Monthly Archives: April 2012

Re: Really Bad Patriot Mythology—When Ideas can be applied practically, stick with them….when they only lead you down rabbit-trails…..”just say ‘no’”….

I have had friends and mentors present some of those ideas to me for close to 40 years. The conclusion I have came to is, if there is something to these theories I still don’t know how to use it to my benefit. In my battles to clean up our legal system I have had more positive affect by holding up a sign in front of the courthouse letting the public know the judge was unfair or dishonest than I believe I could have had by standing mute or saying the court does not have jurisdiction over me. I have also used my campaigns for political and judicial office as a soapbox to inform the public to some affect. Maybe someone can use those ideas to gain some advantage. Although it took a lot of patience and the help of Charles Lincoln, Roger Kehew and others, I am proud of our contribution to getting the Montana Supreme Court to come out with the attached opinion using methods that made sense to me.

I carried a couple of bills during the last legislative session that would have helped the system some more. It is too bad they were killed in the process. Would you like to help get similar bills passed in the coming session if I am lucky enough to get re-elected?

Jerry O’Neil
Montana HD 3
406-892-7602

Really Bad “Patriot Mythologies” (the antidote: READ, ABSORB, REFLECT, and UNDERSTAND)(sorry if it sounds like work, but it is!)

I received an e-mail this morning from a client, referring me to this article under the subject heading: “A Good Article about Lawyers and the BAR”.  

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=238180

Quite simply, nobody despises the “Integrated Bar” more than I do—by “Integrated Bar” is meant the constitutionally intolerable “licensing” of attorneys through the State Supreme Court system, adopted almost everywhere in the United States, Constitutionally enshrined here in the State of California.  But real is real and fake is fake, and the article posted by “Seawitch” on “Rumor Mill News” is about as far from reality as anything could be.  I do not wish to reproduce such drivel on my humble blog, so I’d ask you to read it first, and then my commentary:

No, sadly, that’s not a “good” article at all but a collection of poppycock fake “mythology” just plausible enough to fool some of those with no actual experience on the inside of the legal profession, or any good instinct for how life works, either, I might add.  I first ran into all that gibberish and nonsense about twenty years ago before my son Charlie was born even when I had just finished law school at the U of C and was getting ready to take the Florida Bar Exam.  
The Republic of Texas movement was still on the upswing, Ruby Ridge had not yet happened and it was almost a year before Mount Carmel, Waco, went up in flames.  If you ever want to dissect this pack of lies line-by-line we can do it late some night when there’s absolutely nothing better to do, but I submit to my own readers that it is hardly worth your time…..
Just for starters, I attach here for your reading enjoyment the cited case of  Erie v. Tompkins.  Erie R Co v Tompkins 304 US 65 58 SCt 817 92 LEd 1188 SCOTUS 1938
Now this is not one of the cases that normally fills the student of history with shock and awe at the majestic progression of historical process a la longue durée.  No, this is a “do your really want to be a lawyer” bone dry deadly dull case torturous case dealing with procedure and choice of law that every law student reads in first year civil procedure.  
And moreover, contrary to “Sea Witch’s” article on “Rumor Mill News”, the Supreme Court’s opinion in this case says nothing even remotely like “no cases are allowed to be cited that are prior to 1939.” or that “There can be no mixing of the old law with the new law. The lawyers (who were members of the American BAR Association, were and are currently under and controlled by the Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britain) created, formed and implemented the new bankruptcy law. The American BAR Association is a franchise of the Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britain. Since the Erie RR. v. Thompkins case was decided; the practice of law in this country was never again to be the same.”.
Every word of this paragraph is absurd nonsense. But it is especially weird to derive it all from a case which concerns nothing more dramatic than a rule that state law applies in federal court in diversity cases. I will send “Erie” to you So you can read it for yourself.  And as a former member of the bar, I can tell you that there are no secret oaths.  Now, truthfully, there may be a lot of broken oaths to uphold the Constitution, but no secret oaths.  No, sadly, that article is not only bad but it perpetuates myths which are so far off base that they hurt us in our fight for serious reform against the bar.  The bar is corrupt, monstrously so, but it is not because it is really a “British Accredited Registry” or anything remotely like that.  
Real Patriots must  be armed and ready for the fight to save our country.
Real Patriots need to be, like those of 1774-1792, literate and well-studied in the common law and constitutional history of England, her Empire, and of Europe and even Latin America.   The line “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” or that you can defeat ignorance through gossip or cheap and shallow knowledge cheaply and shallowly acquired and used, is a tool of our Globalist enemies.
Real Patriots would do well to learn how to read history and in particular how to study and understand Judicial Decisions, especially those of the Supreme Court of the United States. It’s work. In fact it’s REAL work—Erie v. Tompkins does not touch on juicy issues of race, sex, contraception, or even whether the New Deal was constitutional or not (despite the fact that it was decided in 1938 after the Court-packing crisis was over and Felix Frankfurter and other Roosevelt appointees were safely on the Court).
Patriotism without historical knowledge and common sense is exactly what our enemies frame it to be: blithering idiocy.  Please study the case itself, and don’t rely on “Seawitches”, for legal advice or anything else, because the reality of the Supreme Court’s Erie R.R. v. Tompkins‘ key holdings are that they are dry as  bleached bones:
In federal courts, except in matters governed by Federal Constitution or by acts of Congress, law to be applied in any case is law of the state.
There is no federal general common law and Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a state, whether they be local or general in nature, be they commercial law or apart of the law of torts.
The phrase “laws of the several states,” as used in statute requiring federal courts to apply laws of the several states except in matters governed by federal Constitution or statutes, held to include not only state statutory law, but also state decisions on questions of general law, in absence of any constitutional provision purporting to confer upon federal courts power of declaring substantive rules of common law applicable in a state.
I would generally be wary of any website that calls itself “Rumor Mill News” anyhow and authors with names like “Seawitch”…. even though I admit that Rumor Mill News has published some of my material, which is why, I guess, my client thought I would like that article….  But “fair is fair and real is real and fake is fake”, you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and such like aphorisms forever!  
The problem with the Bar is that it is unconstitutional both as a matter of substantive (First, Fifth, Ninth Amendment) and procedural (“Separation of Powers” between Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches) and monopolistic in nature, and is simultaneously socially, economically, and culturally (as well as legally) corrupt for all those reasons.
There are no easy answers to why our legal system is so corrupt, but “lack of education” and the quest for “easy solutions to difficult problems” and the general population’s lack of education and unwillingness to read and become educated are all major aspects of the problem.  The average American graduates High School (and College, and amazingly enough, many who finish Law School itself) with no real practical notion of any legal procedure, how to read or research law, and so the average American High School Graduate, College Graduate, and even Law School graduate has no idea how to defend himself or herself when (1) arrested, (2) questioned by the police or other authorities, (3) sued, (4) threatened with divorce or a child custody fight, (5) assessed with back taxes, (6) required to seek a license or register for some otherwise “lawful form of employment,” (7) do anything at all in the real world.  Saying that lawyers are all employees of an alien power or the British Crown doesn’t help anybody make it through any of these problems.
 So many Patriotic Americans have been led down insane roads by idiotic gurus to believing really stupid things, and Rumor Mill News has recently gathered a lot of the most incompetent, inept, and stupid ideas into one single article.  No one benefits except the “new world order” types who get to cite such examples to call all of us who believe in the constitution crazy idiots without a smidgen of common sense, historical knowledge, or real practical experience in the legal world….. and that means THEY get stronger and WE get weaker—so let’s learn how to take criticism from each other and improve our standing as a movement with real brains and practical intellectual capacity AT LEAST equal to the 1790s frontiersmen of the Blue Ridge Mountains of Western Virginia & North Carolina, Kentucky & Tennessee….who after all, were the First to assert States Rights against the Federal Government’s attempts to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and of the press when protesting against the government.  
The Los Angeles-based 10th Amendment Center has led the way in showing how State’s Rights Nullification, in the tradition of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions against the Federalist Presidency of John Adams, is still a viable option for neutralizing the worst abuses of the Bush-Obama administrations including (1) the USA Patriot Act, (2) the Real ID Act, (3) Obamacare, and (4) the National Defense Authorization Act.   But even Governor Michael Dukakis once tried to assert States’ Rights in Massachusetts to Nullify his state’s participation in illegal and unconstitutional undeclared wars abroad, and for that he should be applauded…..

