On February 24, 2022 – the day Russia invaded Ukraine – the Russian political philosopher Aleksandr Dugin published  an article titled It’s All About Ukraine’s Liberation. 

He believes this military operation could bring about “a total change in the entire global world order architecture”.

And Dugin’s view is Putin’s view.

Here’s an English translation of Dugin’s article:

If the whole thing were about restoring the territorial integrity of the DPR and LPR, which we recognized as independent states, it seems to me that events would have developed according to a different scenario.

I believe it’s all about the Ukraine’s liberation, and I mean of all of it. [Upon reaching this goal], we will stop.

This morning, Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin] stated that any compromises and half-measures no longer work. We provided the West and Kyiv with the opportunity to speak the language of peace, we provided the West and Kyiv with the opportunity to speak the language of diplomacy. All of our proposals have been dismissed. There is no other option left, except what we are doing now.

I believe that the first stage will be the liberation of Novorossiya (not just Donetsk and Luhansk [oblasts], but Novorossiya in its historical borders). The logic of Putin’s words, ‘do you want de-communization?’ is quite clear. Lenin (and then Khrushchev) created an artificial entity ‘Ukraine.’ Ukraine has parted with this legacy of Communism, Bolshevism, Lenin, and Khrushchev, just as we did. After all, such partition cannot be unilateral. We are parting with the Ukraine created by Lenin, we are pushing de-communization to its logical limit.

I believe that the first red line is the liberation of Novorossiya, with which our operations in Odessa and Kharkov, at the north and south [of the country] as well as at left-bank Ukraine and Novorossiya, are connected. The only question left is the western Ukraine. I do not know how it will be resolved. The maps showing attacks on military facilities in Western Ukraine demonstrate our determination to go all the way in this regard.

I believe that it all will end with the unification of the Eastern Slavs in these regions, i.e., the unification of all three branches of the Eastern Slavs: Novorossians, Belarusians, and Great Russians in a single union, in a single body, which will be a part of the Eurasian Union. It seems to me that we would not have taken such extreme measures if there were not such a task. We have put too much at stake, if it [turned out] that the goal was just the liberation of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. When a show stops, the clowns are forgotten, because they disappear from the agenda.

Regarding Ukraine, I am not inclined to demonize the Ukrainian state at all, because the part of the Eastern Slavs, known as the Little Russians, has historically proven to be absolutely incapable of building a state. Whenever the Little Russians were lucky enough to get a historical chance to build a state, they failed. They do not know how to do it. I believe we should not blame them. After all they are our brothers, and it is high time for them to return to the united eastern Slavic motherland.

We ourselves, the Great Russians, are only part of this triune East Slavic people. They have failed in building their own state, thus they elect clowns, Nazis, extremism, and clowning instead of professional politicians, they orchestrate brutalities, when it is necessary to demonstrate humanity and gentleness. In other words, they do the opposite, not what state-building demands from them. So it has been for centuries.

Ukraine began to collapse back in 2014, disintegrating actively. And to elect a clown at such a time… For what reason? To amuse [themselves]? Well, he continues to do that. They belong to the world of virtual culture. Laughs, skeptical remarks in social networks do not affect or determine anything.”

One should not make fun of them: They are our brothers, so they are as brave as we are, they are part of our people. Thus, as it seems to me, one must treat them with respect, even when we are on different sides of the barricades.

We should not address them with words such as ‘surrender, dogs,’ but instead with, ‘Brothers, understand, this is not our war. We stand for freedom and independence from any power, However, we, the Great Russians, know this path better, and we are including you in our empire. Let us build a serious state, not clownish and hysterical one.’ Now, regarding for Alexander Lukashenko’s statements; after pro-Western forces tried to dethrone him, he realized the real stakes. I believe Lukashenko will join the union of eastern Slavs.

It is not about the DPR’s and LPR’s recognition. I am talking about a completely different page in world history, about a multipolar world and a total change in the entire global world order architecture. And in this respect, we can only withstand together, as a pole.

The Eastern Slavs are our Eurasian friends, it is an integrated territory of Eurasia, where there is a core (Eastern Slavic people) and adjacent territories. The procedure of the [republics’] recognition is no longer important. It is important that Lukashenko, China, and Iran stand with us. And this is only the beginning. The development depends on our brave armed forces. We have already finalized all the diplomatic procedures… Ukrainian statehood is coming to an end before our eyes; it no longer exists.

