- The first volume, whether it was found by the authorities in 1784 on a courier struck by lightening as he was riding from Frankfort to Paris or a year later by the Bavarian police at the home of a German writer named Franz Xaver Carl Wolfgang Zwack zu Holzhausen they had been ordered by the Bavarian government to raid and search, was published in 1786, by the order of the Elector of Bavaria, as 'Einige Originalschriften des Illuminatenordens'. It is about a conspiracy against all European governments, whose object is "The happiness of the human race", and by which "by and by the unequal will become equal ; (...) every person shall be made a spy on another and on all around him" ; "There is no way of influencing men so powerfully as by means of the women. These should therefore be our chief study ; we should insinuate ourselves into their good opinion, give them hints of emancipation from the tyranny of public opinion, and of standing up for themselves ; it will be an immense relief to their enslaved minds to be freed from any one bond of restraint, and it will fire them the more, and cause them to work for us with zeal, without knowing that they do so, for they will only be indulging their own desire of personal admiration." In a nutshell, "Equality and Liberty are the essential rights that Man, in his original and primitive perfection, received from Nature. The first blow against Equality was struck by property. The first blow on Liberty was struck by Society and governments. The only supports for property and government are civil and religious laws. So, to restore human rights in its primitive equality and freedom, we must begin by destroying all religion, all civil society, and, eventually, abolish property." (Adam Weishaupt/Johann Heinrich Faber, Introduction à mon apologie suivi de Le véritable Illuminé ou les vrais rituels primitifs des Illuminés, translated from French by the editor, Grammata, 2010)
The authenticity of the document, excerpts of which were made available to the English public at the end of the XVIIIth by Robinson (http://www.bilderberg.org/lucis.htm) and l'Abbé Barruel ('Memoirs illustrating the history of Jacobinism', 1799), has never really been questioned by any serious student of this subject, nor by Freemasons, who still raise a few valid points against some of Barruel's and Robison's conclusions, to which we shall return in another post. How could it be questioned, when it was only, so to speak, an abstract of the views developed by the Jew Weishaupt in the twenty books he had published earlier (http://grammata.pagesperso-orange.fr/catalogue/auteurs/weishaupt.htm) ? Let us also bear in mind that, despite the fact that an English translation of 'Einige Originalschriften des Illuminatenordens' was allegedly published later as 'The Original Writings of the Order and Sect of the Illuminati', the main secondary sources on this subject in the English language still remain Barruel's and Robison's work, as well as `The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799'. John C. Fitzpatrick, Editor. Mount Vernon, October 24, 1798.
The second volume was first published in 1903 under the title 'Jewish Program of World Conquest', in the Saint Petersburg newspaper ZnamjaI, and then, in an enlarged edition, by a Russian named Sergei Alexandrovitch Nilus. 'The Protocols of the Elder of Zion' "contain the plan for an occult war, whose objective is the utter destruction, in the non-Jewish peoples, of all tradition, class, aristocracy, and hierarchy, and of all moral, religious, or supra-material values. With this aim in view, an occult international organisation, directed by real leaders clearly conscious of their goals and of the methods to be followed to achieve them, would appear for a long time to have been exercising, and continuing to exercise, a unitary invisible action, which constitutes the source of the main forms of corruption of Western civilisation and society : liberalism, individualism, egalitarianism, free thought, anti-religious Enlightenment, and various additions which, following on from these, bring about the revolt of the masses and communism itself.
It is important to note that the absolute falsity of all these ideologies is expressly recognised : they are stated to have been created and propagated only as instruments of destruction and, in relation to Communism, the 'Protocols' go so far as to declare : "If we have been able to bring them to such a pitch of stupid blindness is it not a proof, and an amazingly clear proof, of the degree to which the mind of the GOYIM is undeveloped in comparison with our mind? This it is, mainly, which guarantees our success." (Protocol XV).
Not only they talk about political ideologies which will have to be instilled without anyone being allowed to grasp their true meaning and their goal, but they talk also of a "science" created with the purpose of general demoralisation, and significant references are made to the scientistic superstition of 'Progress', to Darwinism, to Marxist and historicist sociology, and so on. "Goyim are no longer able to think, in the field of science, without our help", while, once again, the falseness of all those theories is acknowledged (I, II, III, XIII).
In the third place, we find discussion of a specifically cultural action : to dominate the principal centres of official teaching ; to control, through the monopoly of the popular press, public opinion ; to spread in the so-called leading countries an unhinged and equivocal literature (XIV) ; to provoke, therefore, as a counterpart of social defeatism, a moral defeatism, to be increased by an attack upon religious values and their representatives, to be carried out, not head-on and openly, but by stirring up criticism, mistrust, and discreditable rumours regarding the clergy (XVI, IV).
The 'mercantilisation' of life is indicated as being one of the principal means of destruction ; hence, also, the necessity of having a crowd of 'economists' as conscious or unconscious instruments of the secret chiefs. Once the spiritual values which were at the root of the former authority have been destroyed and replaced by mathematical calculations and material needs, all the peoples of the world must be brought to a universal war, in which it is assumed each will follow its own interests, and all will remain unaware of the common enemy (IV) ; finally, it is proposed to encourage the ideas of the various competing groups, and, instead of attacking them, to use them to realise the overall plan, so that a capacity for providing support for the most diverse conceptions, from the aristocratic and the totalitarian to the anarchist or socialist ones, is recognised, provided that the effects contribute to the common goal (V, XII). The necessity of destroying family life and its influence on spiritual education is also recognised (X), as is that of rendering the masses stupid by means of sport and distractions of all kinds, and stirring up their passionate and irrational tendencies to the point at which they lose any faculty of discrimination (XIII).