Brindis a la Carmencita: Happy Birthday to Jacqueline Amber Burns!

Veteran of L’Embassade du Canada, Accuracy in Media, and the Fraser Institute, not to mention of my last archaeological expedition to Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula in 2000, Camp Street, New Orleans and before that to Campeche and Catemaco in 1991-2.  Happy Birthday, Carmen!  Your extraordinary loyalty and friendship over two decades are gratefully acknowledged, you are one in ten million!

OBAMA’S DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT MARCHES FORWARD!

From whence, in the Constitution, does the President derive the power to regulate commerce by executive fiat?   I am simply dumbfounded by the implications of the following article, presented as if it were a positive thing, on the President’s action today against “For Profit” Schools.  I have no idea what a “for profit” school in this context might be.  Honestly, I don’t care and it doesn’t matter.  The point is he signed an executive order which completely exceeds his power as Executive to make new law…..

But on the other hand, I think it’s safe to assume that Obama was NOT talking about his own almae-matri  in Cambridge 02138 and Chicago 66307.  A few years ahead of our de facto President, the marvelous Kansan-Kenyan Hawaiian who grew up in Indonesia, I attended Harvard and the University of Chicago myself.   Since leaving these schools, their administrations remember to talk to us (the alumni) about nothing so much as their endowments and how to raise their endowments and whether Harvard’s $32 BILLION dollar endowment is really up to meeting the challenges of the future, considering that it’s actually DOWN $5 billion from its $37 billion peak in 2009 (coincidentally or not, that was the last year my son Charlie IV attended summer school there, obviously there’s a connexion, must have been that the school has suffered because nobody paid anything close to his summer tuition fees ever since then…certainly it nearly broke the Homeland Security Bank Chez Lincoln….).  (See Harvard Magazine, May-June 2011: http://harvardmagazine.com/2011/09/harvard-endowment-rises-to-32-billion).   Obama would never attack the hands the shaped and formed his presidency at these two elite institutions in which my family has something of a history pre-dating his.   Harvard University and the University of Chicago, after all, were indeed the places that fed Obama, Loved Obama, Protected Obama (to paraphrase the introductory “movie-within-the movie” played at the beginning of the Hunger Games).  

In any event, I repeat:  From the standpoint of democratic process and constitutional government—-and whether Obama is trying to Suppress the “Not-for-Profit” Endowment building processes of Harvard and Chicago (and Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Columbia, Stanford, Tulane, SMU, Vanderbilt, Emory, Duke, etc.) or whether this has to do with institutions about which I know very little like the “University of Phoenix” or similar mass-marketing projects—the President of the United States has no power to enter an Executive Order such as described herein below:

Obama Cracks Down On For-Profit Schools That Prey On Veterans

By Mary Bruce | ABC OTUS News – 

In front of thousands of service members, President Obama today signed an executive order aimed at protecting veterans from for-profit educational institutions trying to “swindle” and “hoodwink” them instead of providing the education they deserve.

Speaking to the Army’s Third Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Ga., the president, with his wife at his side, described how some for-profit institutions target veterans, bombarding them with emails and phone calls, promising advanced degrees and future job placement.

“You’re dealing with folks who aren’t interested in helping you.  They’re not interested in helping you find the best program.  They are interested in getting the money.  They don’t care about you; they care about the cash,” he said. “That’s appalling.  That’s disgraceful.  It should never happen in America.”

The order, part of the president’s ongoing “We Can’t Wait” executive action campaign, is intended to crack down on these improper recruiting practices and to strengthen student protections for veterans.

“The executive order I’m about to sign will make life a whole lot more secure for you and your families and our veterans – and a whole lot tougher for those who try to prey on you,” the president said.

The order requires colleges that participate in the G.I. Bill program and the Department of Defense’s tuition program to provide veterans with the “Know Before You Owe” form, a document that outlines the financial aid available to student and how much debt they will likely take on.

The order also directs the Department of Veterans Affairs to trademark the term “G.I. Bill” to prevent educational institutions from fraudulently marketing their programs to beneficiaries of the program.

While members of Congress have introduced legislation to address these same issues, today’s action was intended to cast Obama as a take-charge president willing to circumvent gridlock on Capitol Hill.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-cracks-down-profit-schools-prey-veterans-234203210–abc-news-politics.html

If, indeed, “today’s action was intended to cast Obama as a take-charge president willing to circumvent gridlock on Capitol Hill” it should more properly be characterized and denounced everywhere as the act of an unprincipled economic dictator who despises democracy and loathes the democratic process.   I hope that I will live to see Obama punished severely in a Court of Law, with processes and judgments far fairer and more just than those he presides over.   I hope that when Obama is arrested, he will be informed of the charges against him and allowed to consult with any attorney or counselor of his choice, that he will be indicted fairly by a Grand Jury not controlled by any United States Attorney or any prosecutor, whose deliberations are not only public but open and interactive with the will of the people, and that Obama will be tried by a jury of literate citizens who understand both the law and the constitution, and sentenced by that same jury and not some political hack appointee, a formerly successful high dollar real-estate lawyer or U.S. Attorney who decides to don a robe and take a pay cut in exchange for absolute power and immunity.  In short, I hope that Obama will be arrested, charged, prosecuted, and sentenced for his treason against the Constitution in a resurgent, rennaissant America which has thrown off all of the terrible laws and customs which Obama is imposing, including of course, but not limited to the National Defense Authorization Act which allows for indefinite detention without charges even of American Citizens—whether Obama deserves fully to belong to that highly diverse and privileged population of the human race, or not….

Dombrowski v. Pfister Anniversary Day (Decided April 26 1965)(Occasionally the Warren Court got it absolutely right….ok, it hurts to say that, but it’s true….)

New Orleans in the early 1960s was not really a hotbed of liberal activism, but I suppose it was a more comfortable place for the ACLU to set up shop than, for example say, Oxford, Mississippi or smaller counties.  New Orleans District Attorney (later Appeals Court Judge) Jim Garrison and many others from “the big easy” certainly took a dim view of their activities and they regarded (possibly correctly) the ACLU as a bunch of commie-pinkos determined to destroy and subvert the American Way of Life (ok, all doubts aside they were CERTAINLY correct about that, however….).

The Supreme Court was blatantly politically biased in favor of the ACLU and was on a political mission to reshape the South in the image of the Brave New World where nobody knows or cares about heritage or history.  In this, the Supreme Court has been amazingly successful.  The average American does not know enough history to follow historical hints on a crossword puzzle or play a historical trivial pursuit game, much less to learn from the lessons of history to prepare for the future.  

But in 1965, to protect the ACLU and its allies from prosecution at the hands of Jim Garrison and the staunchly Anti-Communist Louisiana State Legislature, the Supreme Court did a marvelous thing: it allowed the United States District Courts to enter injunctions against State Proceedings in violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. 

