The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRaches Archive
Home
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
Table of ContentsOptions
List of Bookmarks

Losing “Home”

The modern world is a world of ephemerality in every way.  Accordingly, the concept of a home has been lost to the meat-robots who are rapidly replacing humans.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, “a person in the United States can expect to move 11.7 times in their [sic] lifetime”; the propensity of Americans to wander about is a perennial topic of discussion.  In Europe, many of the War stories I find most tragic are not of individuals who died, but of the destruction and dispossession of family homes that had been established for centuries before the United States even existed.  And in my own life experience, I have too oft found myself surrounded by chic cosmopolites, who deem excessive attachment to living in one place to be a sign of emotional immaturity—perhaps even of mental illness.

The following article, which was nestled alongside a heart-rending review of Silesian Inferno (Schlesisches Inferno) at pp. 15–18, is a peculiar favorite of mine.  I have tried showing it to people, but never yet found anyone who understands it.

To Professor Oliver’s observations about “abolishing humanity”, I can add only that humans are indeed being replaced by fungible wetware computing assets, programmed and managed by more reliable, more intelligent machines. ®


Coming Home

By Revilo P. Oliver
Liberty Bell, November 1992, pp. 11–15.

[*11] The Manchester Guardian may have been a liberal publication when it was founded in 1821.  When I first began to glance occasionally at copies of it, a hundred and thirty years later, it had already become an evangel for “Liberal intellectuals,” telling them what to think—or to recite without troubling their consciousness with thought.  I am, by the way, becoming very tired of putting quotation marks about a phrase that designates a horde of chatterboxes who are neither liberal[1]In political terms, a liberal necessarily desires a society fit for liberi, free men, and, heeding George Washington’s warning that “government, like fire, is a useful servant, but a fearful master,” he will strive to reduce governmental control of individuals to a very minimum—the very antithesis of the slavery desired by the self-styled “Liberals,” who perpetually agitate for more Soviet-style legislation and more degradation of their own race, which they take pride in denigrating and betraying.  And they have already imposed on us Marx’s dictatorship of the Sheenies and their thugs who control a mindless proletariat.  The last American liberal was Albert Jay Nock, whose Our Enemy, the State (New York, Morrow, 1935) should be read by everyone who is at all interested in politics in the true sense of that word—the sense in which it was used by a constitutional lawyer, who was fond of remarking, “Never try to discuss politics with a politician: he couldn’t understand it, and wouldn’t give a damn, if he could.” nor intellectual.  “Liberal intellectuals,” as Joseph Sobran once dared to say publicly, to the displeasure of his editor-in-chief,[2]Cf. Liberty Bell, August 1987, pp. 2–5. are only slightly disguised Communists, i.e., votaries of the Marxian religion, although some may be too ignorant to know it.

As one would expect, recent issues of the Guardian’s weekly supplement, which is widely distributed in this country, are filled with passionate yelps that the “rich nations” (that means you, sucker) [*12] must reduce their own standard of living so that they can give trillions of dollars to the “poor nations” (and that means billions of niggers, wogs, and other biological détritus) to help them “save the planet” (by breeding faster).  (That is the hogwash purveyed by the Gore who is now, incredible as it seems, a candidate for the office of Vice President.)[3]Cf. Liberty Bell, April 1992, pp. 21-22.  There is naturally no mention of the only pollution from which the planet needs to be saved, the horrible overpopulation by billions of vocal anthropoids that are multiplying like guinea pigs, thanks to the fatuity and subconscious death-wish of our own ill-starred race.

Occasionally, however, the Guardian Weekly prints something worth reading.  In the issue for 21 June 1992 there is an item by Ralph Whitlock, which, I hope, may have reminded the paper’s habitual readers that there is much that neither they nor we can understand about our fellow creatures, who have as much right to this planet as we do, although our race, long bemused by a pernicious superstition, thought that they were made for our swollen-headed species to use and abuse.  It is worth quoting.

Mr. Whitlock says that last May he and a neighbor were commenting on the late return of swallows and house martins when

Over the meadows before his house, dipping and diving toward us as they hawked insects on the wing, were four or five martins.  Suddenly they were with us, and, losing their interest in flies, they made straight for the sites of their fast year’s nests.  Without hesitation and with no exploratory reconnoitering, they flew directly to the vestiges of the nests that had survived the winter’s gales, and clung to them twittering.  It was as if they were saying, “Well, here we are Home again! and so glad to be here!”