The statehood implies a sort of military sovereignty. If there is no military sovereignty, then there is no state. We will negotiate with a legal and legitimate leader of Ukraine. We will discuss with him an alliance, fraternal relations, guarantees, borders, but not with clowns [i.e., Zelensky]. We fought together, we died together. And we will resurge together.

That is why today not only [ethnic] Russians must realize that they are Russians: Ukrainians (Little Russians) must realize that they are Ukrainians, i.e., what their grandfathers and great grandfathers were. [Ukrainians] should remember the Orthodox choice of Kievan Rus. This is our and your heritage.

What Dugin writes bears out what David Starkey says (see the post immediately below). Tsarist Russia rises again to reclaim its empire. 

Who is Aleksandr Dugin?

He has been a self-declared Satanist, Nazi, Bolshevik. He loves Vladimir Putin, his Tsar. Also the Russian Orthodox Church. (Does he mix Satanism and Christianity? Aren’t they already mixed?) Some call him “the new Rasputin”. He is intensely anti-Semitic, and proclaims his hatred of freedom, tolerance, and all (erstwhile) “Western values”. (Read about him here.)

The political thinker who has influenced him most strongly is the Italian Fascist, Julius Evola. (Read about him here.)

Many historical terrors will be repeated now. Because the West has decayed and become weak and effete; is preoccupied with silly pseudo-problems such as “global warming”, “social justice”, “gender”, “diversity, inclusion and equity”.  And is giving up force and energy self-sufficiency; and is trying to destroy the nation-state, for which alone armies will fight and die.

Here’s a video of GBNews hosted by Mark Steyn on Thursday, February 24, 2022 – the day Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Watch from about 6.25 minutes to about 26.25 minutes.

Listen to historian David Starkey on how the West has given up force to become a world of illusion. Without force, “human rights”, “international law”, and a “United Nations” are illusions.

Putin is Tsar of Russia striving to restore the Tsarist Empire.

The rivalry of empires is the future, as it was the past.

Paul Joseph Watson confirms with video clips what someone somewhere in this empty chamber denies: that the tyrant Trudeau is an agent of the Great Reset plotted by the satanic Klaus Schwab, lord of the World Economic Forum:

“Remember the day, February 18, 2022 as the day Canada sealed its fate.”

https://youtu.be/q9h7BO_VYKM

No longer the decline, now the fall of the West?

Are all the nations of the West now to fall into the hands of tyrants?

Does the fate of Canada mark the beginning of the end of the free world?

An event that changes a status quo seems always to be unpredictable. It comes from the side,  from just out of sight, looms up suddenly and everything is different.

Western governments were tightening their grip on their citizens. Their attempt to become totalitarian by pretending that the earth would burn up unless we all obeyed their commands did not succeed. Then they tried to cower us into submission by claiming that a disease – from a secretly man-made virus launched into the world by Communist China – would kill us all, wipe out whole populations unless we covered our faces, imprisoned ourselves, refrained from contact with other people, closed our businesses, stopped enjoying the shared pleasures of restaurants and theatres and stadiums, caged our children in loneliness, and above all allowed potentially lethal chemicals to be injected into us. And that horrific stratagem nearly succeeded.

What could we do? What help could be discerned approaching from anywhere on the horizon? None. We were close to despair.

And then, all of a sudden – hey presto!  – thousands of people who work day and night to bring us every material thing we need to keep alive, refused to obey the tyrants. The truckers of Canada said no to the command to be injected with dangerous substances. They refused to comply even when threatened with the loss of their licenses. They have stopped delivering the goods on which everyone – including the power-drunk tyrants – depend.

They block roads and bridges with their mighty vehicles.

They disturb the sleep of the tyrants by honking their horns. Never before has freedom had so loud and strong and powerful a voice.

The tyrants stamp the earth, scream invective at the truckers, threaten them with bankruptcy, homelessness, starvation, loss of their children, years behind bars. The truckers do not move. Their horns proclaim “Freedom!”

The tyrants order the drivers of tow-trucks to bring their mighty engines and drag the trucks off the roads and bridges. The tow-truckers refuse. And the horns honk “Freedom!”

Some tyrants go into hiding. Are they shaking with fear? Is the honking sound of freedom driving them now to despair?

They have made enemies of the people they govern. They have ignited war with their own citizens. They scorn democracy.

In country after country truckers are following the Canadian example and showing the tyrants where the real power lies.

Down with the tyrants!

All praise to the truckers!

We hear the honking, open our doors, emerge with our children bare-faced into daylight, crowd together, and cheer the glorious sound of freedom.