Today, almost everything that happens in State Court violates the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, whether the venue is judicial foreclosure, judicial eviction, judicial dissolution of marriage, judicial domestic relations/child custody adjudication, or criminal prosecution.  President George W. Bush once (to this Country’s permanent disgrace) said that the Constitution was just a piece of paper.  The State Courts of my home state of Texas, onetime state of Florida, and currently adoptive state of California seem to use the Constitution as paper instead of Charmin or Cottonelle….  The state courts, in most parts of the United States in fact, are disgrace, so why are Federal Courts not enjoining their unconstitutional practices right and left?  Well, because the “powers that be” like it this way—it is so convenient to be able to sweep aside the Constitution through elected State Court judges and then have life-time appointed Federal Court judges just say, “don’t worry, that’s fine, you keep on doing whatever you want to do.”

For at least a dozen years now, I have been saying and in fact strongly advocating that Federal Courts need to use their supervisory power to a greater extent over the State Courts, because the State Courts have run amok, in so many different ways.   Various half-assed jurisprudential doctrines such as Rooker-Feldman and Younger v. Harris abstention, together with the evisceration of meaningful Civil Rights Removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1443(1) and related illegitimate principles (utterly lacking in constitutional basis of any kind) such as judicial and prosecutorial immunity, coupled with a ferociously unfair application of res judicata and collateral estoppel, have made the State Courts all but absolutely and totally untouchable in every way.

All but absolutely:  two wonderful cases, Dombrowski v. Pfister, decided 47 years ago today (April 26, 1965) and Mitchum v. Foster, decided 7 years later in 1972, SHOULD have thrown the doors wide open to Civil Rights injunctive action against the abuses of the state courts.  Why this has not happened is, as is obvious to anyone above the age of puberty with an IQ in excess of 100, merely a matter of self-serving judicial politics.  The Lower Federal Courts have basically insulated the State Courts from review even though the Supreme Court said that they didn’t have to do so.

TO EVERYONE WHO CARES ABOUT FIGHTING POLITICALLY MOTIVATED CORRUPTION IN THE STATE COURTS, I recommend that you read and seek to resuscitate the life of Dombrowski v. Pfister (attached:   04-26-2012 Dombrowski v Pfister 380 US 479 85 SCt 1116 14 LEd2d 22 SCOTUS-April 26 1965) and Mitchum v. Foster (attached:  Mitchum v Foster 407 US 225 92 SCt 2151 32 LEd2d 705 [June 19 1972]).   The middle member of this trio of cases is Younger v. Harris and you needn’t worry about studying this one: if you sue to enjoin a State Prosecution, the State will immediately cite Younger v. Harris and quote it at length.  The analysis will be yours whether YOUR situation compares most closely with Dombrowski v. Pfister, an anti-Civil Rights drama set in New Orleans in the age of Jim Garrison (of Oliver Stone’s JFK Fame, played by Kevin Costner) or Berkeley during the “Summer of Love” (the setting for Younger v. Harris).  Unfortunately, most of the US more closely resembles Mississippi Burning at present than any other historical movie—the only difference is that all people, whites, black, browns, and reds, are being suppressed and deprived of their constitutional rights without regard to race, creed, or color, and the Courts are going along with this, pretty much unquestioningly.  It is up to the people to demand that the suppression of rights and the Congressional, Executive, and Judicial Suspension of the Constitution end now.  Following and building upon two of the Warren Court’s finest legacies would serve us all well now….

A University of Virginia Law Review Article also provides a useful perspective on these case: 74 Virginia Law Review 1141 The Ideologies of Federal Courts Law 1141 as does a distinct article from the Indiana Law Review published ten years later: 32 Indiana Law Review 71 Federal Power to Commandeer State Courts 1998 and one published at Yale just the year after Dombrowski v. Pfister was decided, in 1966: 75 Yale LJ 1007 *1966* Theories of Federalism and Civil Rights.

Happy Saint George’s Day!

First on a personal level, to my son Charlie, to his mother Elena and grandma Nina in memory of Charlie’s uncle, Elena’s brother, Nina’s son, and my brother-in-law George,

then to my “Extended Family” of all the true Christian people of England, Greece, Aragon, Catalonia, Portugal, Malta, Serbia, Romania, Russia, Lithuania, and Ukraine, and to all their descendants in the Americas or Australia, South Africa, Iraq or India, to all militant Christians everywhere, and to every Church, Convent, and Monastery dedicated to or named after the great dragon-slayer as patron,

but especially to my old parish Church Saint George’s, with its new organ and very old Louis Comfort Tiffany stained-glass windows, most of which survived Hurricane Katrina, at 4600 Saint Charles Avenue in New Orleans 70115 (just Uptown-Riverside west of Napoleon between Cadiz and Valence)

I send greetings and wishes for a Happy but above all Victorious Saint George’s Day!

True, it appears that Marine Le Pen did not quite slay the dragons of socialism and alien invasion in France in the elections on Sunday.  It would have been awfully nice if she had made it into the runoff.  But instead, Socialist Francois Hollande and “NeoCon” Gaullist Nicolas Sarkozy will compete for her voters…and perhaps the Front National will be a necessary part of any coalition government in France from now on.  I continue to respect the French and to pray for their continued leadership in fighting globalism and transnationalism.  

For his part, Sarkozy is a true Global ethnic mishmash exceeding even the “shake-and-bake” spirit embodied in the U.S.’s own Kenyan Kansan by way of Indonesia and Hawaii Barack Hussein Obama—Sarkozy is a Hungarian Aristocrat-Ottoman-Greek-Jewish-French Catholic hybrid….  I’m not saying that Sarkozy is a dragon or anything…. but

Happy Saint George’s Day to all who believe in the words of Christ from the Gospel of Matthew 10:34-39

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.  He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

This, in my opinion, is the Spirit of Saint George’s Day, and of All Saints Day, of Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, of “Patriot’s Day” April 18, last week, and of July 2-4 (respectively “Vote and Decision to Independence Day” [July 2 was Benjamin Franklin and others favored as the U.S. National Holiday] and Signing of Declaration Day in Philadelphia 1776), and July 14 (French Bastille Day).  The French have a long and particularly strong tradition of political Dragon Slaying, I think—-it may be time for such things to happen to wipe out the current “Ancien Régime” in Washington and New York, for example… A really and truly Happy Saint George’s Day!

Vive La France! Vive Le Front National! Vive Marine Le Pen! (J’espere que les Peuple Francais diront “OUI” “Nous Aimons Notre Liberte et Notre Identitee Europeenne”

By the time I was three or four my mother had taught me a réciter les jours de la semaine en Francais:

La semaine au lundi commence,

Et le mardi l’ouvrage avance;

Ensuite vient le mercredi,

Le jeudi, puis le vendredi

Le samedi comble nos vœux,

Et dimanche nous prions Dieu.

Ce dimanche je prierai ici a California que les Francaises tous diront “OUI, MARINE LE PEN, ENCORE et TOUJOURS NOUS AIMERONS NOTRE LIBERTÉ et LA CIVILISATION des NOTRES AIEUX, et AUSSI, au MEME TEMPS, NOUS AIMONS NOTRE IDENTITÉ en TANT que LIBRES et VAINQUEURS CHRÉTIENS, CITOYENS FRANÇAISES et EUROPÉENS!”

The Only Responsible Vote in France on Sunday 22 April 2012 is one for Marine Le Pen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2132611/French-elections-2012-Marine-Le-Pen-responsible-vote-France.html

By RICHARD WAGHORNE

PUBLISHED: 06:26 EST, 20 April 2012 | UPDATED: 09:20 EST, 20 April 2012

France’s politics would appear to be in deceptively rude health. As Sunday’s first stage of the country’s two-round presidential election approaches, the vital indicators return vivid signs of life.

