THIS AD may be a perfect illustration of our fraudulent monetary system, which renders what is fertile infertile and what is infertile (money) fertile. Jamie Dimon, president of JP Morgan Chase, will be paid $27 million this year for, among other things, increasing debt peonage. And as if that isn’t enough, his company psychologically castrates American men by promoting “transgenderism.” (The commercial is ambiguous, but everyone knows the subtext. And don’t bother writing to Chase to complain. They don’t give a hoot what you think.)

It is often said that usurers — those who charge interest on loans — deserve payment for their loans because of the opportunities they lose by not using money in another way. But that assumes that they would make their money increase another way. It also assumes they have actual money to lend.

In fact, most bank loans are made with money created through the accounting deception known as double-entry book-keeping. As Colin McKay writes:

All of the ‘money’ that we believe ourselves to own, and that we circulate daily among ourselves in payment for goods, services, and investments, is neither ‘money’ in true substance, nor are we the owners of it.

The reality of the system is this. Bankers create IOUs out of nothing. These digital tokens represent our IOU to the bank. Then—by a clever accounting trick—they let us borrow their IOUs as ‘money’.

Usury is money magick, as McKay argues. It’s an inversion of values. It destroys the natural order. The inversion of male and female follows as night follows day. In the manufactured chaos of sexual confusion, the indebted may never realize they’ve been robbed. Read More »

A READER writes:

A cell phone is a Satanic device for sucking the soul and all traces of a personality out of the body of its user.  The user becomes the adjunct of the device.  All young adults are users of the device. Read More »

PATRICK BUCHANAN wrote in a recent column:

No matter who wins in November, there is no going back for the GOP.

Can anyone think the Republican Party can return to open borders or new free-trade agreements like NAFTA?

Can anyone believe another U.S. Army, like the ones Bush I and Bush II sent into Afghanistan and Iraq, will be mounted up and march to remake another Middle East country in America’s image?

Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom are history.

What the Trump campaign revealed, as Republicans and even Democrats moved toward him on trade, immigration and foreign policy, is that Bush Republicanism and neoconservatism not only suffered a decisive defeat, they had a sword run right through them.

They are as dead as emperor-worship in Japan.

— Comments —

George Pal writes:

The death of Bush Republicanism may be a hankering in search of a desire.

Communism hadn’t died in 1989. The baton or gavel (or hammer and sickle) had merely been passed on to other brigades (cadres) in the instance of cultural Marxists who had sapped their way into education decades (many decades) earlier.

What may seem, at first glance, a cadaver, is more likely a zombie – like Schrödinger’s cat, dead and living; and like the modern though not yet, seemingly, fully evolved anthropocene leech – blood sucking. Golems and trolls (and neocons – whatever their moniker de jour) are never gotten rid of – never. Short odds that the greatest likelihood is a re-branding and a younger hip (hep) cohort steps up as vanguard – meaning Establishmentarian Republicanism may be sacrificed in name only and an ilk, or three, of Bill Kristols exiled – otherwise, SNAFU.

Never one to stand in the way of progressive nomenclature I might suggest, up from Neoconservatism – Meliorism. Who could not stand proud and puffed as a Meliorist? Read More »

IAN FLETCHER, author of Free Trade Doesn’t Work: What Should Replace It and Why, comes close to endorsing Trump in the liberal Huffington Post:

MICHAEL RUSKIN writes:

U.S. President Barak Obama recently released information giving insight into the type of appalling behaviour the Russians are carrying out in Syria. Following the liberation of Palmyra, St. Petersburg conductor, Valeri Gergiev, thought up the idea of taking the Symphony Orchestra of the Mariinsky Theater there to perform a concert of Bach, Shchedrin and Prokofiev in the Roman Amphitheater. This was the first performance at the UNESCO site since the theatre was used by ISIS to hold public executions.

“I can assure the public we would have brought in Madonna and Beyoncé to perform instead. There would have been a  strong insistence that the music for such an event should  reflect the values which we think are important and worthy of promoting. It’s why we are invading countries and starting coups and wars,” Obama [should have] concluded while speaking from the White House.  

When a reporter asked how the U.S.A. could have liberated Palmyra as it was surreptitiously backing Daesh through its Saudi Allies, the president [should have] said that it didn’t matter, “What’s important is public perception and we’re good at manipulating that.”