Nigel Farage addresses The Freedom Association, Friday, February 4, 2022:

Why did the “woke” academics at the University of Leicester throw away an archive entrusted to their care?

We now know they did. They threw away the archive of the Institute for the Study of Terrorism (IST) – compiled painstakingly over many years and often at personal risk by me and my fellow researchers – as unwanted trash.

My complaint to the university elicited this response from Professor Henrietta O’Connor, the spokesperson charged by the Principal to deal with the complaint: :

The School of Criminology, as with all Schools and departments, prioritises collections in their care which are most pertinent to contemporary research and teaching. A recent search for material relating to the IST proved inconclusive. Any IST material located in future will be appraised by a professionally-qualified archivist and, if appropriate, transferred to the care of our University Archives and Special Collections.

It’s a confession. They keep what is “most pertinent to contemporary research and teaching”.

What is “most pertinent to contemporary research and teaching”? They declare unequivocally, “Ethnicity, sexuality and diversity.”

That is the agenda of the Left to which they are committed. They are “woke”. They have chosen to implement the current Leftist policy known as “cancel culture”. They are erasing records of the past that do not fit with the current – or as they say “contemporary” – political beliefs of the Left.

The IST archive, recording thousands of instances of the savage crime of terrorism – almost all of it by organizations on the Left, with support from the USSR and some from Communist China, through the Cold War years 1968-1990 – was an affront to the ideology of the “woke”.

The search for the archive was not “inconclusive” as the professor claims.  The searcher – the chief archivist of the university – concluded that the archive was lost.

But let’s say some “IST material” may be  “located in future”. Would it be preserved?  Not necessarily. Not probably. Frankly, not a chance.  It would be subject to a process of “prioritising”.  And as it would not be wanted for the teaching of  “ethnicity, gender, and diversity” – and would even pose a threat to such studies – it would not be judged “appropriate”, would not be “prioritised”, and so would be discarded.  

The professor implies, by saying the person who would make the judgment would be “professionally-trained”, that the profession of archivist requires its practitioners to adhere to “woke” ideology as routinely, normally, correctly, as the profession of medicine requires its practitioners to adhere to the ethics of Hippocrates.

Most universities in the Western world now are conscientiously trying to erase history. The IST archive is just one of an incalculable number of records, relics, depictions, monuments that are being destroyed by the very institutions that were founded to preserve our cultural inheritance.

To what end? Is there a  supremely desirable objective that can only be attained by perpetrating this vast relentless destruction?

The answer is to be found in a column by Conrad Black at American Greatness, in which he points out how like George Orwell’s Britain of 1984 America has become in 2022:

Since the Party controlled the present, it also controlled the past.

“One could not learn history from architecture any more than one could learn it from books. Streets, inscriptions, memorial stones, the names of streets—anything that might throw light on the past had been systematically altered.” In other words, “History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”

“Purges and vaporizations were a necessary part of the mechanics of government.”

Down came the statues, inscriptions and “anything that might throw light on the past.” As in 1984, America’s founding documents are pure crimethink. Teacher unions now force feed this propaganda in the schools and when parents object, the Department of Justice calls them domestic terrorists.

The past is falsified, statistics are meaningless, and the Party is always right.

“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only pure power.” As Winston Smith learns:

Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?

In 2022, embattled Americans are beginning to understand the parallels.

As are the citizens of most of the countries of the late “free West”.

Is it too late to save our culture before it is gone beyond recovery?

Jillian Becker      February 1, 2022

The plot is laid.

The [current Democratic] American regime wishes to purge conservatives in the military and national security establishment, crackdown on gun owners and conservative organizations, assume greater federal control over state and local police, and censor and repress all political dissent to rig the 2024 election.

For this regime, the only available justification for such a coup is the specter of January 6, so they must exaggerate its importance out of all proportion to reality, while simultaneously avoiding any real investigation that could puncture the narrative. The one-off incident of January 6 has been cast as a “permanent insurrection,” a bloody shirt that Democrats and our anemic overlords can wave whenever needed to justify a new and previously-unprecedented power grab.

This permanent insurrection is the real Big Lie of 2020, and it will become the Big Lie of 2022 and 2024 if the corrupt ruling class can get away with it.

For half a decade, the globalist American ruling elite have stoked fears about “democracy” being in “peril” whenever they lose an election. Now, they are on the brink of overthrowing democracy completely in the name of “saving” it.

