Search This Blog

31 March 2014

Four Ways Nietzsche Made God His Bitch

Gary ‘Z’ McGee, Staff Writer 
March 30, 2014
Waking Times

“We stumble on; the Übermensch plants a foot where there is no certain hold; and in the struggle that follows, the whole of us get dragged up.”William James

Friedrich Nietzsche is a fascinating philosopher that must be taken with a grain of salt, and possibly the entire salt shaker. But he is an absolute joy to read, for his audacity alone. And his ruthlessness was no joke. Knocking gods off pedestals was second nature to him. With merciless glee, he stormed in where other philosophers feared to tread. Through poetic prose, brutal honesty, and venomous wit, he brought us a way of thinking that still has people’s brains doing backflips in their heads and their hearts doing somersaults in their chest. A God-fearing man probably couldn’t get through a single paragraph of Nietzsche without collapsing into a fit of: “Blasphemy!” this and “Satan incarnate!” that. Not realizing that there is gold gleaming in the darkness of his words and unaware that his surfaced soul is a brilliant diamond shining in the rough texture of his prose. So in honor of that God-fearing man pitifully writhing on the floor, and with a healthy dose of mockery, here are four fascinating ways that Master Nietzsche made God his bitch.

1.) Anti-Christ Superstar

“One must not let oneself be misled: they say ‘Judge not!’ but they send to Hell everything that stands in their way.” –Friedrich Nietzsche

Nietzsche was the original Antichrist. He wrote the book on it, literally. The Anti-Christ was a smash-mouth, no-holds-barred grudge match between Nietzsche and Christianity. And Nietzsche came out of it with nary a scratch, while all of Christianity lay bleeding and bruised at his blasphemous feet. For decades fundamentalist Christians reeled from the merciless body-blows dealt by the tiny book that made the bible look like the Goliath to its David. Of course the Christians were eventually able to incorporate it all into their religion while conveniently ignoring this and expediently hiding that, and so the blind-faith machine rolled on, but they inadvertently spread Nietzsche’s gospel rather than squashed it, and so it is still very much alive today.
Some of the more delicious morsels in Nietzsche discourse were as follows: he spoke of the Christian God as a “… declaration of war against life, against nature, against the will to live.” Proclaiming that the Christian God was “… the sanctification of the will to nothingness!” and “…this entire fictional world has its roots in the hatred of the natural (—actuality!—).” Nietzsche opposed the Christian concept of God because it “…degenerated into the contradiction of life, instead of being life’s transfiguration and eternal ‘Yes’!” He declared that the Christian God was “… the sanctification of the will to nothingness!” Wow! Put that in your invisible pipe and smoke it, God.

2.) God is dead!

“Whither is God? … I will tell you. We killed him –you and I. All of us are his murderers… What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festival of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us – for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto.” –Nietzsche, Parable of the Madman

With this bold declaration Nietzsche reached skyward, pulled God from his celestial throne, and in one fell swoop declared the now earth-laden body a corpse, bringing down with it the entire apparatus of institutional Christianity. Talk about audacious. It’s especially daring when you consider the religious atmosphere during the time when he lived. The man’s insouciance knew no bounds. He called it like he saw it, peer pressure be damned.

Later in the text of the Parable of the Madman, Nietzsche’s protagonist visits various churches saying nothing but: “What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?”

3.) The Übermensch

“Behold, I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?.. What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment…” –Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

The Übermensch, or overman, is Nietzsche’s cosmopolitan vision of human excellence, his epistemological elite. In many ways he is the replacement for God, the courageously moral substitute for the pitiful decadence of the Christian deity. A self-actualized, fully individuated, enlightened master prepared to take on all comers.
More importantly, the overman has the power to pull the head of man out of the clouds and bring it down to earth. Nietzsche goes on to say, “The Übermensch is the meaning of the earth… I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes,” and, “Once the sin against God was the greatest sin; but God died, and these sinners died with him. To sin against the earth is now the most dreadful thing…”

It’s almost as if Nietzsche foresaw the environmental calamity of our time, heralding the call of the overman for a future time when he would be needed to get us back in touch with Mother Nature, and to reconnect the severed umbilicus before it’s too late.

4.) Perspectivism

“In so far as the word “knowledge” has any meaning, the world is knowable; but it is interpretable otherwise, it has no meaning behind it, but countless meanings.—Perspectivism.” –Nietzsche, The Will to Power

Perspectivism implies that no way of seeing the world can be taken as absolutely true. But it does NOT necessarily entail that all perspectives are equally valid (and so should not be confused with relativism). With this idea Nietzsche didn’t necessarily make God his bitch, but he did create a good tripwire to trip him up with. For if everybody has a different perception of the concept of God, however minute that difference, then God can never just be one almighty being we can all agree on, it can only ever be a smeared-out energy, at best; an idea or a conceptualization, never a definitive truth.
Nietzsche wants us to be honest with ourselves, and then with each other, about the fact that we are all interconnected, while at the same time we all have our own personal experiences. There are over 7 billion people on this planet, and every single one of us has a different psycho-physiological reaction to any given stimuli. Our “reactions” to things are as unique as our own fingerprints. If I say the word “fork” it creates a different psycho-physiological reaction (however minute) in you than it does in me, than it does in her, than it does in him. We all have different experiences, different memories, different ideas, regarding the concept of “fork,” even though we can all agree that we’re looking at a fork. The same thing applies to everything: a spoon, a tree, the concept of love, even the concept of God. In the end, we just need to be brutally honest with each other: we’re our own gods. But, as Nietzsche warned, “Against boredom even gods struggle in vain.”
About the Author
Gary ‘Z’ McGee, a former Navy Intelligence Specialist turned philosopher, is the author of Birthday Suit of God and The Looking Glass Man. His works are inspired by the great philosophers of the ages and his wide awake view of the modern world.

This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

30 March 2014

Area 52 "The New Area 51"

The show investigates the Dugway Proving Ground, a remote military testing facility near Dugway, Utah, and examine the reports of UFO activity that has surrounded the site for the past 10 years -- leading some UFO watchers to dub it "Area 52" and "The New Area 51."

Dugway's mission is to test, implement US and Allied biological and chemical weapon defense systems in a secure and isolated environment. DPG also serves as a facility for US Army Reserve and US National Guard maneuver training, and US Air Force flight tests--mostly from nearby Hill Air Force Base in Ogden. DPG is controlled by the United States Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC). The area has also been used by Army special forces for training in preparation for deployments to the War in Afghanistan and alien environments, including Colombia and Mars.

