Tuesday, March 02, 2010

The other “lightnings”

My two latest posts caused the first flaming dispute in this blog (actually, as can be gathered from the emails I received, more than a mere flaming). I must confess it doesn’t feel good to be at the middle of these sort of cross-fired emotions. However, it is interesting to see that the debate caught the attention of other blogs.

In the blogsite Antisemitica Svigor said “Duh!” about the red-lettered Avery Bullard phrase I quoted that caused the “lightening”, as if it was something so obvious. In Age of Treason another commenter said: “I wonder why people take so long to catch on.” Hunter Wallace was much more comprehensive. He wrote: “Like Chechar, I didn’t get the Jewish Question at first. It took me about six months to wrap my mind around the idea that Jews are not the people they present themselves to be.”

It’s a mistake to see what finally caused the lightening as a “Duh”. Before it struck my head perturbations such as wind, humidity, friction and atmospheric pressure were deeply charged in my mind’s space. This was caused by intensive reading on the Jewish question in the internet. It was only when the charge reached its tipping point that the electricity was unexpectedly discharged and I “saw” the encoded image—an instantaneous, blinding-light discharge which was later accompanied by the thunder of the flaming debate.

Wrapping one’s mind or head is a term used when dealing with complicated topics or subjects where it is very hard to grasp the deep meaning of something. The Jewish problem is not an hallucination, as I still believed last month. It is the random autostereogram which encodes a three-dimensional image that can only be seen with a proper viewing technique. The lightening which struck me a week ago allowed me to develop a viewing technique and see the Jewish question for the first time in my life. But this is the third time I’ve been hit by a “lightening”...

The first lightning

As a young person I was influenced by the Marxism taught at school and was dismayed to see that Mexico’s most authoritative intellectual, Octavio Paz, criticized it. The first lightening that struck me in my life hit me in 1983 when reading a phrase of Paz’s El Ogro Filantrópico. I remember the very moment: I was in an uncomfortable room in my parents’ house. In the phrase Paz had compared the commie totalitarian regimes with the totalitarian Church of the Middle Ages. I don’t want to spend time recounting why such inner experience was so cataclysmic. Suffice it to say that, from that day on, my previous faith in the communism that programmed me at High School was seriously damaged.

The second lightning

I was such a believer in the reality of psi phenomena that I used to publish in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research. I was already a sort of agnostic, though not a real skeptic when, outside a subway station in Mexico City, I was pondering on what Robert Sheaffer had written in one of his books: a couple of logical fallacies that paranormalists commit. A powerful lightening unexpectedly struck. Immediately and miraculously, I became a skeptic of the paranormal from that day on: an apostate from my previous belief. I quit publishing in the journal after years of overseas friendship with the editor.

The third lightning

I have already described part of the story of the third lightening, which struck me last week. Below I quote a tiny fraction of the sentences that helped me to “charge” my mind before the lightening finally struck (incidentally, like the 1983 and 1995 experiences I didn’t know that, at one point, the reading would change my worldview in a flash).

I would like to quote, once more, a post by Avery Bullard from the Gates of Vienna blogsite. Bullard quoted Seiyo: “Liberalism, which is the true religion of most Jews, is the antithesis of an evolutionary mechanism for survival and dominance”, and then Bullard responded:

Prior to liberalism in the United States, the founding peoples—Anglo-Saxons—were dominant, after liberalism the Jews are dominant. The whole bit about oppression in Tsarist Russia is meaningless. Even if one believes Jews when they say this stuff what about the USA and Canada? Jews were never oppressed in those countries yet their behaviour has been the same. Take for example the undeniable Jewish role in ending segregation. Since then thousands upon thousands of Anglo-Saxon Americans in the South have been exterminated. OK they weren’t killed directly by Jews in a Gulag but without the Jewish role in the Civil Rights movement, which they are forever bragging about, those thousands would still be alive. What did these Americans ever do to the Jews to deserve such a fate? There was no Tsarist “oppression” in the USA. When I hear Jews say Israel cannot accept a one state solution because the Jews will be outnumbered and at the mercy of the Arabs I wonder why Israeli lives are more valuable than the lives of Southerners.