We quote from Revolver:

In 2020, despite unprecedented efforts to rig the outcome with delayed vaccine trials, suppression of the Hunter Biden story, rewritten election rules, and ballot harvesting, Joe Biden eked out a “win” by the smallest of margins. Now, one year into his administration … ’70s-style inflation is back, dozens of cities are setting murder records, the Afghan War ended in profound national humiliation, and Biden’s signature legislative initiative is Build Back Deader. Endless Covid panic, critical race theory in schools, and the urban crime explosion may finally break apart the Democratic coalition of the fringes that focuses all of America’s hatred onto a dwindling population of white middle class kulaks. …

The American regime is terrified. They moved heaven and earth to derail Trump’s term in office and turn him out after four years. Now the ruling class faces the very real prospect that, if the 2024 election is remotely fair, he will be swept back into the White House, more powerful than ever before…

That is, if the 2024 election is fair.

America’s governing class and its media apparatchiks have repeatedly labeled Trump’s complaints about the 2020 election “the Big Lie.” But there is a Bigger Lie afoot, one with a much greater bearing on the future. The Bigger Lie is this: That the January 6 Capitol incident was an “attempted coup,” and that this coup was launched by a wider pro-Trump “anti-democracy” movement (as opposed to the anti-Trump, anti-democracy movement known as the FBI).

The January 6 “insurrection” itself was plotted, incited, organized, directed by the FBI, for precisely the purpose it is now being put to. 

This movement, the Bigger Lie goes, is a “danger to our democracy” and must be hunted down to destruction.

In the name of this Bigger Lie, America’s governing class of academics, security staters, elected lawmakers, and media propagandists are preparing to sweep away what remains of America’s democratic process. Their goal: to render the 2024 election null, with a preordained outcome that poses no danger to the ruling elite’s wishes. …

The Atlantic magazine dribbled out a warning of the plot back in October. In his article entitled, Kamala Harris Might Have to Stop the Steal, Russell Berman argues that, while it would have been bad if Mike Pence had intervened to prevent Joe Biden’s victory last January, it will be perfectly legitimate if Harris does the same in 2024.

For a few hours inside the ransacked Capitol on January 6, then–Vice President Mike Pence helped to preserve the democratic order by insisting that he was powerless to change the outcome of the election.

Should Trump or his acolytes try to subvert the 2024 election, the last Democrat with any power to stop the steal—or at least try to—would be Harris. “She’s certainly going to have quite a job on her hands on January 6, 2025,” Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and liberal constitutional scholar, told me. Nine months ago, Tribe and other Democrats praised Pence for interpreting his authority narrowly, but the next time around, they might ask Harris to wield the same gavel more forcefully.

Ominous.

Writing in the Washington Post … three retired Army generals further developed the open conspiracy against a free and fair election in 2024. The three stooges charted new waters of hyperbole and hysteria, warning of an impending civil war in the United States requiring, conveniently, “decisive action” from the military to stop a “Trumpian loser”. The fix for this grave danger? Naturally, a major purge of the military, and the imprisonment of senior Republican leaders:

As we approach the first anniversary of the deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, we — all of us former senior military officials — are increasingly concerned about the aftermath of the 2024 presidential election and the potential for lethal chaos inside our military, which would put all Americans at severe risk.

In short: We are chilled to our bones at the thought of a coup succeeding next time.

All service members take an oath to protect the U.S. Constitution. But in a contested election, with loyalties split, some might follow orders from the rightful commander in chief, while others might follow the Trumpian loser. Arms might not be secured depending on who was overseeing them. Under such a scenario, it is not outlandish to say a military breakdown could lead to civil war.

With the country still as divided as ever, we must take steps to prepare for the worst.

First, everything must be done to prevent another insurrection. Not a single leader who inspired it has been held to account. Our elected officials and those who enforce the law — including the Justice Department, the House select committee and the whole of Congress — must show more urgency.

But the military cannot wait for elected officials to act. The Pentagon should immediately order a civics review for all members — uniformed and civilian — on the Constitution and electoral integrity. There must also be a review of the laws of war and how to identify and deal with illegal orders. And it must reinforce “unity of command” to make perfectly clear to every member of the Defense Department whom they answer to. No service member should say they didn’t understand whom to take orders from during a worst-case scenario.

In addition, all military branches must undertake more intensive intelligence work at all installations. The goal should be to identify, isolate and remove potential mutineers; guard against efforts by propagandists who use misinformation to subvert the chain of command; and understand how that and other misinformation spreads across the ranks after it is introduced by propagandists.