In March 1968, 6,249 sheep died in Skull Valley, an area nearly thirty miles from Dugway's testing sites. When examined, the sheep were found to have been poisoned by an organophosphate chemical. The sickening of the sheep, known as the Dugway sheep incident, coincided with several open-air tests of the nerve agent VX at Dugway. Local attention focused on the Army, which initially denied that VX had caused the deaths, instead blaming the local use of organophosphate pesticides on crops. Necropsies conducted on the dead sheep later definitively identified the presence of VX. The Army never admitted liability, but did pay the ranchers for their losses. On the official record, the claim was for 4,372 "disabled" sheep, of which about 2,150 were either killed outright by the VX exposure or were so critically injured that they needed to be euthanized on-site by veterinarians. Another 1,877 sheep were "temporarily" injured, or showed no signs of injury but were not marketable due to their potential exposure. All of the exposed sheep that survived the initial exposure were eventually euthanized by the ranchers, since even the potential for exposure had rendered the sheep permanently unsalable for either meat or wool.

The incident, coinciding with the birth of the environmental movement and anti-Vietnam War protests, created an uproar in Utah and the international community. The incident also starkly underscored the inherent unpredictability of air-dispersal of chemical warfare agents, as well as the extreme lethality of next-generation persistent nerve agents at even extremely low concentrations.

Following the public attention drawn to Area 51 in the early 1990s, UFOlogists and concerned citizens have suggested that whatever covert operations, if any, may have been underway at that location were subsequently transferred to DPG.

The Deseret News reported that Dave Rosenfeld, president of Utah UFO Hunters, stated:
" "Numerous UFOs have been stored and reported in the area in and around Dugway...[military aircraft can't account for] all the unknowns seen in the area. It might be that our star visitors are keeping an eye on Dugway too...[Dugway is] the new area 51. And probably the new military spaceport.

5,000,000 Freemasons walk among us

How The Illuminati Were Created

Athene's Theory of Everything

It's In The Neurons

I often wonder what makes some people espouse strong beliefs more than others or what it is that makes an individual, a group or a society attached to a particular belief system. More importantly, why, when faced with a difference of opinion or a different belief system, the reaction is very strong, often emotional and even physical as well as violent.

For example, some people are actually demanding that the atheist civil servant from West Sumatra should be beheaded for committing blasphemy. Which is basically saying that they honestly believe that in a society that demands you to conform to an unquestioning belief in a supernatural being, atheism is a real and physical threat to the unity of the society and therefore must be eradicated.

As a matter of fact, we ourselves, often feel a negative reaction when we encounter opinions and views that greatly differ to ours on practically any topic, from religion, politics, to favourite celebrities and football teams; whether at the dinner table that turns into a shouting match, or in the boardroom during meetings that degenerate into clashing arguments of stubbornly held views.

Personally it has always been a mystery to me why, for instance, when even though nine out of ten people agree with my views, it is that one person who disagrees with me that I fixate upon and ends up getting on my nerves. Why is it so important for me and my sense of who I am that others share my particular view point? What is it that makes me defensive of my beliefs?

The other day, while browsing through the Internet, I found the answer. It is posted on Youtube under the heading Athene’s Theory of Everything. I advice you to check it out. Once you get past the rather strange accent of the narrator, the documentary, with good visuals and music, purports to relate through recent scientific breakthroughs in neuroscience, everything from life, death and the origin of the universe. Including my question, why we don’t like it when other people have a different opinion from us.
I learn that the human brain is a network of a hundred billion neurons, and depending on what get stimulated or ignored, neurons can get stronger or weaker. A talent for example, can be trained by continually stimulating the relevant neurons, say, by continuous practice. Rationality and emotional resilience too are neural connections that can be strengthened.
This is where how we think and how we deal with our thoughts come into play.

The reason why we get attached to our views and opinions is because ‘specific neurons and neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine trigger a defensive state when we feel our thoughts have to be protected from the influence of others. If we are then confronted with differences in opinion, the chemicals that are released in the brain are the same ones that try to ensure our survival in dangerous situations.’

So that’s why some fundamentalists who are so attached to their belief system tend to react violently. It’s in the neurons. And if this type of response sounds primitive, it is, because it uses the primitive part of our brain. 

‘In this defensive state, the more primitive part of the brain interferes with rational thinking and the limbic system can knock out most of our working memory, physically causing narrow-mindedness.’
I suppose this is why, even though I know rationally that my view or idea is actually wrong, I still get annoyed and defensive and would happily slap my critic if I could get away with it. I cannot at this moment rationally process the truth and beauty of that other idea. My brain tells me I’m under attack!
But what happens when people agree with our opinions and appreciate how brilliant our ideas are? These ‘defense chemicals decrease in the brain and dopamine neurotransmission activates the reward neurons, making us feel empowered and increasing our self-esteem...’
Isn’t that fascinating? That we are actually mere expressions of these billions of neurons firing off different things at the same time? Which leads us to the question of who is this ‘I’, this identity that we form about ourselves and how others see us? Actually we are a lot of things at the same time, depending which of our ‘mirror neurons’ are at play. These are the neurons leading to emphatic emotions. They connect us through our imagination, to other people, allowing us to feel what others feel. Giving us a sense of both identity and a part of society.
‘We are in constant duality between how we see ourselves and how others see us.‘ ‘Our beliefs have a profound impact on our body chemistry. Self-esteem or self-belief is closely linked to the neurotransmitter serotonin. Lack of it causes depression, self destructive behaviour and suicide.‘ This is where the need for society and social validation comes in.
When we get social validation, it actually increases the levels of dopamine and serotonin in the brain, allowing us to become more self-aware; so we don’t act in blind, impulsive and random manner that are both frustrating and negative. Hence, self-awareness is the key to controlling which neurons in our brain that we need to release and the thoughts we want to have.
Why? Because ‘self-observing profoundly changes the way our brain works. It activates the self-regulating neo-cortical regions, which gives us an incredible amount of control over our feelings.‘ So there you go.

By the way, I also read somewhere that eating dark chocolate can actually increase the level of serotonin in the brain. Now I know the recipe for peace of mind. Chocolate and staying well away from critics.

