a phenomenon that has taken place around the world, and here at home as well in the U.S. and in Canada. The whole issue about gun control appears to be a gimmick conceived by pro-fascist elements of the intelligence community in order to suscitate a reaction against gun control itself, thus creating a tension in the population between partisans of gun control and people who oppose it. If it eventually passes into a law, it has the advantage of disarming the people, rendering them susceptible to surrender to a coup d’état of some kind. In the event of such coup d’état, bunch of thugs belonging to the extreme-right type, such as neo-nazis, would be deputized, i.e. transformed into agents of law and order, such as the Freikorps or Brownshirts were in pre-war nazi Germany. Nazi Germany passed a gun control legislation in 1938, just before the war, so Jews, liberals and dissidents couldn’t defend themselves against these thugs who were sent to round them up. Also, it appears that the gun control legislation that was passed in the U.S. in 1968 copy-pasted to a large extent the German law of 1938.
An argument that is made pretty often to justify gun control is that guns kill people, so by reducing the number of guns and their accessibility, a society then reduces statistics on murders. Well, if you think about it carefully, that’s stupid. A gun by itself has never killed anyone. It is humans who kill. Nothing will ever happen until a human being takes the gun and shoots. Dave Emory brings (at the time of the lecture, in the ’90s) a very important statistic concerning Switzerland. Although the country had a very high proportion of citizens who possessed a weapon, the crime and murder rates were among the lowest in the world. You see? That’s the opposite of what the propaganda says. A disarmed population has a much higher chance of being subject to crime and agression if they can’t defend themselves. Emory goes on to say that everyone in Switzerland had to do some time in the army…and that they brought their weapon with them when they got out of it, with full rounds of amunitions. The concept that is being defended here is that every citizen in Switzerland is considered to be a member of the army and as such, is susceptible to be called to defend the country in case of a coup or agression. According to you, what would happen to bunches of Brownshirts who would try to round up these citizens? They would receive a bullet between the eyes. That’s why everybody keep quiet in that country. In the end, what is important to remember, is the fact that an armed population favor the decrease of the crime rate, not the other way around. I am particularly glad that the Conservative government here in Canada is willing to abolish the long-gun registry. In case of a coup d’état, the population needs to be able to defend themselves.
And in Norway, people there should not let themselves be disturbed, distracted and influenced by the mass-killings that have happened recently. What is important is the well-being of the community in the long run. Being aware that Breivik is probably an agent of these same pro-fascist elements of the intelligence community that Emory describes in this lecture, the population has to keep the focus on what is good for them and not let themselves be carried away by their emotions. Judgement and discernement are always essential.
Since last tueday, March 8th, we have been flooded with a deluge of articles singing the anthem of the glory of feminism. Far from being critical of the movement itself in relation with real gains it has brought to women, these articles were generally pretty complacent with the subject, beating the drum for even more feminization of society. One issue that finds itself on the front burner all the time is « equality » of representation of the sexes in jobs. Feminists absolutely want their 50% representation quota. It appears non-negociable. Norway, which practise policies around those lines, is often cited as an example. Quebec, my Province, is another stronghold of this tendency.
Well, the 50% representation quota has yet to prove its efficiency. Can you imagine an american football club, for example, where the team should be composed of 50% of Afro-Americans and 50% of European-Americans? And what about Latinos? Shouldn’t they be included too, with a 33% of representation? A professional sport club is managed in a way to have in the roster the best players possible, wherever they come from. Their ethnic or geographic origin doesn’t matter. And that’s exactly the opposite that feminists try to do with the 50% representation quota. According to their logic, businesses shouldn’t be composed of the best people possible, whatever they are women or men, but with « equal » representation of these.
Frankly, the whole thing is depressing. On one side, you have the fascists who try to degrade, exploit and submit everyone in a way that makes them slaves, robots or animals. There is no place for human evolution, for nuances, for critical thinking or sensibility. And on the other side, you have the communists/socialists who try instead to found Republics with « new » ideas that were never part of human tradition, while these « new » ideas are yet to prove themselves as worthy and efficient. It is obvious that communism/socialism can’t produce anything of value. Just take the soviet car Lada as an example. Was it good? No. Examples are numerous where we can see that a system based on bolshevik, marxist, socialist or communist ideas cannot stimulate and engineer anything that will work and stand in the long run. When workers are assured to keep their jobs, they don’t work as well and as hard, and it shows in the final quality of the product.
