9/11 After 20 Years

“the world’s only superpower” suffered the most embarrassing defeat at the hands of a few Saudis armed only with box cutters”.

Afterwards, the so-called superpower invaded a nation of primitive agrarian goat herders armed with only AK’s and few RPG’s, occupied the country for 20 years and left with there tail between their legs in utter defeat. But it sure made the MIC rich.

…for a Middle Eastern “war on terror” whose real purpose was to destroy Israel’s enemies in the interest of Greater Israel. Commentary Magazine editor Norman Podhoretz had called for such a war, and General Wesley Clark reported that he was informed of Pentagon war plans to that effect.

“Watch and share this short—yet incredibly revealing—clip of Wesley Clark, a former four-star general in the US Army, as the 20th anniversary of 9/11 approaches:”

https://mobile.twitter.com/queeralamode/status/1435784470607515649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1435784470607515649%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theautomaticearth.com%2F2021%2F09%2Fdebt-rattle-september-11-2021%2F

How many who didn’t swallow the narrative 20 years ago, or who saw through it as some time went by, have nevertheless set sight aside, essentially erased that weighty factor from their se•equation, & are all aboard the narrative du jour from the same/sorts of people that spooned them the narrative du yore? Same, further back, gone but “not” forgotten, JFK’s exploding-out-the-back head? And on further back as far as you’d care to go?

“What you have to be, before you can be an Olympic pole vaulter – hello! – is an Olympic pole vaulter!” Cogdis cowards are born, plentifully born, not made, too. Born, not made.

*Nothing* could ever be overt enough, terrible enough, big enough to straighten corkscrews into razors, or change/make led’s into incandescents.

Light (brigade) emitting d’oh!d’s.

And nothing will ever stop the aggression that corkscrew led’s ramp-propagate & invite. Led corkscrews are hated…& loved to eat. The classic love-hate relationship.

Ma’ Nature does the dog-eat-dog, qualitatively & quantitatively, & she don’t bow to philosophers or notions of justice.

Predators, incl parasites, & prey. That’s the hardwire, hardwar, superhighway.

Well the deputy walks on hard nails and the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it’s doom alone that counts
And the one-eyed undertaker he blows a futile horn
“Come in,” she said
“I’ll give you shelter from the storm”

Human level, it’s symbiotic dysbiosis, but that is the tune she call-loops, & that is the dance.

Cue They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?

Yeah, they do. But first they race ‘em, ride ‘em, draft-impress ‘em to draught & dray, shear & milk – eat ‘em living. Then the dessert course, the shooting, eating ‘em dead, or feeding ‘em to the dogs, or just letting ‘em decomp…all to comp/ensate for that which cannot be sated.

Fooked up. If this is by design, then whatever designed it ain’t no friend, friendo. Cute little girls with dimples & curls exteriors singing brightly from the deck of implanted good ship lollipoptimism will disagree, as will whistlers-passing-graveyards – because they did not choose their nervous systems, personalities, dimples or curls.

“Free will” is one of those “as if’s” that pays dividends – theoretically…but practically? look around – to adopt. This process has been on rails since long before rails were invented, massively subsidized-defrauded, & run thru the exterminated bison herd (cuz holodomor & final solution them redskins – eat ‘em up even better than they’d been eatin’ each other up before “progress” arrived…).

The Leddihn book I’ve been pulling from lately is free pdf via Mises. See the two charts, The Twofold Aspect of Man & Chart of “Modern Civilization” – Appendix II & III (ppg. 394-395), that come after this bit of the final chapter, “Odds & Ends”:

Even in spite of the fact that it is technical development which finally devours ochlocracy294 one has little reason to league together with Beelzebub to drive out Satan. The technical inventions cannot all be forgotten, canceled, or destroyed from one day to the other. Yet a healthy skepticism toward “progress” and a sound self-control in regard to the acceptance of technical “improvements” are absolutely necessary. Technics may exist and continue but we must bury our excessive enthusiasm for technics (and the sciences) and save it for
worthier objects. To invent is a human tendency and inclination, to put inventions into actual existence is another thing. We have also an innate desire to drink, to eat, to shirk work, to amuse ourselves, to be

* The Bourgeoisie actually wanted domination, not equality. Yet the clamor for equality was morally more justifiable. Marx dropped the mask when he spoke about the dictatorship of the proletariat. Even Ernest Renan, by no means an admirer of conservative values and an outspoken enemy of the Church, warned against the confusion of American and European “democracy.” From a European democracy he expected nothing but a series of disasters. (Cf. his La Réforme Intellectuelle et Morale, Paris, 1884, pp. 66-67, 79, 103-104, 114.)

ODDS AND ENDS 317

selfish and yet — we must tame and control all these desires. The limit-less indulging in technical progress is as suicidal and destructive as limitless drinking or limitless loafing.295

This is, of course, only a pious hope because the suicidal, self-liquidating aspects of modern civilization are not manifest to the masses, and it is significant of our times that the leaders follow the masses and not vice versa. The masses see only the “bigger and better” and never the reverse side of the medallion. We can observe in the political development of the past 150 years an almost deterministic and coercive sequence of phenomena, leading us with an ever increasing speed to the downfall of western civilization. We witness a seemingly unavoidable doom expressed in the terms of enslavement, coldness, ossification — a return not only to the animal world, but to the helpless, motionless, deaf, dumb, and insensitive realm of minerals.