Mass meetings in Paris and elsewhere have drawn numbers and passion hard to imagine in some parts of an exhausted Western Europe. Online politics has made an impact for the first time. There is a choice on the ballot paper of ten candidates, ranging as fully from right to left as from plausible to eccentric. 

France’s rarely quiescent intellectuals have offered their customary profusion of commentary on the country’s choices.  

Marine Le Pen, who heads France's National Front party, has highlighted the country's right to defend its national identityMarine Le Pen, who heads France’s National Front party, has highlighted the country’s right to defend its national identity

What France has not confronted honestly is the likelihood that this is the final French election for some time in which the country will vote on its future with an acceptable degree of control over its own destiny. The erosion of French self-government has been commissioned from within and awaits to be ratified from without.

Nicholas Sarkozy has campaigned on the theme of a ‘Strong France’. His speeches consciously allude to the Fifth Republic’s founder General de Gaulle, praising an ‘Eternal France’ Sarkozy himself has never been in danger of embodying. Rather, he is the latest architect of the decline of French democracy to something bordering on irrelevance.

The most urgent, the most assiduously avoided challenge facing France is the erosion of its self-government. Sarkozy’s European policy has abetted the long-desired European federalism of the French political class, through means of government by decree from Brussels and the outright replacement of recalcitrant governments in Greece and Italy. 

In other European countries, the surface pretence of politics as usual has only been perpetuated by the craven compliance of hostage governments, as in Ireland. The fundamental deceit is that France herself is immune from the consequences of her president’s betrayal of other ancient European nations.

As the election campaign has demonstrated, this is not so to any extent which would return decisions over economic matters and identity to the French people. France’s banking system is critically exposed to the debts of the delinquent European margins, confirmed in Sarkozy’s last year in office by the trauma of a sovereign downgrade in a country where banks hold a status akin to proxies of the State. This very central standing in French public life, with its implicit expectation of support in crisis, was not enough to convince ratings-agencies of their durability – precisely because it is in question whether the French State possesses the capacity to deliver such support if required. 

Although it is unlikely that this will come to pass, should Sarkozy secure re-election he would in all probability find himself faced with the appalling question of whether France herself could survive the humiliation of direction from Berlin and Brussels in the threatened eventuality of Spanish or Italian default.

Nicolas Sarkozy has campaigned on the theme of a ¿Strong France¿, but some feel he has helped to erode the country's independenceNicolas Sarkozy has campaigned on the theme of a ¿Strong France¿, but some feel he has helped to erode the country’s independence

Much as Friedrich Hayek caustically referred to ‘socialists of all parties’ in the age of British muddy centrism shared between Labour and the Conservatives before the rise of Margaret Thatcher, one might see the choice of leading candidates in France as that between Eurofederalists of various parties. Neither Nicholas Sarkozy nor the likely victor Socialist François Hollande differ in their deference to ever-closer union. Much of their respective programmes must accordingly be discounted entirely as the outlines of an agenda they would never give themselves the liberty to execute.

The insurgent hard-left challenger Jean-Luc Mélenchon numbers the old French Communist Party within his alliance, calls for revolution in Europe, and speaks to supporters who bring Soviet flags to his rallies. The only other candidates polling in double figures, save one, is the centrist François Bayrou who combines many of his opponents’ defects with few redeeming virtues of his own.

In present circumstances, given present choices, the only responsible vote in France next Sunday is a vote for Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s National Front. This requires to be immediately qualified in several important respects:

Marine Le Pen believes France should leave the single currency in a bid to dodge any further fallout from the Euro crisisMarine Le Pen believes France should leave the single currency in a bid to dodge any further fallout from the Euro crisis

Le Pen’s protectionist economic policies are both foolish and futile. Her campaign has often been poor and indistinct. This is particularly culpable during a European crisis which ought to have given her party an opportunity unparalleled since inception and suggests serious limits in her own capabilities. 

Her efforts to regulate the political instincts of her party mitigate without cancelling out present reminders of its unacceptable past, most notable among which are her vocal and hot-headed father Jean-Marie Le Pen. 

Her stalwart defence of France’s right to perpetuate its national identity has forced Nicholas Sarkozy to give the issue a seriousness of attention he failed to grant it while office, but has sometimes been made by appeal to the lower instincts of the French electorate rather than the higher.

Marine Le Pen remains, among an imperfect choice in urgent times, the only candidate capable of saving France’s control over her finances, borders, and identity. 

She is the only candidate available to conservative voters advancing the case for an exit from the Euro, the one measure which if executed carefully might yet save France from being swamped by foreign debts amassed elsewhere in a European project largely of its own making. 

While Nicholas Sarkozy raises the prospect of securing French borders through withdrawal from the Schengen area, she possesses the requisite disdain for European entanglements which he all too comprehensively does not. Her defence of French national identity in the country with Europe’s most numerous Muslim minority is credible, whereas Sarkozy’s betrays his increasingly impotent opportunism. 

France next elects a president to the Élysée Palace in 2017. The most urgent question in this election ought to have been whether the next will matter much. There is no good reason as things stand to believe that France will escape the impotent slide into the morass of multiculturalism and bankrupt late European social democracy. 

COMMENTS:

I think he forgot to add that her party is the most democratic of them all. The FN is politically and ideologically closer to the UKIP and not the BNP! Marine Le Pen wants to cut down immigration to only a couple of thousand entries a year, I remember David Cameron having the same speech a couple of months ago. Does that make him a fascist too? Of course not, on the other hand accepting hundreds of thousands of immigrants a year in a country riddled with mass unemployment, with a serious housing, financial and social crisis would be an act of irresponsibility and is cruel to both French residents and future immigrants.- KT, Cambridge, 21/4/2012 15:44

what bothers me is peoples definition of fascism I think we need to look it up in a dictionary, the so called nazi party, were actually the national socialist workers party , so they were a national left wing party—when business and government come together, that is fascism .- the truth, wrexham, 21/4/2012 14:48

cp kent .Do you really believe that Adolf, the man of the volk and the leader of the National SOCIALISTS was ‘right wing’? Right wing means less State, not more. – chas warner, taunton uk, 20/4/2012 16:12———————————————————————————- I agree, but people think that right-wing means more state because socialist and the BBC keep calling anyone they don’t like, BNP, EDL etc… “FAR-RIGHT”. Anyone who has been on the BNP website and read their policies will know that they are left-wing. - Paul, Essex, 21/4/2012 14:16

Great – but this polemic is wrong about the F.N.’s protectionalist policies. It the LACK of protection against Chinese imports that has totally decimated our manufacturing industries – and brought great wealth to China and great poverty to the UK. I am all for international trade, but only when there is a level playing field. Our workers cannot be expected to compete against workers who are paid £2 a day, have no health and safety, who grossly pollute the environment, who have suicide nets around their factory, and have the greatest number of worker fatalities in the entire world. We cannot and should not, be forced to compete ‘on equal terms’ with such a nation, which is why the UK also needs protectionalist policies. Perhaps Madame le Penn could stand for the Westminster parliament too.- Ralphy, Salop, 21/4/2012 14:14

The Daily Mail should hope Mélenchon does well. The right would finally have a legitimate reason to moan about socialism!- Marcos, NW London, 21/4/2012 13:23

‘Ever wondered why the establishment hate the BNP so much? It’s not their immigration policy but their anti-banker/globalist policies!’ The Nazi Party was also anti-banker/globalist in its rhetoric. In the end though they colluded with heads of business in a corporatist state.- Marcos, NW London, 21/4/2012 13:19

4-20 Focus on Cannabis and Confederates, Hitler and the Hunger-Games, the New Dark Ages, and Andreas Behring Breivik

