I write this in modern Latin because we have to be aware that now we live in a transnational Europe where our elites are basically committing treason against us. For this reason, we have to communicate and collaborate at the transnational level to success in the preservation of our liberties.
What History shows at the time where Marx lived was a succession of peoples with strict class structures and little or no social mobility. The Capitalist age introduced the idea of free within-society economical competition and inspired Darwin for a theory about the origin of species, suggested to Marx the idea of the class struggle. Paradoxically, for the Marxist, was the capitalism indeed the system that dissolved the strict class structures thanks to the nature of the markets that encumbered entrepreneurs that created whatever that others considered worth to pay for. This created massive, peaceful social permeability for the first time in history. Rather than exacerbating class differences as Marxians though, Capitalism dissolved them. The declining noble families had to marry up with wealthy hardworking bourgeoisie, Some of which were entrepreneurs from artisan and working class origins.
The combination of free markets, property rights, the rule of law and a pacific way to change government trough elections, together with the sacred respect for the individual and its autonomy, gave Europe a way to prosper and innovate. The violent conflicts were confined to the international relations were nations contended for the supremacy in the continent.
Comparing the post-industrial intermediately after revolution with the early Modern Age shows striking differences. Before the capitalist revolution, Europe were dominated by empires with stratified class structures, were the way of life is defined at birth and innovation was slow or absent. But time after the Industrial revolution specially during the XX century, Europe changes again for the worst. The ambient that an entrepreneur desires is a free market with no artificial entry barriers and equal opportunities. Once he becomes a wealty capitalist, what he desires is a closed, regulated market with entry barriers and privileges that keep it away from the competition of other potential entrepreneurs. Since wealty capitalists marry with the other upper class members resulting from the other ways of social promotion: politics, magistrates and so on (the religious class in Europe stayed unmmarried), The result was the formation of an homogeneous higuer class with strong interest in closing the paths for upper class promotion. Once a person has reachec the upper classes, the very mechanisms of promotion becomes dangerous, because these mechanism are inherently two way. Therefore the upper class tend to severe the brides that permits social mobility. In the capitalist era, the upper classes, by basic instinct of conservation, start to generate sclerotic tissues around their positions of privilege.
The tissue at hand in the early capitalistic-democratic nation-state were the growth of bureaucracy and regulations with the ideological plausible excuses of the common good and the protection of poor people. Not only the market and industrial activities were scleroyized, but also any other mechanism of promotion. The political class stablish its own barriers for the creation of political parties and the access to independent political candidates. They establish alliances with modern mass media to influence public opinion. Legistators and Lawyers create its own labyrinthine jurisprudence. As Cicero said, “more laws, less Justice”.
The sclerotization stopped innovation and prosperity. Moreover the positions of practically unchallenged privileges without moral restraints favours collusion of interests, unjust exactions and corruption. Society stagnated.The entire society enters in a phase of paranoia. Minorities are declared guiilty of everything. Of course, uncontrolled foreigners and foreign imports becomes a threat for the status quo. Mercantiñinst trade barriers and personal barries rare stablished between european countries. Their respective exports sectors fall and are subsidized. New regulations are created to overcome the problems created by the previous ones. political foreign policies becomes more and more hostile. Under increased poverty, populist leaders aired sentiments of hatred and victimism against real or supposed enemies. Political blocks and militar alliances appear. War is the logical consequence.
After the defeat of the hitlerian empire, Europe was exhaust. Their elites were trown off and everything started again. A new era of growth and optimism started but this time the sclerotizing activity started again soon. This time, the excuse was the reconstruction and the peace in Europe. The European Union was created by Jean Monnet and other as a political union from the beginning rather that as a mere economic union. This latter was the initial form that adopted because that was the easiest first step towards the final goal of political union. The EU, in essence, was a local and more ambitious attempt of the same idea for which the ONU was created for, as result of the two world wars. Of course due to these horrendous conflicts, the values that aimed both institutions were the exact opposite of the values that -suppossedly- were the causes of the former conflicts: racism, clash of cultures, nationalism. The political drives of these antivalues were imperalism, Nazism and Fascism, the regimes of the three defeated superpowers: Japan, Germany and Italy. Of course, these ideologies were not the ultimate causes of the conflict. Internal sclerotization , corruption and the consequent international animosity were the ultimate causations of the rise of these ideologies.