This is the first phase of the occult war : its goal is to create an enormous proletariat, to reduce the peoples to a mush of beings without tradition or inner strength. Then there is proposed a further action, on the basis of the power of gold. The secret chiefs will control gold globally, and, by means of it, all the peoples already deracinated, along with their apparent, more or less demagogic, leaders. While, on one hand, the destruction will proceed through ideological poisons, revolts, revolutions and conflicts of all sorts, the masters of gold will stir up crises of domestic economy everywhere, with the purpose of driving humanity to such a state of prostration, despair, and utter mistrust towards any ideal or system that it becomes a passive object in the hands of the invisible dominators, who will then manifest themselves, and impose themselves as absolute world-wide rulers. The King of Israel will be at their head, and the ancient promise of the Regnum of the 'Chosen People' will be achieved."
http://thompkins_cariou.tripod.com/id68.html
'The Protocols of the Elder of Zion" is by now universally believed to be a hoax, a forgery concocted by the Tsarist Police to spur anti-Semitism. However this may be, "The serious and positive conclusion of the whole controversy which has developed, J. Evola stated decisively, is that, even if we assume that the 'Protocols' are not 'authentic' in the narrow sense, it comes to the same thing as if they were, for two capital and decisive reasons :
1) because the facts show that they describe the real state of affairs truthfully ;
2) because their correspondence with the governing ideas of both traditional and modern Judaism is indisputable." (ibid.)
The third volume, baptised 'The Authoritarian Personality (Studies in Prejudice)', was published in the 1951 by the Jew Theodor W. Adorno, the Jewess Else Frenkel-Brunswik, and the Jew Daniel Levinson. The Institut für Sozialforschung, a school of neo-Marxist interdisciplinary social theory whose early members were all Jewish and whose later theorists, such as Adorno, were also all Jewish, was founded in the mid-1920's in Frankfurt am Main by a Jewish Marxist businessman called F. Weil and his fellow Marxist and factory owner F. Pollock. By 1930, gods know why, they undertook to move that Institute of Social Research out of Germany, while actually moving their funds to the Netherlands. It was eventually closed down by National-Socialist authorities in 1933. It was actually moved to Geneva and, from there, within a few months, to New York City, where most of its thinkers had resettled. It was there that most of the main works of what was to be called later the 'Frankfurt School' began to emerge.
The members of the Frankfurt School are advertised and sold in a typically sanitised manner by most medias, including the Encyclopædia Britannica, as having "tried to develop a theory of society that was based on Marxism and Hegelian philosophy but which also utilized the insights of psychoanalysis, sociology, existential philosophy, and other disciplines. They used basic Marxist concepts to analyze the social relations within capitalist economic systems. This approach, which became known as 'critical theory,' yielded influential critiques of large corporations and monopolies, the role of technology, the industrialization of culture, and the decline of the individual within capitalist society. Fascism and authoritarianism were also prominent subjects of study."
From a non Jewish standpoint, this is, as is crystal clear from the actual text of 'The Authoritarian personality', what their social theory amounts to :
"To further the advance of their `quiet' cultural revolution - but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future - the Frankfurt School recommended (among other things):
1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools' and teachers' authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of `pansexualism' - the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:
attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces
declare women to be an `oppressed class' and men as `oppressors'
Munzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School's long-term operation thus: `We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.'
The School believed there were two types of revolution: (a) political and (b) cultural. Cultural revolution demolishes from within. `Modern forms of subjection are marked by mildness'. They saw it as a long-term project and kept their sights clearly focused on the family, education, media, sex and popular culture.
The School's 'Critical Theory' preached that the 'authoritarian personality' is a product of the patriarchal family - an idea directly linked to Engels' Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, which promoted matriarchy. Already Karl Marx had written, in the "Communist Manifesto", about the radical notion of a 'community of women' and in The German Ideology of 1845, written disparagingly about the idea of the family as the basic unit of society. This was one of the basic tenets of the 'Critical Theory' : the necessity of breaking down the contemporary family. The Institute scholars preached that `Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change.
Following Karl Marx, the School stressed how the 'authoritarian personality' is a product of the patriarchal familyit was Marx who wrote so disparagingly about the idea of the family being the basic unit of society. All this prepared the way for the warfare against the masculine gender promoted by Marcuse under the guise of `women's liberation' and by the New Left movement in the 1960s.
They proposed transforming our culture into a female-dominated one. In 1933, Wilhelm Reich, one of their members, wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of 'natural society'. Eric Fromm was also an active advocate of matriarchal theory. Masculinity and femininity, he claimed, were not reflections of 'essential' sexual differences, as the Romantics had thought but were derived instead from differences in life functions, which were in part socially determined. His dogma was the precedent for the radical feminist pronouncements that, today, appear in nearly every major newspaper and television programme." http://www.scribd.com/doc/28282102/The-Frankfurt-School-Conspiracy-to-Corrupt-by-T-Matthews
To serve as prolegomena to a discussion of the question of the 'Enlightened ones', also known and advertised as the 'Illuminati', from an iconoclastic perspective, in the light of J. Evola's work . The following is taken verbatim from https://henrithibodeau.wordpress.com/2015/06/08/back-in-1969-dr-richard-day-made-some-astonishing-predictions-about-where-the-world-would-be-today/
This description of another publication (https://henrithibodeau.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/silent-weapons-for-quiet-wars-hoax-warning-or-elite-blueprint-for-global-domination/), can also be mentioned, given the strong thematic similarities.Back in 1969, Dr Richard Day made some astonishing predictions about where the world would be todayOn March 20th, 1969, the late Dr Lawrence Dunegan (1923-2004) attended an astonishing lecture at a meeting of the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society. The lecturer was Dr Richard Day (1905-1989), who at the time was Professor of Pediatrics at Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. Day had previously served as Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Dr Dunegan had been a student of Dr Day at the University of Pittsburgh, and was thus well acquainted with him. He later claimed that Dr Day had asked the attendees not to take notes or record what he was about to tell them during that lecture. Something which Dr Dunegan said he found unusual for a professor to ask of his audience. The reason, Dr Day implied, was that there would be negative repercussions – possibly personal danger – against him if it became widely known that he had talked about the information he was about to relay to the group.