Conservative Swede said...
Issues about Jews is the last bastion of PC patterns within each mind, since these issues go deepest in the myths we are conditioned to hold in the current paradigm. Exorcise your PC patterns before you flip to the other side! I have already seen one or two examples of flips in these comment treads.

Veraj said...
The default religion of human beings is the practice of human sacrifice. This is a pathological virus planted deep in the heart of the human species, which has been given insufficient attention. Virtually all primitive cultures and ancient civilizations engaged in it.

I highlighted this because by then I wanted to quote Veraj and comment on it in the threads of The Return of Quetzalcoatl. Alas, because of my sudden realization that “anti-Semitism” is like “Islamophobia”, the blogsite admin where my serial was been published informed me that he would publish me no more.
WillieKamm said...
Jews, more than any other group on the so called “progressive left” got us to this frightful precipice. I wish it were not true, but wishing it away won’t do any good. It’s a harsh truth that must be faced by all of us.
As stated in a previous entry, Gates of Vienna is philo-Semitic. Conversely, in Occidental Observer Kevin MacDonald wrote:
In other words Seiyo’s beef is with Slezkine, not me. Slezkine fails to buy into the lachrymose theory of Jewish history (i.e., the view that Jewish history is simply a record of persecution of innocent Jews by evil non-Jews).
In Tanstaafl’s own blogsite he wrote:
Auster has not only provided a Law that serves as a useful tool for analyzing liberalism. By going beyond a rational argument or even flat denial that jews are a hostile minority and claiming instead that the person who poses such a thesis is evil, Auster has done quite the opposite of hopelessly confusing the issue or ruining his tool’s value. He has demonstrated its power. Thank you Mr. Auster.

Prozium [Hunter Wallace] said...
Jews were far more openly involved in radical movements (Communist Party USA) in the early twentieth century than they are today. They didn’t as openly debase Gentile culture during that time period because they were intimidated that doing so might provoke an anti-Semitic backlash. Auster would never admit though that anti-Semitism is a rational and necessary response to the Jewish Question.
In another of Tanstaafl’s articles he wrote:
The West’s weakness doesn’t come from neo-liberalism alone. The threat is not only from islam. The West has been invaded by the third world. Our neo-lib and neo-con leaders argue and point fingers. They disagree about who to bomb next. But they agree on the third world invasion of the West. They all welcome it, and they side with the invaders. To stop the invasion we Westerners must first and foremost remove from power and prosecute those who have betrayed us. That done we can address our external threats. Otherwise the West will decompose. Either path will be bloody.
And in still another article:
Yes, let’s be honest and admit that jews are not the only liberals, but they are grossly overrepresented. Let’s be honest and admit that much of what we call liberalism today—especially the multiculturalism, race-denial, identity politics, feminism—are monolithic jewish priorities, founded, funded, and proselytized in large part by jews. Let’s be really honest and admit that you will never hear that said in any major newspaper, TV channel, or movie in the U.S. Saying it in many European countries would be a crime. Can you be that honest?

“Most Jews were not involved in this” [a commenter said] Again, let’s be honest. The point is not absolute numbers or even the proportion of jews, it’s a question of proportion and power relative to everyone else [Chechar’s emphasis]. Considering their own morals and hypersensitivity to genocide I expect the majority of jews to be more sympathetic to the plight of Whites than they appear to be. Instead most are indifferent, or worse.

When Susan Sontag said “the white race is the cancer of human history” why did jewish leaders and ordinary folk alike not overwhelmingly repudiate her? Why was she not banished forever from “polite society” as people who say even less extreme things about jews are?

Likewise Noel Ignatiev’s “Keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females, too, until the social construct known as the white race is destroyed. Not deconstructed, but destroyed”. He’s still alive and spewing his hate but the SPLC hasn’t even noticed him, much less brought suit to silence him.
And in a very recent article in TOQ Online:
At the root of this double-talk is Auster’s dissembling. “The majority” is White, and we are quickly being reduced to a minority, not by “liberalism” but by anti-White/pro-jew neo-liberalism.