Anyway, Both EU and ONU where created with imperialism, nazism, racism and fascism as core antivalues in a world where values were relative and personal, but antivalues were sacred and enforced. Since then, this emphasis on relativism and antivalues is characteristic of European politics.
In an sclerotized society, the upper-level people confiscate the centers of thinking. The search of Truth is substituted by the defense of the upper class interests. The universities were created by the Church, as such, they were separated from direct imperial power. during the XX century, universities were progressively absorbed by government and were devoted to contribute to the international nationalist competition. Hard sciences stayed away of manipulation thanks to the unchangeable nature of their hard facts and theories. However, soft and human sciences and humanities: Psichology, anthropology, Sociology, History, where the best tools that the elite classes needed for unchallenged power. An elite gain legitimate power when he has the support of the great majory of the people. To do so, It has to present a long term plan and a way of life. Any plan must be based on an clear picture of the terrain. A political plan must be based on ultimate conceptions of History, the World, his society and Human Nature itself. Additionally, it has to surpass the promises of the traditional religion and the previous regime.
For an elite class that need unchallenged power, the christian religion does not bring the tools for the realization of his political plans, among other things, because the christian conception of the fallen nature of man. For this reason the elites have to present alternative views of the core concepts that religion provided before. The only way to obtain absolute power is to promise an utopia of absolute happiness for the majority of the people in a convincing way and thist was only convincing if the human nature is capable of achieving it. Thus, the elite has to reject the fallen nature of man and proclain that this was a construction of the current ideological conditions. All of this sound marxist. In fact the philisopher Eric Voegelin would say, this is the core idea of the gnostic religions. The process that produces a ideological or religious atmosphere is not consciously conspirative; It is mostly unconscious. It is what I call the psychology of Social Capital. I will write about this soon. In the interwar period, this process of elite formation produced Nazism and Fascism. In the context of Europe the after WWII dictatorship agenda evolved with its own institutional and ideological materials:
The soft sciences shared the prestige of the hard sciences since, before the utopianist ideologies because soft sciences also shared with the hard sciences their honest quest for Truth. The soft nature of the latter were due more to the complexity of the facts that they studied than the weak nature of their inquiry. However under utopianist odeologies all this changed, and soft sciences were abduced by the elite political system as a substitute of the core concepts of Religion, for the purpose of political propaganda. That happened before, but never like in the XX century , elite state ideology and University were in so deep collaboration.
The university scholars soon became sources of ideologies for the upper class domination. Depending on the needs of the elites, they sanctified state regulation of Economy. They justified barriers for the entry in politics. They justified dictatorship, mass deportations, a police state, the extermination of the Jews etc. University education became a formal requirement for working in any major activity in the administration of Justice. Universitary education became a formal requirement stablished by regulations for highly paid jobs. The universitaries became themselves part of the elite. This does not have to be that way nor ever did before.