During this time, feminists continue to brainwash themselves with these idealistic ideas based on fantasy and delusion. It looks like that they don’t understand the game of human life. While in all animal species it is the female that feeds and takes care of the offsprings, certain feminists advocate for the male in human societies to stay home and do precisely that while women go to work! Listen, I could go on for pages but I will simply let you read these three articles from local newspapers. You can find articles with similar views in your local area. Have a good reading and try not to be contaminated by this propaganda.
Here are two newspaper articles that express the naivety and immaturity of what is called « feminist » thinking, which is nothing else than disguised bolshevism. The 100th anniversary of the International Women’s Day is coming next tuesday on March 8th. The precursor of the Day, the National Women’s Day, was organized by the Socialist Party of America in 1909. In 1911, the first International Women’s Day took place in Austria, Denmark, Switzerland and Germany, at which occasion women took the opportunity to advocate for their rights. Starting in 1913, the Day was progressively transfered to March 8th. In 1917, the Day was held on the 23rd of February in Petrograd. A bread riot broke out led by women. They marched through the streets gathering men from the many factories. Up to 100,000 people occupied downtown districts for three or four days. Many people joined the protests, quite similar to what we are seeing now in the Middle East. More recently, to give a local example, in 2000, 50 feminist activists met at Philips Square in downtown Montreal on March 9th, the day after the Day. They proceeded to Mary Queen of the World catholic cathedral where, inside, they spray-painted slogans for abortion on the altar, sticked sanitary napkins on pictures and walls, spread condoms all over the place and committed various mayhems. You surely have your own examples in your area.
I propose to you two articles to feed your reflection on the links between feminism and bolshevism. First, a paper from Naomi Wolf, in which she tries to convince us that women played an important role in the uprisings in the Middle East. You see, we have to read reality as it is, not as we would like it to be. She idealizes these women from the street protests as if they were some kind of heroes, linking them implicitely to women in Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution, while they probably were only, like their male counterpart, useful fools participating in a much bigger game. We have to let go with this infantile and desastrous tendency to intellectualize and conceptualize things. Reality is what it is, not what we would like it to be. Women as much as men are the prey of powerful forces that couldn’t care less about women’s rights or rights of any sorts, unless they play along with the agenda of the oligarchies that rule the world.
The second article is by Janet Bagnall from the Montreal Gazette. Incidently, she opens her article by mentioning the 100th anniversary of the International Women’s Day. She tries to make the case of Norway as a model for equality. Again, we have the « privilege » to be gunned down with numbers relative to gender representation in certain jobs. She gives for example the statistics that only 3% of women are chief executives of the world’s biggest 500 companies, and that only 15% of parliamentary positions are held by women, as if it was only a question of mathematics. There are plenty of factors that explain why women are under-represented in certain jobs, the most important being biological and physiological differences that make a woman different from a man. That, the feminists can’t understand. They absolutely have to get their 50% quota of representation because if not, they won’t sleep at night. In all animal species, the female give birth and take care of the offsprings while the male chase and bring food. It has been like that for a long time with humans and it will remain exactly like that probably until the end of times, because humans don’t choose what they are. They manage with it and make the best out of it.
Bagnall brings the example of Norway as being almost the closest realization of feminist Paradise on earth. In 2006, the State introduced a law that requires at least a 40% representation of women in boards of publicly traded companies… But what if there are not enough qualified women to fill all these positions? Does that mean that they have to hire incompetent women to complete the quota? It looks that way. Skei Grande, leader of the Liberal Party in Norway, said to Bagnall that they don’t even think about gender representation anymore. It is 50%-50% and that’s it…
You know, I am a strong partisan of competence in workplaces and I don’t like these forced quotas that enterprises have to conform to. In the end, I can’t help but to see in this the footprint of bolshevism, which I call red fascism. Equality doesn’t mean egalitarianism. Women and men being equals doesn’t imply that they have to do exactly the same things and the same way. Our women in the western world have been corrupted by a totalitarian ideology, feminism, which is only a front for bolshevism. That is why they have been complaining for a century and are still continuing to do so. Bolshevism can’t make women happy and it will never be able to. Women have to look elsewhere, inside of them first, and second in the wisdom of the tradition. Man is not the enemy of woman, he is her partner.