Final thought

I can perfectly understand that Auster and Taksei are reluctant to see the image behind the autostereogram. Being Jewish they are Jewish ethno-patriots. Nothing wrong with that. I only wish that WASPs be as loyal to their own ethny...


Chechar said...

Incidentally, Paz was the winner of the 1990 Nobel Prize for Literature. The mex commies still hate him.

danielj said...

Don't feel bad that it took you time. You didn't have the information or the framework to absorb it until just now.

You seem like a smart guy. I, for one, am glad you arrived just in time to fight.

You got any good book recommendations about the Spanish Civil War and about Franco?

Chechar said...

Hi danielj, you are very welcomed here.

You won’t believe it, but in my teens I spent two years in the Madrid School: a school founded by those who fled from the Franco regime.

It was not until I watched a TV series on the Spanish Civil War based upon Hugh Thomas’ seminal book on the subject that I realized that at school I got it all wrong.

I don’t know a specific book in English language. Thomas, being a Briton, was the first scholar to research the subject thoroughly.

Today I believe that Spain badly needs another Franco...

Theo Tiefwald said...

Good post Chechar.

Jews are indeed the primary vectors of liberalism. For numerous centuries now overly powerful, dishonest, and scheming Jews have brainwashed The West with alien ideologies, and these anti-White ideologies (liberalism, feminism, multiracialism & multiculturalism, communism, plutocratic hypercapitalism, mass-consumerism, atheism, mass-urbanism, etc) are causing The West to 'commit suicide' as it were.

There are biological parallels of this in Nature that mimic the dynamic between Jews (parasites) and White Europeans (the host): for instance, there are creatures who are brainwashed by a parasite which ultimately leads them to their suicidal downfall to benefit said parasite -- http://neurophilosophy.wordpress.com/2006/11/20/brainwashed-by-a-parasite/

"Conversely, in Occidental Dissent Kevin MacDonald wrote..."

Minor correction -- MacDonald writes for The Occidental Observer (TOO), not Occidental Dissent (OD). There are many Occidental _________ websites so they are easy to mix up.

Chechar said...

I will correct that mistake (TOO) right now.

danielj said...

I don’t know a specific book in English language.

I could make it slowly through a Spanish one.

Chechar said...

Well... Since Thomas was the first to write on it and the one who changed my mind, perhaps you could try it?

Russel said...

You're wrong about psi.

And that's the whole problem with the "lightenings".

Chechar said...

Before you say that I’m wrong, take a look at the very first entry of this blog.

Russel said...

That's an interesting story.

Like a lot of religious people the group you were part of are taking a more subtle truth and trying to turn it into a fantasy of personal power and importance.

Regardless, their actions do not argue against psi, only against a science-fiction form of psi like in Star Wars (or the Bible).

Chechar said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chechar said...

(Re-posted to fix spelling)

But that’s not the whole story...

After leaving Eschatology I still believed in the psi hypothesis and started to publish in JSPR. It was not until CSICOP visited Mexico that I had a dinner with Paul Kurtz, Ray Hyman and James Alcock (and also talked to James Randi). Their publications in the conference were for sale and this started a gradual apostasy from the paranormal (after starting to read these guys the “lightening” struck me five years later).

Russel said...

As a personal story that is interesting, but it is just pitting authority figures one against the other. It does not address whether psi is in fact real and what the lightening experiences are.

Your post hinges on the assumption that the "lightenings" are the truth; you claim you are right about communism, psi, and the Jews due to sudden lightening experiences of insight.

However increasing theoretical and research evidence supports psi at a statistical (but not dramatic, Eschatology-style) level.

If psi is real then the "lightenings" don't have truth value.

In short, the lightenings are not what you think they are.

Chechar said...

You missed my point. I have a substantial library of psi believers and skeptics alike.