And I fell to marvelling at the unerring instinct that had brought them all those 7,000 miles from their winter quarters in South Africa, 14,000 miles if you reckon the autumn journey.  When the time came to begin the journey the birds must have had a clear picture of their destination, and a detailed programming of their route. … And there was no mistaking the impulse which guided them, for, the next day, they were busy laying the foundation of a new nest under the house eaves, using what remained of their nest of the previous year.

In the martins and many other species of birds, as I remarked when commenting on Dr. Rhine’s imposition on the credulity of the [*13] public,[4]I noticed this passage of impudent arrogance, astonishing even in Jews, when glancing through that horrendous collection, but I seem to have failed to make a note of precisely where it occurred. we have a genuine instance of “extra-sensory perception.”  Their astonishing journeys are certainly not explicable in terms of the five senses that we possess.  The most plausible theory is that they somehow perceive the lines of force in the earth’s magnetic field and, perhaps, the angle of the sun’s rays.  But whatever the explanation, we have here a phenomenon of what can be called a “spiritual force” and is much more worthy of our attention than absurd religions about supernatural beings, whether old and outworn superstitions or newly invented by the hucksters of marvels for the gullible.

The same inexplicable power of perception is present in various species of mammals.  If you ride a horse over winding trails in the foothills, which he has never visited before, the instant his head is turned homeward he will know it, although you may not, if you have not consulted a map.  There are apparently unquestionable reports that if a baboon is carried, in a vehicle from which he cannot look out, a hundred miles along the two legs of a right-angle triangle, he will, when released, start homeward across the hypotenuse.

We lack that power of extra-sensory perception, although some have claimed that vestiges of it are to be found in the most primitive species of talking anthropoids, Capoids and Australoids.  However that may be, as the late Robert Ardrey has insisted in several of his books,[5]New York, Harcourt-Brace, 1924; reprint available from Liberty Bell Publications, \$6.50 + postage. all of the higher mammals, at least, including us, possess an instinctive sense that connects them with a specific place, a home.  And all of them, if not degenerate, will fight to the death to preserve that home.

We all have that instinct, although “Liberal intellectuals” and other nitwits try to deny it.  I have met a highly intelligent woman, who holds a quite responsible position in a large city, but maintains, at considerable expense, a house in the town in which she was born, a thousand miles away; she refuses to rent it, and has it maintained by a hired caretaker, although she can visit it for a few days only once or twice a year.  “Without that home,” she said, “I would feel lost, a mere bit of flotsam adrift in the human sea.”

[*14] The perspicacious lady is right.  We are truly human only when we own some plot of ground with a house that is our home, from which we may wander, but to which we can always return.  That is why the World Destroyers are imposing real-estate taxes, usually for socially pernicious ends, such as “Welfare” and the monstrously overgrown boob-hatcheries, that reduce “ownership” of a home to renting it from the tax-collector; and use the Communist devices of income and inheritance taxes to make it admittedly impossible for most of the younger generation of Americans ever to have, even provisionally, a home of their own.  That js why they have almost succeeded in liquidating families and making marriage a purposeless farce.  (Although holy men rant about marriage as a magical “sacrament,” the social function of marriage is to ensure the inheritance of property by the owner’s legitimate children.  One cannot speak of another possible result of marriage, the lifelong devotion of a man and a woman to each other, without exciting shrieks from the harridans of female “liberation,” who are currently concerned with the danger that their “liberated” sluts might live with one man long enough to become accustomed to him.)

Much effort has been devoted to reducing Americans to “flotsam adrift on a human sea,” individuals as rootless as tats in a sewer.  In this, they have had the coöperation of the large corporations, which have become another device for destroying private property.  In 1945, all the businesses in a typical American town, with the possible exception of a branch of the Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company and perhaps one of United Cigars, were owned by local “capitalists.”  Today the town has only “outlets” of huge corporations, managed by hirelings who are shifted about the country from state to state like tumbleweed on a desert, precisely for the purpose of preventing them from staying long enough in any one place to acquire property, form family connections, and put down roots.

Our enemies have created a generation of isolated individuals, as unconnected with others as billiard balls and half-mad with the terrible loneliness of a man in a crowd.  In this work of devastation they are abetted by mattoids and rancorous misfits, such as H. G. Wells,[6]That Wells knew what he was doing when he became, like Toynbee, an agent of a dire conspiracy is shown by one significant short story, “The Isle of Dr. Moreau.”  His motive, so far as I know, has not been determined.  On Toynbee’s impudent confession of conspiracy against civilization, see Liberty Bell, May 1988, pp. 7–8. who [*15] realize that there is only one way to produce a “warless world” and that is to abolish humanity and replace it with zombies deprived of their racial instincts.  The dehumanized animals will be herded by God’s People, of course.