After WWII the elite universitary scholars selected the ideas that did not damage and, if possible, enhance the efforts of the upper class for its own perpetuation from the surviiving ideologies, as a natural effect of its unconscious social capital psychology. Their own class people included big capitalists, politicians, Periodist, magistrates etc with which they merry and marry. Among these ideologies were keynessanism, that promoted regulations and State intervention, good for the interests of big capitalists and politiciens. Cultural determinism by the american school of Franz Boas and Margaret Mead, that supported social engineering and relativism. That was good to undermine the influence of the Christian Churches, and, specialy, the Catholic Church. That was the institution that did not summed up to the big blood-coalition of university, big enterprise, politics ad mass media. The Cultural marxism ideology had all the Messianic and Utopian appeal of Marxism, but with the advantage that the ate of the dominant class, -their own class-, had been substituted by the ate to the dominant culture (the Western Culture). It added the bonus of sanctifiying the role of social and cultural engineers which justified massive intervention in Society. Cultural marxism that was formulated by the Frankfurt School was made from the ground up to exploit the defeated ideologies in the WWII for the advanance of Comunism. It simply states that nazism, racism and imperialism were the natural outcomes of free Capitalism and Christianism. That was perfect for the purpose of the post WWII elites because it implies state regulations and Church demonisation. It also explained the core antivalues of their preferred creations: The EU and the ONU. Consecuently, It also re-targetted both institutions against their enemy institutions : The Church -that was an obstacle for unlimited power- and free capitalism that makes social mobility unavoidable. Cultural Marxism promotes, briefly, the destruction of all Western institutions, from nuclear familly up. The comunists designed it in order to undermine demoralize and conquest the West. These were also ideal for an elite with unlimited power that not even the Pharaons dreamed with. Instead of the comunist elites, was the european elites who intended to profit from cultural marxism. Of course, the elites applied the most destructive elements of the doctrine to others families and groups, not of course to their own, so many corrupt, selfish conservatives also feel happy with the idea, in its social capital psichology.
Last but not least, Cultural Marxism was the worldview upon which stablish strong relations with the elites of the enemies: the former soviet union and later, the Islamic rulers. Never in history, but marginally, the elites of a country or an empire did confraternizate with the enemy. In a peace period, the elites happily intermix, make business, interchange ideas and genes. All of this build transnational interests. But in periods of conflict, the normal way of relations between the elites of different countries, not to mention civilizations, were broadly the sane as the relations between middle classes. They instinctively knew that in case of conflict their interests were aligned with the interests of its own country as a whole, contrary to marxist beliefs. This is rather true when the country has been, via regulations and sclerotization, a property of their own for generations.
What is different in the after WWII situation is the existence od the Cold War, where a protective militar umbrella over Europe was provided by the first superpower, USA, to protect us from the other superpower, the URSS. De-responsabilized from the duty of self defense and knowing that USA could not afford to fall Western Europe in comunist hands, the European elites had free hands to advance its own interests in foreigh hostile powers as if there were in a period of peace, feeling that its status and in-country posessions were in no more danger than the ones of the Nort-Americans.
Nurtured in the university with the ate ideologies against its own culture, the politiciens and the bussinesmen happily collaborated with the elites of hostile Comunist and the third world countries. Most of the third world countries were educated in the same elite universities of Europe, where they received the same ate ideology agains the West. Most of the Western Left did anything to collaborate with the Communist countries. If not for the defeat of its own countries, it was for the advance of its own personal internal power agendas, aided by Russians in exchange for support of soviet propaganda. In excange, not only did they silenced the atrocities in the comunist countries and the support in whatever international cause in favor of the URSS and against USA; The archives of the Kremlim store a gigantic list of meeting minutes and spy reports where visiting elected left politiciens of western countries show clearly their disposition for betrayal and collaboration with the USSR if that represented a personal advantage. Among the conservative Western politiciens, the desire to undermine the sphere of influence of USA in third world countries and the conrresponding weight of american companies in favor of big European capitalists produced a similar foreign policy. The De Gaulle foreign politics exemplifies this consensus between left and right elites in the French Republic to undermine USA and feed its own class interests. Of course little has been published about that, since the same elites govern us today.
The fall of Comunism produced a revivlval of free capitalism in all the world. It seemed the End of History, but this seemed also the end of the european elites. No economical intervention means less barriers for elite. New political and social intervention should be created. To opportunity to strengthen and reinforce even to completely severe the barriers between ordinary Europeans and the elites. For this purpose, a tool was added to the arsenal that wrapped up all the antivalues of the elite. He leaves ouside nothing but an untransitable moral desert where social death is for sure: Political Correctness. A new destructive offensive was launched against the ordinary European citizens themselves, with the aim to deprive them from the sources of their very notion of self history, to cruch its self reliance, the worth of self defense and to eradicate the right to self government, because anything that elevates happy cattle psychology up to the conscience of citizenship is a threat for an elite that see the opportunity of perpetuating itself by means of a perfect closed ideology.