Dr Day apparently also told the group that what he was about to say “would make it easier for them to adapt if they knew what to expect beforehand,” something of an ambiguous statement which became clearer as Dr Day spoke.
Insider of the “New world System”?
Dr Dunegan got the impression that Dr Day was talking as an “insider”, rather than as a person who was presenting a theory or speaking in terms of retrospect. Dr Day’s knowledge seemed concrete as he talked about the future and the strategies of people and organizations that had a defined plan for the world – what he called a “New World System” – and who were in a position to make sure that plan was executed according to a set timescale.
From a review of A. Burgess' 1962 novel 'The Wanting Seed' (https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/barbarians-at-the-wormhole-on-anthony-burgess/) :
Burgess’s novel [The Wanting Seed] imagines a future England wrecked by overpopulation, packed with immigrants, and controlled by homosexuals. As the island nation becomes increasingly overcrowded, and Greater London spreads to the sea, the government takes up the task of population management with gusto. It encourages homosexuality, tries to control the number of children citizens can have, all but outlaws religion, runs Abortion Centers, and takes on the task of converting dead children into fertilizer. “It’s Sapiens to be Homo,” runs one of the Ministry of Infertility’s slogans. The “Homosex Institute,” we learn, “even ran night-classes.”
(...)
Burgess was forthright about his terror of homosexual invasion. In an 1981 interview, he explained his aims when writing The Wanting Seed:
Also I was interested in what was already apparently happening in England. Homosexuals were rising to the top. Indeed, we had a homosexual prime minister, Edward Heath. He’s been very clever about it. He’s never been found accosting little boys. It may have been hushed up. There’s no doubt that there is a homosexual mafia, not only in England, but also in California. Santa Monica: that’s the biggest homosexual conclave in the world.
(...)
While Tristram is imprisoned, the state collapses. Fertility cults spring up throughout England, cannibalism becomes an open practice, and a cannibalism-promoting version of Catholicism gains popularity. By the end of the novel, a new government has arisen from this hideous state of nature. Tristram is pressed into the army, which is sent to fight in an artificially manufactured war in Ireland designed to reduce the population.
The Wanting Seed gives the reader three or four dystopian future worlds for the price of one. This process of radical social transformation, from one dystopian world to another and then another, lays bare the very essence of Burgess’s vision of history. In the future historiography of The Wanting Seed, history is understood to be cyclical, moving in great repeating spirals through three distinct stages: the Pelephase, the Interphase, and the Gusphase. These phases represent, by Tristram’s description, a “subsumption of the two main opposing political ideologies under essentially theologico-mythical concepts.”
During the Pelephase — named for the theologian Pelagius — governments assume man to be basically good, believe the doctrine of Original Sin to be a fraud, and act as if society were perfectible. Pelegianism authorizes liberalism, socialism, and communism. In time, disappointed at the population’s failure to be good, governments bring on the Interphase, which heralds the development of total state control, torture, and murder. Socialism and Communism edge into Orwellian terror and totalitarianism. During the following Gusphase — named for St. Augustine, Pelagius’s great theological opponent — man is thought to be essentially sinful, hopelessly irredeemable. This faith in human badness comes to justify social conservatism and laissez faire economics, but in time this vision also proves to be too pessimistic an account of human potential, leading to a neo-Pelegianism.
This cycle of phases is a “sort of perpetual waltz” that repeats “for ever and ever.” The world of A Clockwork Orange might be taken to be on the cusp of a transition between extreme Pelagianism and its own totalitarian Interphase. Alex and his droogs, after all, do bear some resemblance to The Wanting Seed’s “greyboys,” the sadistic homosexual gangs whose thirst for violence is pressed into service by the murderous Interphase state. The Wanting Seed represents one whole cycle, starting us in an ascendant Pelephase, taking us through an Interphase, a Gusphase, and back into a renewal of Pelagianism.
This is a cartoonish vision of politics, to be sure, but as Burgess’s biographer Andrew Biswell suggests, “Burgess believed it, totally and uncritically.” In Biswell’s view, the “Augustine/Pelagius distinction might be thought of as the engine which drives Burgess’s mature imagination.” In his personal life, Burgess fled England to avoid paying taxes, decrying the state’s “neo-Pelagianism,” and he personally seemed to come down on the side of Augustine, but The Wanting Seed suggests something stranger still: that caring too much about which phase you happen to be in, preferring one over another, is something of a philosophical mistake.
Two other reviews of this novel that are worth mentioning are :https://www.anthonyburgess.org/twentieth-century-dystopian-fiction/dystopias-the-wanting-seed-and-dystopian-reproduction/ ; http://www.spiked-online.com/review_of_books/article/9940#.WNKOzWeQyig
The second review cites plenty of contemporary examples of the promotion of homosexuality in relation to the widely propagated concept of earthly overpopulation.
Van: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com <evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com> namens g.vdheide@... [evola_as_he_is] <evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com>
Verzonden: donderdag 9 maart 2017 18:41
Aan: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: [evola_as_he_is] Re: The Killing TrilogyThe following is taken verbatim from https://henrithibodeau.wordpress.com/2015/06/08/back-in-1969-dr-richard-day-made-some-astonishing-predictions-about-where-the-world-would-be-today/
This description of another publication (https://henrithibodeau.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/silent-weapons-for-quiet-wars-hoax-warning-or-elite-blueprint-for-global-domination/), can also be mentioned, given the strong thematic similarities.
Back in 1969, Dr Richard Day made some astonishing predictions about where the world would be today
On March 20th, 1969, the late Dr Lawrence Dunegan (1923-2004) attended an astonishing lecture at a meeting of the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society. The lecturer was Dr Richard Day (1905-1989), who at the time was Professor of Pediatrics at Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. Day had previously served as Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Dr Dunegan had been a student of Dr Day at the University of Pittsburgh, and was thus well acquainted with him. He later claimed that Dr Day had asked the attendees not to take notes or record what he was about to tell them during that lecture. Something which Dr Dunegan said he found unusual for a professor to ask of his audience. The reason, Dr Day implied, was that there would be negative repercussions – possibly personal danger – against him if it became widely known that he had talked about the information he was about to relay to the group.