The territorial imperative is inherent in our racial inheritance—and no doubt, with variations, in other races, which need. not concern us.  The blind forces of biological evolution have so formed our species that we are fully human only when we are attached to property, a home, and, if possible, a family that has a known past and could have a future.  The great majority of Americans became so befuddled that they, having at fist accepted Marx’s income tax in the spirit of the girl who was not worried by becoming “only a little bit pregnant,” have been brought by their unappeaseable enemies, step by step, to a plight in which almost the whole of their lives is a continuous revolt against nature.

The laws of nature are absolute and from them there is no appeal.  They may be violated for a time by individuals, nations, and races, but never with impunity.  The ultimate and inescapable penalty for all is death.


Notes

[1] In political terms, a liberal necessarily desires a society fit for liberi, free men, and, heeding George Washington’s warning that “government, like fire, is a useful servant, but a fearful master,” he will strive to reduce governmental control of individuals to a very minimum—the very antithesis of the slavery desired by the self-styled “Liberals,” who perpetually agitate for more Soviet-style legislation and more degradation of their own race, which they take pride in denigrating and betraying.  And they have already imposed on us Marx’s dictatorship of the Sheenies and their thugs who control a mindless proletariat.  The last American liberal was Albert Jay Nock, whose Our Enemy, the State (New York, Morrow, 1935) should be read by everyone who is at all interested in politics in the true sense of that word—the sense in which it was used by a constitutional lawyer, who was fond of remarking, “Never try to discuss politics with a politician: he couldn’t understand it, and wouldn’t give a damn, if he could.”

[2] Cf. Liberty Bell, August 1987, pp. 2–5.

[3] Cf. Liberty Bell, April 1992, pp. 21-22.

[4] I noticed this passage of impudent arrogance, astonishing even in Jews, when glancing through that horrendous collection, but I seem to have failed to make a note of precisely where it occurred.

[5] New York, Harcourt-Brace, 1924; reprint available from Liberty Bell Publications, \$6.50 + postage.

[6] That Wells knew what he was doing when he became, like Toynbee, an agent of a dire conspiracy is shown by one significant short story, “The Isle of Dr. Moreau.”  His motive, so far as I know, has not been determined.  On Toynbee’s impudent confession of conspiracy against civilization, see Liberty Bell, May 1988, pp. 7–8.

 
Hide 18 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. black dog says:

    A wonderful article. I’m English, and England isn’t a big country. But it varies a lot in a small space. I know which part of it is home. But it’s rapidly filling up with people who don’t understand it, have no connection to it. Not just immigrants, but the richer southerners, fleeing from the mess they created down south. I agree that this rootlessness is the consequence of deliberate policy by our so called rulers. But the last and most important thing you can take from someone is the place they call “home”. I’m staying here.

    • Replies: @Raches
  2. ulithi says:

    An “unerring instinct” for home; a homeward trek “across the hypotenuse”; an “instinctive sense” and attachment to property, home, place and hearth- Advent , an appropriate time to re-read Chesterton.

    • Replies: @Raches
  3. “Meat machines” are a dead giveaway, Karlin. Only ruski would know meat machines, Sorokeen aint that popular in the west.

    • Replies: @Raches
  4. Raches says: • Website
    @ulithi

    An “unerring instinct” for home; a homeward trek “across the hypotenuse”; an “instinctive sense” and attachment to property, home, place and hearth- Advent , an appropriate time to re-read Chesterton.

    A. K., or G. K.?  Professor Oliver knew Mr. Arthur Keith Chesterton, and highly praised Miss Rosine de Bounevialle for carrying on his Candour magazine; see Liberty Bell, March 1994, pp. 30–33.  Incidentally, I believe that was the last Liberty Bell article which Oliver wrote before his death in August 1994; his final months were unproductive, on account of severe ill health.

    Oliver himself was one of the great masters of English prose.  I reread his articles to improve my own writing, in an opposite application of the principle by which, perniciously and ineluctably, reading Twitter deforms people into illiterate morons. ®

    • Replies: @ulithi
  5. Home is where the heart is. He who loses his home loses his heart. He who denies his home never had a heart in the first place.

    Thus pity the homeless man. And beware the homeless cosmopolitan.

  6. Raches says: • Website
    @Thelma Ringbaum

    I never read much of Mr. Karlin’s work; I was only just getting into it when he wound up his blog at The Unz Review.  I did not borrow the term from him, and I would acknowledge it if I had.