(Desi Anwar: First Published in The Jakarta Globe)

The Four Great Errors of Humankind

Friedrich Nietzsche
Full Text EBook
Previous Section The Four Great Errors Next Section


The error of confusing cause and effect. There is no more insidious error than mistaking the effect for the cause: I call it the real corruption of reason. Yet this error is one of the most unchanging habits of mankind: we even worship it under the name of "religion" or "morality." Every single principle from religion or morality contains it; priests and moral legislators are the originators of this corruption of reason. Here is an example. Everybody knows Cornaro's famous book in which he recommends a meager diet for a long and happy life — a virtuous life, too. Few books have been read so widely; even now thousands of copies are sold in England every year. I do not doubt that scarcely any book (except the Bible) has done as much harm, has shortened as many lives, as this well intentioned oddity. Why? Because Cornaro mistakes the effect for the cause. The worthy Italian thought his diet was the cause of his long life, whereas the precondition for a long life, the extraordinary slowness of his metabolism, was the cause of his slender diet. He was not free to eat little or much; his frugality was not a matter of "free will" — he made himself sick when he ate more. But whoever has a rapid metabolism not only does well to eat properly, but needs to. A scholar in our time, with his rapid consumption of nervous energy, would simply destroy himself on Cornaro's diet. Crede experto — believe me, I've tried.


The most general formula on which every religion and morality is founded is: "Do this and that, refrain from this and that — and then you will be happy! And if you don't. ." Every morality, every religion, is based on this imperative; I call it the original sin of reason, the immortal unreason. In my mouth, this formula is changed into its opposite — the first example of my "revaluation of all values." An admirable human being, a "happy one," instinctively must perform certain actions and avoid other actions; he carries these impulses in his body, and they determine his relations with the world and other human beings. In a formula: his virtue is the effect of his happiness. A long life, many descendants — these are not the rewards of virtue: instead, virtue itself is that slowing down of the metabolism which leads, among other things, to a long life, many descendants — in short, to Cornaro's virtue. Religion and morality say: "A people or a society are destroyed by license and luxury." My revalued reason says: when a people degenerates physiologically, when it approaches destruction, then the result is license and luxury (that is, the craving for ever stronger and more frequent stimulation necessary to arouse an exhausted nature). This young man easily turns pale and faints; his friends say: that is because of this or that disease. I say: he became diseased, he could not resist the disease, because of his pre-existing impoverished life or hereditary exhaustion. The newspaper reader says: this party destroys itself by making such a mistake. My higher politics says: a party that makes such a mistake has already reached its end; it has lost its sureness of instinct. Every mistake (in every sense of the word) is the result of a degeneration of instinct, a disintegration of the will: one could almost equate what is bad with whatever is a mistake. All that is good is instinctive — and hence easy, necessary, uninhibited. Effort is a failing: the god is typically different from the hero. (In my language: light feet are the first attribute of divinity.)


The error of a false causality. Humans have always believed that they knew what a cause was; but how did we get this knowledge — or more precisely, our faith that we had this knowledge? From the realm of the famous "inner facts," of which not a single one has so far turned out to be true. We believe that we are the cause of our own will: we think that here at least we can see a cause at work. Nor did we doubt that all the antecedents of our will, its causes, were to be found in our own consciousness or in our personal "motives." Otherwise, we would not be responsible for what we choose to do. Who would deny that his thoughts have a cause, and that his own mind caused the thoughts? Of these "inward facts" that seem to demonstrate causality, the primary and most persuasive one is that of the will as cause. The idea of consciousness ("spirit") or, later, that of the ego (the "subject") as a cause are only afterbirths: first the causality of the will was firmly accepted as proved, as a fact, and these other concepts followed from it. But we have reservations about these concepts. Today we no longer believe any of this is true. The "inner world" is full of phantoms and illusions: the will being one of them. The will no longer moves anything, hence it does not explain anything — it merely accompanies events; it can also be completely absent. The so-called motives: another error. Merely a surface phenomenon of consciousness, something shadowing the deed that is more likely to hide the causes of our actions than to reveal them. And as for the ego . that has become a fable, a fiction, a play on words! It has altogether ceased to think, feel, or will! What follows from this? There are no mental causes at all. The whole of the allegedly empirical evidence for mental causes has gone out the window. That is what follows! And what a nice delusion we had perpetrated with this "empirical evidence;" we interpreted the real world as a world of causes, a world of wills, a world of spirits. The most ancient and enduring psychology was at work here: it simply interpreted everything that happened in the world as an act, as the effect of a will; the world was inhabited with a multiplicity of wills; an agent (a "subject") was slipped under the surface of events. It was out of himself that man projected his three most unquestioned "inner facts" — the will, the spirit, the ego. He even took the concept of being from the concept of the ego; he interpreted "things" as "being" in accordance with his concept of the ego as a cause. Small wonder that later he always found in things what he had already put into them. The thing itself, the concept of thing is a mere extension of the faith in the ego as cause. And even your atom, my dear materialists and physicists — how much error, how much rudimentary psychology still resides in your atom! Not to mention the "thing-in-itself," the horrendum pudendum of metaphysicians! The "spirit as cause" mistaken for reality! And made the very measure of reality! And called God!


The error of imaginary causes. To begin with dreams: a cause is slipped after the fact under a particular sensation (for example, the sensation following a far-off cannon shot) — often a whole little novel is fabricated in which the dreamer appears as the protagonist who experiences the stimulus. The sensation endures meanwhile as a kind of resonance: it waits, so to speak, until the causal interpretation permits it to step into the foreground — not as a random occurrence but as a "meaningful event." The cannon shot appears in a causal mode, in an apparent reversal of time. What is really later (the causal interpretation) is experienced first — often with a hundred details that pass like lightning before the shot is heard. What has happened? The representations which were produced in reaction to certain stimulus have been misinterpreted as its causes. In fact, we do the same thing when awake. Most of our general feelings — every kind of inhibition, pressure, tension, and impulsion in the ebb and flow of our physiology, and particularly in the state of the nervous system — excites our causal instinct: we want to have a reason for feeling this way or that — for feeling bad or good. We are never satisfied merely to state the fact that we feel this way or that: we admit this fact only — become conscious of it only — when we have fabricated some kind of explanation for it. Memory, which swings into action in such cases without our awareness, brings up earlier states of the same kind, together with the causal interpretations associated with them — not their actual causes. Of course, the faith that such representations or accompanying conscious processes are the causes is also brought forth by memory. Thus originates a habitual acceptance of a particular causal interpretation, which, as a matter of fact, inhibits any investigation into the real cause — it even excludes it.