Before writing anything else, I just want to reiterate a great big Cheer “Vive La France” for Marine Le Pen and the Front National in France.  The French National Elections are this Sunday, April 22, 2012, and although polls are not rating her as having much of a chance of winning, we can always hope that people lie to pollsters (as we know they do) and speak truth inside the ballot booth.  There was once a time when Jean-Marie Le Pen came in Second and the Established World went mad with fear that a real outsider candidate might have a real chance.  It was almost as crazy as the “Vote for the Crook, It’s Important” nationwide campaign to insure that Edwin Edwards beat David Duke in 1991, when Duke received over 60% of the White vote in Louisiana.  (Prior to serving his full ten year term for racketeering, the Federal Bureau of Prisons in its great mercy released Edwards from the federal gulag into a halfway house on January 13, 2011).  Marine Le Pen has none of Duke’s biographical baggages and the Old France is quite a bit more threatened by obvious aliens and outsiders today than the New France of La Louisianne  was in 1991, but the same forces of corporate industry and global homogenization have the same goal in both cases: KILL THE POLITICAL OUTSIDERS, let the real enemies of the people reign….  And no, of course, nothing that I’m saying has anything whatsoever to do with my theory of why I’m not on the California Ballot this year, absolutely, positively, nothing.

But today if 4-20, and as the show trial of Andreas Behring Breivik concludes its first week, I can only say that I am more convinced than ever that it IS a show trial staged precisely for the purpose of suppressing freedom in a uniquely European/Scandinavian way.  9-11 was too widely recognized in Europe for the staged fraud it was for the rail bombings in Madrid or the tube bombings in London to work again.  (France, as the world-leader in rational 9-11 doubt, was strangely immune to terrorist attacks—everyone old enough to talk in France knows what a sham 9-11 was and no one in that most enlightened country in Europe would be taken in by such a farce—but as PT Barnum is so famous for saying—no one EVER went broke UNDER-estimating the intelligence of the American people).

Just look at Andreas Behring Breivik making a pseudo-Nazi arm salute and then describing in such cool rational terms how he killed people.  Cui Bono Baby?  Would any rational thinking terrorist really imagine that killing a bunch of teenagers was going to garner sympathy for the cause of expelling non-Nordic immigrants from Norway?  Obviously Andreas Behring Breivik is NOT insane, as evidenced by his coherent and predictable patterns of speech and by his ability to follow instructions on courtroom decorum (such as “Don’t Make the Nazi salute anymore”, it upsets people).  But his explanation for what he’s doing is absurd.  Cui bono?  The only plausible beneficiaries of Andreas Behring Breivik’s attack are those who want to discredit his words.  The BNP, the Front National, and the German NPD certainly shy away from him, as do the National Democrats of neighboring Sweden.  Going around killing innocent people cannot CAUSE in the knowledge (which Breivik has affirmed) that you will become the most hated man in Norway is NOT a very effective way or means to become an apostle to cultural homogeneity.  Breivik’s trial has been scheduled in the week leading up to the French Elections….Marine Le Pen being the most effective anti-immigration leader in Europe, without any doubt—is this mere coincidence?  Anyone who studied how to kill people as calmly and as privately as Breivik did must have studied some history, and there is NO historical precedent or antecedent for mass random killings of completely innocent people leading to identity as a hero.  Sorry folks—if I’ve missed something out there, please let me know, but as far as I am concerned, Andreas Behring Breivik’s entire life story is part of the plot to make the descendants of the Vikings bow down and serve Mecca in much the same way that the Varangian guard once served the Byzantine Emperors.  It is to the Norwegian’s credit that they (unlike the Brits and the Americans) couldn’t be taken in by staged MUSLIM terrorist attacks), but in effect, they’ve just been taken in by the polar opposite….  And the fabled freedoms of Scandinavia will soon start to fade and diminish.  Sad but I guarantee you it’s true….

So the looming signs of the New Dark Ages come both closer and more obvious—Andreas Behring Breivik would not be giving Nazi-Arm Salutes if he were a real Nazi, he would not have chosen the targets he chose if he were a real Nazi, and this is, after all, Adolf Hitler’s birthday (4-20-1889).

The connection between Hitler’s birthday and Cannabis is one of the odder coincidences of history.  Why?  Some inconclusive evidence suggests that Hitler might (as many frontline soldiers in the Kaiser’s army did) have used Heroin during WWI, but otherwise his use of drugs is confined to having used various drugs during WWII, especially as the war went against him.

In the twisted and uneducated America today, what would you expect in the era of GW Bush & BH Obama, understanding of history is so confused in the popular mind that there is a tendency to conflate general notions of racism into one template. Confederates are considered equivalent to the Nazis and the Nazi forced labor of non-Germans in Europe to Southern American/US (i.e. “Confederate”) chattel slavery.  Critics of the Southern Confederacy have, on-line in this 150th anniversary year of Shiloh, gone so far as to claim that the CSA, if it had won the war, would have sought to extend slavery to Latin America and throughout the Western Hemisphere.  Such hateful, hate-filled fantasies seem likely to bear fruit in Tim Burton’s upcoming “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter“, and all I can say is—”will someone please help me organize a boycott?”  

The CSA Confederates and their Southern Patriotic heirs may believe in segregation of the races, and may even believe that Barack Hussein Obama is constitutionally disqualified to be and serve as Reich’s Fuhrer, I mean Chairman of the Central Committee and Supreme Soviet, I mean President…. but the Southern Tradition is one of individual freedom, not corporate tyranny.  Tennessee Williams, of course, saw a serious contradiction evolving in this tradition in the 1950s when he wrote Sweet Bird of Youth when Big Oil and other mostly “Yankee” Corporate Interests were taking over the South (especially early in Texas and Louisiana, but throughout the South after WWII)….

To a true Son of the Confederate State of America, there is nothing sadder than such confusion as links Confederates with Nazis, traditional southerners with corporate values or interests….because the reality is the extreme opposite.

The Confederates fought for Freedom AGAINST Centralized Government and Dictatorship, and modern Southern leaders, like the late Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, were war heroes on the beaches of Normandy to liberate France in 1944.  In Lincoln’s Marxists, Donald Kennedy and his co-author draw intense comparisons between Abraham and Adolf.  They do not mention the ultimate irony that Judah P. Benjamin, a West Indian Jew, was one of the leading statesmen of the Confederacy, or that Florida’s David Levy was the very first Jewish American to sit in the United States Senate.  Levy County on the Florida Gulf Coast is named after this pioneering Hebrew settler of the Sunshine State, and by some irony Levy County is the site of the infamous “Rosewood” Massacre.   But really and truly, as I have recently written, All Americans are now living in “Greater Rosewood,” Levy County, Florida—we are all subject to summary foreclosure and eviction by force—from sea to shining sea, but it is NOT the Klansmen who are after us this time….it is the Banks….and their “servicers” of course…. 04-19-2012 Carrie Loft v Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp et al Response to Order of 04-05-2012 and Motion for 30 day Extension of Time to file FAC.  

As I have also written here and elsewhere, the United States Federal Courts are unwilling to apply the Civil Rights Laws of the Land for the protection of white people, apparently because these laws only exist to foment racial discord and competition between Black and White (with some bones here and there thrown to fomenting conflict with Hispanics and Asians).   So long as the Banks and Banksters apply their vicious fraud equally to black and white alike, the courts will not recognize any violation of the civil rights of the people.  This too, is a sign of the Bush 41-Clinton-Bush 43-Obama Dark Age, descending upon us…

   The Nazis had certain ideals in common with conservatives throughout Western Europe and North America: the romanticized revitalization of indigenous European Culture, for example, rooting the spirit of progress in national pride and identity.  Such things are found in England, France, Italy, Poland, Russia, Greece, and Israel, not to mention in the United States and many countries in Latin America, or even post-Colonial Africa and Asia.