Finally, the Defense Department should war-game the next potential post-election insurrection or coup attempt to identify weak spots. It must then conduct a top-down debrief of its findings and begin putting in place safeguards to prevent breakdowns not just in the military, but also in any agency that works hand in hand with the military.

The military and lawmakers have been gifted hindsight to prevent another insurrection from happening in 2024 — but they will succeed only if they take decisive action now.

The comments beneath the piece make it clear that the intended audience, the professional-managerial segment of the Democratic base, is getting the message. The most-liked of the nearly 7000 comments on the article proposes banning Fox News from mess halls and other common areas at military installations. Another commenter among the top five proposes charging Republican leaders with treason. “A good place to start would be to immediately remove all service members who have refused the lawful order to be vaccinated,” writes another top commenter. …

David H. Freedman, writing in the digital pages of Newsweek, spun up his own fantastical scenario about the upcoming, inevitable Trump uprising.

Millions of Angry, Armed Americans Stand Ready to Seize Power If Trump Loses in 2024, blared the headline. Freedman further waxed hysterical:

In 2020, 17 million Americans bought 40 million guns and in 2021 were on track to add another 20 million. If historical trends hold, the buyers will be overwhelmingly white, Republican and southern or rural.

America’s massive and mostly Republican gun-rights movement dovetails with a growing belief among many Republicans that the federal government is an illegitimate tyranny that must be overthrown by any means necessary. That combustible formula raises the threat of armed, large-scale attacks around the 2024 presidential election—attacks that could make the January 6 insurrection look like a toothless stunt by comparison. “The idea that people would take up arms against an American election has gone from completely far-fetched to something we have to start planning for and preparing for,” says University of California, Los Angeles law professor Adam Winkler, an expert on gun policy and constitutional law.

Melissa Block of NPR published a piece entitled The clear and present danger of Trump’s enduring Big Lie. Once again, the focus was on the need for urgent action, right now, to check the amorphous danger of an impending Donald Trump coup d’etat. After all, a “failed coup” is just practice for a “successful one”, according to a professor quoted in the NPR piece:

“It wasn’t enough, but next time, it could well be enough. And the fact that it’s been rehearsed makes me worry,” Yale professor Timothy Snyder says. “This is what historians and political scientists who study coups d’etat say. They say a failed coup is practice for a successful one.”

What we’re potentially looking at, Snyder warns, is nothing less than the end of the democratic United States as we’ve come to know it. …

The regime media has relentlessly pushed that phrase — “failed coup” — in the last few months.

A smattering of mainstream media headlines demonstrate the crescendo of hysteria and hyperbole emanating from the nation’s chattering class.

The choice of emphasis on January 6th as a “coup attempt” is central to the open conspiracy to ensure that it isn’t at all possible for Trump, or any other Republican, to fairly contest what could be a very crooked 2024 election.

In the last election, Democrat attorney Marc Elias masterminded the successful strategy to change the rules and election laws in battleground states to ensure a Joe Biden victory. It is no exaggeration to say that without Elias’s efforts, Donald Trump would likely still be president.

But the crafty lawyer Elias isn’t finished yet. Last year, Elias and his cronies worked to eliminate signature verification, allow ballots without a postmark, create shady drop boxes, and enable ballot harvesters to round up hundreds of ballots with little to no oversight. For the next election cycle, his strategy is even more banana republic.

Elias seeks to use lawfare to simply bar President Trump and his allies from the ballot entirely.

Over the past several weeks, Elias’ idea has gained momentum. Shortly after the new year, a group of eleven North Carolina voters filed a complaint to bar Rep. Madison Cawthorn from seeking reelection based on his supposed role in the January 6 “insurrection”. On January 22, The New York Times published UCLA law professor and former US attorney Harry Litman, who said the complaint presents a “strong case”. If this stunt makes any headway, expect it to be used again and again, with the left using ideologically corrupt judges and bureaucrats to try to bar the public from voting for the pro-Trump candidates it wants. …

The left is attempting a totalitarian power grab and present it as “protecting democracy”.  Kicking one’s opponent off the ballot, ideologically purging the military, and using that military to buttress a rigged political outcome? This is the kind of thing we would expect to witness happening in Zamunda, not America.

More and more blatantly, America’s ruling class is slowly making it obvious that to them “democracy” really just means they are in charge and the policies they support are adopted, the consent of the governed be damned. …

In 2024, Biden is the incumbent president, so unsurprisingly all the forecasts have changed. In 2020, when Democrats won thanks to last-minute rule changes often imposed by courts or unelected electoral commissions, this was entirely legitimate and in accord with “democracy”. In 2024, if Republicans win thanks to changes enacted by democratically-elected legislators and governors, their victory will be illegitimate, and Kamala Harris and the military will be tasked with swooping in to “save our democracy” extra-judicially extra-constitutionally.