Bat Ye'or details how the idea of a cooperation of Euro-islamic collaboration to undermine USA was launched by De Gaulle in the 70's -after the first oil crisis- of the past century. In the XIX century, the repeated defeats of the Ottoman Empire drove England and later Germany to form an alliance with Turks against Russia for the protection of their own interest. being a minor threat since Napoleon, Islam played for the European powers the game of good boys that where with us for the contention of the Russian big boy, despite the contemporaneous atrocities that Ottoman islamist committed in the Balcans and the extraordinary genocides committed against Armenians, Greek, Albanians etc. Deaths sumed up millions for each nationality. Ottomans slaves were true ethnic Slavs. They invented the term. Anyway, the history of Islam was whithered to encompass the new role assigned to Islam among the European powers. In this period the mith of a tolerant Islam was born in Europe. Of course the medieval history of Europa had to be changed to accomodate this mitth, but it was worth the pain for the Western European powers. They shaped the cultural landscape of the nineteen century. Soon European crusaders that defended, by demand, Europe and the founding locations of Christendom, then part of the Roman Empire -and thus part of Occident- were depicted as barbarians and aggressors. Even the Spanish christians that simply recovered their lands from islamic domination.
The Euro-islamic cooperation started by France simply build on that and deepened what was done before. This time the cooperation was "oiled" by different mundane reasons. Some arabs elites were inmensely rich, The european elites were in good disposition to make business with wathever enemy following their post WWII tradition and, finally, big oil reserves were an strategic motive easy to sell among european citizens, who had suffered the first oil crisis after many years of economic paralysis, aggravated by abusive economic regulations and a welfare state that saw its inmense financial holes. To fill these holes, Keynessian policies of inflation and taxes grew to abusive and economically paralyzing levels. Above these mundane reasons were the deep ideological motives, closely chosen for the perpetuation of the European elites. For the elites, there were no objection in the ideological space to say no to the two main demands of Islamic countries: mass inmigration of Islamic people to european countries and a 180 degree turn in the european support for Israel. At last, Europe was growing (really not so much) and cheap workers were needed for jobs that booming southern portugueese, italian and spanish could have done. Israel as Europe, had the support of USA against comunist-islamic hostility. if The ruling european elites culld'nt care less for Europe and learned to deeply ate what Europe represented, then why they should care for Israel?. A first effect of the euro-arab dialog was the freedom of movement of PLO on some euripean countries, even the rigth to train themselves in exchange for no local terrorist actions. Inmense amounts of money flows from europe to Islamic countries under the concept of foreigh aid, specially to Palestinians that are converted rapidly into arms.
Mass inmigration of arabs probably started from the beginning by purpose and was covered up with the excuse of worker industry demand. The demand was there obviousle, but also were the offer from booming less developped Western European countries, certainly at a higuer price, and thus not good for the elite sector of big business capitalists. A more strict cultural separation with inherent racist connotation posibly made preferable foreigh culture workers that can be kept easily apart than could be european southerns with the danger of mixing with the natives. What we certainly know are some left politiciens expressing frankly the idea of enforcing mas inmigration and multiculturalism with the cover up of job demand. See references below.
1.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UKmore-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
2.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222613/Labour-let-migrants-engineer-multicultural-UK.html?ITO=1490&referrer=yahoo
3.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222769/Dishonest-Blair-Straw-accused-secret-plan-multicultural-UK.html
It is supposed that the urge of elites for women to enter the labor market with the excuse of elevating what was called "the active population" was also a trick of the feminist agenda supported by the same upper class ideologies. As usual, this was also a two birds with a shoot kill: The extra femenine workers provided higuer tax incomes for the elite run welfare state necessary for the advance in the destruction of the nuclear family.