If that were all that Hitler’s Naziism had amounted to—resurgent national pride and rebuilding the nation shattered by the Great Depression (which effectively began in Germany immediately after Versailles in 1919 and never really ended).  Chancellor Sutler in V-for-Vendetta is a thinly disguised Hitler (“H” is the 8th letter of the alphabet starting with “A”, “S” is the 8th letter of the alphabet reciting backwards from “Z”).  Chancellor Sutler, like Hitler, believed in the power of the Big Lie.  But unlike Chancellor Sutler and his terrorism through “St. Mary’s” infection…. Hitler did more than merely terrorize his own people.  He went off to terrorize the French and the Poles.  Had Hitler NOT embarked on his war of extensive military conquest, Naziism might have been accepted and remained a “Third Way” in Europe.  Great Britain had guaranteed the integrity of Poland, and the 129 years of the Polish Partition was a wrong that deserved finally to be righted (one of the few things the Versailles Conference actually got right, surely, was the restoration of Polish national identity and autonomy).

But as a Confederate and Patriot of the American tradition, I cannot accept Hitler’s invasion and conquest of Poland, which started World War II, as even remotely legitimate.  One interesting thought is that Hitler must have had at least as clear an idea that invading Poland (and especially then invading the Soviet Union two years later, breaking faith with the after the Von Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact) would ultimately lead to his demise as Andreas Behring Breivik must realize that his slaughter of innocents would win him no friends either personally or for his cause.  

One could almost wonder and ask “cui bono” of Nazi Germany?  Nazi Germany led to the modern religion of Globalism, suppression of nationalism, and “we are one” suppression of the ideology of race-as-extended family, in short, of race as a biologically natural and real element of human culture and social identity.  World War II also resulted in the foundation of the state of Israel and the rise of a distinctly non-Christian ethos and elite in the world, which non-Christian ethos and elite clearly either needed and created or is now using and needs Andreas Behring Breivik in Norway, and George Zimmerman in Florida…  (not to make any comparison here—what Andreas Behring Breivik did in Norway was murder—intention killing of another person without justification or provocation of any kind, but what George Zimmerman did in Florida was, in my opinion, probably—almost certainly—self-defense, but it is being USED as a racially polarizing device and divisive event by President Barack Hussein Obama….).  

Going back to my April 13, 2012, essay on the Hunger Games and the New Dark Ages, and the comparison and contrast between the Hunger Games and V-for-Vendetta, the latter is clearly about Hitler-like totalitarian oppression, while the former directly concerns Confederate Rebels within an easily recognizable future North American Corporate/Centralized Government hegemony.

Confederates were not Nazis; they were not conquerors.  For all of Robert E. Lee’s fabled brilliance a military strategist, his best bet was to seize Washington D.C. and Maryland for the Confederacy in 1861-1862, when the northern armies were poorly organized and poorly led, but he and Jefferson Davis declined even to try to impose their will on Maryland and Delaware, slave states which had elected not to secede.   The Confederacy, it has often occurred to me, could and should have simply taken Washington D.C. right after the First Battle of Manassas/Bull Run, and taken over the capital there.  The War of 1861 might have then ended, perhaps with the Confederate Constitution replacing the new Federal Constitution of 1787 as Southern Sympathizers from Ohio, Illinois, and New York joined in. Slavery would have probably ended in the South by the 1880s or 1890s regardless, as it did in Brazil and the Spanish Colonies,but this is not consistent with Obama era anti-Confederate education, because Confederates were actually the original anti-Communists.  Worse (for themselves and the CSA) because Lee and Davis were dedicated to NON-CONQUEST IDEOLOGY, they gave up their best chances at winning in 1861-62.  By the time Lee invaded the North in earnest in 1863, there was no obvious purpose in doing so, no reasonable strategy, and once again, the chance to seize Washington D.C. and make it the Confederate Capital was lost.  Gettysburg ended that campaign and with it all reasonable hopes of Confederate victory, all reasonable hopes for the survival of the Confederate Constitution.

The Hunger Games, as I wrote last week, seems firmly rooted in the legacy of the vanquished 13 state of the Southern Confederacy, of which North Carolina was the state that sacrificed the most (suffering the greatest number of casualty losses, per capita, of any Southern State—Virginia lost more by number, but not as a percentage of the population, Florida lost the least, participating in the war hardly at all, Texas effectively won the war, maintaining its independence throughout, but surrendering on June 19, 1865 at Galveston, in spite of it all; New Orleans surrendered exactly 150 years ago this month, constituting the first great loss of the Confederacy, without firing a single shot, much as Paris was not defended in World War II—the French apparently like to save their beautiful cities from war-time destruction and mayhem…. consistently choosing discretion over valor….).

 But the Hunger Games also captured the coldly exploitative nature of the centralized government, in need of lots of “coal, minerals and row crops” as President Snow puts it while talking to the ill-fated game-master Seneca, who mistakenly thinks that “everyone likes an underdog.”

In the book, Hunger Games, which I finally started reading after seeing the movie last night for a seventh time in Santa Monica, suppression of private ownership of arms (even including ordinary bows and arrows like Katniss’) is a key an important aspect of the Government’s policy towards the people of District 12 (= Appalachia,  filmed in North Carolina).  

It was critical to keep the people disarmed lest they ever rise up against the establishment armies.  The people were forbidden effectively to feed themselves…. for fear that a well-fed populace might hunger for freedom….

In that connexion, I am today on my way to Fresno to work with members of the 4-20 cooperative there.  None of them, to the best of my knowledge, will be celebrating Hitler’s 123 birthday there this evening.  They have other problems.  The State of California has legalized medical marijuana but the Federal government continues to suppress it.  Just as in 1860, the Centralized Government wishes to suppress the farmers who supply a product much in demand around the world, to denigrate individual autonomy and local authority.  Unlike 1860, the states are weak, and in fact what I will face in Fresno is finding the ways and means to oppose the degree to which the Federal Government has skipped the state or effectively nullified state authority all together, and seeks to impose state law by collaborating with city and county authorities.

This is a Tenth Amendment crusade in the Confederate tradition: restore individual independence by building up autonomous farmers.  I personally haven’t touched cannabis as an intoxicant since July 1991, but the occasion when I did, in the Mary Martin Suite at the Hotel Pontchartrain in New Orleans, was one of the turning points in my life (and certainly it sounded the death knell of my marriage).  

But for the moment, I take pride in knowing that in 2012 as it was 152 years ago, real freedom and real liberty reside in the defense of self-supporting farmers away from the city and centralized economy and government.  This is the Confederate way, and the Confederate way is anti-communist and anti-Nazi, all at the same time as it is anti-Obama, anti-Bush, and generally antithetical to the Corporate establishment which rules America and Europe, and which has dedicated untold millions to the suppression of real individualists such as Marine Le Pen, and the creation of such fake individualists as Andreas Behring Breivik……

April 13: The Hunger Games, Judicial Immunity, and the Dawn of a New Dark Age

Life in its petty pace from day-to-day (and related notes on why I’m not on the California ballot)

Is it a coincidence that the California Secretary of State refused to approve me for a ballot place as candidate for the United States Senate Seat currently held by Diane Feinstein within 3 days of Facebook Canceling my profile because I was “promoting or organizing violence?”  Since I have never (to the best of my knowledge) advocated (much less “organized”) violence except to praise the spirit of continuing revolution, it was a great shock to me, but that was how my Spring season began.  (My long-time personal assistant and “Man Friday” Peyton assures me that I’ve never organized anything in my life, violent, peaceful, or indifferent)  

The snafu that led to my ballot position not being approved may yet prove the subject of a lawsuit, so I shan’t go into details except to say: California’s “Top Two, Voter Nominated” primary system only makes sense if non-professional political operatives (i.e. “voters”) are actually permitted to nominate candidates, and this requires a certain exercise of common sense on the part of the Registrar of Voters in each county as well as the Secretary of State.  Obviously, my supporters are largely battered down middle class working people who no longer trust the government to begin with.  They are anything BUT government insiders.  If only political insiders can maneuver the system then it is NOT a true “voter nominated” system.

I would guess that, in fact, the “top two” system was designed to protect the best funded insider candidates from even any hypothetical threat from outsiders like me, and that is, of course, a way of stifling change and preventing any real “dynamic” in the democratic process.  ”Top two” primaries arguably serve a system well-designed to engender a “thousand year reich”, ironic indeed since one would think that individuals of Barbara Boxer’s, Diane Feinstein’s and Henry Waxman’s background and ethnic origins would not WANT a thousand year reich….but perhaps the quibble was with the identity of the master race destined to rule for a millennium, rather than whether a unitary elite should have such power…. forever.

Remembering V-for-Vendetta and Serenity from 2005-2006

The only redeeming feature of Spring 2012 so far is a new movie, which equals and possibly surpasses in political insight my (obvious, previous) all time favorite: V-for-Vendetta.   V-for-Vendetta was a futuristic science fiction (literally based on cartoon characters based on a four centuries old English school boys’  rhyme about a highly manipulated historical even in 1605) and as such it served as an allegory about 9-11 and the “W” Bush (43rd Presidential) administration in the USA.   The lead characters, the Guy Fawkes’ masked “V” (Hugo Weaving) and Evey Hammond” (Nathalie Portman), were an amazing couple NOT in love (at least not romantically, and not in any way at all, at least not until Evey’s post-mortem eulogy) were, as cartoon characters are, difficult to relate to any ordinary people one might encounter in life.  

The brilliance of V-for-Vendetta was the incisive treatment of 9-11 and all that had happened in and around that date under the Bush 43 administration: barely a stone was left unturned to expose the rotten mould and horrible colony of insect life underneath it.  The sad part about V-for-Vendetta is that it’s message apparently resonated with so few people.  

As a movie, it should have had a national impact on political thought, revealing the ruling government as an oligarchy of hypocrisy, lies and fear through government media manipulation concealing a simple policy of orchestrated terrorism attributed to foreigners, specifically Islamic fundamentalists, in the justification of never-ending war, even though it was in fact the brainchild policy of the government itself.  

Above all, V-for-Vendetta reminded us of Adolf Hitler’s brilliant but evil insight, that the great mass of people will sooner believe a great lie than a small one.  Another movie concerning a “big lie” by the government was Joss Whedon’s beautiful epic Serenity.  The tale of the outer-space “wild-west racially non-discriminatory confederates” was, in so many ways, merely the extra galactic, historically unspecific, parallel to V.  Unlike V, Serenity did not focus on any specific modern event like 9-11, but  very generally shared a focus on governmental experiments in biotechnology and psychological manipulation as the root of transformational events in human history.  Of course, Serenity very unusually and distinctively echoed and memorialized the injustice of the Confederate defeat at the hands of a technologically superior Centralized government (“the Federation”).

Die Hungerspiele von Panem/Die Tribute von Panem (Totliche Spiele) (You’re a Damn Confederate, aren’t you?)

The new movie which in my mind at least now threaten’s V-for-Vendetta’s supremacy as the greatest political movie of our time premiered on Friday March 23, and is of course, the Hunger Games. (I confess I have not read Suzanne Collins’ books—everything I say here is based on the movie and the movie alone, which I found absolutely overwhelming—but I didn’t read Gone with the Wind until I was 26, by which time I had seen the movie at leas 30 times in my life).  The Hunger Games lacks any of the cartoonish elements of V-for-Vendetta and Serenity (as much as I like and appreciate the genuinely artistic value of those elements).  

My suspicions of Collins’ perspectives as those of a not-so-closet Confederate sympathizer gain more than moderate a bolster from the knowledge that, although born in Connecticut, the author was the daughter of a Vietnam veteran and spent her High School (i.e. critical formative identity) years in the heart of Dixie, specifically in Alabama in the 1970s…. where she attended  high school at the Alabama School of Fine Arts in Birmingham, where she was a Theater Arts major.  Oh yea, FWIW, the Alabama School of Fine Arts was founded by George Corley Wallace’s Wife, Governor Lurleen Wallace, in 1968, shortly before she tragically died of Cancer at age 41, and George Corley Wallace was Governor 1971-1979, all through Suzanne’s High School years.

Now, one way of looking at it is that, perhaps, the Hunger Games takes place after the collapse of the United States and Civil War to which the government news commentators in V-for-Vendetta made such frequent allusion.  According to those reports, the USA “the country that had everything” had become a “cesspool” of continental proportions due to its “Godlessness.”  While that’s a legitimate perspective, I think that the overwhelming weight of evidence and frame of reference in the Hunger Games is to the War of Southern Independence/War Between the States/War of 1861-1973, realizing that those dates are not the ones usually used in High School American History texts.

In fact, The Hunger Games in some of its visuals at least, almost approximates a kind of a futuristic Nanook of the North staged realism, focusing on the lives of the common people of the post-War (I mean Post-War Between the States) south, especially of the Appalachian regions of North Carolina (where The Hunger Games was filmed “on site”).  As in Whedon’s Serenity, the strong suggestion of Confederate nostalgia and sympathy is, to my mind at least, absolutely undeniable.  

It is too much to ask that we NOT see parallels to the War of 1861-65 and its aftermath when the “Treaty of the Treason” and “War” movie both recite that 13 Districts of “Panem” (“Panem” to my eyes sounds like a Hellenized partial translation of “E Pluribus Unum“, cf. Pangea) rose up against the Paternalistic “Welfare” Government that “fed them, protected them, cared for them”, that the District 12 setting is so obviously the REAL Southern landscape of coal-mining Appalachia, and that the poor whites of District 12 have a closely parallel lives and culture to at least the partially segregated black-African dominated population of District 11.

Without wanting totally to “spoil” the Hunger Games for anyone who hasn’t seen it, I will just summarize my interpretation of its wild popularity this way (aside from the obvious: a very human love story about two extraordinarily mature for their age teenagers who were unlikely ever to have fallen in love, but end up being “perfect” for each other, played by a genuinely handsome “All American Boy” lead and beautiful soft-spoken and emotional “Tomboy-type-Girl” who is so hot she literally sets her red dress on fire, combined with lots of action): Even though most Americans are not in fact hungry for food (that is the “Nano of the North” element reality of the starving South of 1865-1950, seeing oppressed, hard-working, underdogs whose primary source of protein was from very small game—squirrels, because the deer were almost all hunted out) people are clearly hungry for genuine justice and a fair playing field. (For one alternative, but to my mind, quite beautifully written and  excellent review of the Hunger Games, I recommend “The Feminist Spectator” by Princeton University’s Jill Dolan, published on April 4: http://www.feministspectator.blogspot.com/.  I somehow doubt that Professor Dolan would agree with me on the strong Confederate Sympathies implicit in The Hunger Games but there was once a President of Princeton University, the only Ph.D. ever to become President of the USA in fact, who thought that Birth of a Nation was the greatest historical drama in history, and portrayed the reality of his native south perfectly—unfortunately, that was also the Democratic President who signed into law (1) the 16th Amendment and Federal Income Tax, (2) the Federal Reserve Banking System, and the (3) the 17th Amendment, namely Woodrow Wilson….)