Dr Day apparently also told the group that what he was about to say “would make it easier for them to adapt if they knew what to expect beforehand,” something of an ambiguous statement which became clearer as Dr Day spoke.
Insider of the “New world System”?
Dr Dunegan got the impression that Dr Day was talking as an “insider”, rather than as a person who was presenting a theory or speaking in terms of retrospect. Dr Day’s knowledge seemed concrete as he talked about the future and the strategies of people and organizations that had a defined plan for the world – what he called a “New World System” – and who were in a position to make sure that plan was executed according to a set timescale.
H. Marcuse's major work 'Eros and Civilization : A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud' (first to appear in 1955 and republished in 1966), is, against all expectations, not widely available online.
For documentation purposes we reproduce here the tenth chapter 'The Transformation of Sexuality into Eros' from the book's second part (adapted from http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:J8fXewSdTGUJ:www.academia.edu/4081965/Herbert_Marcuse_Eros_and_Civilization_A_Philosophical_Inquiry_into_Freud_1974+&cd=5&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=be).
The chapter's subparagraphs are :
The abolition of domination
Effect on the sex instincts
"Self-sublimation" of sexuality into Eros
Repressive versus free sublimation
Emergence of non-repressive societal relationships
Work as the free play of human faculties
Possibility of libidinous work relations
Footnoting has been left out, but can be found in the above mentioned copy, or, alternatively, at http://freudians.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Marcuse-Eros-and-Civilization-Part-II-Beyond-the-Reality-Principle.pdf.
"Polymorphous sexuality" was the term which I used to indicate that the new direction of progress would depend completely on the opportunity to activate repressed or arrested organic, biological needs: to make the human body an instrument of pleasure rather than labor. The old formula, the development of prevailing needs and faculties, seemed to be inadequate; the emergence of new, qualitatively different needs and faculties seemed to be the prerequisite, the content of liberation. The idea of such a new Reality Principle was based on the assumption that the material (technical) preconditions for its development were either established, or could be established in the advanced industrial societies of our time.
('Political Preface')
No longer used as a fulltime instrument of labor, the body would be resexualized. The regression involved in this spread of the libido would first manifest itself in a reactivation of all erotogenic zones and, consequently, in a resurgence of pregenital polymorphous sexuality and in a decline of genital supremacy. The body in its entirety would become an object of cathexis, a thing to be enjoyed -- an instrument of pleasure. This change in the value and scope of libidinal relations would lead to a disintegration of the institutions in which the private interpersonal relations have been organized, particularly the monogamic and patriarchal family.
('The Transformation of Sexuality into Eros')
The Transformation of Sexuality into Eros
The vision of a non-repressive culture, which we have lifted from a marginal trend in mythology and philosophy , aims at a new relation between instincts and reason. The civilized morality is reversed by harmonizing instinctual freedom and order: liberated from the tyranny of repressive reason, the instincts tend toward free and lasting existential relations -- they generate a new reality principle. In Schiller's idea of an "aesthetic state," the vision of a non-repressive culture is concretized at the level of mature civilization. At this level, the organization of the instincts becomes a social problem (in Schiller's terminology, political), as it does in Freud' s pyschology . The processes that create the ego and superego also shape and perpetuate specific societal institutions and relations. Such psychoanalytical concepts as sublimation, identification, and introjection have not only a psychical but also a social content: they terminate in a system of institutions, laws, agencies, things, and customs that confront the individual as objective entities. Within this antagonistic system, the mental conflict between ego and superego, between ego and id, is at one and the same time a conflict between the individual and his society. The latter embodies the rationality of the whole, and the individual's struggle against the repressive forces is a struggle against objective reason. Therefore, the emergence of a non -repressive reality principle involving instinctual liberation would regress behind the attained level of civilized rationality. This regression would be psychical as well as social: it would reactivate early stages of the libido which were surpassed in the development of the reality ego, and it would dissolve the institutions of society in which the reality ego exists. In terms of these institutions, instinctual liberation is relapse into barbarism. However, occurring at the height of civilization , as a consequence not of defeat but of victory in the struggle for existence, and supported by a free society, such liberation might have very different results. It would still be a reversal of the process of civilization, a subversion of culture -- but after culture had done its work and created the mankind and the world that could be free. It would still be "regression" -- but in the light of mature consciousness and guided by a new rationality. Under these conditions, the possibility of a non- repressive civilization is predicated not upon the arrest, but upon the liberation, of progress -- so that man would order his life in accordance with his fully developed knowledge, so that he would ask again what is good and what is evil. If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the "original sin" must be committed again: "We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence."
The notion of a non-repressive instinctual order must first be tested on the most "disorderly" of all instincts -- namely, sexuality. Non-repressive order is possible only if the sex instincts can, by virtue of their own dynamic and under changed existential and societal conditions, generate lasting erotic relations among mature individuals. We have to ask whether the sex instincts, after the elimination of all surplus-repression, can develop a "libidinal rationality" which is not only compatible with but even promotes progress toward higher forms of civilized freedom. This possibility will be examined here in Freud's own terms.
We have reiterated Freud's conclusion that any genuine decrease in the societal controls over the sex instincts would, even under optimum conditions, reverse the organization of sexuality toward precivilized stages. Such regression would break through the central fortifications of the performance principle: it would undo the channeling of sexuality into monogamic reproduction and the taboo on perversions. Under the rule of the performance principle, the libidinal cathexis of the individual body and libidinal relations with others are normally confined to leisure time and directed to the preparation and execution of genital intercourse; only in exceptional cases, and with a high degree of sublimation, are libidinal relations allowed to enter into the sphere of work. These constraints, enforced by the need for sustaining a large quantum of energy and time for non-gratifying labor, perpetuate the desexualization of the body in order to make the organism into a subject-object of socially useful performances. Conversely, if the work day and energy are reduced to a minimum, without a corresponding manipulation of the free time, the ground for these constraints would be undermined. Libido would be released and would overflow the institutionalized limits within which it is kept by the reality principle.