Abyssus abyssum vocat. Yet the abysses get wider every time. We saw since the sixteenth century not only the spectacle of heresies provoking counterheresies but also such political forms as compelled directly or indirectly geographical neighbors to copy and imitate these forms, often very much against their own will and desire. One country using party regimentation, totalitarian forms of government, compulsory military service, poison gas, military planes or tanks coerces all the rest of the world to adopt similar means of warfare — or to surrender.

Even the great victories of the “democracies” over the semifeudal, semibureaucratic, semiparliamentarian monarchies were largely due to the fact that the “democracies” (still mitigated by their strange, liberal tradition) could rally a mass enthusiasm which could not possibly be “organized” by the states with a predominantly hierarchic tradition. Quantity defeated quality. The Prussian State in particular, and the different Fascisms (and socialisms) in general, worked toward a synthesis of mass enthusiasm and efficient, cold-blooded (nonpatriarchal) bureaucracy, an arousing of the hatred of the mob and the mechanical planning of a state machinery working on precision. This lies at the bottom of Nazi, and even of Fascist, efficiency. There is, after all, nothing deadlier than the combination of the spirit of Chicago and Potsdam, or a mixture of Bentham, Frederick of Prussia,* and Henry Ford.

• Yet he was at least a statesman and not a politician like those ignorants who dug the graves of their own countries in 1919 at the Peace Conference or that sublime myopic idiot Ludendorff (by no means a Junker) who for immediate “gains” organized bolshevism in Russia. A statesman makes history, a politician “politics.”

318 THE MENACE OF THE HERD

Yet modern anthropocentrism in spite of its dynamic appearances, its constant flux, and its seemingly manifold forms of expression, is extremely poor in alternatives. There is usually only the choice between the *chronologically different forms and stages* of one and the same thing.

*The choice of the anthropocentrist, rejecting all “political” forms congenial to medieval theocentrism, is therefore an extremely limited and unhappy one; he either chooses to be “modern” and to be a slave of a Leviathan state and society under a totalitarian plebiscitarian “leader” or he prefers to cling to a more old-fashioned ochlocracy with a limited liberal tradition. Life in this form of “democracy” is infinitely more human, agreeable, and desirable; but the sword of Damocles under which he lives is prospective military defeat on account of amateurish incompetence and this means a life under an alien tyrant in an alien setup. For him there exists no other choice.*

The only way the “democrat” can meet the challenge of the “fascist” is by discarding gradually his liberal heritage and becoming more and more authoritarian. (Such a metamorphosis could clearly be seen in the
Baltic countries, between 1930 and 1938, effected by the fear of communism menacing them politically and in a military way.) In war the military emergency completes this process of “modernization” and the last shreds of liberty have soon gone with the wind.296

There is something apocalyptic in this ever increasing speed of development which even optimists have ceased to call “progress.” Whoever has observed a big stream approaching a fall will be impressed by the constantly increasing rapidity of the waters as they come nearer and nearer to the brim of the cascade. Here is a point at which a boat would seem to have no chance to reach the security of the shore. A mile further up a landing might still have been feasible, but not fifty yards before the threatened cataclysm occurs. The Occident has now fairly well reached the dangerous point. A “return” to the medieval values has its sworn enemies everywhere and the final catastrophe is a menacing possibility. There is still a faint possibility of salvation but without action, without a fundamental change of direction, the boat loaded with the thoughts and inventions of the past 150 years will continue its suicidal course and speed to its doom.

Looking back it seems paradoxical at first thought that the anthropocentric trend was initiated by men who denied the greatest dignity of man — free will. This denial of the greatest of all our qualities is the ommon
stigma of all heresies from Calvin to Marx, Rosenberg, and Freud.

ODDS AND ENDS 319

This denial created generations of “drifters” as well as irresponsible fanatical activists. And neither of them is now able to act freely any more. They are *subject* to history.

Liberal democracy in Europe had still the advantage that it offered a freedom (to those who believed in it) and permitted also the dissemination of theocentrical, cultural values. Totalitarian ochlocracy on the other hand is watertight. It kills where its predecessor only sneered. When Walt Whitman exclaimed:

One’s self I sing — a simple, separate Person; Yet utter the word Democratic, the word en masse,

he had also extolled totalitarianism without knowing it. Yet now when the great hour for America has struck it is not the formless mass, the phantasmagoria of artificially leveled equality, the illusion of progress which stirs her to action but the eternal ideal of the dignity of the person and his liberty. She knows that sacrifices await her, sacrifices without material reward, without recompensation. She is ready to take the other way, not the easy and dark one of the unhappy East, but the steep and glorious one of the West. She knows and senses with Milton, whose work belongs not less to America than to England, the old truth of his immortal lines:

But what more oft, in nations grown corrupt
And by their vices brought to servitude,
Than to love bondage more than liberty —
Bondage with ease than strenuous liberty.

None of it can possibly succeed without a willing, complicit media on side at all levels of planning and implementation.