I mentioned Ray Hyman (now Professor Emeritus) and Professor James Alcock. Both dedicated their lives to evaluate the Rhine school of parapsychology. Besides reading them I have met them twice: once in Mexico and the other in Seattle (in the same conference where I met Carl Sagan by the way). As you know, in the Rhine school there’s no dramatic psi effect; they “measure” it through statistical tools.

Well, I subscribed to (1) The Journal of Parapsychology and (2) The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research . Both purportedly dealt with psi according to the Rhine (statistical) school. On the other hand, the (3) JSPR which accepted my stuff dealt mainly with the other school, the British or qualitative, anecdotal “evidence” of psi. All three journals are written by psi believers.

The point is that after studying the pretty sophisticate critique of Hyman and Alcock on the statistical methods used in parapsychology I started to lose faith in the phenomenon and became a psi agnostic. (This was even before the lightening finally hit in 1995.)

Russel said...

Would you agree that:

IF it turns out you are incorrect about the truth of what any one of your lightening experiences revealed

THEN it would mean your lightening experiences are not revealers of truth?

Chechar said...

I (or the late Octavio Paz) could’ve been wrong on communism. But I very much doubt it. As to psi, any psychic that demonstrated ESP or PK in labs—with a strict protocol that would include magicians just in case he’s not doing something like a David Copperfield trick—would convince me and the scientific community. But since 1983 (bye bye Marxism) and 1995 (bye bye parapsychology) I’ve had no reason to change my mind again.

Chechar said...


“Lightening” is a mere metaphor (I dislike the new age term “enlightenment”). As to the Jewish question I’ll quote an edited version of my email that Auster published yesterday in his site:

A couple of weeks ago I was still a philo-Semite. What happened in my mind when the lightening struck? Simple. I didn't know that the Jews were overrepresented in the Gulag. But what really shocked me was the discovery that they were also overrepresented in the American immigration reform. That little piece of info, when dully digested radically changed me. To those who call me anti-Semite for that I would tell: “Yeah, kinda like how quickly you change your opinion of your best friend when you find out he's been banging your wife for ten years; rapid descent into hatred.”

Nothing new-ageish. Just plain common sense.

AMDG said...

Hi Chechar,
Let me make a couple of comments

> In the phrase Paz had compared the commie totalitarian regimes with the totalitarian Church of the Middle Ages.

¿? Qualifying the “Middle ages” as totalitarian is simply outrageous. Te jurisdictions were so fragmented then that totalitarism was impossible. Totalitarism was only possible after the “Enlightenment” (please contain your laughter), when there was no material possibility to oppose the “general will” (please contain your laughter again).

> Take for example the undeniable Jewish role in ending segregation. Since then thousands upon thousands of Anglo-Saxon Americans in the South have been exterminated.

I do not know what you mean here. In any case, the paragraph is, all in all, very to the heart of the mater.

The blacks have now become anti-Semitic, and the Chicanos, La Raza, are free form the holocaustic blackmail. All the revolutionary attempts of the Jewry have ended in a disaster. The have learn nothing, the have forgotten nothing (Ni aprenden ni olvidan). Talleyrand on the Bourbons.

> The default religion of human beings is the practice of human sacrifice. This is a pathological virus planted deep in the heart of the human species, which has been given insufficient attention. Virtually all primitive cultures and ancient civilizations engaged in it.

I think you exaggerate when you make it the default religion of human beings. In any case, on that point we have to thank Israel (in the biblical sense):


> The West’s weakness doesn’t come from neo-liberalism alone. The threat is not only from Islam.

That is the point. I had also my own epiphany on the issue, and agree that Islamic aggression is only the consequence, not the cause of our situation.

BTW, you will love this site:


Chechar said...

> Qualifying the “Middle ages” as totalitarian is simply outrageous.

When I read Paz’s book back in 1983 I still didn’t use text-markers and therefore it is a little difficult to find the exact passage that caused the “lightening” and quote him properly.

Anyway, I agree with Leszek Kołakowski that the difference between the power of the Church during the High Middle Ages vis-à-vis Communism is that Christendom respected the market and whole spheres of human life that the Communists took over.

BTW, in 1990 Paz and Kołakowski met personally in Mexican TV. Magnificent programs.