FROM Henry Makow:

DR. THOMAS F. BERTONNEAU writes:

The bathroom wars are not new. In the mid-1980s, I studied comparative literature in the graduate program at UCLA. The Comparative Literature Program was housed on the third floor in UCLA’s iconic Royce Hall, modeled after the Cathedral of Saint Ambrose in Milan. Although Royce Hall was one of the four large structures of Royce Quad, the original 1929 campus, its third floor was a fairly remote place. It might have been that remoteness that made it a place of rendezvous for campus (and undoubtedly for many off-campus) homosexuals, who, then as now, apparently get a “kick” from performing pornographic acts in public places. Read More »

FROM LifeSiteNews:

“What we are really talking about is the abolition of sex,” Stella Morabito, senior contributor to The Federalist and an expert on cults and propaganda, told LifeSiteNews.  “And it is sex that the trans project is serving to abolish legally, under the guise of something called ‘the gender binary.’  Its endgame is a society in which everyone is legally de-sexed.  No longer legally male or female.  And once you basically redefine humanity as sexless you end up with a de-humanized society in which there can be no legal ‘mother’ or ‘father’ or ‘son’ or ‘daughter’ or ‘husband’ or ‘wife’ without permission from the State.  Government documents are already erasing the terms.  In such a society, the most intimate human relationships take a hit. The family ends up abolished.”

“A sexless society is ultimately a totalitarian society because it erases in law the most basic human relationships,” said Morabito, “particularly the mother-child bond.”

Pro-family advocates have for years warned that the weakening of family bonds leads to a weakened society and greater government involvement in the individual lives of its citizens.

FROM an article by Frank Ching:

Much has been said about China’s growing nationalism but little attention has been paid to its increasing assertion of something akin to sovereignty over ethnic Chinese who are citizens of other countries.

While this is particularly noteworthy in Hong Kong, it is also true in the United States, Australia and other countries.

What China wants is for foreign citizens of ethnic Chinese background to be loyal to the “motherland” – meaning China – regardless of their citizenship and to work to further the interests of China.

This was disclosed in the People’s Daily a couple of years ago when it encouraged “more and more overseas Chinese to participate in the local political life”.

FROM an article in The Daily Caller by Emmett McGroarty and Jane Robbins:

Headmaster John Vallance pronounced the billions of dollars spent on classroom technology a “scandalous waste of money” that “distracts” from quality teaching. “We see teaching as fundamentally a social activity,” Dr. Vallance said. “It’s about interaction between people, about discussion, about conversation. We find that having laptops or iPads in the classroom inhibits conversation – it’s distracting.”

Dr. Vallance identified a related problem with technological “personalized learning” – when conversation is removed from education, the students find themselves confronted with a uniform point of view. “The digital delivery of teaching materials across Australia has had a powerful normative effect,” he observed. “It’s making it quite difficult for children to learn how to disagree, how not to toe the party line, because they can’t question things – the possibility of questioning things has been taken away from them.”

So according to a prominent educator who has seen the results in the classroom, digital learning increases the likelihood of, well, indoctrination. Bill Gates, who through his vast wealth pushes his well-known political and cultural predilections, apparently sees no problem with this. Parents might disagree. [emphasis added]

MIKE KING uses some strong language to comment on the West Point cadets who posed in a pre-graduation photo last week flashing the raised-fist, Communist salute:

As controversy over the photo emerged, the terrorist-sympathizing skanks in question quickly shifted into that “I dindu nuffin” mode that works so well for them — assuring detractors that the clenched fist pose was only meant as a show of sisterly solidarity, not cop-killing, bigotry or revolution. This explanation is, of course, a lie — itself an expellable offense from honor-based West Point. The clenched fist salute stands for Communist Power and/or one of its evil spawns, Black Power — and these catty cadets with scowls on their faces damn well know it! Read More »

YES, Capitalism is just as oppressive as Communism. In that vein, Stephen Turley has an excellent article at The Imaginative Conservative on corporate support for laws mandating unisex restrooms:

Predictably, the so-called “bathroom bill” was greeted with sweeping denunciations from the political left. What was surprising was the volume of outcry toward the law leveled by corporations such as Apple, Starbucks, Kellogg’s, and PayPal who, along with more than 100 CEOs, signed an open letter urging the repeal of this “discriminatory and radical new anti-LGBT law.”[1] Even the NBA suggested that it would move the All-Star Game if the law wasn’t repealed.[2]  Such tactics echoed earlier threats by Disney, Intel, Dow Chemical, and the NFL to boycott Georgia if its governor signed a so-called “religious freedom” bill, which would allow faith-based organizations to deny services to those who violated their religious beliefs.

But why on earth do CEOs care so much about this? Why do they act as if they have a dog in this fight? Why are they so adamantly siding with such a small percentage of the population?

I believe that the key to understanding this corporate solidarity with transgenders is to see it as part of a mass process known as globalization. Considered the defining trait of modernity, globalization involves what is in effect a worldwide social system constituted by a capitalist economy, telecommunications, technology, and mass urbanization.[3] What is crucial for us to observe is that globalization involves a social dynamic known as disembedding, which is a propelling of social and economic factors away from localized control toward more transnational processes. For example, think of your local mall: In one sense, the mass shopping complex is in fact local in terms of its proximity to consumers; but notice that the retail outlets that comprise the various stores at a mall are not local but rather national and international chains and brand names. This is especially the case with the latest releases at the movie theater or the offerings at the food court. This is disembedding: from the ubiquity of “Made in China” imprints on our products and consumables, to the mass influx of immigrant labor, both legal and illegal, and the ever-increasing “Orlando-ization” of our urban and suburban landscapes by chains and franchises, our lives are increasingly defined and interpreted by translocal economic and social processes.