Any demonstrations in support of Donald Trump or another Republican candidate will not only be declared invalid and illegitimate, they will be labeled a second “insurrection” justifying a devastating domestic military response against American citizens, Posse Comitatus Act be damned. Lastly, top Democratic legal experts are explicitly carving out the possible position that electing Trump or his closest allies to federal office is simply illegal under the 14th Amendment. …

The Democrats are trying to turn the federal republic into a one-party state; to establish permanent undemocratic rule by the Democratic Party.

That’s what they mean when the speak of “our democracy”.

So, while it does look highly probable that the Republicans will win the mid-term elections this year, don’t count on it.

The only things the Democrats are good at are cheating, lying, stealing, killing, enslaving and  – insurrection.

The fatal sickness, a pandemic in this age, is not Covid, though Covid may be a symptom of it. Definite symptoms are “Marxism, “progressivism”, climate alarmism, and – most fashionably – “wokeism”.

What is it?

The Danish philosopher Kierkegaard called it despair in his book The Sickness Unto Death.*

We think he is right about that.

Despair is the giving up of all hope: the total loss of reasons to go on existing.

Is collective despair possible? Global collective despair?

Has a time come when the human race is willing to destroy itself because it can see no reason to continue to exist? 

Out of innumerable examples of published statements calling for the end of the human species, we select three:

Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental. … The optimum human population of earth is zero.– Dave Foreman, founder of Earth First

The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing….This is not to say that the rise of human civilization is insignificant, but there is no way of showing that it will be much help to the world in the long run. – From an editorial in The Economist

We should not have children.  – From Better Never To Have Been by David Benatar

In fairness to Benatar it needs to be said that his ardent advocacy for human extinction arises not from disgust with human beings as in the case of the other would-be terminators, but from the sincerest pity for their inevitable suffering. Still –  and therefore – in his opinion, go they should.

A group of Jewish Marxists known  as the “Frankfurt School”, doubly infected with intellectual despair by European nihilism and self-hatred, fled from the killer dictator of Germany and brought their own killing misanthropy to America.

In the fetor of their hubris

It was borne across the sea

With a cruelty in their bosoms

That’s destroying you and me.

They were haters of civilization, and what they advocated is destructive of it to such an extent that human survival would be unlikely. Examples by quotation from the (arguably) most extreme of them – Herbert Marcuse – may be found here.

Their philosophy, reinforced by their intellectual epigones, now dominates the universities and public education in America and emanates from there.

It is the only true human pollution of the planet.

It informs the agenda of the Democratic Party, and so of the “Biden” administration and the majority of both houses of Congress.

Out of a fair number of articles whose authors notice the anti-human tenor of contemporary nihilistic Leftism and condemn it, here are three, all found recently at American Greatness:

No society that has stopped believing in its right to exist and the majesty of its laws can deter lawlessness. – Christopher Roach

Statements calling for human extermination come easily to the woke Left’s lips …  Paul Gottfried

Best of all:

Few have described wokeism as the cruel creed that it is. Wokeism’s natural logic is to destroy the lives of people of both genders, of all races, and—if need be—those of every age, all to leverage an otherwise unworkable ideological agenda. It is nihilist and destroys everything it touches. – Victor Davis Hanson

Nihilism is the philosophy of despair.

Is there a case to be made for the continuation of our species?

What is the value of human life?

We say it is impossible to measure, because human life is itself the only measure of value. No human life, no human consciousness – no such thing as value.

Footnote:

* Kierkegaard, though an ironist, considered himself a Christian, sole member of his own singular denomination, so he prescribes an esoteric remedy unavailable to anyone else.

A University Has Lost an Archive

The University of Leicester has lost the archive of the Institute for the Study of Terrorism (IST).

I founded the Institute for the Study of Terrorism in London in 1984 under the aegis of Alun Gwynne Jones, Lord Chalfont, an erstwhile Minister of Defence. Its archive was built on the foundation of the research I had done for my books on terrorism in Germany and the Middle East: Hitler’s Children: the Story of the Baader-Meinhof Gang and The PLO: the Rise and Fall of the Palestine Liberation Organization. The information I had gathered was augmented and updated continually through the six years of the Institute’s existence. With a team of five, sometimes six or seven, we worked at it in subterranean offices in central London. Our register of terrorists, names of groups and individuals with details of their affiliations, their objectives, and their actions, steadily grew.