Among he agreements result of the "euro-arab dialogue" were a (new) revision of european school texts about Islam and the financing the research of european universities with islamic petrodolars for "studying" the islamic culture. Since then almost any study about Islam produced by Universities is ,almost for sure, crap.
Multiculturalism is the application of cultural relativism and cultural determinism to the political life with the addition that cultural europeism has been supressed as a consequence of Cultural Marxism, since europeism is, according with the latter, the cause of all the bad things in the World. With multiculturalism the elites are the final and unchallengeable arbiters between different cultures that govern themselves with their own laws. This of course is not possible, since power can not be exerted out of the vacuum. For this reason multiculturalism needs a superelite, a mundial gobernment and a super-army composed of mixed origins with no other ideological or religious identification but with the governing superelite. The ideal people for this purpose should be a brainwashed, deculturalized and submitted minority. Guess who could be? Suppossedly, the rest of us. Democracy will be imposible, and it should be so, since elections gives promotions, and social mobility is deletereous for the superelite. How to supress Democracy? As Fjordman said abut Swedish politics:
“The more suffocating the censorship becomes regarding the problems created by Muslims, the more discussion there is of ways to get rid of the straitjackets of heterosexuality. This is clearly done in order to give the citizens the sense of living in an open, free and tolerant society. Diversity of sex is used as a substitute for diversity of political opinions.”
Diversity is used as a substitute for political freedom whereever it is being restricted. It is supposed that the Multicultural elite will permit and protect all lifestyles. They will care for your needs and your freedom. Then, why you have to molest yourself doing politics? Only Fascist that want to restrict freedom could do it. The global multiculturalist dictatorship will guaratee your freedom.
Strauss Khans
How an elite could do such gigantic betrayal?. What, in the end, they want?. They want power. Raw power like any of us. The reason because no Western European had the absolute power of an oriental despot with its harems, eunucs, slaves, with the righ to kill at will etc is because other europeans did not permit it in the light of our traditions of human dignity, love of freedom and many other precepts that we can not even identify. They were in us and we passed to our descendants. The reason why we are sure that they work is our differential history of achievements with respecto to other civlizations. By Importing non european people, and destroying our freedom-giving traditions, they can behave like oriental despots; Besides their regular Harems they, like the ottoman Janisaires, they could pottentialy slave people and violate women at the light of the day without fear of justice. This must be the oriental sensuality that they so deeply praise. Totalitarian elites did it along history until today and will do it in the future.
Despite their atrocities, the Ottoman rulers feel deeeply religious when slaying or violating. The multicultural elite has the presumption of being commisioned for an high mission: To extend peace of eco-multicultiralism to the entire earth, something that is a religious undertaking for which it must be praised and every obstacle must be removed. Just like Ottomans feel about themselves in its empire. Raw power supported by unlimited moral excuses is what attract these illuminated ambitious psychopaths and their followers. In part because raw power also atract women. For those that think that this is a fantasy, it is worth to remember that only a generation ago, Illuminated ambitious psychopaths, that departed from European roots and traditions of civility provoked the Second World War.
Raw power is also the halmark of islamic elite, that only submits to Alla. it also was the halmark of comunists elites who only responded to the Laws of History. All of them are very close. why it isn´t strange that they confraternize? By the way, Hitler lamented in Mein Kamp that Germans did not have been conquered by Islamist and converted, because with islamic religion germans would have already conquered the world.
Let´s hope that this were an unfounded speculation. But completing this picture, at the end what will be the future ideology for such a people and such totalitarian world? I do not know. What I can for sure know is what in their dreams the elite aggresive islamist will demand to any world superelite: the total implantation of islam in exchange for peace with islamic agressors. In this way both elites can achieve the goals they are after. Has this agreement already ben reached? Is Europe the first step in the process?.