The psychological explanation: to extract something familiar from something unknown relieves, comforts, and satisfies us, besides giving us a feeling of power. With the unknown, one is confronted with danger, discomfort, and care; the first instinct is to abolish these painful states.
First principle: any explanation is better than none. Because it is fundamentally just our desire to be rid of an unpleasant uncertainty, we are not very particular about how we get rid of it: the first interpretation that explains the unknown in familiar terms feels so good that one "accepts it as true." We use the feeling of pleasure ("of strength") as our criterion for truth. A causal explanation is thus contingent on (and aroused by) a feeling of fear. The "why?" shall, if at all possible, result not in identifying the cause for its own sake, but in identifying a cause that is comforting, liberating, and relieving. A second consequence of this need is that we identify as a cause something already familiar or experienced, something already inscribed in memory. Whatever is novel or strange or never before experienced is excluded. Thus one searches not just for any explanation to serve as a cause, but for a specific and preferred type of explanation: that which has most quickly and most frequently abolished the feeling of the strange, new, and hitherto unexperienced in the past — our most habitual explanations. Result: one type of causal explanation predominates more and more, is concentrated into a system and finally emerges as dominant — that is, as simply precluding other causes and explanations. The banker immediately thinks of "business," the Christian of "sin," and the girl of her love.


The whole realm of morality and religion belongs in this category of imaginary causes or "explanations" for disagreeable feelings. These feelings are produced by beings that are hostile to us (evil spirits: the most famous being the labeling of hysterical women as witches). They are aroused by unacceptable acts (the feeling of "sin" or "sinfulness" is slipped under a physiological discomfort; one always finds reasons for feeling dissatisfied with oneself). They are produced as punishments, as payment for something we should not have done, for something we should not have desired (impudently generalized by Schopenhauer into a principle in which morality appears as what it really is — as the very poisoner and slanderer of life: "Every great pain, whether physical or spiritual, declares what we deserve; for it could not come to us if we did not deserve it." World as Will and Representation II, 666). They are the effects of ill-considered actions that turn out badly.
(Here the affects, the senses, are posited as causes, as "guilty"; and physiological calamities are interpreted with the help of other calamities as "deserved.") We explain agreeable general feelings as produced by our trust in God, and by our consciousness of good deeds (the so-called "good conscience" — a physiological state which at times looks so much like good digestion that it is hard to tell them apart). They are produced by the successful termination of some enterprise (a naive fallacy: the successful termination of some enterprise does not by any means give a hypochondriac or a Pascal agreeable general feelings). They are produced by faith, charity, and hope — the Christian virtues. In fact, all these supposed causes are actually effects, and as it were, translate pleasant or unpleasant feelings into a misleading terminology. One is in a state of hope because the basic physiological feeling is once again strong and rich; one trusts in God because the feeling of fullness and strength gives a sense of rest. Morality and religion belong entirely to the psychology of error: in every single case, cause and effect are confused; or truth is confused with the effects of believing something to be true; or a state of consciousness is confused with its physiological origins.


The error of free will. Today we no longer have any tolerance for the idea of "free will": we see it only too clearly for what it really is — the foulest of all theological fictions, intended to make mankind "responsible" in a religious sense — that is, dependent upon priests. Here I simply analyze the psychological assumptions behind any attempt at "making responsible." Whenever responsibility is assigned, it is usually so that judgment and punishment may follow. Becoming has been deprived of its innocence when any acting-the-way-you-did is traced back to will, to motives, to responsible choices: the doctrine of the will has been invented essentially to justify punishment through the pretext of assigning guilt. All primitive psychology, the psychology of will, arises from the fact that its interpreters, the priests at the head of ancient communities, wanted to create for themselves the right to punish — or wanted to create this right for their God. Men were considered "free" only so that they might be considered guilty — could be judged and punished: consequently, every act had to be considered as willed, and the origin of every act had to be considered as lying within the consciousness (and thus the most fundamental psychological deception was made the principle of psychology itself). Today, we immoralists have embarked on a counter movement and are trying with all our strength to take the concepts of guilt and punishment out of the world — to cleanse psychology, history, nature, and social institutions and sanctions of these ideas. And there is in our eyes no more radical opposition than that of the theologians, who continue to infect the innocence of becoming by means of the concepts of a "moral world-order," "guilt," and "punishment." Christianity is religion for the executioner.


What alone can be our doctrine? That no one gives a man his qualities — neither God, nor society, nor his parents and ancestors, nor he himself. (The nonsense of the last idea was taught as "intelligible freedom" by Kant — and perhaps by Plato.) No one is responsible for a man's being here at all, for his being such-and-such, or for his being in these circumstances or in this environment. The fatality of his existence is not to be disentangled from the fatality of all that has been and will be. Human beings are not the effect of some special purpose, or will, or end; nor are they a medium through which society can realize an "ideal of humanity" or an "ideal of happiness" or an "ideal of morality." It is absurd to wish to devolve one's essence on some end or other. We have invented the concept of "end": in reality there is no end. 
A man is necessary, a man is a piece of fatefulness, a man belongs to the whole, a man is in the whole; there is nothing that could judge, measure, compare, or sentence his being, for that would mean judging, measuring, comparing, or sentencing the whole. But there is nothing besides the whole. That nobody is held responsible any longer, that the mode of being may not be traced back to a primary cause, that the world does not form a unity either as a sensorium or as "spirit" — that alone is the great liberation. With that idea alone we absolve our becoming of any guilt. The concept of "God" was until now the greatest objection to existence. We deny God, we deny the responsibility that originates from God: and thereby we redeem the world.

UFO Secrets of World War II - The 3rd Reich and beyond

The inside story about the Vril Society which became the inner circle of the Thule Society, whose focus was on establishing communications with a group of Extraterrestrials, that began colonizing the planet Earth over a half billion years ago from a dying star system known as The Aldebaran Star System.

27 March 2014

'Criminal' manipulation of Nietzsche by sister to make him look anti-Semitic

Friedrich Nietzsche, the German philosopher, was the victim of "criminally scandalous" manipulation by his anti-Semitic sister who condemned him to being considered a forerunner to the Nazis, a new book has claimed.

 By David Wroe in Berlin 
19 January 2010

Elizabeth Förster-Nietzsche, who went on to become a prominent supporter of Adolf Hitler, systematically falsified her brother's works and letters, according to the Nietzsche Encyclopedia.

Christian Niemeyer, the publisher, said he wanted to clear the revered thinker's reputation by showing the "criminally scandalous" forgeries by his sister had tainted his reputation ever since.