Freud repeatedly emphasized that the lasting interpersonal relations on which civilization depends presuppose that the sex instinct is inhibited in its aim. Love, and the enduring and responsible relations which it demands, are founded on a union of sexuality with "affection," and this union is the historical result of a long and cruel process of domestication, in which the instinct's legitimate manifestation is made supreme and its component parts are arrested in their development. This cultural refinement of sexuality, its sublimation to love, took place within a civilization which established possessive private relations apart from, and in a decisive aspect conflicting with, the possessive societal relations. While, outside the privacy of the family, men's existence was chiefly determined by the exchange value of their products and performances, their life in home and bed was to be permeated with the spirit of divine and moral law. Mankind was supposed to be an end in itself and never a mere means; but this ideology was effective in the private rather than in the societal functions of the individuals, in the sphere of libidinal satisfaction rather than in that of labor. The full force of civilized morality was mobilized against the use of the body as mere object, means, instrument of pleasure; such reification was tabooed and remained the ill-reputed privilege of whores, degenerates, and perverts. Precisely in his gratification, and especially in his sexual gratification, man was to be a higher being, committed to higher values; sexuality was to be dignified by love. With the emergence of a non-repressive reality principle, with the abolition of the surplus-repression necessitated by the performance principle, this process would be reversed. In the societal relations, reification would be reduced as the division of labor became reoriented on the gratification of freely developing individual needs; whereas, in the libidinal relations, the taboo on the reification of the body would be lessened. No longer used as a fulltime instrument of labor, the body would be resexualized. The regression involved in this spread of the libido would first manifest itself in a reactivation of all erotogenic zones and, consequently, in a resurgence of pregenital polymorphous sexuality and in a decline of genital supremacy. The body in its entirety would become an object of cathexis, a thing to be enjoyed -- an instrument of pleasure. This change in the value and scope of libidinal relations would lead to a disintegration of the institutions in which the private interpersonal relations have been organized, particularly the monogamic and patriarchal family.
These prospects seem to confirm the expectation that instinctual liberation can lead only to a society of sex maniacs -- that is, to no society. However, the process just outlined involves not simply a release but a transformation of the libido: from sexuality constrained under genital supremacy to erotization of the entire personality. It is a spread rather than explosion of libido -- a spread over private and societal relations which bridges the gap maintained between them by a repressive reality principle. This transformation of the libido would be the result of a societal transformation that released the free play of individual needs and faculties . By virtue of these conditions, the free development of transformed libido beyond the institutions of the performance principle differs essentially from the release of constrained sexuality within the dominion of these institutions. The latter process explodes suppressed sexuality; the libido continues to bear the mark of suppression and manifests itself in the hideous forms so well known in the history of civilization; in the sadistic and masochistic orgies of desperate masses, of "society elites," of starved bands of mercenaries , of prison and concentration-camp guards. Such release of sexuality provides a periodically necessary outlet for unbearable frustration; it strengthens rather than weakens the roots of instinctual constraint; consequently, it has been used time and again as a prop for suppressive regimes. In contrast, the free development of transformed libido within transformed institutions, while eroticizing previously tabooed zones, time, and relations, would minimize the manifestations of mere sexuality by integrating them into a far larger order, including the order of work. In this context , sexuality tends to its own sublimation : the libido would not simply reactivate precivilized and infantile stages, but would also transform the perverted content of these stages.
The term perversions covers sexual phenomena of essentially different origin . The same taboo is placed on instinctual manifestations incompatible with civilization and on those incompatible with repressive civilization, especially with monogamic genital supremacy. However, within the historical dynamic of the instinct, for example , coprophilia and homosexuality have a very different place and function. A similar difference prevails within one and the same perversion: the function of sadism is not the same in a free libidinal relation and in the activities of SS Troops. The inhuman , compulsive, coercive, and destructive forms of these perversions seem to be linked with the general perversion of the human existence in a repressive culture, but the perversions have an instinctual substance distinct from these forms; and this substance may well express itself in other forms compatible with normality in high civilization. Not all component parts and stages of the instinct that have been suppressed have suffered this fate because they prevented the evolution of man and mankind. The purity, regularity, cleanliness, and reproduction required by the performance principle are not naturally those of any mature civilization . And the reactivation of prehistoric and childhood wishes and attitudes is not necessarily regression ; it may well be the opposite -- proximity to a happiness that has always been the repressed promise of a better future . In one of his most advanced formulations, Freud once defined happiness as the "subsequent fulfillment of a prehistoric wish. That is why wealth brings so little happiness: money was not a wish in childhood."
But if human happiness depends on the fulfillment of childhood wishes, civilization, according to Freud, depends on the suppression of the strongest of all childhood wishes: the Oedipus wish. Does the realization of happiness in a free civilization still necessitate this suppression? Or would the transformation of the libido also engulf the Oedipus situation? In the context of our hypothesis, such speculations are insignificant; the Oedipus complex, although the primary source and model of neurotic conflicts , is certainly not the central cause of the discontents in civilization , and not the central obstacle for their removal. The Oedipus complex "passes" even under the rule of a repressive reality principle. Freud advances two general interpretations of the "passing of the Oedipus complex": it "becomes extinguished by its lack of success"; or it "must come to an end because the time has come for its dissolution, just as the milk-teeth fall out when the permanent ones begin to press forward." The passing of the complex appears as a "natural" event in both cases.
