…by Jonas E. Alexis and Mark Dankof
Mark Dankof is the former 36th District Chairman of the Republican Party in King County/Seattle. He was an elected delegate to Texas State Republican Conventions in 1994 and 1996 and entered the United States Senate race in Delaware in 2000 as the nominated candidate of the Constitution Party against Democratic candidate Thomas Carper and Republican incumbent William Roth.
Jonas E. Alexis: Moral, spiritual, and intellectual blindness always leads to dishonesty, irrationality, and an abiding hatred of those whose goal in life is the pursuit of the truth and submission to the moral order or practical reason.
I have learned over the years that some people don’t like the truth, largely because they cherish some preconceived ideas and ideological weltanschauung. If truth happens to be against their prevailing vision, then they would sometimes dump the truth and continue to hold their precious vision or ideology. Plato himself had to deal with those people in his day. He wrote in The Republic:
“And don’t you think that being deceived about the truth is a bad thing, while having a grasp of the truth is good? And don’t you think that having a grasp of the truth is having a belief that matches the way things are?”
Indeed, having a belief that matches the way things really are is sometimes dangerous because it will certainly put you at variance with the very people who want nothing to do with the way things really are. Logic and reason are always compatible with the way things really are, but ideology is not.
To put it bluntly, if a person is not willing to submit his will to practical reason, then no amount of evidence will convince that person that he might be in error. I could give more than a dozen examples to prove this point, but I will stick to just three here. In 2015 a correspondent told me that
“Logic and reason are elements of the evidential argument. By themselves, Logic and reason prove nothing. We have plenty of cases of logic correctly applied which lead to stunningly wrong conclusions.”
The interesting thing is that the individual wrote a lengthy paragraph hopelessly attempting to use logic and reason to show that “logic and reason prove nothing”! I responded by saying:
“In order to say that ‘logic and reason prove nothing,’ one obviously has to use logic and reason—an impressively and fantastically incoherent argument. In fact, if ‘logic and reason prove nothing,’ why should I listen to [X] here? Are you telling me to ignore your point? If this is so, then you shall have your wish.”
The individual responded by repeating that “Neither logic or reason can offer more than a system of thought. As such, they are forever entangled with a specific state of consciousness. The assertion that logic and reason are the key to unlocking the mystery is thus the assertion that there is only one valid state of consciousness.” I then wrote back saying:
“It is simply astonishing to see that thinking people like you cannot see the trap of their own circular and worthless reasoning. How can you use ‘logic and reason’ to prove that logic and reason mean nothing? If that is not the zenith of irrationality, what is?
“I remember one time a friend of mine gave a lecture at a university during which he argued that things must be coherent. At the end of the lecture, an irate lady walked to the microphone and asked, ‘Why does everything have to be coherent?’ To which the speaker responded quite humorously, ‘Do you want me to give you a coherent answer or incoherent one’? She was completely stumped and had nothing else to say.”
I simply could not get anywhere with that individual, but he was hardly an isolated case. My interaction with those who believe that Jewish behavior is genetic was also disappointing. These people believe in the Darwinian ideology, which universally posits that free will is an illusion and that man is just a machine.
The laughable thing is that these people are mad and sad because Jewish oligarchs like Goldman Sachs do not want to follow moral rules and principles. These people write books, go to conferences, give lectures across America and much of the West and even produce documentaries arguing relentlessly and indefatigably that “Jewish supremacism” ought not to be allowed to do this or that. My response is, “Well, duh!”
If the behavior is genetic and that there is no such thing as free will, as your fundamental ideology incoherently perpetuates and aggressively promotes in some academic circles, then why should you be upset when people like Netanyahu cannot control theirs actions, which you say is “scientifically” rooted and grounded in genetics and not in moral responsibility or practical reason? How do you expect the oligarchs to stop their essentially diabolical activities when your metaphysical assumption repugnantly posits that there are no free will?
On what Darwinian ground should you compel the oligarchs to obey and follow the moral law, which is the essence of what it means to be human beings? On the “preservation of the favoured races in the struggle for life,” as the subtitle of Darwin’s Origin of Species suggests? On what Darwin called “the imbeciles,” who should not be allowed to live?
Moreover, if Darwin is right in advancing the “survival of the fittest” idea, who are we to tell the oligarchs that they are not “the fittest”? What are the parameters? And how do you define “the fittest”? If the small minority of the Jewish oligarchs has the power to suppress almost the entire population, doesn’t that entail power and hence “the fittest,” according to your own view? Can a stupid minority accumulate that much power in one century after another? According to Darwinian principles, shouldn’t that be part of natural selection applied to humans? Can we start appealing to morality when the essence of Darwinism denies objective morality in the first place?
No one has ever made any serious attempt to deal with these vitally important issues. It seems to me that these issues are as much psychological and ideological a phenomenon as anything else. I would hasten to say that some of the people who desperately promote these ideas look for comfortable delusions, and they convince themselves that they understand inherent contradictions that undergird their own ideology when in fact they sometimes have no clue.
When I raised those fundamental problems, I was personally attacked by people who astonishingly declared that, well, Alexis “is black, and that’s his way of affirming himself.” In other words, saying that a person is black is now a substitute for producing serious evidence for a philosophically incoherent and an intellectually repugnant ideology. Moreover, Alexis is not credible because…well, you know the drill by now.
The risible thing is that those who are perpetuating that Jewish behavior is genetic and at the same time appealing to Darwinism think that they are using science, reason and logic to buttress their point! These people aren’t that stupid; they just don’t want to give up their cherished ideology.
A proposition or intellectual project cannot be logical or rational or scientific or even plausible if it violates the moral order. Darwin’s project didn’t have place for moral philosophy, and that’s one reason why he couldn’t even understand Kant’s Metaphysics of Ethics. Darwin’s failure to grasp moral philosophy has left a devastating effect on his intellectual children, who now struggle mightily to make a philosophically coherent point on Zionism and subversive movements in the West. You simply cannot be a consistent Darwinist and a staunch opponent of Zionism.
Finally, I had to learn the hard way that some people simply are not interested in following the truth wherever it may lead. I had a dialogue with a friend of mine during which he agreed with the proposition that a man should not be judged by the color of his skin but by the content of his character.
But in the very next breath he put his stamp of approval on affirmative action, which is largely based on skin color and what is now called reverse discrimination. He has been bamboozled by the architects of the culture of death—the very people who do not allow their followers to assess an ideology critically and truthfully.
So, what does it really mean to be “Free at Last”? Well, in order to answer that question properly, we need to go back to Augustine, who convincingly argued that “Thus, a good man, though a slave, is free; but a wicked man, though a king, is a slave. For he serves, not one man alone, but, what is worse, as many masters as he has vices.”
Augustine understood that good and evil cannot exist without the moral law, and the moral law cannot exist without Logos. Failing to understand this basic principle will eventually lead to social and political unrest and even chaos. The moral law is objectively and universally biding, and it is our defense against tyranny, political manipulation, covert or diabolical operations.
In short, “Free at Last” has to be firmly planted in the moral law. As a corollary, a deviation from the moral law is a recipe for political and social disaster. Historically, we have witnessed how this has played out in America, particularly in the 1960s and 70s. What we have seen over the past fifty years or so is that “Free at Last,” like “democracy” and “freedom,” has essentially been used as a form of what E. Michael Jones would probably call “political control” or “ethnic cleansing.”
The sad part is that many of the people who have been singing “Free at Last” don’t know that they are being manipulated by the Powers That Be. Some of these people have been used like a remote control in the political landscape. In fact, that was exactly how noted historian David Levering Lewis of New York University put it.
J. A. Schumpeter once declared that “there are many Keynesians and Marxians who have never read a line of Keynes or Marx.” In the same way, there are many people who constantly sing about “Free at Last” but never understand the political and ideological milieu in which “Free at Last” itself was hatched and concocted. Those people have invariably become victims of the social engineers of this world.
The interesting thing is that “Free at Last” can never be sung in places like the South Side of Chicago, where the Illinois Black Panther Party has historically been involved in, according to the Chicago Tribune, “revolutionary politics” and “killing cops.” It has been reported that at least 39,000 homicides have occurred over the past sixty years in Chicago alone.
That is 650 homicides every year! From 2012 to 2017, there have been 1.5 million incidents Chicago alone. Even the Ku Klux Klan could never attempt to compete with those figures. Now, if the social media and political pundits really want to help, why aren’t they devoted much time to address the real issue?
Hollywood made things worse in producing film about Blaxploitation like Foxy Brown, Across 110th Street, Dolomite, Black Caesar, Coffee, Cleopatra Jones, Sweet Sweetback’s Badass Song, Blacula, Superfly, The Mack, Black Belt Jones, Slaughter, etc. Those movies were released in the 1970s, but they have left an indelible mark on new directors like Quentin Tarantino, who went on to direct and produce Jackie Brown in 1997—a film which exclusively followed the same cinematic pattern of Blaxploitation. In fact, Palm Grier, the actress who played Foxy Brown in the 1970s also played a central role in Tarantino’s Jackie Brown.
Modern movies and TV series such as Luke Cage are arguably an extension of Blaxploitation, which in many ways idolizes pimps, whores, gangsters, drug dealers, etc. As E. Michael Jones pointed out in our interview back in 2016,
“Blaxploitation was Jewish revenge against the anti-Jewish resentment which had spread throughout the civil rights movement during the late ‘60s…In many respects, the rise of the Black Panther as the premier black power organization came about because the Panthers were willing, if not avid, to accept Jewish/Hollywood money. One of their biggest sources of funds, as David Horowitz has pointed out, was Bert Schneider, the producer of Easy Rider.”
If this sounds a little far-fetched, then listen to the late Irving Louis Horowitz, a noted sociologist and professor and one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto II. He recounted that his parents used to cheat the black Christians, counting it “a special occasion on which my father wreaked his own revenge on Christendom.” He continued to say:
“The scam went like this: the unsuspecting customer would bring in all light bulbs for testing. Each bulb would be placed against the side of the bulb tester rather than against the filament that would light up the bulb. The trick was easily learned and passed on to my mother, my sister, and me. I became a master at this special bulb test.
“When the same bulbs were retested after the customer left, they almost always were found to be perfect, or least good enough for resale. My father placed them into inventory and sold them as new. The special bulbs were resold countless times each season. Hence, it was no accident that the volume of December bulb sales probably surpassed that of any other month. December profits also showed remarkably uncharacteristic good health.”
The masters of this world still want to manipulate a large section of the population. In fact, it was George Soros himself who put gas in the social fire which was already ignited in Ferguson by supporting gangsters and destroyers with a 33 million-dollar check. Jim W. Dean said that “Soros took over where the Frankfurt School left off.”
In short, whenever you hear the song “Free at Last,” check to see if the singer is still not in moral, spiritual and intellectual bondage; check to see if he is not being manipulated by the shakers and movers of this world. I would hasten to say that whenever a person is free from moral, spiritual and intellectual bondage, then the song is irrelevant and unnecessary. Mark Dankof, your thoughts on some of these issues.
Mark Dankof: Like other major cities in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, the theme of Free at Last, I’m Free at Last was the recited mantra of the collective, both in the Alamo City and around the country, along with an enthusiastic and sycophantic Corporate Media.
As an admitted Dinosaur and aging Prophet of the Old Right well into the 21st century, I really wonder how many of these largely well-meaning folks really believe this sort of thing. Are they, or most of the rest of us Free at Last? Or are we all in individual and collective bondage to the diabolical American Warfare-Welfare-Surveillance-Perversion State?
Clearly, my own ideas are a part of the public record over time. I reflect tonight on such dated but relevant Night Thoughts of the past like “Obama and the Jews: Social Engineering in the American Military and the Coming War with Iran,” what I said about the Ceremony of the 4 Chaplains on February 11th, 2001 here in San Antonio, and my conclusions reached in America the Beautiful, Why We’re Finished.
I reflect on the things David Stockman just penned on the economic serfdom awaiting so many of the folks who think they’re Free at Last, or Charles Bausman’s reflections on why certain taboos need to be dropped and replaced with open conversation and examination of the present and the past, as well as the future.
Maybe some of the best of the MLK Marchers in San Antonio who are decent folks and able to converse with the ideas of others in a living room or a quiet table in an out-of-the-way restaurant or cafe might be interested in what Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo has told us about the mythology of The Empire on Saint Abraham Lincoln and the American War Between the States.
The encyclopedic works of Ray McGovern may well suggest to the MLK celebrants that they aren’t Free at Last in any sense of the repeatedly chanted mantra, but are in fact the coming cannon fodder of The Empire in expanding American military operations for the America’s Ashkenazic Reich in Central Banking, the Israeli Lobby, the Frankfurt Institute’s Institute of Social Research, George Soros, and the armaments manufacturers.
Sheldon L. Richman’s “The Old Right Was Right” for the Mises Institute deserves being added to a good reading list at night when average Americans of every skin tone and ideological stripe have the deepening and ominous sense that something is desperately wrong and worsening.
And I did write my aforementioned treatise on Marquis McCants as a special warning of a friend to dispossessed Americans of every color and creed with all of these Night Thoughts over the passing years in mind. I guess they missed it at the time here in San Antonio, where the funeral and the burial of a fine young man needlessly sacrificed were held.
I hold it out again to the best of the folks here who participated in the MLK March as one who admits that I generally march to the tune of a different drummer and have for most of my life. I dance neither with the Central State and The Empire, or those who beat the drums for both in Hollywood and on MSM.
As Karl Hess would tell you in a pub or in Dear, America, believing that you’re Free at Last is the sort of thing generally found on the floor of Mr. Trump’s horse stable. It’s piled in copious amounts on top of We’re Defending Their Freedoms, We Have the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Thank You for Serving!
-  Plato, The Republic (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 116.
-  The determinist position, which is ideologically compatible with Darwinism, has been challenged time and again. See for example Nancey Murphy and Warren S. Brown, Did My Neurons Make Me Do It?: Philosophical and Neurobiological Perspectives on Moral Responsibility and Free Will (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009); Edward Kelly and Emily Williams Kelly, Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007); M. R. Bennett and P. M. S. Hacker, Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2003).
-  Staunch Darwinists like Daniel Dennett still believe that there are some people who ought to be expunged. As Dennett declares in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: ““Which is worse, taking ‘heroic’ measures to keep alive a severely deformed infant, or taking the equally ‘heroic’ (if unsung) step of seeing to it that such an infant dies as quickly and painlessly as possible? I do suggest that Darwinian thinking helps us see why the traditional hope of solving these problems (finding a moral algorithm) is forlorn. We must cast off the myths that make these old-fashioned solutions seem inevitable. We need to grow up, in other words.” Daniel C. Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meaning of Life (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995), 514.
-  See Janet Browne, Charles Darwin: The Power of Place (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2002), 297.
-  See Francis J. Beckwith and Todd E. Jones, Affirmative Action: Social Justice or Reverse Discrimination? (New York: Prometheus Books, 1997); see also Thomas Sowell, Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004).
-  For a cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2000).
-  Even people like Thomas Sowell has agreed that the so-called civil rights movement has historically ruined the black family in America. See for example Black Rednecks and White Liberals (New York: Encounter Books, 2005).
-  See E. Michael Jones, The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2004).
-  Murray Friedman, What Went Wrong?: The Creation & Collapse of the Black-Jewish Alliance (New York: The Free Press, 1995).
-  Quoted in Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society (New York: Basic Books, 2009), vi.
-  Kyle Bentle, Jonathon Berlin, Ryan Marx and Kori Rumore, “39,000 homicides: Retracing 60 years of murder in Chicago,” Chicago Tribune, January 9, 2018.
-  Ibid.
-  Mowafak Allaham and Ryan Marx, “Does a hot summer mean more crime? Here’s what the data show,” Chicago Tribune, August 23, 2017.
-  Quoted in E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 811.
-  Kieran Corcoran, “Billionaire George Soros spent $33MILLION bankrolling Ferguson demonstrators to create ‘echo chamber’ and drive national protests,” Daily Mail, January 16, 2015.