We were a registered charity, but also funded ourselves by compiling reports for businesses needing to know what terrorist threats they could be faced with in foreign countries. Foreign contributors kept us posted on terrorist activity in their countries and regions, so quite often we received life-saving information ahead of the news agencies or even the intelligence agencies, Interpol, airport and port authorities, or the military. On one occasion, for instance, we were able to stop the import into Britain of lethal material disguised as wine in bottles with a very plausible label, because we had been tipped off by our contacts in Germany. Among our foreign advising experts was the head of the Small Arms Section of the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C.

The Nature of the Archive

We built, often at grave personal risk to ourselves, a unique and irreplaceable collection of documents and recordings; lists of names of terrorist groups and individuals; photographs of perpetrators, victims, crime scenes, battlefields; descriptions and assessments of weapons and explosives.

The recordings included interviews I held with former terrorists who had served time in prison and wanted not just to return to normal life, but having come genuinely to regret their crimes, wanted to help oppose terrorism as a form of reparation. They would tell me about their organization’s membership, methods, aims, actions and plans. It was easy for them to get in touch with us. Although our address was secret, our telephone number was in the directory. They would call and I’d make an appointment to meet them in a public place, usually a busy hotel.

Our chief archivist, Ian Geldard, was a brilliant researcher with an extraordinary talent for discovery and detection. Once, at the height of the scare of bombs in planes, he packed a suitcase with the apparatus of a time-bomb, including fake explosive, then passed with it through X-ray machines between London’s Heathrow airport and Berlin’s Tempelhof and back again without being stopped, proving how dangerously untrustworthy the “safety measures” were. We informed the media and the airport authority of the experiment and its results. The report was filed in our archive along with many others.

My co-director Bernhard Adamczewski and I traveled across Europe, together and separately, to gather information firsthand. He found a “wanted” German terrorist in Vienna and informed the local police of the man’s whereabouts. We visited battlefields in the Middle East and pulled bloodstained documents from the rubble of bombed terrorist offices and encased them in transparent plastic covers to be photocopied. The copies were translated and filed. I came upon the deserted camp of one west African terrorist organization where, in the rows of desks in the classrooms, there were exercise books in which students had taken down lessons extolling Soviet Communism as the ideal system. The course had been run by graduates of Moscow’s Patrice Lumumba University. Those proofs that the organization was serving the interests of the USSR went back to London with me and entered our archive. 

The Uses of the Archive  

Once we had come into existence, legislators, the press, law enforcement, the transport and travel industries no longer had to rely on the announcements put out by terrorist groups themselves to know what they were doing, what they intended to do, and why. We supplied dependable information to members of Parliament, scholars, news channels, individual reporters and investigative journalists, airport and seaport authorities. We co-operated with the police in Britain, including the terrorist section of Scotland Yard’s Special Branch, and were several times able to give helpful information to law enforcement in other Western and allied countries.

I commissioned experts to write about particular terrorist organizations. We published their work as booklets in distinctive uniform yellow covers.  We co-convened two international conferences, one with the Institute for European Defence and Strategic Studies, one with London University’s Faculty of Laws which was opened by the Home Secretary. All this was done with the aim of promoting a shared understanding among Western policy-makers that terrorism was an inexcusable evil, regardless of the cause, however high, in the name of which it was carried out.

The archive established that almost all the terrorist groups in the First World and its allies between 1969 and 1990 were supported with training, and/or funding, arms, asylum, by Soviet Russia. (A few were affiliated with China.) I called their actions the hot spots of the Cold War.

With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the defeat of the USSR in 1991, most of the terrorist wars in the West came to end. And since we had found and reported that most of them were Soviet sponsored, donors to our institute concluded that our usefulness was also at an end. In 1990, donations stopped. Businesses no longer asked for assessments of danger. I warned that the era of terrorism was not over, but few believed me. Hamas, a terrorist branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, was in power in Gaza and using terrorist methods against Israel. The ayatollahs governing Iran were supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon. Though I did not know that Osama bin Laden was just getting started with his organization al-Qaeda (so the colossal atrocity of 9/11 was already in the womb of time), I saw that the mass immigration of Muslims into the West meant that Europe and America could become targets of terrorism in furtherance of Islamic jihad.

Reluctantly, I closed the Institute and sought a permanent home for the archive. Its obvious guardian would be a university. I anticipated that our records, solidly proving the guilt of two Communist regimes for promoting decades of mass murder in the West, would be a permanent resource for historians of the Cold War.