Globalization is the inevitable outcome of an economic order that puts profit above all else.

Wilton Diptych, 1395

The Wreath with which we are to Crown  Our Lady Queen of May

We’ll twine the rose that early blows
With the lily of the vale;
And violet we won’t forget,
That scents the morning gale.

Chorus
Flowers are springing, birds are singing,
The earth is bright and gay,
Then let us weave a blooming wreath
For Mary, Queen of May. Read More »

THIS is a wonderful excerpt of a 1978 recording of Eugene Ormandy conducting the Philadelphia Orchestra in a performance of the Russian composer Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov’s Scheherazade, a symphonic suite based on The Arabian Nights. I am going to refrain from politically incorrect observations at this time. I don’t want to bore you, offend talented female musicians or insult conductors who think they are above wearing a tuxedo.

DAVID C. writes:

I hadn’t visited your website in quite a while but stopped by a few minutes ago to peruse your latest writings. I read “Feminist Jorge.” You are one of literally two people on the Internet who can be counted upon to write with incisive clarity on a regular basis. Always refreshing and always sad for being so rare.

As for feminist Whore-Hay, I actually left the Church some time ago because of his sort of nonsense. There is no Catholic Church and the beliefs you espouse, however beautiful, turn out simply to have no basis in reality. We both know the teachings of the Church cannot be meaningful if the Church itself is not real, and the wholesale abandonment of Catholicism by Catholic bishops proves that it is not.
Read More »

THE idea that the world is overpopulated and thus cannot sustain high fertility is one of the most well-funded ideas in the 21st century. Bill and Melinda Gates, for example, are developing new ways to sterilize humanity as we speak — and spending billions on it.

But overpopulation is also a patently false idea when presented as scientific fact, based as it is on subjective standards of what is good. It is a concept propelled into wide circulation by poor thinking and also by misanthropy — a real and true disdain for human beings.

In his book The Death of Christian Culture, John Senior explains why we cannot ever project scientifically that the world will have too many people and why we can confidently say, “The more the merrier:”

The Zero Population Group prefers contraception and abortion because, they say, the world cannot support geometrically increasing numbers of people. They have revived the error of the eighteenth century amateur sociologist, Malthus, who applied the abstract science of geometry to concrete, real, contingent, human — and therefore capricious — beings, which never works. If such and such a trend continues, he said, such and such occurs. But such and such a trend does not continue and surprises undreamt of occur. As it turns out — we know this not by geometric projection but by observation of what has happened — in the first stages of transition from an agricultural to an industrial society, there is a population spurt because medical technology reduces infant deaths. But then fertility falls off as industrialization advances. There are spurts again in times of happiness and hope; a few year’s peace after war, prosperity after depression, freedom from totalitarianism. There have been local jiggles upward when an ice storm breaks the power lines and kills the television set, when husbands and wives discover an unexpected night of happiness and hope away from the latest news.

But the chilling truth is that industrialism brings on paralyzing gluttony and greed in which the quality of life is quantified. Paradoxically, you cannot afford to have children in the affluent society. The world has never been so rich and wretched as in these air-conditioned Edens where another child would sap the payments on the second car. There is no population bomb today. Quite the opposite: the question is whether industrialized society can reproduce itself at all. Read More »

M. OLIVER HEYDORN critiques the political objective of full employment from a social credit perspective. Social credit advocates insist modern technology has rendered full employment impossible, and yet the fruits of technology, combined with a better and more just monetary system, can provide a basic income to all.

He writes:

One of the axioms of the existing economic order is the policy of ‘Full Employment’ (FE). Everyone must work for his daily bread or be dependent on those who do (via either redistributive taxation or increased public borrowings meted out in the form of welfare, unemployment insurance, pensions, etc.) when he is unable to work or when insufficient work is available.

Such a policy makes absolutely no sense. It is neither necessary nor possible to realize it.

It is not necessary because we are physically capable of producing everything that people can use with profit to themselves while only calling on a minority of the available labour force and the situation is steadily improving or deteriorating – depending on your point of view. Because of continuing (not to say ‘accelerating’) technological advancements, we can produce more and/or better with fewer and fewer people working. Indeed, it has been predicted that 50% of existing jobs in the US will be automated within 20 years. This is a hard fact of life. Insisting on full employment in the face of the fourth industrial revolution is simply puritanical foolishness which is bound to increase unnecessary strains and stresses until we reach a breaking point … from which they may be no return. Read More »