Hunger for Justice and Freedom

Like the residents of the 13 oppressed Districts of Panem, despite all government hypocrisy and lies to the contrary Americans both you and old today know that the odds are NOT in their favor and that, in fact, the odds are fairly hopelessly stacked against them.  And yet the system has this tiny escape valve: that about 1 in every 24 people can make it rich.  That is, one-in-twenty four of the oppressed can make it rich IF they’re willing to “play the government’s game” and basically, kill a lot of their fellow citizens in the process.  As of this April 13, 2012, I have seen the Hunger Games 5 times, and each time I’ve liked it more, seen more details.  I will have to read the books before completely integrating it into my thought processes about modern pop-cultural reaction to the impending doom that this American Life obviously faces, but I submit to you: the American people (on the whole, and certainly as a population compared to many parts of the world at the present and throughout history) may not be starving or hungry for food, but they hunger for justice and an even playing field, and they do not “relish” the very real prospect of a thousand years of subservience to “the government that feeds, them clothes them, takes care of them.”

Of Time and Space and Presidential Succession in the Leap Years…..

The Hunger Games takes place on the 74th anniversary of the institution of these gladiatorial combats.  The significance of that 74 years has bothered me.  On the one hand, it COULD refer to 1860 (the election of Abraham Lincoln and the secession of “District 1, South Carolina…) + 74 = 1934, the year in which Roosevelt’s New Deal started WPA reorganization of the South in earnest, or it could refer to the original publication date of the book, 2008, as the 74th year since 1934—or it could refer to both.  The coincidence, again, is hard to avoid.  1934 was the first full year of (de facto) Socialist Dictatorship in the United States (Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected in 1932, took office in March 1933, and many of his first year legislative proposals only took effect in 1934).  2008, 74 years later, Barack Hussein Obama, the first Communist President of the United States, was elected and took office, “perfecting” or at least completing the process begun by Abraham Lincoln in 1860, a mere 12 years after the publication of the Communist Manifesto in London in 1848.  (See Al Benson, Jr., & Walter Donald Kennedy’s 2011: Lincoln’s Marxists, Pelican Publishing, Gretna Louisiana, a fine historical summary of the connexion between Communism and Central government predominance in the USA, a historical summary which is easy to read although not nearly well-enough documented with footnotes and source citations as professional historians would like and scholars generally would appreciate).

Another aspect of the Hunger Games is the correlation between the oppressive Central government of Panem and Edward Gibbons’ the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, on the one hand, and a heartless, Machiavellian version of the Social Darwinism of the late 19th century on the other.  The capital of Panem is degenerate in a distinctly Roman Imperial Silver Age manner (Rome’s “Silver Age” normally said to run from the death of Augustus in A.D. 14 through the death of Marcus Aurelius in A.D. 180).  Nero and even Caracalla (“Post-Silver Age” Emperor from A.S. 198-217) would have felt quite at home in the Capitol of Panem, I think.  But the “Emperor” himself is a distinctly late 19th century Anglo-American type (President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland), who has a Romano-”Robber-Baron’s” scorn for the “underdog” without any explanation or moral justification, just the political desire to keep himself and his world on top and everyone else underneath.  President Snow appears to share none of the cultural degeneracy of the Capital, but has a great deal in common with aristocratic Victorian gardeners of the late 19th century.  

Snow’s name is English, as are most of the names of the characters known from District 12.  Most of the residents of the Capitol City, however, and apparently of Districts 1-2, have Roman names: “Cato”, “Caesar”, “Seneca”, “Octavia”, and “Claudius” just to name a few…..  

So the Hunger Games follows the pattern of Serenity and V-for-Vendetta in another distinctly modern way (although all these movies do it well, and for good purposes and effect, quite a few others, such as Captain America and [the movie that I dread most]—Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Slayer, do it very poorly and for improper purposes): historical metaphors and mythic realities are conflated, merged, and reorganized.

NOX OCCIDIT (“NIGHT FALLS”)

In any event, there is a Leonard Cohen song that summarizes why the Hunger Games, as a historical-mythological and futuristic allegory of injustice and game rigging, is so wildly popular, and that song is:

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows that the war is over
Everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That’s how it goes
Everybody knows

Everybody knows that it’s me or you
And everybody knows that you live forever
Ah when you’ve done a line or two
Everybody knows the deal is rotten
Old Black Joe’s still pickin’ cotton
For your ribbons and bows
And everybody knows

And everybody knows that the Plague is coming
Everybody knows that it’s moving fast
Everybody knows that the naked man and woman
Are just a shining artifact of the past
Everybody knows the scene is dead
But there’s gonna be a meter on your bed
That will disclose
What everybody knows

And everybody knows that you’re in trouble
Everybody knows what you’ve been through 
From the bloody cross on top of Calvary 
To the beach of Malibu 
Everybody knows it’s coming apart
Take one last look at this Sacred Heart
Before it blows
And everybody knows

The saddest difference between V-for-Vendetta and Serenity on the one hand and the Hunger Games on the other is the complete transparency of the society of Panem: “Everybody knows that the system’s rotten…. everybody knows that the war is over, everybody knows that the good guys lost.”  Everybody knows that the government that feeds the people, clothes them, and cares for them does not like underdogs.  President Snow is a late 19th Century-styled  avatar of George H.W. Bush (41st), Bill Clinton, George W. Bush (43rd), & Barack Hussein Obama all rolled into one.  

At least in V-for-Vendetta and Serenity, there still existed the apparent hope that revelation of truth could lead to revolution and change. 

But now President Obama signs the National Defense Authorization Act allowing indefinite detention of American Citizens on American soil without charges or trial, and he does so unblinkingly and unabashedly.  President Obama jingoistically adopts the dead Trayvon Martin as his own son in an effort to exacerbate racial tensions and divisions to his advantage in an election year at the same time that he tells the AIPAC Conference that he supports Israel’s quest to maintain ethnic homogeneity and integrity.  

There are no secrets in modern America, our Joseph Stalin, aka President Obama, has no need of Hitlerian, Rooseveltian, or “W” Bushian type “Big Lie”—he tells us all that he wants the power to take away all our rights, but asks us to trust him that he won’t really do it—except in the case of real underdogs, like, I guess, for example, George Zimmerman?  And speaking of that, how many of you imagine that George Zimmerman, whether he be called White, Hispanic, or Jewish, or all of the above, will get a fair trial?

So now to celebrate April 13 even further: WHERE WILL WE BE 74 years from now, or from 2008, say in 2082?  I predict we may well be in a New Dark Age, and not just because I’m not on the California Ballot for this year (although that is symptomatic).  

So far as “fixed games” go, what could be worse than a criminal prosecution set by agreement between Judges and prosecutors arranged through bribes?  Is that the American Way?  We wouldn’t like to think so.  In 1980, the year I graduated from the College of Arts & Sciences at Tulane and started graduate school at Harvard, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California said that “fixing” cases was not a normal judicial function and that no judicial immunity could attach to such activities: Rankin v Howard 633 F2d 844 _9th Circuit December 5 1980.  A short six years later, that same Ninth Circuit reversed itself and found judicial immunity from civil suit for such activities: Ashelman v Pope 793 F2d 1072 *EN BANC* 9th Circuit 1986

But the outrageous history of the suppression of judicial immunity just goes on and on through the subsequent citation history of Ashelman v. Pope to show how official immunity for prosecutors and the executive branch has almost merged with Judicial immunity to the point that the government is just one big immune mass of oppression against the people, and the modern government of E Pluribus Unum, aka “Panem” can prosecute you, jail you, and torture you, with complete immunity.