The Archive Bought by a University  

The University of Leicester bought the archive in 1993. There, I thought, it will be safe. In due course the University archivist who had inspected the archive and negotiated the deal to acquire it, invited me and Ian Geldard to see how they were organizing it. They named it, with my approval, “The Becker-Adamczewski Archive of the Institute for the Study of Terrorism”. We were shown that published books were separately accommodated on the shelves of the main library, and that the bulk of the collection was to be kept in a special building, bought and adapted for the purpose of housing special collections. It was called the Scarman Centre for the Study of Public Order and was under the department of Criminology. Our archive was one of the first two to be put in it – the other (we were told or I assumed) was that of Lord Scarman himself, the High Court judge.

I was not entirely happy with the decision of the university to categorize our archive under Crime. I was doubtful  that scholars would look for research material on terrorism under that heading. I would have classed it under Politics, International Affairs, War, or History, but the decision was not mine to make. I trusted that wherever it was kept, our unique and irreplaceable collection of documents, photographs, and recordings would be properly preserved and accessible to scholars.

It was a treasure for a university to possess. 

What Happened to the Archive

In 2007 I came to live in America, where I launched this website, The Atheist Conservative. In 2020, the president of Republican Atheists, Lauren Ell, posted a profile of me on their website. I had mentioned to her that the IST archive had been bought by the University of Leicester. Wanting information about it, she contacted the university – and was told that it could not be found.

As soon as Lauren Ell informed me that the archive was apparently lost, I made my own inquiry and the loss was confirmed. The building in which the greater part of it had been housed was no longer in use by the university and there was no record of where the IST research material had been moved to. However, the Head of Archives and Special Collections, Dr. Simon Dixon, let me know that he was undertaking an investigation of the loss.

Dr. Dixon did all he could to find the archive. He courteously kept me informed of the efforts he made, which were hampered by the lockdowns imposed on the university during the Covid-19 epidemic. In the late summer of 2021 he brought his search to an end. He had failed to find any remnant of the archive except the books which had been placed immediately in the university’s general library – and apparently added to with more printed material some twelve years later.

Dr. Dixon wrote to me in his final letter:

I am very sorry to report that it has not been possible to locate the full archive … My enquiries have included correspondence with current and former members of staff and a physical visit to the former School of Criminology building … [T]he printed material acquired by the University in 1993 was integrated into the Library’s main run of holdings in 2005/6 and has subsequently been managed in accordance with our collections management policies.

The rest of the archive had not been so managed. Only a trace of it – some “correspondence” – had been found:

While the unpublished archival material cannot be located, I have taken steps to ensure that a small amount of correspondence that has been recovered is preserved as part of the Archives and Special Collections for which my team are responsible. I have not given up hope that further records will come to light in future, and any additional material that I am made aware of will be permanently retained in the same way.

I am extremely sorry not to be able to provide you with more conclusive information regarding the archive at this time. …

I believe Dr. Dixon’s apology is sincerely meant, but I have received no apology or expression of regret from the University of Leicester.

If our archive was not relevant to learning, teaching and research at the University of Leicester, it could have been sold or given to some other institution. There are still some academies in America, or faculties within academies that would probably value it and make use of it. It could have been a national treasure. But it was treated as a thing of little or no value.  Why?

If one of the primary purposes of a university is to protect and hand on intellectual heritage, commitment to archive preservation is fundamental to that purpose. Perhaps the reason why the University of Leicester did not protect the IST archive was because it is now committed to erasing the past. An indication of this is in reports that the administration wants to “decolonize” the teaching of English literature by eliminating medieval studies (so Chaucer, inter alia, is to be removed from the curriculum), and “focus on ethnicity, sexuality and diversity”. 

Ceasing to teach something does not necessarily entail the destruction of materials used for teaching it. Is it likely that a university entrusted with documents of national and international importance would deliberately discard them because they are no longer useful to its teaching?  Would it choose to waste the fruits of long, hard, even dangerous effort exerted against a malign force threatening the Western world? Sadly, I suspect it would if it came to believe that the Western world was systemically at fault and needed to be transformed. But if therefore it would no longer protect documents of public importance, should it still be funded with public money?

The loss of an archive, whether by negligence or decision, is a calamity. To lose it by negligence is barbarously callous. To discard it deliberately is an act of intellectual vandalism, the equivalent of book-burning. If, in either case, a university is responsible, the disgrace must leave a permanent stain on its reputation.

Jillian Becker   January, 2022