We have spoken of the self-sublimation of sexuality . The term implies that sexuality can, under specific conditions, create highly civilized human relations without being subjected to the repressive organization which the established civilization has imposed upon the instinct. Such self-sublimation presupposes historical progress beyond the institutions of the performance principle, which in turn would release instinctual regression. For the development of the instinct, this means regression from sexuality in the service of reproduction to sexuality in the "function of obtaining pleasure from zones of the body." With this restoration of the primary structure of sexuality , the primacy of the genital function is broken -- as is the desexualization of the body which has accompanied this primacy. The organism in its entirety becomes the substratum of sexuality , while at the same time the instinct's objective is no longer absorbed by a specialized function -- namely, that of bringing "one's own genitals into contact with those of someone of the opposite sex." Thus enlarged, the field and objective of the instinct becomes the life of the organism itself. This process almost naturally, by its inner logic, suggests the conceptual transformation of sexuality into Eros.
The introduction of the term Eros in Freud's later writings was certainly motivated by different reasons: Eros, as life instinct, denotes a larger biological instinct rather than a larger scope of sexuality. However, it may not be accidental that Freud does not rigidly distinguish between Eros and sexuality, and his usage of the term Eros (especially in The Ego and the Id, Civilization and Its Discontents, and in An Outline of Psychoanalysis) implies an enlargement of the meaning of sexuality itself. Even without Freud' s explicit reference to Plato the change in emphasis is clear: Eros signifies a quantitative and qualitative aggrandizement of sexuality. And the aggrandized concept seems to demand a correspondingly modified concept of sublimation. The modifications of sexuality are not the same as the modifications of Eros. Freud' s concept of sublimation refers to the fate of sexuality under a repressive reality principle. Thus, sublimation means a change in the aim and object of the instinct "with regard to which our social values come into the picture." The term is applied to a group of unconscious processes which have in common that
... as the result of inner or outer deprivation, the aim of object-libido undergoes a more or less complete deflection, modification, or inhibition. In the great majority of instances, the new aim is one distinct or remote from sexual satisfaction , i.e., is an asexual or non-sexual aim.
This mode of sublimation is to a high degree dictated by specific societal requirements and cannot be automatically extended to other and less repressive forms of civilization with different "social values." Under the performance principle, the diversion of libido into useful cultural activities takes place after the period of early childhood. Sublimation then operates on a preconditioned instinctual structure , which includes the functional and temporal restraints of sexuality, its channeling into monogamic reproduction, and the desexualization of most of the body. Sublimation works with the thus preconditioned libido and its possessive, exploitative, aggressive force. The repressive "modification" of the pleasure principle precedes the actual sublimation , and the latter carries the repressive elements over into the socially useful activities.
However, there are other modes of sublimation. Freud speaks of aim-inhibited sexual impulses which need not be described as sublimated although they are "closely related" to sublimated impulses. "They have not abandoned their directly sexual aims , but they are held back by internal resistances from attaining them; they rest content with certain approximations to satisfaction." Freud calls them "social instincts" and mentions as examples "the affectionate relations between parents and children, feelings of friendship, and the emotional ties in marriage which had their origin in sexual attraction." Moreover, in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, Freud has emphasized the extent to which societal relations ("community" in civilization) are founded on unsublimated as well as sublimated libidinous ties: "sexual love for women " as well as "desexualized, sublimated, homosexual love for other men" here appear as instinctual sources of an enduring and expanding culture. This conception suggests, in Freud's own work , an idea of civilization very different from that derived from repressive sublimation, namely , civilization evolving from and sustained by free libidinal relations. Géza Róheim used Ferenczi's notion of a "genitofugal libido" to support his theory of the libidinous origin of culture.
With the relief of extreme tension, libido flows back from the object to the body, and this "recathecting of the whole organism with libido results in a feeling of happiness in which the organs find their reward for work and stimulation to further activity." The concept assumes a genitofugal "libido trend to the development of culture" -- in other words, an inherent trend in the libido itself toward "cultural" expression, without external repressivemodification. And this "cultural " trend in the libido seems to be genitofugal, that is to say, away from genital supremacy toward the erotization of the entire organism. These concepts come close to recognizing the possibility of non-repressive sublimation. The rest is left to speculation. And indeed, under the established reality principle, non-repressive sublimation can appear only in marginal and incomplete aspects; its fully developed form would be sublimation without desexualization . The instinct is not "deflected" from its aim; it is gratified in activities and relations that are not sexual in the sense of "organized" genital sexuality and yet are libidinal and erotic. Where repressive sublimation prevails and determines the culture , non-repressive sublimation must manifest itself in contradiction to the entire sphere of social usefulness; viewed from this sphere, it is the negation of all accepted productivity and performance. The Orphic and Narcissistic images are recalled: Plato blames Orpheus for his "softness" (he was only a harp-player), which was duly punished by the gods -- as was Narcissus' refusal to "participate." Before the reality as it is, they stand condemned: they rejected the required sublimation. However,
... La sublimation n 'est pas toujours la négation d 'un désir; elle ne se présente pas toujours comme une sublimation contre des instincts. Elle peut être une sublimation pour un idéal. Alors Narcisse ne dit plus: "Je m'aime tel que je suis," il dit: "Je suis tel que je m'aime."
The Orphic and Narcissistic Eros engulfs the reality in libidinal relations which transform the individual and his environment; but this transformation is the isolated deed of unique individuals, and, as such, it generates death. Even if sublimation does not proceed against the instincts but as their affirmation , it must be a supra-individual process on common ground. As an isolated individual phenomenon , the reactivation of narcissistic libido is not culture-building but neurotic:
The difference between a neurosis and a sublimation is evidently the social aspect of the phenomenon. A neurosis isolates; a sublimation unites. In a sublimation something new is created -- a house, or a community, or a tool -- and it is created in a group or for the use of a group.
Libido can take the road of self-sublimation only as a social phenomenon: as an unrepressed force, it can promote the formation of culture only under conditions which relate associated individuals to each other in the cultivation of the environment for their developing needs and faculties. Reactivation of polymorphous and narcissistic sexuality ceases to be a threat to culture and can itself lead to culture-building if the organism exists not as an instrument of alienated labor but as a subject of self-realization -- in other words, if socially useful work is at the same time the transparent satisfaction of an individual need. In primitive society, this organization of work may be immediate and "natural"; in mature civilization, it can be envisaged only as the result of liberation. Under such conditions, the impulse to "obtain pleasure from the zones of the body" may extend to seek its objective in lasting and expanding libidinal relations because this expansion increases and intensifies the instinct's gratification. Moreover, nothing in the nature of Eros justifies the notion that the "extension" of the impulse is confined to the corporeal sphere. If the antagonistic separation of the physical from the spiritual part of the organism is itself the historical result of repression, the overcoming of this antagonism would open the spiritual sphere to the impulse. The aesthetic idea of a sensuous reason suggests such a tendency. It is essentially different from sublimation in so far as the spiritual sphere becomes the "direct" object of Eros and remains a libidinal object: there is a change neither in energy nor in aim.
The notion that Eros and Agape may after all be one and the same -- not that Eros is Agape but that Agape is Eros -- may sound strange after almost two thousand years of theology. Nor does it seem justifiable to refer to Plato as a defender of this identification -- Plato who himself introduced the repressive definition of Eros into the household of Western culture. Still, the Symposium contains the clearest celebration of the sexual origin and substance of the spiritual relations. According to Diotima, Eros drives the desire for one beautiful body to another and finally to all beautiful bodies, for "the beauty of one body is akin to the beauty of another," and it would be foolish "not to recognize that the beauty in every body is one and the same." Out of this truly polymorphous sexuality arises the desire for that which animates the desired body: the psyche and its various manifestations. There is an unbroken ascent in erotic fulfillment from the corporeal love of one to that of the others, to the love of beautiful work and play, and ultimately to the love of beautiful knowledge. The road to "higher culture" leads through the true love of boys. Spiritual "procreation" is just as much the work of Eros as is corporeal procreation , and the right and true order of the Polis is just as much an erotic one as is the right and true order of love. The culture-building power of Eros is non-repressive sublimation: sexuality is neither deflected from nor blocked in its objective; rather, in attaining its objective, it transcends it to others, searching for fuller gratification.
In the light of the idea of non-repressive sublimation, Freud's definition of Eros as striving to "form living substance into ever greater unities, so that life may be prolonged and brought to higher development" takes on added significance. The biological drive becomes a cultural drive. The pleasure principle reveals its own dialectic. The erotic aim of sustaining the entire body as subject-object of pleasure calls for the continual refinement of the organism, the intensification of its receptivity, the growth of its sensuousness. The aim generates its own projects of realization: the abolition of toil, the amelioration of the environment, the conquest of disease and decay, the creation of luxury. All these activities flow directly from the pleasure principle, and, at the same time, they constitute work which associates individuals to "greater unities"; no longer confined within the mutilating dominion of the performance principle, they modify the impulse without deflecting it from its aim. There is sublimation and, consequently, culture; but this sublimation proceeds in a system of expanding and enduring libidinal relations, which are in themselves work relations.
The idea of an erotic tendency toward work is not foreign to psychoanalysis. Freud himself remarked that work provides an opportunity for a "very considerable discharge of libidinal component impulses, narcissistic, aggressive and even erotic." We have questioned this statement because it makes no distinction between alienated and nonalienated labor (between labor and work): the former is by its very nature repressive of human potentialities and therefore also repressive of the "libidinal component impulses" which may enter into work. But the statement assumes a different significance if it is seen in the context of the social psychology which Freud proposes in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. He suggests that "the libido props itself upon the satisfaction of the great vital needs, and chooses as its first objects the people who have a share in that process." This proposition, if unfolded in its implications, comes close to vitiating Freud' s basic assumption that the "struggle for existence" (that is, for the "satisfaction of the great vital needs") is per se anti-libidinous in so far as it necessitates the regimentation of the instinct by a constraining reality principle. It must be noted that Freud links the libido not merely to the satisfaction of the great vital needs but to the joint human efforts to obtain satisfaction , i.e., to the work process:
... experience has shown that in cases of collaboration libidinal ties are regularly formed between the fellow-workers which prolong and solidify the relations between them to a point beyond what is merely profitable.
If this is true, then Ananke is not a sufficient cause for the instinctual constraints of civilization -- and not a sufficient reason for denying the possibility of a non-repressive libidinous culture . Freud's suggestions in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego do more than reformulate his thesis of Eros as the builder of culture; culture here rather appears as the builder of Eros -- that is to say, as the "natural" fulfillment of the innermost trend of Eros. Freud's psychology of civilization was based on the inexorable conflict between Ananke and free instinctual development. But if Ananke itself becomes the primary field of libidinal development, the contradiction evaporates. Not only would the struggle for existence not necessarily cancel the possibility of instinctual freedom (as we suggested in Chapter 6); but it would even constitute a "prop" for instinctual gratificaiton. The work relations which form the base of civilization, and thus civilization itself, would be "propped" by non-desexualized instinctual energy. The whole concept of sublimation is at stake.
The problem of work, of socially useful activity, without (repressive) sublimation can now be restated. It emerged as the problem of a change in the character of work by virtue of which the latter would be assimilated to play -- the free play of human faculties. What are the instinctual preconditions for such a transformation? The most far -reaching attempt to answer this question is made by Barbara Lantos in her article "Work and the Instincts." She defines work and play in terms of the instinctual stages involved in these activities. Play is entirely subject to the pleasure principle: pleasure is in the movement itself in so far as it activates erotogenic zones. "The fundamental feature of play is, that it is gratifying in itself, without serving any other purpose than that of instinctual gratification." The impulses that determine play are the pregenital ones: play expresses objectless autoeroticism and gratifies those component instincts which are already directed toward the objective world. Work, on the other hand, serves ends outside itself -- namely, the ends of self-preservation. "To work is the active effort of the ego... to get from the outside world whatever is needed for self-preservation." This contrast establishes a parallelism between the organization of the instincts and that of human activity:
Play is an aim in itself, work is the agent of self-preservation. Component instincts and auto-erotic activities seek pleasure with no ulterior consequences; genital activity is the agent of procreation. The genital organization of the sexual instincts has a parallel in the work-organization of the ego-instincts.
Thus it is the purpose and not the content which marks an activity as play or work. A transformation in the instinctual structure (such as that from the pregenital to the genital stage) would entail a change in the instinctual value of the human activity regardless of its content. For example, if work were accompanied by a reactivation of pregenital polymorphous eroticism, it would tend to become gratifying in itself without losing its work content. Now it is precisely such a reactivation of polymorphous eroticism which appeared as the consequence of the conquest of scarcity and alienation. The altered societal conditions would therefore create an instinctual basis for the transformation of work into play. In Freud's terms, the less the efforts to obtain satisfaction are impeded and directed by the interest in domination, the more freely the libido could prop itself upon the satisfaction of the great vital needs. Sublimation and domination hang together. And the dissolution of the former would, with the transformation of the instinctual structure, also transform the basic attitude toward man and nature which has been characteristic of Western civilization.
In psychoanalytic literature, the development of libidinal work relations is usually attributed to a "general maternal attitude as the dominant trend of a culture." Consequently, it is considered as a feature of primitive societies rather than as a possibility of mature civilization. Margaret Mead's interpretation of Arapesh culture is entirely focused on this attitude:
To the Arapesh, the world is a garden that must be tilled, not for one's self , not not for one's self, not in pride and boasting , not for hoarding and usury, but that the yams and the dogs and the pigs and most of all the children may grow. From this whole attitude flow many of the other Arapesh traits, the lack of conflict between the old and young, the lack of any expectation of jealousy or envy, the emphasis upon co-operation.
Foremost in this description appears the fundamentally different experience of the world: nature is taken , not as an object of domination and exploitation, but as a "garden" which can grow while making human beings grow. It is the attitude that experiences man and nature as joined in a non-repressive and still functioning order. We have seen how the otherwise most divergent traditions of thought converged on this idea: the philosophical opposition against the performance principle; the Orphic and Narcissistic archetypes; the aesthetic conception. But while the psychoanalytical and anthropological concepts of such an order have been oriented on the prehistorical and precivilized past, our discussion of the concept is oriented on the future, on the conditions of fully mature civilization. The transformation of sexuality into Eros, and its extension to lasting libidinal work relations, here presuppose the rational reorganization of a huge industrial apparatus, a highly specialized societal division of labor, the use of fantastically destructive energies, and the co-operation of vast masses.
The idea of libidinal work relations in a developed industrial society finds little support in the tradition of thought , and where such support is forthcoming it seems of a dangerous nature. The transformation of labor into pleasure is the central idea in Fourier's giant socialist utopia. If
... l'industrie est la destination qui nous est assignée par le créateur , comment penser qu 'il veuille nous y amener par la violence, et qu' il n 'ait pas su mettre en jeu quelque ressort plus noble , quelqu'amorce capable de transformer les travaux en plaisirs.
Fourier insists that this transformation requires a complete change in the social institutions: distribution of the social product according to need, assignment of functions according to individual faculties and inclinations, constant mutation of functions, short work periods, and so on. But the possibility of "attractive labor" (travail attrayant) derives above all from the release of libidinal forces. Fourier assumes the existence of an attraction indnstrielle which makes for pleasurable co-operation. It is based on the attraction passionnée in the nature of man , which persists despite the opposition of reason, duty, prejudice. This attraction passionnée tends toward three principal objectives: the creation of "luxury, or the pleasure of the five senses"; the formation of libidinal groups (of friendship and love); and the establishment of a harmonious order, organizing these groups for work in accordance with the development of the individual "passions" (internal and external "play" of faculties). Fourier comes closer than any other utopian socialist to elucidating the dependence of freedom on non-repressive sublimation. However, in his detailed blueprint for the realization of this idea, he hands it over to a giant organization and administration and thus retains the repressive elements. The working communities of the phalanstère anticipate "strength through joy" rather than freedom , the beautification of mass culture rather than its abolition. Work as free play cannot be subject to administration; only alienated labor can be organized and administered by rational routine. It is beyond this sphere, but on its basis , that non-repressive sublimation creates its own cultural order.
Once more, we emphasize that non-repressive sublimation is utterly incompatible with the institutions of the performance principle and implies the negation of this principle. This contradiction is the more important since post-Freudian psychoanalytic theory itself shows a marked tendency to obliterate it and to glorify repressive productivity as human self-realization. A striking example is provided by Ives Hendrick in his paper "Work and the Pleasure Principle." He suggests that the "energy and the need to exercise the physiological organs available for work" are not provided by the libido but rather by a special instinct, the "mastery instinct." Its aim is "to control, or alter a piece of the environment ... by the skillful use of perceptual, intellectual, and motor techniques." This drive for "integration and skillful performance" is "mentally and emotionally experienced as the need to perform work efficiently." Since work is thus supposed to be itself the gratification of an instinct rather than the "temporary negation" of an instinct, work "yields pleasure" in efficient performance. Work pleasure results from the satisfaction of the mastery instinct, but "work pleasure" and libidinal pleasure usually coincide, since the ego organizations which function as work are "generally, and perhaps always, utilized concurrently for the discharge of surplus libidinal tension."
As usual, the revision of Freudian theory means a retrogression. The assumption of any special instinct begs the question, but the assumption of a special "mastery instinct" does even more : it destroys the entire structure and dynamic of the "mental apparatus" which Freud has built. Moreover, it obliterates the most repressive features of the performance principle by interpreting them as gratification of an instinctual need. Work pure and simple is the chief social manifestation of the reality principle. In so far as work is conditional upon delay and diversion of instinctual gratification (and according to Freud it is
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo
Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New
content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019.
Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can
continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More
evola_as_he_is@{{emailDomain}}