    “Meat machines” or “meat-robots” is a Rachesism, not to be confused with the many Oliverisms I borrow in my writings.  I have been preaching about that for years, mostly to buggy wetware units that are incapable of being reprogrammed.  (I blamed hardware faults, which can be fixed only by eugenics.)  An essay intersecting with that subject will be forthcoming on Proems, at some near-future time. ®

    • Replies: @hillaire
  7. Raches says: • Website
    @black dog

    A wonderful article.  I’m English, and England isn’t a big country. […]

    My condolences.  I think it was Oliver who once remarked somewhere that an Englishman’s home was once his castle—now, it is his kennel; but I cannot find the exact quote at this moment.

    But the last and most important thing you can take from someone is the place they call “home”.  I’m staying here.

    Good luck keeping your home for your posterity. ®

  8. ruralguy says:

    I’ve moved 16 times, so far, across the country and out of the country, as an engineer pursuing job opportunities. The advantages were the friends that I met, the novelty of different types of work, and the excitement of exploring a new location. But, the disadvantages were the friends moved on when I moved on, work became less important and less a part of who I was, as I aged, and the new locations became much the same, as the nation nationalized and then globalized. Yet, the lure of the open road is very strong in me. The grass is always greener somewhere else. But, as Erma Bombeck noted, it is always greenest over the septic tank. I’ve lived over many septic tanks :).

  9. ulithi says:
    @Raches

    Your prose reminds of G.K. ; your theology and politics of A.K., I say more G.K. would be ok.

  10. I felt the same disorientation when I finally sold the house I grew up in, after holding it for almost four years after my father’s passing. The final impetus was that I discovered insurance companies frown on coverage of vacant properties, no matter how well maintained, and if there had been vandalism or a fire it would have been an uphill battle to get what I was paying the company to provide. This unelected power of uncontrolled capitalism is the reason why a strong government is an absolute necessity in the modern world. George Washington is all fine and good but the United States is a global antidemocratic empire and no longer a tiny agricultural republic.

    I suggest getting Publication 706 from the IRS, available through their website. In it you will discover the first \$11 mullion of an inheritance (rising to \$12,060,000 in 2022) are exempt from estate (aka “death”) tax, so the claims of unjust federal confiscation are those of the elite, not the people.

    For the past forty years, there has been an ongoing campaign to delegitimize the very idea of state institutions designed to improve the well being of the population. The government, obeying its constitutional mandate “to provide for the common welfare”, is relentlessly attacked as an enemy of progress by those who profit from evading its legitimate oversight. But we are seeing that countries with intact state institutions have been better able to handle the current pandemic and cannot be easily dismissed as authoritarian. They are, rather, efficient – far more so than any for-private-profit system.

    I will close with this quote from your friend Adolf Hitler, explaining the rationale for his authoritarian government in a speech to Berlin armaments workers in December 1940, “”In these countries [capitalist democracies], money in fact rules. That ultimately means a group of a few hundred persons who possess enormous fortunes. As a result of the singular construction of the state, this group is more or less totally independent and free . . . . Free enterprise this group understands as the freedom not only to amass capital, but especially to use it freely; that is, free from state or national supervision. So one might imagine that in these countries of freedom and wealth, unheard-of public prosperity exists. … On the contrary, in those countries class distinctions are the most crass one could think of: unimaginable poverty on one hand and equally unimaginable riches on the other. … In these lands of so-called democracy, the people are never the primary consideration. Paramount is the existence of those few who pull the strings in a democracy, the several hundred major capitalists. The broad masses don’t interest them in the least, except during elections.”

  11. Charles says:

    My favorite Oliverism is “boob-hatcheries”. It is the perfect term to describe American “education” over the last several generations.

  12. Revilo Oliver: “There is naturally no mention of the only pollution from which the planet needs to be saved, the horrible overpopulation by billions of vocal anthropoids that are multiplying like guinea pigs, thanks to the fatuity and subconscious death-wish of our own ill-starred race.”

    Interesting that Oliver, the staunchest of anti-semites, should here invoke the subversive(?) Freudian concepts of the subconscious and the existence of a death wish. The idea of the death wish, which Freud sketched out in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, was perhaps the only one of Freud’s ideas that was never accepted by a majority of psychoanalysts. Is there really such a thing, and is permitting the overpopulation of, or even continued existence of non-whites really a proof of its existence? A more optimistic, alternative view would see most of the modern world as an American empire; a multi-racial global empire arising from a technological system in which America occupies the central position. This technological empire itself could be seen (and in other contexts, is seen by those on the right) as both an embodiment of the white will-to-power and a proof of its racial superiority; an expression of civilizational confidence.