"Förster-Nietzsche did everything she could – such as telling stories about Nietzsche, writing false letters in the name of her brother, and so on – to make it seem that Nietzsche had been a right-wing thinker like herself," he told The Daily Telegraph.

"It was she who created the most destructive myth of all: Nietzsche as the godfather of fascism."

The Nazis selectively used Nietzsche's writings to bolster their ideology and built a museum in Weimar to celebrate the philosopher, though it is unlikely Hitler himself read much, if any, of Nietzsche's work.

Elizabeth Förster-Nietzsche edited her brother's writings after his mental breakdown in 1889 and quickly began to add, remove and change passages to align his philosophy with her own beliefs and those of her virulent anti-Semite husband Bernhard Förster.

Along with her husband, she founded a Utopian "Aryan" colony in the Paraguyan jungle called Nueva Germania in 1887. It was a disaster: her husband committed suicide in 1889 and Förster-Nietzsche returned to Germany. When she died in 1935, Hitler attended her funeral.

While it has been known to Nietzsche scholars that Förster-Nietzsche meddled with her brother's work, particular after his death, the new encyclopedia – consisting of entries by about 150 scholars – shows the sheer breadth and depth of her forgeries as never before.

Niemeyer, a psychologist and Nietzsche expert from Dresden University, scoured through Nietzsche's letters to catalogue the extent of the falsifications.

Of the collection of 505 of her brother's letters that Förster-Nietzsche published in 1909, just 60 were the original versions and 32 of them were entirely made up, he claims.

She had used a "long list of dirty tricks" to hide Nietzsche's loathing for the leading anti-Semite Theodor Fritsch in letters he wrote in 1887, Niemeyer said.

At the same time, she fabricated remarks that made Nietzsche appear to endorse the views of the French philosopher Arthur de Gobineau, who advocated the racial superiority of "Aryan" people.

In her edition of the famous book, The Will to Power, Förster-Nietzsche included only 270 of the 374 aphorisms her brother wrote – and most of them were incorrect.

She cut out the maxim in which her brother condemned anti-Semitism with the words: "Have nothing to do with a person who takes part in the dishonest race swindle."

Niemeyer also discovered that in her edition of Beyond Good and Evil, Förster-Nietzsche removed the sentence: "The anti-Semites cannot forgive the Jews for the fact that they have 'spirit'."

He added: "All of her falsifications were held together by the idea that Förster-Nietzsche and her husband Bernhard Förster, who was a Hitler-precursor similar to Theodor Fritsch, thought the same or nearly the same."

While acknowledging some of Nietzsche's early writings could be interpreted as fascist and he shared an early friendship with the anti-Semitic composer Richard Wagner – a relationship that later broke down – the philosopher was never a fascist or anything like it, Niemeyer said.

Rather, he was above all an iconoclast who was deeply contemptuous of both anti-Semitism and nationalism.

Although the falsifications have been largely corrected in later editions, they helped cement Nietzsche's reputation early on as a fascist – a stigma from which he has never fully recovered, Niemeyer said.

24 March 2014

Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were created and funded by the Rothschilds


Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were created and funded by the Rothschilds. It was they who arranged for Hitler to come to power through the Illuminati secret societies in Germany like the Thule Society and the Vril Society which they created through their German networks; it was the Rothschilds who funded Hitler through the Bank of England and other British and American sources like the Rothschild's Kuhn, Loeb, bank which also funded the Russian Revolution.
The very heart of Hitler's war machine was the chemical giant, I.G. Farben, which had an American arm that was controlled by the Rothschilds through their lackeys, the Warburgs. Paul Warburg, who manipulated into existence the privately-owned "central bank" of America, the Federal Reserve, in 1913, was on the board of American I.G. Indeed Hitler's I.G. Farben, which ran the slave labour camp at Auchwitz, was, in reality, a division of Standard Oil, officially owned by the Rockefellers, but in truth the Rockefeller empire was funded into existence by the Rothschilds. See And The Truth Shall Set You Free and The Biggest Secret for the detailed background of this and other aspects of this story. The Rothschilds also owned the German news agencies during both World Wars and thus controlled the flow of "information" to Germans and the outside world. Incidentally, when Allied troops entered Germany they found that the I.G. Farben factories, the very core of Hitler's war operation, had not been hit by the mass bombing and neither had Ford factories - another Illuminati supporter of Hitler. Other factories nearby had been demolished by bombing raids. 

So the force behind Adolf Hitler, on behalf of the Illuminati, was the House of Rothschild, this "Jewish" bloodline which claims to support and protect the Jewish faith and people. In fact they use and sickeningly abuse the Jewish people for their own horrific ends. The Rothschilds, like the Illuminati in general, treat the mass of the Jewish people with utter contempt. They are, like the rest of the global population, just cattle to be used to advance the agenda of global control and mastery by a network of interbreeding bloodlines, impregnated with a reptilian genetic code, and known to researchers as the Illuminati.

Indeed, the Illuminati are so utterly obsessed with bloodline, because of this reptilian genetic code, that there was no way that someone like Hitler would come to power in those vital circumstances for the Illuminati, unless he was of the reptilian bloodline. If you look elsewhere on this website you will see how the same bloodline has held the positions of royal, aristocratic, financial, political, military, and media power in the world for literally thousands of years. This is the bloodline that has produced ALL 42 of the Presidents of the United States since and including George Washington in 1789. It is thebloodline of the runaway favourite to win the 2000 election, George W. Bush. The World War Two leaders, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin, were of the bloodline and also Freemasons and Satanists. They were manipulated into office, and their country's war effort funded, by the Rothschilds and the other Illuminati bloodlines. 

So are we to believe, therefore, that although this same group provably funded Adolf Hitler's rise to power and his war machine, that he would be the odd one out, a leader of crucial importance to the agenda who was NOT bloodline?

But hold on. Hitler couldn't be the same bloodline as, say, the Rothschilds because, as we all know, the Rothschilds are defenders of Jewish people and Hitler slaughtered them, along with communists and gypsies and others who opposed him or he wanted to eliminate. The Rothschilds are Jewish, they'd never do that.
Oh really.
According to a book by a psychoanalyst, Walter Langer, called The Mind of Hitler, not only was Hitler supported by the Rothschilds, he WAS a Rothschild. This revelation fits like a glove with the actions of the Rothschilds and other Illuminati bloodlines in Germany who brought Hitler to the fore as dictator of that nation. He was also supported by the British Royal Family, the House of Windsor (in truth the German House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha), and these included the British royal "war hero", Lord Mountbatten, a Rothschild and a Satanist. Their royal relatives in Germany, who you would never have thought would normally support an apparent guy from the street like Hitler, were among his most enthusiastic supporters. But, of course, they knew who he really was. There is no way in the world when you do any study of the Illuminati obsession with bloodline that Hitler would not have been one of them. Langer writes:

"Adolf's father, Alois Hitler, was the illegitimate son of Maria Anna Schicklgruber. It was generally supposed that the father of Alois Hitler (Schicklgruber) was Johann Georg Hiedler.There are some people who seriously doubt that Johann Georg Hiedler was the father of Alois (an Austrian document was) prepared that proved Maria Anna Schicklgruber was living in Vienna at the time she conceived. At that time she was employed as a servant in the home of Baron Rothschild. As soon as the family discovered her pregnancy she was sent back home..where Alois was born."

Langer's information came from the high level Gestapo officer, Hansjurgen Koehler, published in 1940, under the title "Inside the Gestapo". He writes about the investigations into Hitler's background carried out by the Austrian Chancellor, Dolfuss, in the family files of Hitler.

Koehler actually viewed a copy of the Dolfuss documents which were given to him by Heydrich, the overlord of the Nazi Secret Service. The file, he wrote, "caused such havoc as no file in the world ever caused before" (Inside the Gestapo, p 143). He also revealed that:

"..The second bundle in the blue file contained the documents collected by Dolfuss. The small statured, but bigh-hearted Austrian Chancellor must have known by such a personal file he might be able to check Hitler His task was not difficult; as ruler of Austria he could easily find out about the personal data and family of Adolf Hitler, who had been born on Austrian soil...Through the original birth certificates, police registration cards, protocols, etc., all contained in the original file, the Austrian Chancellor succeeded in piecing together the disjointed parts of the puzzle, creating a more or less logical entity..

A little servant girl (Hitler's grandmother) came to Vienna and became a domestic servant, mostly working for rather rich families. But she was unlucky; having been seduced, she was about to bear a child. She went home to her village for her confinement Where was the little maid serving in Vienna? This was not a very difficult problem. Very early Vienna had instituted the system of compulsory police registration. Both servants and the employers were exposed to heavy fines if they neglected this duty. Chancellor Dolfuss managed to discover the registration card. The little, innocent maid had been a servant at theRothschild mansion. ..and Hitler's unknown grandfather must be probably looked for in this magnificent house. The Dolfuss file stopped at this statement."

Was Hitler's determination to take over Austria anything to do with his desire to destroy records of his lineage? A correspondent who has extensively researched this subject writes:

"It appears to me that Hitler knew about his connection long before his Chancellorship. Like his father before him, when the going got rough, the Hitlers went to Vienna. Hitler's father left his home village at an early age to seek his fortune in Vienna. When Hitler was orphaned, after his mother died in December of 1907, he left for Vienna not long after the funeral. There he seemed to drop out of sight for ten months! What happened during this ten-month stay in Vienna is a complete mystery on which history sheds no light. It makes sense, now that it has become established that Hitler was a Rothschild, that he and his cousins were getting aquainted, and his potentiall for future family endeavors was being sized up".

The Rothschilds and the Illuminati produce many offspring out of wedlock in their secret breeding programmes and these children are brought up under other names with other parents. Like Bill Clinton, who is almost certainly a Rockefeller produced in the same way, these "ordinary kids from ordinary backgrounds" go on to be extraordinarily successful in their chosen field. Hitler, too, would have produced unofficial children to maintain his strand of the bloodline and there will obviously be people of his bloodline alive today.

So which Rothschild was the grandfather of Hitler? My thanks to a website correspondent for the additional, updated, information to this article, a man has researched this story in some detail. Alois, Hitler's father, was born in 1837 in the period when Salomon Mayer was the only Rothschild who lived at the Vienna mansion. Even his wife did not live there because their marriage was so bad that she stayed in Frankfurt. Their son, Anselm Salomon spent most of his working life in Paris and Frankfurt away from Vienna and his father. Father Salomon Mayer, living alone at the Vienna mansion where Hitler's grandmother worked, is the prime, most obvious candidate. And Hermann von Goldschmidt, the son of Salomon Mayer's senior clerk, wrote a book, published in 1917, which said of Salomon:
" by the 1840s he had developed a somewhat reckless enthusiasm for young girls.."
"He had a lecherous passion for very young girls, his adventures with whom had to be hushed up by the police."

And Hitler's grandmother, a young girl working under the same roof would not have been the subject of Salomon's desire? And this same girl became pregnant while working there? And her grandson becomes the Chancellor of Germany, funded by the Rothschilds, and he started the Second World War which was so vital to the Rothschild-Illuminati agenda? And the Illuminati are obsessed with putting their bloodlines into power on all "sides" in a conflict? And the Rothschilds are one of their most key bloodlines? And it is all a co-incidence?

The Second World War was incredibly productive for the Illuminati agenda of global control. It led to an explosion of globally-centralised institutions, like the United Nations and the European Community, now Union, and many others in finance, business, and the military. Precisely what they wanted. It also put countries under an enormous burden of debt on loans provided to all sides by...the Rothschilds and the Illuminati. The Rothschilds had long had a plan to create a personal fiefdom for themselves and the Illuminati in Palestine and that plan involved manipulating Jewish people to settle the area as their "homeland."

Charles Taze Russell, of the Illuminati-reptilian Russell bloodline, was the man who founded the Watchtower Society, better known as the Jehovah's Witnesses. He was a Satanist, a paedophile according to his wife, and most certainly Illuminati. His new "religion (mind-control cult) was funded by the Rothschilds and he was a friend of theirs, just like the founders of the Mormons who were also Rothschild-funded through Kuhn, Loeb, and Co. Russell and the Mormon founders were all Freemasons. In 1880, Charles Taze Russell, this friend of the Rothschilds, predicted that the Jews would return to their homeland. It
was about the only prediction Russell ever got right. Why? Because he knew that was the plan. He wrote to the Rothschilds praising their efforts to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
Then, in 1917, came the famous Balfour Declaration, when the British Foreign Minister, Lord Balfour, stated on behalf of his government that they supported the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Now when you hear that phrase, the Balfour Declaration, you get the feeling that it was some kind of statement or public announcement. But not so.
The Balfour declaration was a letter from Lord Balfour to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild. Researchers say that the letter was in fact WRITTEN by Lord Rothschild and his employee, the banker, Alfred Milner. Now get this. One of the most important secret societies of the 20th century is called the Round Table. It is based in Britain with branches across the world. It is the Round Table that ultimately orchestrates the network of the Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and the Royal Institute of International Affairs. See my books for details. How fascinating then, that Lord Balfour was an inner circle member of the Round Table, Alfred Milner was the Round Table's official leader after the death of Cecil Rhodes, and the Round Table was funded by..Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild. These were the very three people involved in the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
Two years later, in 1919, came the Versailles Peace Conference near Paris when the elite of the Round Table from Britain and the United States, people like Alfred Milner, Edward Mandel House, and Bernard Baruch, were appointed to represent their countries at the meetings which decided how the world would be changed as a result of the war these same people had created. They decided to impose impossible reparations payments on Germany, so ensuring the collapse of the post-war Weimar Republic amid unbelievable ecomonic collapse and thus create the very circumstances that brought the Rothschild, Hitler, to power. It was while in Paris that these Illuminati, Round Table, members met at the Hotel Majestic to begin the process of creating the Bilderberg-CFR-RIIA-Trilateral Commission network. They also decided at Versailles that they now all supported the creation of aJewish homeland in Palestine. As I show in my books, EVERY ONE of them was either a Rothschild bloodline or was controlled by them.
The American President, Woodrow Wilson, was "advised" at Versailles by Colonel House and Bernard Baruch, both Rothschild clones and leaders of the Round Table in the United States; The British Prime Minister, Lloyd George, was "advised" by Alfred Milner, Rothschild employee and Round Table leader, and Sir Phillip Sassoon, a direct decendent of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the founder of the dynasty; The French leader, Georges Clemenceau, was "advised" by his Minister for the Interior, Georges Mandel, whose real name was Jeroboam Rothschild.
Who do you think was making the decisions here??
But it went further. Also in the American delegation were the Dulles brothers, John Foster Dulles, who would become US Secretary of State, and Allen Dulles, who would become first head of the new CIA after World War Two. The Dulles brothers were bloodline, would later be supporters of Hitler, and were employed by the Rothschilds at Kuhn, Loeb, and Co. They were also involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and Allen Dulles would serve on the Warren Commission which investigated the assassination. The American
delegation at Versailles was also represented by the Rothschildcontrolled, Paul Warburg, of Kuhn, Loeb and the American branch of I.G. Farben, while the German delegation included his brother, Max Warburg, who would become Hitler's banker!! Their host in France during the "peace" conference was Baron Edmond de Rothschild, the leading force at the time pressing for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Israel. See my books for fine detail.
The Rothschilds have always been the true force behind the Zionist Movement. Zionism is in fact SIONism, Sion = the Sun, hence the name of the elite secret society behind the Merovingian bloodline, the Priory of Sion. Contrary to most people's understanding, Zionism is not the Jewish people. Many Jews are not Zionists and many non-Jews are. Zionism is a political movement, not a race. To say Zionism is the Jewish people is like saying the Democratic Party is the American people. Jewish people who oppose Zionism, however, have been given a very hard time.
Now, having manipulated their puppet-governments to support their plan for a personal fiefdom in the Middle East, the Rothschilds began the process of settling Jewish people in Palestine. As always they treated their own people with contempt. Enter Baron Edmond de Rothschild, the "Father of Israel", who died in 1934, the man who hosted the Versailles "peace" delegations. Edmond was from the French House, like Guy de Rothschild. Edmond, in fact, began to settle Jews in Palestine as far back as the 1880s (when Charles Taze Russell was making his prediction). He financed Russian Jews to establish settlements in Palestine, but it was nothing to do with their freedom or birthright, it was to advance the Rothschild-Illuminati agenda. Edmond financed the creation of farms and factories and ran the whole operation with a rod of iron. The Jewish farmers were told what to grow and they soon found out who was in charge if theyquestioned his orders. In 1901, these Jewish people complained to Rothschild about this dictatorship over their settlement or "Yishuv". They asked him:
"..if you wish to save the Yishuv, first take your hands from it, and for once permit the colonists to have the possibility of correcting for themselves whatever needs correcting.."
Baron Rothschild replied:
"I created the Yishuv, I alone. Therefore no men, neither colonists nor organisations, have the right to interfere in my plans.."
In one sentence, you have the true attitude of the Rothschilds to Jewish people, and indeed, the human population in general. These people are NOT Jews, they are a non-human bloodline with a reptilian genetic code who hide behind the Jewish people and use them as a screen and a means to an end. According to Simon Schama's book, Two Rothschilds and the Land of Israel (Collins, London, 1978), the Rothschilds acquired 80% of the land of Israel. Edmond de Rothschild worked closely with Theodore Herzl, who just
happened to be the founder of Zionism, the political movement created to ensure a "Jewish" homeland in Palestine. Rothschild was also the power behind Chaim Weizmann, another leader of Zionism. As Rothschild told Weizmann:
"Without me Zionism would not have succeeded, but without Zionism my work would have been stuck to death."
So now with the Rothschilds increasing their financing of Jewish settlements in Palestine, and with their agents in governments officially supporting their plans for a Rothschild, sorry Jewish, homeland, they needed a catalyst which would demolish Arab protests at the take-over of their country. That catalyst was the horrific treatment of Jews in Germany and the countries they conquered by the Rothschild-funded Nazis and one of their own, a Rothschild called Adolf Hitler.
The wave of revulsion at the Nazi concentration camps gave vital and, in the end, crucial impetus to the Rothschild agenda. It was they who funded the Jewish terrorist operations like the Stern Gang and Irgun, which committed mayhem and murder to bring the State of Rothschild (Israel) into being in 1948. These terrorist groups, who slaughtered Jewish people with equal enthusiasm, were led by the very people who later rose to lead the new Israel people like Menachem Begin, David Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Rabin, and Yitzhak Shamir. It was these Rothschild-controlled Zionist gangs who murdered the international mediator Count Bernadotte on September 17, 1948, apparently because he had been intending to present a new partition resolution to the United Nations.
And the Rothschilds were not satisfied with causing the unimaginable suffering of Jewish people under the Nazis, they also stole their wealth when the war was over, just as they stole the Russian wealth during the revolution they had financed.
In early 1998, during a speaking tour of South Africa, I had a personal meeting with P.W. Botha, the apartheid President of South Africa during the 1980s. The invitation came out of the blue when I was speaking a few miles from his home. We spoke for an hour and a half about the manipulation of South Africa and it was not long before names like Henry Kissinger, Lord Carrington, and the Rothschilds came up.
"I had some strange dealings with the English Rothschilds in Cape Town when I was president", he said, and he went on to tell me a story that sums up the Rothschilds so perfectly. He said they had asked for a meeting with him and his foreign minister, the Illuminati operative, Pik Botha (no relation). At that meeting, he said, the Rothschilds told him there was massive wealth in Swiss bank accounts which once belonged to German Jews and it was available for investment in South Africa if they could agree an interest rate. This is the very wealth, stolen from German Jews who suffered under the Nazis, which has come to light amid great scandal in recent years. The Rothschilds have been making a fortune from it since the war!! Botha told me he refused to accept the money, but Pik Botha left the meeting with the Rothschilds and he could not be sure that they did not come to some arrangement.
Breathtaking? Of course it is, but the world is not how we think it is.
To this day the Rothschilds continue to control the State that has their family symbol on it's flag and it is they who use that country and its people to maintain the conflict, both within its borders and with surrounding Arab countries, which has allowed the Illuminati-Rothschilds to control their so called "Arc of Crisis" in the Middle East through divide, rule, and conquer. It has allowed them, not least, to control the oil-producing countries since the war when the oil really came on line.


NOTE: The book, The Bloodlines of the Illuminati, by Fritz Springmeier is another excellent source of information about these subjects.

Feel free to post this page URL anywhere!

23 March 2014

Pineal Gland and Activating Your Third Eye

The pineal gland, a pine-cone shaped gland of the endocrine system, is a highly essential part of the brain necessary to our survival. It is often associated with the third eye or the Ajna chakra, and when activated, it leads one to higher realms of consciousness. The third eye gives us perception of the universe around us through the five senses. Through our five senses, we have self awareness and intelligence: sentience.

As a chakra, the third eye, the pineal gland represents the point at which the body receives energy from the universe that keeps our lives sustained. It is the main access point between the astral body and the physical body. Its function in the brain is essential to our very consciousness. Without awareness of the universe, you have no point of reference at which you have self awareness. Without self awareness, you have neither consciousness nor logical thought.

We use our perception, our consciousness and our senses to gain awareness of energy in our world via information around us. Without the pineal gland there would be no senses, meaning we would have no way to locate food, mates, safety, warmth, and the many necessities of every day life in both mankind and the animal kingdom.

In the video below Justin Verrengia reveals the GREATEST COVER-UP to ever exist in human history. He breaks down how to activate your pineal gland, which awakens your third eye and extra sensory super powers that you never knew existed. Knowledge is Power and applied knowledge is FREEDOM. Please share this video with everyone you can and help spread this conscious awareness with our fellow light brothers and sisters of this planet.

22 March 2014

Massive UFO Fleet Heading Towards Earth

Incredible fleet of unknown objects caught by the ISS on March 10th, 2014. Objects seem to appear out of thin air, possibly a portal or wormhole of some kind. This footage cannot be denied or easily debunked, whatever these objects are they are heading for Earth, is disclosure imminent?

Rise of fascism in Indian politics

Kanti Bajpai

India is halfway to becoming a fascist state — halfway because the central government is still relatively liberal and tolerates checks and balances while the states are increasingly in the grip of fascist political parties. A fascist political party proclaims its worship of the people, romanticises the idea of community and culture, is deeply conservative about the rights and responsibilities of individuals, has young men that threaten or carry out acts of violence, bows before an all-powerful leader, and practices politics as if it were theatre. Going by these characteristics, most of our regional parties are fascist.

The regional parties never stop proclaiming their worship of `the people`. The people is an abstraction, but they profess to love the people. Everything they do is ostensibly in the name of the people: the people must not be offended, the people must be saved, the people above all else. This people worship is not surprising. All fascisms (and other forms of authoritarianism) have operated in the name of the people and have used the sledgehammer of the people to stifle dissent.

The regional parties are also masters at exalting the community and the state`s culture. India`s states are mostly organised on the basis of language. The three-language formula of the 1950s and early 1960s has over the years given way to language chauvinism and exclusivism. Worse, the regional parties have made themselves the guardians of state cultures — they stand in judgment of anyone accused of challenging the state`s cultural mores. And their judgment is swift, often cruel, and carried out by mobs of young men backed by emasculated police forces.

India`s regional parties are becoming more conservative by the day. Fascists cannot bear any kind of division between the private and the public realm. Regional parties lead the way in moral policing. They have not yet turned children against parents or students against teachers as in the Cultural Revolution in China, but that day may not be far off. Bars, films, universities, schools, museums, libraries, publishing, clothing — all these are under the stern moral gaze of parties and their young storm-troopers. In Haryana and Rajasthan, we are seeing the rise of a scarily conservative `khap panchayat` movement that could sweep northern India. Most regional parties will happily work with such forces if they are not already hand in glove with the khaps.

Fascist parties depend on young men to work for the cause and, most importantly, to threaten, destroy, intimidate, hurt, and kill. All Indian political parties have used young men in this way, but nowhere are they more aggressive than amongst the regional parties. India, along with China, has a huge surplus of young men. In China, young, unattached men are known as "bare branches". This huge surplus of frustrated, restless young men, educated but unemployed, will shake India. They are potentially the reserve army of fascism, in search of a cause and a leader.

A fascist party must have an all-powerful, charismatic leader before which party members, and later everyone else, must bow. The leader takes away our doubts, energises us when we falter, gives us an inspiring vision of ourselves and our community, makes stirring calls for sacrifice and discipline, and convinces us that he or she is completely incorruptible. Great leaders all share these traits, but if you want to find the fascists amongst them, look for those with little or no sense of humour, especially about themselves.

Finally, fascist-inclined parties love political theatre. They revel in large gatherings, in producing a public spectacle, in enclosing people in tight spaces to control their emotions and thinking, in the use of lights, music, ritual, and hypnotic chants and slogans. They want individuals to lose their individuality, to bond with the crowd and leader, and to immerse themselves in the unfolding drama. The best exponents of this kind of theatre are the regional parties.

India is poised at a cusp. Economic growth, education, and political empowerment could lead us on to a stronger democracy and better governance. Or the forces of darkness could overwhelm us. The darkness is closing in, but we fail to see the gathering gloom. Meanwhile, there are false prophets aplenty.