    Revilo Oliver: “Much effort has been devoted to reducing Americans to “flotsam adrift on a human sea,” individuals as rootless as [r]ats in a sewer. In this, they have had the coöperation of the large corporations, which have become another device for destroying private property. … The great majority of Americans became so befuddled that they … have been brought by their unappeaseable enemies, step by step, to a plight in which almost the whole of their lives is a continuous revolt against nature.”

    Technology itself is nothing less than a revolt against nature, since if natural results were seen as desirable, it would be unnecessary to interfere with nature to try to improve upon them. It should go without saying that the “great majority of Americans” support the very technological “progress” that has brought them to this pass, and do so enthusiastically. Thus, modernity isn’t the result of a plot by “unappeasable enemies”, but rather the outcome of the collective efforts of humanity, to which the white race has itself contributed the largest share.

  13. Anonymous[607] • Disclaimer says:

    The wandering tribes of ancient Europe like the Scythians did not have this problem. Move around, but move with your tribe. Irish gypsies move around, they do not assimilate or become de-generates. In the modern world, groups must come up with new structures to create bonds and boundaries. Religion is part of the bond of groups such as the Ndrangheta and Irish gypsies.

  14. hillaire says:
    @Raches

    I prefer the term ‘meat puppets’… because of course most of the discombobulated sacks of flesh one encounters staggering around nowadays have no volition of their own…

    the palindrome was an excellent fellow, erudite and irreverent…. unfortunately his kind are all but extinct…

    I can guarantee that you won’t be returning from a risky essential mission sometime in the near future, when all is bleak and most imbecilia have transitioned to lady men, when the shit has dropped out of liberal democracies backside and every miscreant walking wants you dead….

    having decimated enemy logistics…. the old land-rover wending homeward bouncing over the littered dead..

    the ‘skipper’ is in full flow.. you sit nodding clutching a bottle of armagnac and your trusty 9 milly.. regaled by a recitation of Homers odyssey…

    in four different languages…

    • Thanks: Rurik
  15. Thrallman says:

    A lot of excellent points by Oliver:

    Although holy men rant about marriage as a magical “sacrament,” the social function of marriage is to ensure the inheritance of property by the owner’s legitimate children.

    He makes the point in one sentence because it’s obvious. Yet there is a lot of studied ignorance out there. More people believe that the purpose of marriage is to legitimize sex, which would otherwise be a mortal sin.

    In 1945, all the businesses in a typical American town … were owned by local “capitalists.” Today the town has only “outlets” of huge corporations, managed by hirelings who are shifted about the country from state to state like tumbleweed on a desert…

    Global corporations have no loyalty to cities, or even civilizations. China owns the West now.

    Our enemies have created a generation of isolated individuals, as unconnected with others as billiard balls and half-mad with the terrible loneliness of a man in a crowd.

    It seems to me this was the reason for the Covid lockdowns. Isolation was the purpose. The rulers seem to have a hostility to human physical interaction.

    The great majority of Americans became so befuddled that they, having at fist accepted Marx’s income tax in the spirit of the girl who was not worried by becoming “only a little bit pregnant,” have been brought by their unappeaseable enemies, step by step, to a plight in which almost the whole of their lives is a continuous revolt against nature.

    There is no hope for the befuddled masses, nor is there hope for democracy. Those who know better are the real elite, and they must save themselves.

  16. gT says:

    From an economic point of view, labour is needed for production so labour must move to where it is needed. Labour doesn’t need a home, or a family for that matter. Economics doesn’t care about the humanity of labour, nor the nation states where labour resides.

    “The nation state is passe. Borders have disappeared. Distance is dead. The earth is flat. Our identities are no longer bound by our places of birth.” Dani Rodrik, who actually doesn’t like Globalization.

    Globalizationists don’t care about the home or the nation, they only care about the money. Nationalists care very much about the home and the nation state on the other hand. The (((Cosmopolitans))) even change their names like the rest of us change our underwear.

  17. gT quoting Rodrik: “The nation state is passe. Borders have disappeared. Distance is dead.”

    The white man’s technology has brought the whole world to his doorstep, and he doesn’t like it very much.

    • Thanks: Raches
  18. If I may, I’d like to suggest a piece of advice that should be given for those Americans who take such a cavalier attitude towards this country. Find a person(s) who lost their identity when a nation changed it’s borders, putting them in the position of “people without a country”. In post WW2 Europe there were many. It would be a shocking lesson to these “Americans” and give them a new attitude towards their own. You become a non-entity. You have no protection against all sorts of situations, some bad enough to do great harm to you or even kill you.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Moderated by Raches. Anonymous comments are welcome, but will be moderated more strictly than those from commentators with at least a pseudonymous reputation.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Raches Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV