Inside The Mind Of A Slavemaster

The Librarian says –
Hi there! You are currently
In the Reading Library—>
World Government section—>
S – Slavemaster

 The “Special” Room.



Inside The Mind Of A Slavemaster

What principles does a sociopath live by?

By Virginia McClaughry


Meet Correa Moylan Walsh.



Correa Moylan Walsh was born in Newburg, New York on September 23, 1862, the son of Joseph Correa and Anna (Wood) Walsh. He prepared for college at Sellech’s School in Norwalk, Connecticut and then attended Harvard where he received a fine slavemaster-approved education in all “the very best philosophers”. He graduated in 1884, and then “went abroad” for six years to “study philosophy” – even though the first book he published was on the topics of mathematics and economics.

However, what was really happening is that he was being groomed by the slavemasters to help them in their New World Order project. One of the places he spent quite some time at was the seat of Slavemaster agents training, Oxford University.

Oxford Round Table 20th anniversary

He returned to the U.S. in 1890, and within a year he became a member of the Reform Club of New York from 1891 to its dissolution.

Using general research resources, very little was apparently known of his activities (other than that he was “pursuing his studies”) until he published his first book a little over 10 years later.

This book, entitled: The Measurement of General Exchange Value was considered so “out of nowhere” that it drew exactly that comment in the economics community.

In a review of his book, the author expressed that surprise.

In 1901, out of the blue, The Measurement of General Exchange-Value by an, until then, unknown author named Correa Moylan Walsh appeared.

It gives a reference #25, which continues on about the oddness of this book appearance, and tells us that Walsh spent time at Oxford.

There appears to be not much known about Walsh…he obtained an undergraduate arts degree from Harvard and studied further in Berlin, Paris, Rome and Oxford.

…Without academic or other known affiliation, he published The Measurement of General Exchange-Value in 1901…The book does not contain a preface.

His appearance writer-wise, was merely a prelude to what his real assignment was, and so in a sense this was simply a classic application of the Toynbee/Cecil method of manipulating public opinion – by first finding a way to draw attention to him, which it did.

I’ll be talking more about that a little later on, but he also had some other connections to the British slavemasters.

By 1909, he was a member of the Society of Psychical Research (SPR). This is one of the main Slavemaster front groups, and it’s no surprise considering his recruitment at Oxford, to find him a member of this group. For more information on the SPR please see Scientology Roots chapter 21-5.

He also was a member of two other Toynbee/Cecil bloc related “influence” groups, the Royal Economic Society and the Royal Statistical Society – as well as in America he belonged to the American Economic Association and the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

References consulted for Walsh’s history:

Decennial Report of the Class Secretary of 1884 By Harvard
25th Anniversary Report of the Secretary By Harvard College
Price and Quantity Index Numbers: Models for Measuring Aggregate Change… by Bert M. Balk

* * *


Did you this line stand out to you at all?

He belonged to the Reform Club of New York from 1891 to its dissolution.

It looks so innocuous doesn’t it – like something you should just pass right over as unimportant.

Except, since I know that everyone has the same abilities I do, it probably jarred you just a little, right?

The reason I’m even making such a point about it, is because it’s a perfect example of how you work, and how you work to ignore how you work.

That little feeling was correct. There is most definitely something to that “Reform Club” business.

Since it’s practically the first thing that he did upon returning from Oxford and abroad, for one reason. I knew there was more, so off I went digging to see what’s up with this Reform Club.

The first thing was that proof of that statement of Walsh’s membership was rather hard to find because he was listed as “C.M. Walsh of Bellport N.Y.” – but I found it anyway here.

The club itself was founded in 1888.



Discussions of “great import” took place in the parlor –


Reform Club New York - Parlor

and the library – where “research and investigations” often took place.

Reform Club of New York - library


Taking up a few other highlights from this particular book now –

On p. 11 – it lists Jesse Isidor Straus as one of the members of the Tariff Reform Committee, and on p. 17 – Isidor Strauss is listed as a Life Member, with an address of 200 sixth avenue.

P. 18 shows Felix Adler was a Resident Member, with an address of 123 E. 60th Street.

That figures, doesn’t it? Of course he’d be mixed up in this.

P. 161 shows that it’s purpose is to promote honest, efficient and economical government, as well as engage in “Tariff Reform”

Sounds so noble and erudite, but in reality it was yet another front group to attack the American government and replace it with a FEDERALIZED one with too much power.

It was also meant to help propagandize and usher in the next controlled “United States” bank – owned primarily by foreigners – the Federal Reserve, as well as personal income tax for every single American. This was achieved by the British Slavemasters in 1913, approximately 15 years after this clubs formation.

It had 15 trustees, their names were listed on p. 156.

Another item they were engaged in, was the anti-President Jackson agenda of the slavemasters to undermine the people having hard currency in the form of silver.

The important thing about that is, this Reform Club was part of a HUGE propaganda movement to try and trash that idea and introduce the slavemasters preferred system of predominantly paper.

Many Americans were snookered into voting for Democrat Grover Cleveland. He was the 22nd and 24th United States President – 1885 – 1889, and was the only President to serve two non consecutive terms.

They had believed that he was going to join and uphold the silver cause, but after pressure was brought hard to bear on him by the usual suspects (the slavemasters and their bankers) he used the Reform Club to make it clear where he now stood.

Most observers expected Democrat Grover Cleveland to join the silver cause, but he stated his refusal to do so in the following letter of February 10, 1891, addressed to E. Ellery Anderson of the Reform Club of New York.

Dear Sir:

I have this afternoon received your note inviting me to attend tomorrow evening the meeting called for the purpose of voicing the opposition of the businessmen of our city to “the free coinage of silver in the United States.”

I shall not be able to attend and address the meeting as you request, but I am glad that the business interests of New York are at last to be heard on this subject. It surely cannot be necessary for me to make a formal expression of my agreement with those who believe that the greatest peril would be invited by the adoption of the scheme, embraced in the measure now pending in Congress, for the unlimited coinage of silver at our mints.

If we have developed an unexpected capacity for the assimilation of a largely increased volume of this currency, and even if we have demonstrated the usefulness of such an increase, these conditions fall far short of insuring us against disaster if, in the present situation, we enter upon the dangerous and reckless experiment of free, unlimited, and independent silver coinage.

Source: The Writings and Speeches of Grover Cleveland, George F. Parker, ed., 1892, p. 374.

– Encyclopedia Brittanica article


The other big propaganda issue that the Reform Club was agitating on, was something called the Tariff. It’s a complicated issue, but the long and short of it is that Britain’s income lines were being hurt by it.

That’s the bottom line.



On page 49 of the Tariff Committee of the Reform Club of New York reportTariff Reform, Volumes 3-4

You can see that 2/3 of a particular tin product was being sent from Britain to the U.S. and it was being taxed when it came into the U.S., Britain didn’t want to be.

Once you cut through all the bullshit, it’s really that simple.

Tariffs on Britain’s exports to the U.S., is what this “Club” of erstwhile red-blooded Americans (I’m being facetious – they were anglophiles) were agitating for reform on. Aren’t we not surprised here.

If you want to see some very true to form, nasty little British propaganda in action, check out p. 55.

But all of this doesn’t really get down to the nitty-gritty like this next document I found does.


– 1889 document found at Hathi Trust

This issue reveals the true purpose of the British front group called The Reform Club of New York.

It was purely to act as a clearing-house for providing propaganda fodder from which “articles” and such could be generated. You could call it –

Propaganda Central



It says right on it –

“TARIFF REFORM” may better describe itself as a bulletin than us a journal. It does not intend to come to the reader as a part of his literary meal. It does not mean to depose a single magazine from the library table. It is not a magazine, but a purveyor of the stuff that magazines are made of. It will endeavor, not so much to furnish “articles,” as material out of which somebody else can make “articles.” It has a wider purpose than giving its own views on public questions, and hopes for editorials, speeches, and debates, whose writers and speakers are indebted to its pages for their facts.

That’s really something, isn’t it? Told you it was a clearing-house.

And look! They have their own “research and investigations” unit. I’ll bet they do. It’s fascinating to see British intelligence activities in action this far back, in writing, isn’t it?

I love real history.

Activity in research and investigation results in the accumulation of matter. There is no end to statistics in the tariff discussion ; as they collect in the Tariff Reform Committee, relief must be bad. The “surplus” must be reduced. This TARIFF REFORM will do. And so, . semi-monthly, our readers will receive statistics, compilations, and data in the respective departments of tariff reform. which we earnestly invite them to absorb for their debates, their conversation, their speeches, their letters, and their editorials.

The distribution of such reading matter is what must be relied on in the prosecution of the work before us, until every voter in the land shall have had his own case truthfully put before him, and patiently reiterated, if need be, until he knows it by heart and can render an intelligent decision.

TARIFF REFORM has for its purpose agitation for reduction or abrogation of certain of [ that would be Britain ] the so-called “protective” taxes, especially of those either so discouraging imports….


Well, I guess now we know why Correa Walsh joined that thing like a shot as soon as came back to the U.S.

To help provide and funnel all that “research and investigation” material they were “arranging for use” by fellow propagandists around the United States.

See how important that little feeling was, and what it pointed you to?


danger pirate black dealings here

MANY sub-front groups were formed around the country for the purpose of pushing this anglophile agenda – while attempting to mask that it was such.

You could call this some of the “fruits” coming out of this Reform Club.

Here’s just one example, from the New York Times in 1891.


At the same time period, by the way – this next one shows that they were getting ready for the first “international” war in 1898.

Also from the New York Times in 1891, this article was about “Naval Reform” to stop the “stagnation”.

Now that you know how the Cecil Bloc operates, you can tell the actual source because of the use of “anonymous” friends term repeatedly, and the rather snarky views, such as this:

The navy cannot be alone relied upon to reform itself. It is admitted by naval officers that the reforming force must come from without. The friends of the report in the navy, men of brains and courage, admit that if the press and the people do not choose the right side of this reform, the indolent, dissipated, and mediocre classes, standing as they do like a solid phalanx in opposition to all reforms, will practically pull the service down to their own level.

Yep, that’s them all right. That has British slavemaster written ALL over it.

This one is interesting –

It presents that “the people” of the West are most interested in the reduction of taxation, and that sentiment was found “everywhere”.

What’s interesting about it is that the writer (anonymous, of course) tries to piggyback that interest onto being an “interest in Tariff Reform”!!!

That was a LIE.

The “people” had no interest in that – these guys are engaged in trying to make them be interested so the British can make more money on their exports to the U.S.

So, I think now that we’ve followed the trail  dog sniffing trail right of the slavemaster present in that innocuous “belonged to the Reform Club” line in Correa’s history – it makes a LOT more sense why Walsh’s first book was what it was.

It still had the element of being “sprung” on the unsuspecting public, but that’s because Walsh had been deep in the “plotting and planning” stage so fondly practiced by the Toynbee/Cecil school of slavemasters – and then they needed to find a way to draw attention to him all of a sudden.

And so they did.

Now I’m going to get into that a bit further as to what they really intended to use Walsh for.

If you haven’t already, please read my library article under the World Government section – entitled: Basic Slavemaster Propaganda Tactics.

In it, I discuss that an important part of the main methods for “spreading” an idea the slavemasters wanted inculcated into society was to use professors, particularly Oxford University professors and other “authorities”. They would have them write a book, and then use that to spawn any number of sub-groups and writers to help validate the idea. Sometimes by attacking it, no less.

In monkey english the point is: Oxford man write book, use to forward propaganda campaign.

John Ruskin was exactly one of those very men.


He was one of the British previous generation of slavemaster propagandists (previous to Correa). He was an Oxford professor and a prodigious writer. One of his writings was a book called Unto This Last (1862).

In the preface, Ruskin recommended that the state should underwrite standards of service and production to guarantee social justice.

That is state socialism (aka National Socialism) that he is talking about, and that is exactly where they were headed as part of their strategy to co-opt the “rule by the people” government with it’s first appearance ever in the United States.

You know, make people think they are free when they are not. They are only FREE to work within the confines of the slavemaster constructs. However broad they might be, they still form a corral. If they don’t, there are any number of “social pressures” to try and force the person either back into the fold or die.

It’s not easy for the average person to tell that that’s what Ruskin said, because as usual, when it comes to their real strategies slavemasters use words like overhead camouflage screens.

camouflage netting

Your view through it as all kind of broken-up and it becomes apparently hard to identify what should be easily identifiable. In other words, you can’t quite tell what they’re really saying unless you break it down by removing the camouflage.

What Ruskin was advocating ever so unclearly in his book, was that he believed in “doing things” for the poor, but that was as far as it went.

The poor were to stay poor, comparatively.

Much like you see in India, Africa, and other specific geographical areas, as a matter-of-fact.

Ruskin was all mixed up with George Holyoake and the related front groups of CO-Operation (Robert Owen), free thought, secularism, atheism, humanism, socialism, Marxism, and “rationalism” – all basically fronts for the same state socialism plan. Please see reading library articles: Evolution Not Revolution, and What is Secularism? for much more about that.

So, in his book, it’s not much of a surprise along the lines of the Cecil Bloc tactic, to find him being an “authoritative” source-point of all that agitation.

Ruskin vehemently opposed attempts to even the disparities and social differences between rich and poor – and that was a dead giveaway for what the real complaint was. The slavemasters were threatened with being toppled off their “wealthy rulers of the world” garish and false thrones. He tried to hide this underneath a “revolution” of abandoning capitalism.

What? Slavemasters were against capitalism? That appears to not make any sense, doesn’t it.

Oh, it makes perfect sense.

What happened see, was that prior to the Industrial Revolution there was the slavemasters that had all the wealth, land, and thereby the “power” – and then there was everybody else. But with the rising of independent production companies and innovations, NOW there were commoners that had become rich enough to rival the slavemasters.

The slavemasters did NOT like that at all, so in order to shift the balance of power back in their favor, they invented the term capitalist as a slur. Then they did an end-run around these unforgiveable commoners (capitalists) who dared to challenged their status quo, and went to the working commoners and told them “Look! THAT is who is making you a slave. REVOLT!”

All done in order to 1: stave off attacks on them and 2: eliminate the “competition” – or at least cut it down to size below the slavemasters – that’s the key part.

They wanted to revert back to the old system of feudalism where the “ruling class” owns the land and the bulk of everything else and in a nutshell – basically you have the “ruling class” and the commoners.

That’s what they had before and they wanted it back. HOWEVER they had to do it. If they had to use “the people” to do it – so be it.

And that’s exactly what they did and here we all are – MODERN feudalism.


Ruskin, as a lead slavemaster propagandist, then offered the state socialism “solution”.

He specifically detailed that he was in favor of a so-called co-operative society…we know what that is, that’s a political system, not the normal use of the words….but in addition to that – Ruskin wanted this society to be based on….and get this –


AnimatedStar OBEDIENCE AnimatedStar


And “benevolent philanthropy”.


Obedience? What the hell is that doing in there? And “benevolent philanthropy” – that means we are all poor enough that we need philanthropy? Good god.

And then, oh happy joy joy, our benificent (generous or doing good) King and nobles would ever so lovingly dispense largesse to the eternally grateful commoners?

No. Sorry. Not interested.


Ruskin also wanted this new society “rooted in the agricultural economy”.

See? How medieval fiefdom of him – just updated with different words. Need those commoners to till the fields – keeps ’em busy so they don’t have any time to knock the slavemasters off their undeserved perches above everyone else.

* * *


Correa Moyan Walsh, our next generation slavemaster propagandist, was pushing these exact same ideas using history and economics to “prove” their veracity.

That is why he was sponsored by the slavemasters, and that is why this book of his was considered to be “the” guide* of later slavemaster propagandists Walter Lippmann, Lord Northcliffe and Rothemere, (british intelligence) and Edward Bernays (nicknamed the Father of Spin).

*See Specific Persons section – Richard Coit.

Overall, you could throw all of Walsh’s writing here under the heading of an analysis of how terrible international socialism is or would be.

However, an odd point is also thrown into the mix, and that is he tried to characterize it’s appeal (the Marx socialism for the whole world idea) as being a “salvation religion” like Christianity and that it was designed to undermine and destroy civilization.

That’s actually very interesting when you consider that Marx was a Slavemaster agent as well. See Scientology Roots Chapter 31-2.

Walsh also specifically exempted from his critique, what is called National Socialism, which is really only a kind of nationalism.

That is an important distinction, because since Walsh was a slavemaster-approved author (meaning he put forth the ideas they wanted to be seen) – if you read his book you can clearly see that it is not socialism that the slavemasters are against, it is socialism that transfers the power to the people instead of the “elite”, that they are against.

See why that’s an important distinction? This is also why they throw around as a slur, the word “nationalism” – while at the same time being members of one of THE most nationalistic places on earth, England.

It’s nationalism that THEY DO NOT CONTROL that they object to.

In his book, Walsh is also just death on rule in the hands of the people of the kind that Thomas Jefferson envisioned. There is example after example of finding different ways to trash those ideals, which to me, is another dead-giveaway of just who this man is working for.

* * *


Walsh’s book offers an extraordinary glimpse into the mind of a slavemaster in real time just as they were beginning their march upon the rest of the world.

Again, this book was the guide to how to bring about the conditions that would usher in their new world order. The bible, quite literally, of the men of Crewe/Wellington House, particularly the Lords Rothemere, Northcliffe, and Americans Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays.

Such is the case with Walsh here, but as I said, it offers just an extraordinary view into how these people think, and still think – I might add.

Let’s have a look.

The Climax of Civilisation by Correa Moylan Walsh, 1917

All quotes are from the above source.

The first thing of interest, is that Walsh says that re: cycles of civilization, his purpose with his books is to point out the germs of decay which are Socialism and Feminism – if you can believe that.


Standing by itself, the present work is offered as a new exposition of the cyclical theory in the philosophy of history. It attempts to describe the course which all civilisations naturally run, and to locate our position in the cycle of our civilisation. This position is shown to be one near the top, or climax, and to contain premonitions of disintegration and decline. The purpose of the work is to point out these germs of decay, and to emphasise the need of guarding against fomenting and cherishing them. The two most comprehensive sources of trouble are the subjects of the two succeeding works.


He seems to be particularly fond on trashing women’s rights. In referring to his second “work” he says that in the U.S. Feminism was the more menacing.

Women having rights…is menacing? Yes, that is what he said. See for yourself.

Yet the final work on Feminism has been more fully elaborated, because in our country it is the more obtrusive and menacing. Especially is its entering wedge, woman suffrage, an impending danger.


For some strange reason, he quotes an old French saying in relation to this.

There is an old French saying that the means are more important than the end — more important in consideration; for it is easy to know what one wants, and the difficulty lies in learning how to get it.


I believe he was trying to hijack that phrase into being a part of his “expose” on why the two evils, Socialism and Feminism won’t work out successfully – whatever that means.

Now here’s a gem of a screwball idea. I’ve known a few Slavemasters in my day and he is being accurate in this portrayal, this is how they think.

… Something that might be permanent only in the world as it should be, deserves not to be adopted till the world is as it should be.


That is just the most circular logic – but it’s primary purpose as a “thought” is as an excuse for stopping good things from happening because…the “world” isn’t ready for them. Which really means the slavemasters aren’t ready – that’s all.

He wants to use older civilizations, of which the supposed history he starts from is already questionable, to prove his point. But, you know what? That’s probably why the Slavemasters supported this book as a “guide” – because they seem to really love it when someone takes their BS and uses it in some way to prove a point. They are kind of perverse that way, but I think it’s also because they know that only other beings can make their ideas “live”.


Chapter 1 –

In the following quotes, numbered references are from the book itself unless otherwise indicated.

Civilisation means making civil, or it refers to the condition of being civil, in both the senses of living in a crowded state and of living in a refined state. It has been well defined as ” the art of living together in close relations.” 1

1 – Henry George, Social Problems, Works, vol. ii. p. 191 ; cf. vi. 25.


Now why is he quoting Henry George, you might wonder.

Because he was a fellow slavemaster propagandist from about 25 years earlier – that’s why. For much more about that, please see my article Evolution not Revolution.

In short, Henry George was a british-sponsored agitator for state socialism in America. And as usual for the time period, his first entrance onto the scene would be in the form of a book – in his case it was Progress and Poverty.

This book proposes, (strangely similar to George Holyoake) to abolish poverty by “political action” – instead of “revolution”.

The book was one of those chosen to be “put into the hands of the masses”, very much like the work Holyoake and his buddies were doing. In order to propagandize MORE people faster, you see.

John W. Lovell had began publishing on his own imprint in 1878 in New York.  It printed cheap reprints for the masses both in series of paperbound and cloth volumes. Lovell’s Library was probably its single greatest achievement in terms of popularity.

Lovell had begun posting segments from Henry George’s book in 1879. By 1882, Lovell`s Library (Issue No. 52) brought out an edition of Henry George’s book for twenty cents.




If you have read my article Basic Slavemaster Propaganda Techniques you’d know the reason for Correa Walsh referring back to Henry George’s book. It is standard operation for branches of the Slavemaster propaganda crew to re-inforce each other and past propagandists to give the illusion of a “universal” or “validated” truth.

Walsh is quoting George because they both are cut from the same slavemaster cloth that way – the state socialism and “co-operation” political way.

Moving on, Walsh shows his agreement with Darwinism and the “man is an animal” theology that was trying to pass as science.

Man as a brute is a predatory species, and can obtain sustenance only with much room around him. Such is savagery, sparsely occupying large territory. Civilisation is its opposite; barbarism, a mean term.

Now that’s what I call a logic failure. Meaning – it has no actual logic at all, because right at the get-go, it starts off from the false premise of that “Man is a brute” (or an animal). After contorting oneself around to try and pretend that is some kind of a true “start”, the slavemaster propagandist merrily concludes that civilisation must be the opposite of that.

And since that is false, well….

Houston, we have a problem.


It’s that comparison thing you’ll find me mentioning here and there. It goes like this. In order for something that the slavemasters do, or come up with, to look even vaguely good at all – it has to be compared with something horrible.

Such is the case here.

Imagine, if you will, if the starting point for what is the basic “nature” of man, was something like we all know that it is. Not an animal, intelligent, honest, fair, adventurous, artistic – the whole shebang.

How good would their “civilisation” look then? Exactly. Not too good at all, In fact, it would suddenly clearly be visible as what it is.



Now we see Walsh do that Cecil Bloc re-inforcement tactic again. He adds a footnote drawing on obviously yet another slavemaster propagandist in order to get the reader to think “it must be true then” because after all…so and so said it too!

Stupid, really, but that is how they do this.

*Thus J. S. Mill in his essay on Civilisation (in Dissertations and Discussions, i. 187-8, Boston ed.), treating civilisation as the contrary of barbarism, and finding barbarism to consist in scanty population, poor for want of agriculture, industry, and commerce, with little sociableness and co-operation, with little law and security provided by the state, concluded that civilisation consists in dense population, rich in the fruits of agriculture, industry, and commerce, sociable and co-operative, governed by law and protected by the state.

Oh Wow! Mr. Mills ideas agree with his – that’s just so amazingly serendipitous. Yea, I’m ridiculing the whole unintelligible proposition. It really is often the most appropriate thing to do, once you see how these cretins operate.

Thomas Jefferson –

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.

 –  Jefferson Cyclopedia  Thomas Jefferson Letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp (30 July 1816)

Look! I can do it too! That’s a joke.

Anyways…next up is Walsh happening to share the exact same views propagandized by, again, those slavemaster propagandists just before him. Felix Adler, George Holyoake, etc.

About how this barbarism they call “civilisation” is to teach us all right and happy living.

The purpose of civilisation is right living and happy living; and these ends are so much more important, that their manifestations monopolise our attention and have received a prominent place in the definition, where, in strictness, they do not belong. To most of us the meaning conveyed by the word is that of a high, in distinction from a low, state of order and prosperity; while the more scientifically-minded have turned to the other side and spoken of civilisation as “our command over the powers of nature,” or “our knowledge of the arts,” though the former of these is a consequence of the latter, and this, of our possession of the sciences.

I’ll give you one example of the previous generation’s propaganda along those lines.

Felix Adler.

Dr. Adler preaches what is known in Germany as ‘Humanism’…

-The New York DAILY GRAPHIC January 22, 1877.

From the Aims of the New York Society for Ethical Culture (started by Felix in 1877) –

To advance the science and art of right living.


See how right in line this was with the concurrent campaigns being run elsewhere and through other front groups?

Moving on – now Walsh is going to tell us what their “civilisation” rests on. And you know what? This is actually true – it IS what their barbarism called “civilisation” rests on!

The thing that isn’t said though, is that this is not the only game in town, we do NOT have to have their ideas on how things should be on this planet.

It’s not the kind of group we have to have – contrary to all the pontification on the subject.

Isn’t that interesting?

… For advance in civilisation has rested on something else than collaboration, at least than friendly collaboration. Friendly collaboration is the beginning of civilisation, and during all the advance of civilisation it remains one of its factors. But there is another factor, which is the exact opposite as regards the accompanying feelings. This is strife, contention, competition. … One fighter, whether an individual or a state, may subdue another, subjugate, enslave that other, compel that other to join forces with those already employed. Thus strife may cause involuntary collaboration, as in slave gangs, and in this way contribute to the advancement of material civilisation.

Friendliness barely even gets a mention, did you notice that? No, the big ticket item, what EVERYbody needs to have in slavemaster-land, is “strife, contention, competition”.



These are not universal truths, these are only truths of how they are, and how their systems operate.

A very important distinction – don’t forget it.

For our Scientologist (former or otherwise) readers out there, you might enjoy seeing L Ron Hubbard’s much later use of the exact same propaganda, thereby revealing yet again, just how much of a slavemaster accolyte he truly was.

Hubbard parallel – Science of Survival, Book I, p. 5

“The cycle of existence for theta consists of a disorganized and painful smash into MEST and then a withdrawal with a knowledge of some of the laws of MEST, to come back and smash into MEST again.”

Sounds like the same strife and contention propaganda to me, how about you?

Book II, p. 248, 249 –

“It seems to be a rule of theta and mest that they form union only at a moment of heavy collision with each other.”

“Although theta has a natural attraction for mest and mest has a natural attraction for theta, if mest has any intention this does not mean that the union at first a harmonious one.”

“While some organization may be made in this first union it seems that the entheta and enmest must separate in order for the theta to extract with it knowledge of the physical laws of mest. Then a second collision is made, and a greater advance comes about, since theta has more knowledge of mest and can make a more harmonious conquest.”

So, they are attracted but can’t have a union without strife and contention (or WAR) until somebody has a conquest. Got it.

katy_perry_kooky face
This is the 3 stooges school of philosophy and science.

Look! They’re getting more enlightened by the minute! – says the slavemaster.

three stooges slap gif

If this crap was true the 3 stooges would be geniuses by now – and they should be ruling the world.

Seriously, think on that one for a minute, because that is what is being said here by these two men. I can’t even think of a proper metaphor to describe just how utterly ridiculous and moronic this thinking is – one that that wouldn’t be an insult to the thing being compared to!

Book II, p. 248, 249 –

“Continual repetitions of this bring theta more and more information; and more and more ability in the handling of mest brings about more complex forms and organizations. This is as true of the group as it is of the individual, and all group activities which will eventually result in learning begin with considerable turbulence. After the turbulence is over, greater advances are then made possible through a much greater understanding of the physical universe by theta. An illustration of this would be the scientific advances obtained in wars, which in the after-peace served men constructively.”

Conquest and strife – scientific advances from wars, it’s the best way! – do you believe them?

Not me.

Notice that said advances that Hubbard is describing, always seem to deal with something being destroyed in one manner or another.

Thereby meeting their criteria of destruction = advance.

I’ve just learned something – ain’t it grand! Wile-E-Coyote-blows himself up

Somehow, I think one doesn’t have to blow oneself up to learn that it could happen.

Book II, p. 248, 249 –

“Death is a name assigned to what is apparently the mechanism by which theta recovers itself and the bulk of its volume from the mest, so as to be able to accomplish a more harmonious conquest of the mest in a next generation.”

Auditing is the action of dying while still alive – therefore. That’s about the long-and-short of it too, I’m sad to say.

Ok, let’s get back to Walsh, because now he’s going to let you all see how the slavemaster’s mind works when they are trying to justify continuing to have strife, and contention, and war.

It goes like this –

But its [strife, etc.] greatest influence is apart from collaboration. It serves the purpose of spurring on to greater effort not only by the sentiment of emulation, because of the dislike of being surpassed, but by the actual need of exerting all one’s energies to avoid being subdued. Also it kills off those who lag too far behind, some times directly, generally at least indirectly. And as those who have it in them to strive hard are more likely to produce off spring like them, this ” survival of the fittest ” in the “struggle for existence ” brings about a ” natural selection,” whereby the fittest parents are left over to produce the fittest children. Strife is thus the weeder-out of the weak and unfit.

You’re probably going – Did he really just say that? Yes, he did.

This is how they think (and a lot of sociopaths do too).

Strife is thus the weeder-out of the weak and unfit.

Well then, I guess all those WARS are just them being helpful to the rest of humanity. God. <shudder>

You wanted to see inside their heads – well, this is it. It’s a MESS in there.

…in the past it is difficult to see how civilisation could have been brought forth from non-civilisation without strife both within the groups and between them. At all events, such has been the course of things.

This is what happens when a slavemaster tries to talk about what he knows it should be like – it just comes out all sarcastic and said with such disbelief that it almost borders on the comical. This is very typical, by the way, the slavemaster/sociopath will take the most exactly detailed right thing (which shows they know it) and say it to you like it’s the stupidest idea they ever heard of!

I know someone who did that on occasion, it was pretty amazing to watch. Very, very surreal. But educational too, because it proved completely unequivocally that we ALL know what the right ideas, decisions, and so on are.

Without any strife at all, it is true, a perfect civilisation once somehow attained, and universally disseminated throughout the world, or in an absolutely isolated region, might continue, simply by the good fellowship of all its members. But where such perfection of civilisation is absent, some elements of savagery still exist, and selfishness and cruelty exert themselves through violence and deceit. The mere friendliness of good individuals in the society cannot eradicate these bad qualities from others. It is therefore somewhat consolatory to know that the contention which these qualities arouse, itself contributes to the advancement of the race.

He is consoled to know that these nastier qualities of a slavemaster “contribute to the advancement of the race”.

Are you beginning to see how they justify their behavior in their mind?

They tell themselves they are helping.

Wow, right? It’s true! I’ve known a lot of these people and they all have it tenuously set in their mind (they have to keep doing it) that they are helping you. Helping you when they run black ops on you, helping you when they give you poisonous drugs and additives, helping humanity by “killing off the weak and unfit” in Wars.

It’s good for you.

That’s how they think.

It’s good for you to “learn about betrayal” – now you’ll know better (and they’re pleased with themselves for delivering the lesson).

It really is that bad, and I’m sure while you may not know a full-out slavemaster, you’ve come across a sociopath or two along your travels and they do think this exact same way.

I’d say the only real difference between a sociopath and a slavemaster is a matter of position, wealth, and proficiency.

Like anything else, some are better at “sociopathing” than others, and if they are also especially proficient at hiding it under the cloak of “good” – they will rise high in the slavemaster hierarchies. But amongst the very highest echelons, you have to be “born” into it – so “opportunity for advancement” will always bump heads on that ceiling.

Going one step further, the reason the slavemaster is always “helping” everyone so harshly has to do with an inverted perception of what happened to them at some point. Whether you agree with past lives or not, most slavemasters have a long run of being one, but this would apply even in a “one life” scenario as well. Put it this way. They were once amongst friends, and not to oversimply it (but I’m going to anyway) they decided that good and all that were missing something. They decided to have competition, especially in the area of abilities. Of course, in order to do that, they had to pretend to lower theirs – and then they were off to the races. Their friends were not appreciative of such a stupid game, beyond maybe a few hours of it here and there, and began doing what good friends do – telling them they are FOS. They take that “painful” experience, say it was their friends trying to help them, and since it made such a painful impression on them they now proceeded to forever try to do the same thing to others. They even created a “society” where this type of behavior could be the “norm”.

All to try and deny the simple truth that their friends were right about them and their untrue to themselves behavior.

There is obviously a much simpler way to handle that problem. And that’s why I humorously say that step 1 for “enlightenment” is Quit yer lyin. Any slavemaster or sociopath I’ve ever known who has “changed”? That’s all they did. Of course, getting there with one of these characters is surely a sometimes prolonged and bumpy ride. Part of the problem is that they think you are trying to change them into some pathetic mewling, “all is good” airy-fairy person – which they are right to resist that. It sometimes takes them a little bit to realize that you do not think “that” is who they really are. It’s such a weird game – they do not respect you unless you see them properly, but at the same time they do everything possible to try and prevent that from happening.

Just another weird twist in “the things people can do” – think of it as it gives you a clear view into just how ABLE they still are. It’s a lot of work to be that “not you” – you know?

With a slavemaster (or similar) it is important to remember that they are the same person they always were, your friend, and as soon as they stop trying to say and be someone other than that? It’s all over – like it never happened even! Pretty amazing really.

Now, Walsh here, keeps trying to make this “idea” work for him, the reason being is that he knows it doesn’t. So, next he goes off into slavemaster declamatio territory here (false history of the world) and searches for metaphors amongst other slavemaster views of things.

Which, of course he finds. He’s been to Oxford, you understand. Fully inculcated into all that Greek business.

Note: If you want to know more about declamatio – see Basic Slavemaster Propaganda Tactics.

I think the reason the slavemaster-types invented this whole “ancient philsophers” business during the last few hundred years, is because…take John Ruskin for example. How credible is a paedophile that looks like he does, gonna be to anyone? And they are pretty much all like that – hard to take seriously. So, idea! Let’s invent these “ancient philosophers” and have them say these wonderful things (ha) and we can all talk about how we are “progressing”  and “evolving” from these olden times.

And that’s exactly how Walsh starts his metaphoric proof –

The most progressive nations in the world — the Greeks, the Romans, and the English — have exhibited the most internal dissensions. Biology teaches the same lesson. “The all-important natural selection is not between species or societies, but within them,” says C. W. Saleeby; “the struggle for existence is fought out mainly between the immature individuals of any species or society, the issue of this struggle determining ” the survivors for parenthood and the future,” Parenthood and Race Culture, 1909, New York ed., p. 325.

Considering “the Greeks” weren’t progressive at all really, especially not at the levels our declamatio authors have spun yarns about, it’s pretty damn funny that he doesn’t realize what he just said there.

I’ll take out the middle part so you can see it better. He said: “The most progressive nations in the world have exhibited the most internal dissensions.”



Let me think…

Basic logic first.

In order to “progress”, one would have to start from pretending they were “unevolved” and “unenlightened” – Right?

So they were lieing about themselves, in other words.

Ok. That would mean that this “nation” then, would have been composed of a bunch of liars and perverts – a gnarly bunch who don’t want to get along and want to fight about everything; who are constantly worried about their imagined inferiorities; and who then got together and progressively evolved their lies and perversions.

I’m sorry, but this is just ludicrous. However, it IS how these people think. They glitz all up their “previous” civilizations into something not even vaguely resembling the truth. They lie about their past lies.

Methinks the slavemasters need to lay off the lie-juice just a little there – it’s gone to their heads!

Look how Walsh, in the below, at least puts the word almost in there, but you can see he really didn’t like to have to, but he did it in order to at least look “balanced”. Then he goes on and on some more about how necessary all this competing and strife is.

Advance has, indeed, almost always been made by some few getting ahead of the rest, and by the rest following along slowly behind, many lagging, some not even moving at all. Those who have gone ahead have done so in two ways : either by making some positive discovery or invention by which old wants may be more easily satisfied and new wants created and indulged, or by seizing to themselves through force or fraud some of the goods produced by others.

Thus some have risen by climbing, perhaps being boosted, and have pulled others up after them; and others have risen by mounting upon the shoulders of their fellow men, pushing them, or at least keeping them, down. Often those who have done the former, have employed their increase of power to do the latter.

These exceptional men become rulers, found families, and oppress the others either by reducing them to slavery, which is subserviency entirely for the benefit of the rulers, or by making them into subjects, in a subserviency only partly for the benefit of the rulers and partly for the benefit of the ruled, — and sometimes pretending to be wholly for their benefit. From slaves they exact service, from subjects tribute.

And what is done by individuals within a community, may be done by one community among other communities : it may forge ahead of the rest by the superior qualities of its citizens and by the resources which their qualities and the nature of the land they inhabit put into their hands, and so may conquer their neighbours, and either in whole or in part may exterminate them in order to occupy their land, or reduce them either to slavery or to the state of subjects.

The conflict both within communities and between them may be long and stubborn, and generate the very qualities, and lead to obtaining from nature the means, by which victory is won. A result is the production of classes within a community, and of subordinate communities within a large state. This differentiation of individuals by contention has been a universal precedent, on our earth, of their organisation, by which collaboration is again obtained.

Now there was a whammy.

This differentiation of individuals by contention has been a universal precedent, on our earth, of their organisation, by which collaboration is again obtained.


Oooh! It’s a UNIVERSAL precedent now. He really wants this to be true. For you scientology students out there, see how similar this is to what Hubbard said?

Science of Survival Book II, p. 248, 249 –

“Continual repetitions of this bring theta more and more information; and more and more ability in the handling of mest brings about more complex forms and organizations. This is as true of the group as it is of the individual, and all group activities which will eventually result in learning begin with considerable turbulence. After the turbulence is over, greater advances are then made possible through a much greater understanding of the physical universe by theta. An illustration of this would be the scientific advances obtained in wars, which in the after-peace served men constructively.”

Slavemasters really hate this equals idea. Watch how Walsh is practically spitting as he tries to describe how things actually are naturally.

Collaboration is now not of equals, working every one under his own guidance, as wise as any other, — a kind of co-operation which can succeed only when all individuals become perfectly wise; it is of unequals, in which some lead and guide and others do what they are told, and some merely transmit orders.

There is multiform complexity, as in the organisms of plants and animals. Individuals in a state are like the cells in a living body, and in the state its members or organs are classes, orders, local communities, contractual combinations or corporations. These develop, and their relations change; and those which change for the best, subdue others and survive till still others subdue them. In short, as we have seen, a civilised state is a growing organism, and the advance of civilisation is this growth.

…The civilisation of every state, or of every cluster of states, therefore forms a cycle, having an ascending movement, a continuance on a highest plane, a gradual descent into, lastly, a lethargic condition, from which if it be again awakened, it will arise to run a new cycle, or else it may stagger on in indefinite decrepitude.

See this?

some lead and guide and others do what they are told, and some merely transmit orders.

That, ladies and gentleman, is their ideal society.

Put another way?

Masters and slaves.


Now here’s a logical conundrum. It’s obvious Walsh couldn’t get his “organism” idea to quite work out with the whole of humanity, because, well, NOT EVERYONE IS A MASTER OR A SLAVE.

Watch him try to explain this, but at the same time he gives away that this is only true within one of their “civilisations”.

All humanity does not form an organism, and so cannot run the course of an organism : whatever be the advance of civilisation in all the world, it is different. Only states are organisms, and only the civilisation of states, individually or in groups, can have the regular evolution and involution that are peculiar to living beings. Many states also have been subject to the misfortune, so common to plants and animals, of being cut off in mid career. Those which have been permitted to run their full course, have always ended in senility.

Now he will call on another slavemaster for re-inforcement of his silly idea.

J. W. Draper compared the life of a nation with the life of an individual, and held that the former as inevitably passes through five (arbitrarily chosen) stages, which are the ages of credulity, inquiry, faith, reason, decrepitude, corresponding to the five ages of infancy, childhood, youth, maturity, senility : Intellectual Development of Europe, 2d ed., New York, 1876 i. p. iii and 2, 12-14, 20, S3, 222-3, 234, 336, ii. 152, 358, 392-3, 400, cf. 246. “Over the events of life,” he said, “we may have control, — but none whatever over the laws of progress,” i. 390.

Walsh adjusts this concept though, using his math ideas.

…Better is the conception of one ascending period, followed by a stationary period at the top, and then a descending period, followed by another stationary period at the bottom.


Moving on to chapter 2 now. This is just such an amazing insight into how they think!

Chapter 2 –

First thing up is more on how great strife and striving are, but also that success is defined by wealth and “enlightenment”.

Wealth.  That’s our big yardstick, followed by “enlightenment” into the slavemaster way of thinking.

Imagine that.




and enlightenment.


What the hell is wealth doing in there, is anybody’s guess.

Walsh will tell us all about it.

IN its most general outline the course of civilisation through a cycle is not difficult to trace. Civilisation advances by the striving and by the strife of individuals and combinations of men both within a state and between different states (tribes, cities, or countries), and leads up to success in the attainment by some of a high position of wealth and enlightenment.

The greater the height to which the attainment has proceeded, the more difficult does it become to keep what is attained and to carry the process further, and for the latter object the inducement wanes. Then comes a time when the motive and the deterrent forces approach equality; whereupon, strife and striving being no more desired by the leaders, there sets in a period of peace and enjoyment.

This, through excessive leisure and dissipation, brings on degeneration of the leaders, giving opportunity to those who were left behind to seek to pull them down, introducing a new kind of contention, in which the lower peoples or orders, now the least bad elements, are the aggressors, and which must bring about disintegration, until out of the turmoil the best elements again obtain the leadership. Thus, in the ascending period, in spite of much destruction, production and acquisition exceed consumption ; in the level period at the top, production and consumption for a time balance ; in the descending period, even though there be less destruction than in the first, consumption out runs production; and lastly, on the level at the bottom, consumption has to adapt itself to production from lack of stores to draw upon.


You always have to watch out for those damn “lower peoples” – the bane of all slavemasters.


Did you notice how he basically said that peace brings about degeneration? Here…I’ll show you.

There sets in a period of peace and enjoyment….brings on degeneration…

By excessive leisure, no less. Oh, right, I forgot. We’re all supposed to be STRIVING.

Forget that “fun” and “peace” stuff.

I think ole Walsh here is not exactly on the right trail of things.

followed the trail - dog

I think this next part is fascinating, because he is talking again along the idea of how bad peace is and says (as if it’s a bad thing) that it is “broken only by a few quick wars” – which makes it again obvious that slavemasters like them some nice long wars.

Wars in the Middle East currently ring a bell? That’s them in action. Speaking from their view: “Ah yes. Nice, long, lovely protracted war against those “infidels” – how delicious, as Winston Churchill once put his view of WWII.

I half expected him to break out and say “Delicious, my precious. Oh yes…My precious.”

my precious

This “nice long war” in the Middle east, that, of course, is because they deliberately made those “infidels” with all their BS history and religion they fed them to try and keep them “down”, but hey, why split hairs.

This long period of peace, to repeat, broken only by a few quick wars, is a period of enjoyment and of lavish consumption. Luxury enters even the army, and the soldiers become discontented and refuse to fight unless they be well paid and well provisioned.

In time the natives become so degenerate that outsiders, mercenaries, have to be hired. All through this period power is in the hands of those who have the ready money to pay the men. No longer the land-owners, but the financiers are the directing class. The time comes when the supplies, not only of delicacies, but of such necessaries as the metals needed for arms, begin to give out. At last not even mercenaries can be obtained, or they, not being regularly paid, behave worse than enemies. The degenerate upper classes are then thrown back on their own resources.

Become so degenerate as to not want to fight Wars? Egads man – the horror of it all!

Next we have…Oh no! We’re out of slaves!

… Slave-labourers, being habitually overworked, always tend to give out, and their numbers were renewed during the early period of warfare by the subjugation of weaker peoples. But this source is now exhausted, and the supply is barely renewed for a time by slave-raids on inferior outside races, until such races grow too strong, or sentiment at home no longer tolerates such conduct. Or cheap free labour is sought from the civilisations which have already decayed or from peoples still barbarous, and lower races are imported to do the hard and dirty work and to keep down wages.

Remember now – what is their ideal society?

some lead and guide and others do what they are told, and some merely transmit orders.

So, now the poor slavemasters, who would just simply expire

fainting - expire

at the idea of having to dig their own ditches so-to-speak, had to come up with a new way to have slaves, only this time they needed to fool people that they weren’t slaves.

That’s socialism, communism, labor parties, humanism, and all the other ism’s they came up with after this “realization” in the 1800’s.

Next Walsh goes into what’s wrong with women being equals.

Furthermore, in general, the distinction between weak men and strong men, and even between men and women, becomes obliterated. Weak individuals without family connections can now rise by their shrewdness to great wealth, and wealth, even land, may be owned, if given to them, by women as well as by men. Wealth, even land, is given to women, and owning it women be come powerful like men.

My god – the horror!

More fainting imminent…

doll faint

The distinction between the sexes tends to break down; for women, being made by men independent of men in particular, seem to be independent of men in general, and they come to make the mistake of thinking they are so and hence are equal to men; to which they are helped by the fact that many weak men are in a similar position of sham independence.


See? That’s what’s bothering them. That women could not be “dependent” on them. I guess for a slavemaster, that just tears apart another silly idea they have – the one that they (as men predominantly) are superior to women.

Maybe that’s why so many of them are homosexuals, who knows. You can see the appeal, starting from such a constant strife type of outlook where even women, mothers, etc. are something to be “overcome”. At least with other men they might feel “equal” in some convoluted way. I could be wrong.

He then flips it back to talking about this is part of the “degeneration” of peace.

This breaking down of old relations goes on with little hindrance during the long period of peace. The upper classes of the wealthy may now be the weaklings of society, while the really strongest men are among the lower; and the abundance of leisure and the indulgence in luxuries of sight and taste and touch on the part of the upper classes tends to enhance this inverted condition. Hence when the period of failing production sets in, the state being ruled by degenerates, disintegration hastens its pace, until at last the ignorant strong ones from the lower classes rise to the surface, where they quickly degenerate in their turn and permit the process to be repeated ; or from outside, barbarians overthrow them, who may in time be the beginners of a new cycle.

Those damn people again…he’s so insulting of them though, isn’t he.

… In the turbulence of an incipient civilisation a free woman can hardly support herself without an individual male protector, and such a one is sought for her by her father and brothers, while every free man needs a wife to save him from the petty labours of the household, which it is his task to provide for and defend. There is thus a division of labour between the sexes, and a natural dependence of each upon the other.

Cf. B. Adams : ” When wealth became force, the female might be as strong as the male; therefore she was emancipated,” op. cit., 31 ; cf. 292.


I see. So as long as their is terrible strife, raping and pillaging, and just generally nasty war conditions – women…let me guess…NEED men to protect them. So, they are willing to put up with all manner of indignities and somewhat slave status just to stay alive.

Ah, but get a little peace going and that man, that slave work, doesn’t look so good anymore.

It’s the same old thing. Slavemasters NEVER look good unless compared to something horrific.

Like being raped or killed.

Now he offers yet another reason why peace=bad and war=good. He certainly has a low opinion of his fellow humanity “prolific like animals”. I think what’s really horrible about that (besides the obvious) is that the predecessor slavemasters invested a LOT of time in training people to be so prolific using declamatio messages from god to do so.

“go forth and multiply” comes to mind. And now…they’re bitching about it? That’s irony for you.

… Therefore, during this period, except for special reasons (also mostly of a religious nature) almost every one, especially among the upper classes, is married, and families are fair-sized, while the lower classes (the proletariat) are prolific like animals. Many children are produced, furthermore, be cause in the dearth of other kinds of amusement (the chase and warfare being the two principal ones), the pleasure of intercourse between the sexes holds a prominent place among the sources of happiness, — so much so, that more children are born than are needed, and the defective and superfluous are allowed to perish.


Sex talk next –

… There are many forms of pleasure, which cast into the shade that derivable from legitimate intercourse in the connubial state.


Whoa. Did he just say what I think he did? Yep, he did. He just tried to have it be believed that other forms of sex cast actual intercourse into the shade.

Does it now…I think that depends on who’s doing it. Most slavemasters are – surprise surprise – horrible at sex with women. It might  sarcasm  have something to do with the fact that they hate women – don’t you think?

“You actually think I like women?”

you actually think I LIKE women - slavemaster

They view them as COMPETITION.


“Eww – do I have to?”

I hate women

And like them better when they are reduced to begging and pleading.


Back to being BENEATH them – you understand.

Walsh, from his ridiculous premise of how terrible it is for women to not “need” slavemaster men, now tries to have us believe that if they are independent, they will all become perverted, dominating and promiscuous sluts bringing sexual diseases into the family.


Scientific knowledge is also disseminated of the means of preventing issue and even conception, permitting of sexual indulgence without the inconvenience of child-bearing. The growth of luxury in city-life also gives freer scope to promiscuity and prostitution, with dispersion of venereal diseases, and importation of them into the family, with result on the one hand of rendering the wife sterile or incompetent to bear more than one child, and on the other of giving some women a fright about marriage. Soft living and want of hard work weakens the constitution and not only makes people more sensitive to pain but also less able and willing to undergo it.

… This change takes place first in the upper classes, then in the middle, and finally extends down to the lower, reaching these when fraternal societies and state pensions for old age take away the last incentive for having children, and the prohibition of child-labour makes children a burden. While it is still only in the upper classes, or also in the middle, the discrepancy between the production of children in the upper and in the lower classes has the effect of increasing their economic inequality; for it promotes the concentration of wealth in the few at the top by making them fewer, while it still permits the lower classes to become poorer through their increasing numbers.

Cf. T. N. Carver : ” The concentration of attention upon subsistence and enjoyment rather than upon nation-building, leads to an exaggerated insistence upon the rights of the individual, whereas the concentration of at tention upon nation-building leads to a strong emphasis upon the obligations of the individual. Therefore there are two distinct types of leadership. One type tells the people a great deal about their rights, their wrongs, and their grievances, and very little about their obligations, except their obligations to themselves. The other type tells them very little about their rights, their wrongs, and their grievances, but a great deal about their obligations,” etc. The National Point of View in Economics, in Supplement to The American Economic Review, March, 1917, p. 6.

Besides the obvious manipulation to have it be believed that there are only two types of leadership – only in a slavemaster world – did you catch how he’s actually complaining about child labour being abolished?

He’s talking about the Industrial Revolution which began in Great Britain (1760 to 1870) – where children were worked in horrific conditions.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

British and American Slavemasters were quite literally working people to death in their zeal for what they called progress during this time period.

He then says that because of this too much peace, now we get a new religion introduced.

… Later, however, with the coming on of hard times again, these doctrinaires, who have been unable to ward off the accumulating evils, and perhaps have mistakenly or dis- honestly assisted their advent, are discredited: science and learning recede; and now it may even happen that by men of deep emotional nature (the prophetic type) a new religion is introduced, which turns its back on the world, gives up the task of civilisation, and exalts the lower classes ; and this — or in its default the old religion, revived and readjusted — soon degenerating into superstition, provides the basic ideas and customs for the last period at the bottom of the cycle, which shades insensibly into the beginning of a new one.


Aha! – so that’s what’s with Fredric Myers, Felix Adler, Helena Blavatsky and so on and so forth, introducing new “world religions” for humanity.

Obviously the slavemasters think this is just a great way to lead people away from “too much peace” and back into correct striving and strifing and progressing again.

But what it’s really about, is keeping the people from putting things back the way they should be – which would include toppling the slavemasters.

Nothing like a good religion to keep everybody busy going nowhere….

we're catching them now



and attacking the “devil” or the “aliens” or the “reactive mind”. Anything but what people really want to do, and should be doing.

But when, in the general disintegration and the approach to misery, all these things must pass off the scene, and the world becomes serious again, and men again take charge of it, then appeal is once more made to powers other than human, and either the old hierarchy or the leading men of the new religion that has won most. following, the successful ones among many competitors, gradually assume, or re-assume, the functions of the former priests, and religion again rises as science and civilisation fall; for which reason religion is the strongest link between cycles, rising in the decline of one, and sinking in the rise of another.


Here he goes now (in the below) fawning over the rich again – which as we know, he has already categorized as the ne plus ultra of humanity.

success in the attainment by some of a high position of wealth and enlightenment


… The priests, however, assert that they rule by divine right; and the warriors, at first asserting that they rule by the right of the sword, might making right, at last get the priests, when subdued, to admit and to teach that they too rule by divine right. The rich have hardly ventured to put in this claim very seriously: they rule by their own superior shrewdness; they are the capable men, who, having managed their own affairs well, have shown their fitness to manage the affairs of others also; at best, owing their advancement to their native endowments, they claim to rule by natural right;

Of course, more strifing results though –

… But when each of the succeeding classes come into power, it pulls down its prede cessor only from its pre-eminence and position of privilege, and continues to use it as a support, so that the priests remain in high office under the warriors, and the priests and warriors under the rich, but each in a changed form, the priests, as we have seen, as preachers, and the warriors as paid officers of the army; and as each remembers its quondam domination and continues to have its own interests, it forms a party, in the political life of the state.

Through all these changes there is a constant growth of the power of the central government and of its action upon the people: ever more and more does it regulate the doings of society, substituting laws for customs.

His position on politics is rather interesting – it’s another take on how there is no enjoyment when there aren’t any wars and revolutions.

… This introduces the last half of the great division of the course of politics. We have now reached the culminating period of civilisation, with its manifoldness and complexity of occupations and interests. Enjoyment dissipates. Before, when there was little variety of recreation, the people took their amusement by meeting together and talking over their common affairs. Then concert was possible, and conspiracies of almost a whole class could be hatched, and revolutions could be planned and successfully executed.

But later every one becomes engaged in seeking after his own pleasure, and finds it at most in small cliques of boon companions ; for the meeting of even a whole town in a theater is merely to receive similar impressions, without any common action on their own part. Concert and united action, thereupon, become much less usual. The ascending period of civilisation is always marked by revolutions; the declining period is a long quiescence, disturbed only by occasional futile uprisings or riots that do more harm than good.

OK, now watch that. There’s something interesting in there.

How does a slavemaster think he can prevent revolution against them?

AnimatedStarSlavemaster Strategy AlertAnimatedStar

every one becomes engaged in seeking after his own pleasure.


Keep the people focused on pleasuring themselves – shopping, food, entertainment, sex. Hey, that’s exactly what goes on these days, isn’t it?



His spin on what democracy is, is something you have to see. It’s really something. In America, we NEVER had this about “rule by the lowest class”. It’s interesting watching this anglophile trying to spin it that way though.

This last half of the great division of politics is further distinguished from the first half by the fact that now all classes rule all. The power of government reaches its maximum, and it is prepared to regulate everything. Affairs of state needing special officials, these are now chosen directly or indirectly by the people as their representatives and agents; or if any one of the old rulers is left, he is reduced to being regarded and treated and made to behave as such. These agents are paid by the people, with salaries, which are not so large as the emoluments the former rulers took to themselves ; and their offices are now a public trust, not because they are solicitous so to view them, but because the people require it of them; and they do not rule in their own right or by divine or by natural right, but in the right of the ruling and ruled (the self-ruled) people, or by a conventional right given to them by all the classes. This condition has generally been called democracy, but mistakenly, since it is not the rule of the demos or lowest class, but the rule of all the classes, and would be better called pantocracy. In such democracy itself (for the term is too habitual to be discarded) the most powerful of the old classes is that of the rich, upon which the others lean; and this class of the rich, or the three first classes in one under this name, though they prefer to look upon them selves as aristocrats, may even regain influence and power so great as to overbalance the rest, forming a state which is describable by the somewhat incongruous term of plutocratic democracy. Over against this condition, the demos proper may wish to get the upper hand entirely and entirely suppress the other classes.

Demos – The common people of an ancient Greek state. Then the reforms of Kleisthenes formed the basis of the democracy, meaning the rule of the demoi, or village councils of the Athens peninsula.

This movement is to-day known as socialism, though this term is more truly appropriate to our present condition, and what is so distinguished is democracy proper (in the literal sense) ; and sometimes for greater clarity, it is dubbed social democracy; which, in the full extent of its aspiration, has never existed, and, as we shall see further on, probably never will exist, at least not in our cycle of civilisation.

Did you see how he finished up by trying to say a social democracy has never existed? And never will?

Oh really…

… The democracy such as has existed and as now exists, or pantocracy, which rules by agents and makes laws by representatives of the whole people, always sets out with a multiplicity of representatives to whom the appointment or the oversight of innumerable other agents is entrusted, in the form known as republicanism.

Always? This guy is lieing. What was done in America was never done before, so how could it be “always”. This is just more British BS, they’ve been trying to sell that line since the days of Thomas Jefferson.

Now he tries to say that a republic ends up with a form of kingship!

But look closely, he also reveals their PLAN for America.

But as responsibility divided between many is diluted and tends to be little observed, the degeneration of republicanism works for the concentration of power in one representative, to whom is entrusted the direction of all the others. Under this one all-powerful individual all the classes are reduced to an equal position of inferiority, and other individuals can rise to power only as they win his favour or that of his favourites.

This last stage can be reached only when the people at large are so un-warlike, and so distracted and divided by their several occupations and amusements, that a comparatively small army in the one man’s pay can keep them all in subjection. And when once reached, it can in spite of its enormous and growing evils never be subverted from within the nation by the people, for the additional very good reason that the people have nothing to substitute for it.


AnimatedStarSlavemaster Strategy AlertAnimatedStar


OK, so to control power in the U.S.  – you get a small group of men representing the “all powerful individual” (which has happened – there is a “king” of the earth, you just don’t know about it).

You do this by:

  • Getting people to be un-warlike
  • Getting people distracted by their several occupations and amusements
  • Getting people divided

That is what they have been doing – exactly.

…augment rather than mitigate the evils that come from the rule of some men over others who are not strong enough to hold them to a strict accounting. Such is the despotism — caesarism or imperialism, ultimately more or less mixed with hierarchism, — in which all republicanism and all civilisation has hitherto ended.

And there is a perfectly great counter-strategy for dealing with a slavemaster.

AnimatedStarSlavemaster KryptoniteAnimatedStar

– hold them to a strict accounting –


Let’s see what’s in chapter 3.

Chapter 3 –

Ah yes, that’s right. Here is where Walsh tries to convince us that modern slavery wasn’t so bad.

… There is oppression practised to-day, but it is much less than the oppression then permitted. There has been slavery in modern times till recently, and when it existed it was habitually condemned as worse than the ancient; which result was arrived at only by the unfair process of comparing modern slavery at its worse, on plantations, with ancient slavery at its best, in domestic service; whereas our domestic slavery was much kindlier than the corresponding slavery in antiquity, and our plantation slavery much less ferocious than the bondage in the Roman ergastula. To-day so sensitive are people, especially the wage-earners themselves, to the hardships of wage-earning, that in their ignorance of real slavery they speak even of this as slavery.

I think my favorite part there is, that people know they are being treated as slaves and subjects, and it annoys the slavemaster that they do know they are still being made slaves!

Which is absolutely true, because remember what he said earlier?

These exceptional men become rulers, found families, and oppress the others either by reducing them to slavery, which is subserviency entirely for the benefit of the rulers, or by making them into subjects, in a subserviency only partly for the benefit of the rulers and partly for the benefit of the ruled, — and sometimes pretending to be wholly for their benefit. From slaves they exact service, from subjects tribute.

Those “exceptional men” – you know, the rich.

… Our modern civilisation has got almost fully into the hands of the rich, and it is beginning to appear unlikely whether it will get much beyond.

Now he slams democracy some more, blaming it on this nebulous “masses” term – who of course are unworthy and incapable of exercising power wisely and justly.

It’s all very questionable, very questionable, as to whether the people can rule properly. (sheesh)

… Also it has hitherto taken place in the series of cycles, as such advance went further in the classic civilisation than in what preceded, and it has gone further still in ours ; for, for true democracy, the masses must be worthy and capable of exercising power wisely and justly; and whether they can reach that point in our cycle, is questionable.

Moving on –

Chapter 4 –

The first thing he does is tell us where we “are” in this supposed slavemaster cycle of civilisation.

We in our present stage of development are entering, or have already entered, the beginning of the culminating plane or swell of our cycle, having nearly reached the highest point of material civilisation, of which our society, on the earth it inhabits, is capable.

What? We are at the highest point? Well, I guess it’s all downhill from here then. (not)

Now he says what are the bad things – from a slavemaster perspective – again covertly attacking the Republic of America.

… Wealth is concentrating, and population is leaving the country and huddling in cities, which are sprouting up like mush rooms. Already we witness the power of financiers, who have begun their efforts at contraction, though with some set backs ; the formation of monopolies both by employers and by employes, restricting production and labour; the socialistic demands of the latter for sharing the goods of the former; and the diminution of the mutual dependence of the sexes, the emancipation of women, and their aspirations after further equality with men. For in the large new states…

Wait a minute, this guy is supposed to be an American. Look how he won’t even NAME his own country here. He just puts it as some generic “large new states”.

OK, now he will hit our Constitution.

For in the large new states the individual is protected by the government in the possession of property and of liberty and in the pursuit of happiness, whereby the feeble and the foolish may lord it over the strong and the wise, and women are clamouring for the right to put their fingers in the pie.

The feeble and foolish (a backhanded euphemism for those “commoners”, and women? That’s the downfall of slavemaster civilization?

Oh, and the individual being protected in “the possession of property and of liberty and in the pursuit of happiness” – that’s a really bad thing too.

I can’t stand it…

Kermit the frog excited

However, what we do have here is:

AnimatedStarSlavemaster KryptoniteAnimatedStar

Individuals being secure and protected in their rights and happiness
Individuals working together – that aren’t slavemaster controlled


Non-dependent Women

I thought I’d really stand out that last one, since it’s such a big deal with slavemasters and all.

pirate winking

More slavemaster strategy coming up here –

Accompanying these phenomena are the deleterious influences upon population that come from a decreasing frequency of marriage, an increasing frequency of divorce, and generally a tabefaction of the paternal and maternal feelings and functions, not to omit mention of impotency arising from the contagion of venereal diseases and its counterfeit in the practice of abortion and prevention. The morality of the period of industrialism and of luxury is already upon us: cosmopolitanism (absenteeism, renegadism) impairing patriot ism ; emphasis upon honesty rather than upon loyalty ; greater tolerance of fraud than of violence ; coming into prominence of the feminine virtues and of a weak humanitarianism, with its relaxation of constraint, of discipline, of chastisement; the individualistic treatment of all questions rather than the as sumption of the public point of view ; and, to repeat, the advocacy of socialistic and feministic reforms that would reduce all persons to atomistic equality.

Ok wait – Atomistic equality? Women are only equal on an atomic level?

Stop, please. This guy is killing me.

pound tthe ground laughing

Besides this guys infatuous over-interest in degrading women, we have ourselves the slavemasters strategy in how to “wreck” things – they think.

AnimatedStarSlavemaster Strategy AlertAnimatedStar

How to degrade a people

  • push for less marriages
  • increase divorce, and have more broken families
  • Tabify paternal and maternal feelings and functions
  • push for forms of perversions and promiscuity that promote impotency and contagion of sexually-transmitted diseases
  • Practice birth-control and abortion (which the body HATES and gets even for)
  • Push for cosmopolitanism – a “world human” view (as if we don’t have that already)
  • Promote absenteeism and renegadism as opposed to patriotism and loyalty

(the rest are all just slavemaster whining)

However, I must comment on this one that he positioned as a bad thing:

emphasis upon honesty rather than upon loyalty

I’m gonna have to go with Wiley here –

wiley coyote - what the fuck

Did he really just try to put honesty in opposition to loyalty? And ergo – that an increase of honesty is part of the downfall of civilization?

Boy is that an insight into the mind of a slavemaster. Note it well.

So, especially because of women and socialism, remember, here is his prediction for our society.

… Like preceding civilisations our civilisation is doomed to decay and to disintegrate; and the beginning of this doom is not far away.

That any civilisation is doomed to fall, may appear like the teaching of pessimism, which seems to be increased by adding that this civilisation of ours can never again be equalled in the material aspect, although, certainly, it is decreased by the consideration that the next is likely to surpass ours in the moral. Yet hardly can sorrow be caused by the thought that we lucky mortals are near the greatest period our earth is capable of ; nor need we be envious if in another couple of thousand years the world may be morally better than it is in our day.

So, it’s an either/or thing, is it? We can’t be happy with enough food, and materials, at the same time as being moral.

No, it’s one or the other. Right.

Yet another ridiculously presented conflict  – moral in opposition to well-fed and housed. That’s almost as good as honesty put into opposition with loyalty. Almost.

Our future civilisation (hence all the bars around here I guess) will consist of less eating and more drinking. Plus, he has some thing about hats and shoes – why he’s even bothering to bring it up god only knows.

… Civilisation hitherto has moved slowly from the warm to the cold regions — into bleakness : in the future it will, in all probability, move back from the cold to the warm regions — into sunshine and light. Then the few rich, instead of going south in winter, will go north in summer; and the mass of the people will avoid the pressure of the need not only of so much heating but of so much housing and of so much clothing, perhaps dispensing with hats and shoes, the latter of which are now often worn, as Senior said, to preserve not so much our feet as our dignity, and which may then perhaps be replaced by that most sightly and sanitary of foot-gear, the sandal. There will be less indoor over-heating and stuffiness, and one cause of unhealthiness will be removed. Then will take place the return to nature desired by the idealists, — to healthy open-air life, the simple life of less eating and more drinking.

OK. Now comes the marching orders to the junior slavemasters and their assistants.

But our duty is plain : we must exert ourselves to retard the decay to which the very period we have entered of peace, of prosperity, and of enjoyment (now momentarily interrupted), [note: he’s referring to WWI there] is the inevitable precursor. Decay may be fated, but its date is not fixed. That depends on us: we may hasten it, or put it off.

I’m including this next part, simply because it’s so hypocritical. Apparently, when the rich are obsessing about accumulating wealth and enlightnement, see that’s ok. But when the middle and lower classes start deserting their duty (as slaves and subjects remember). Well now, that’s just TOO terrible.

… Therefore a time arrives when the motive to lay down the burden equals and then exceeds the motive to carry it. This change of motive power, with its consequent action, always makes its first appearance in the upper classes of society. Among these the evil of desertion of duty often appears even during the ascending period of civilisation, but then it is corrected by another class overthrowing the corrupt and parasitic class and commencing its own leadership in a healthy condition.

But when far-extending security and long-continued prosperity bring this condition to the middle classes, rendering them unfit to purify the rulers, there is little chance that the task will be performed by the lower classes; and when these, too, become infected, the case is hopeless. Every thing being procurable for and valued in money, money be comes the chief object of worship, and the only aims money-making and money-spending.


There’s another slavemaster strategy peeking out of there – do you see it?

AnimatedStarSlavemaster Strategy AlertAnimatedStar

How to prevent being toppled

It’s this –

Stess people so much in basic living necessities that they only have time to focus on money-making and money-spending.


Chapter 5 –

More bitching about women –

The endowment of women by men with property makes them seem independent and the equals of men. Divorce becomes common, and women demand the privileges which nature permits to men.

What privileges would those be, exactly. One wonders…

And here’s the penalties of allowing this abomination to occur.

The consequence is dissoluteness.

The softening of manners, the growing sensitiveness to pain, and the consequent shrinking from inflicting it upon others, or the general effeminateness and humanitarianism, lead to relaxation of discipline and toleration of immorality, the good abandoning the task of controlling the bad…

All that just from women being independent?

wiley oh wow


That is, until we are saved by a new world religion being provided for us.

…until this task is reassumed by the prophets and the mischief is corrected by the recrudescence of religion, reintroducing the old evils of superstition, especially if it have a young and vigorous people to serve as its instrument. In this survey of the tendencies of high civilisation we see the consequences especially of two great evils — the lessening of effort to reproduce wealth, and the lessening of effort to reproduce men.

AnimatedStarSlavemaster Strategy AlertAnimatedStar

Invent religions to stop the “degradation”


This next excerpt is really loaded. Not the least of which is what are the “two evils”. Notice how he falls back on an old biblical mandate – go forth and multiply. As to the rest? This you have to see for yourself.

For the task of civilisation is twofold, consisting of the duty to improve the society in which one’s lot is cast, and of the duty to propagate one’s race throughout all time.

The former requires strife and striving, competition and strenuous exertion; the latter, desire, or at least willingness, to support others.

Abandonment of the one leads to diminution of work, and ultimately to poverty; of the other, to deterioration of the race, and to weakness; of both, to the dissolution of society.

Both, again, are due to general discouragement, which itself is due on the one hand to surfeit and on the other to discontent, and altogether to loss of incentive. Having a common cause, they appear together in the culminating period of civilisation.

… As for the first evil : On the material side the discouragement leads to slackening of competition.

Here’s another example of how bad it would be to have the “lower classes” come into power, as well as bitching about the terribleness of the leveling process of democracy – which <gasp> will break down that distinction between rich and poor.

… Meanwhile, between the upper millstone of the few great capitalists, who can employ unfair competition in the exchange-market, and the nether millstone of the labourers, who can be controlled only by the great employers, the middle classes suffer danger of being crushed out, and of leaving the extremes of wealth and of poverty in confrontation with each other, between whom the combat will be mortal. Meanwhile, as an expression of these tendencies, socialistic ideas have appeared, advocated by the labouring classes and their abettors, who would go further in the leveling process of democracy and break down the last remaining distinction, that between rich and poor ; for that between the sexes they will ignore as a matter of course. The distinction between rich and poor they would break down avowedly to raise all to wealth, but with the more likely result of reducing all to poverty. The coming of the lower classes into power permits the more or less injudicious execution of socialistic ideas, introducing mediocrity and eventuating in distress.


The second evil is….women. Of course!

At last, through the non-observance of the distinction between the sexes and the employment of women in industry like men, it reaches the lower classes, and then there is race-suicide, or a tendency to it, till it is arrested by the end of the civilisation which caused it. Beside this effect on quantity, there is a deleterious effect on quality. A falling birth-rate means avoidance of the struggle for existence, and thus does away with the basis for natural selection. For natural selection large families, potentially at least, through many parturitions, are needed, that the weak may be weeded out and the strong alone survive.

Didn’t he just complain earlier about the “lower classes” breeding like animals and having too many children? Oh yea, he did.

Now after all that pontificating and negligicizing of women and the “masses” – Walsh brings up Francis Galton.

… The causes of racial decay were studied by Francis Galton, who published his results in 1869 in his work on Hereditary Genius. He ascribed the decay which threatens us to the fact that, while ” in a young colony ” (= the early period of civilisation) ” a strong arm and an enterprising brain are the most appropriate factors for a marrying man,” and, women being fewer, ” the inferior males” are less likely to marry ; in an old civilisation the active and ambitious, unless rich by inheritance, cannot make their way up in society “if they hamper themselves with a wife in their early manhood ” (p. 361 ) ; and when they do marry, they, and their sons after them, often look out for heiresses [Walsh note: i.e. single daughters, of parents thereby proved to be little fertile, who therefore themselves are likely to be infertile] and their line is exposed to extinction (pp. 131-40) ;

… “The wisest policy,” he concluded, “is that which results in retarding the average age of marriage among the weak, and in hastening it among the vigorous classes; whereas, most unhappily for us, the influence of numerous social agencies has been strongly and banefully exerted in the precisely opposite direction” (pp. 352-3). Galton wisely despaired of a change for the better coming about of itself…

First off –

I think we should say thanks for letting us know Galton was a cecil bloc propagandist there Walshie boy!  – by his tender loyalties to Galton’s ideas, and by specifically using him to re-inforce his same arguments.

Galton, by the way, then founded eugenics to teach the “right way”. And launching from that insane premise, the British slavemasters began practicing natural selection the New World Order way.



… And when institutional civilisation has become corrupt, even a revival of a good breed might not be sufficient to restore it to health. The new superior race would need to have the knowledge of what they ought to do, and also the will to do it. The latter especially might be lacking, if, instead of being developed by the hard knocks of natural selection, they were produced by the careful nursing of gentle artificial breeding. Yet no one can doubt but that eugenics will be a powerful aid to prevent further decay, if we still have the wisdom and the will-power to apply it. If we do not, and if it be as Utopian as Darwin believed it, perhaps a future cycle will be able to do what we cannot. Meanwhile, therefore, we may proceed.

Applying it – you know what those innocent words are shielding the full magnitude of here, right?

Sterilisation, incarceration, experimentation, and outright KILLING..

Slavemaster expanded strategy coming up here.

… The selfish individualism and loss of public spirit and of loyalty or confidence in one another, which reigns where wealth alone is craved and honesty in carrying out formal or written bonds alone observed, though it increases the power to make private combinations for gain, takes away ability to combine politically; and thus leads to the leaving of everything to one representative governor, who, because the people are too divided and distracted to hold him to account, becomes an irresponsible despot.

AnimatedStarSlavemaster Expanded Strategy AlertAnimatedStar


Remember these points?

You do this by:

  • Getting people to be un-warlike
  • Getting people distracted by their several occupations and amusements
  • Getting people divided


Look at these he just said now.

  • selfish individualism
  • loss of public spirit
  • Loss of loyalty with one another
  • loss of confidence in one another,

reigns where “wealth alone is craved”.


But…the whole point of bringing about these conditions (which they work hard to do) is to:

make the people too divided and distracted


So that they won’t bring on the slavemaster Kryptonite – “hold them to account”.

Ever notice how it’s constantly pushed how “great” the big cities are, around the world? Paris, London, New York, Seattle, Los Angeles, Prague, and so on?

Well, the biggest thing to destroy a civilization, like America, per them, is to shift the population into “the cities”. You know, where they can be distracted by all those “amusements” he mentioned.

… Both the physical and moral causes of decay sum them selves up and manifest themselves in one great evil, which in creases with advancing civilisation till it destroys it. This is what Ferrero calls “excessive urbanisation,” which he considers the disease that killed the Roman empire.

For it is the concentration of population in cities, and their devotion to the elaborating industries there conducted, that call away from the production of materials and cause the decay of agriculture, while luxury and display are fostered, which undermine fortunes.

Cities merely elaborate and consume what the country sends them. The more the spirit of the people drives them from the country to the city for amusement and distraction, the more grows unproductive labour and to less and less falls productive labour.

OK, so slavemaster strategy again.

To destroy America (like Rome allegedly) – call away from the production of materials and cause the decay of agriculture.

There is a catch here though, and that is the both of those things tended to be “slave” or Fiefdom territories.

So, I think that the decay or agriculture and production of materials is definitely intentional on their part – but more because they figure on putting Americans into a position where “can’t do it ourselves” any more, thereby swinging us all the way back around to being a part of a fiefdom again – their “slaves” or “subjects” in order to even have food, clothing etc.

It still applies as one of their strategies, I just would add the caveat of that everyone doesn’t have to go run off and be farmers again either, in order to correct this imbalance.

He reveals another part of their plan. Ever seen the slums, and “bad parts” of a big city? Do you know that one reason they never seem to get around to fixing that situation is because it’s intended to drive those “low working classes” back to the farm? So to speak.

We must let the peoples in the cities suffer, if they congest there too much, so that they will by their own misery be driven back to the country. But can we? Will we? Is not the humanitarian spirit too strong now, as it was too strong in Rome? The cities lead in control of the state now as they did then. They vie with one another for greatness, taking pride in their size. Will they drive away their own population? Already we have shelters and soup-kitchens, not to forget free swimming baths; already our swarming out-of-work city proletariat scorn the country ” hay-seeds,” and prefer to half-starve in company than to drudge on isolated farms.

I think that Walsh, was actually really bothered by what was happening to America, I think it hurt him to see it. Unfortunately, he wound up under the wing of some Oxford slavemasters, and you can see what came out of that. But every once in a while a little bit of him-minus-slavemaster shows up. I think we’re seeing that where he is obviously bothered by farmers being called “hayseeds”.

What he was never told (I’m sure) is that the very people he so looked up to? BROUGHT ABOUT ALL THAT DELIBERATELY.

They HATED when America broke free of them, and never gave up that grudge. Do not under-estimate that with a slavemaster – their ability to hold a grudge is only bested and made inferior by their true enemies ability to never forget an injustice, until rectified. That is what they are trying to imitate, by the way. Poorly.

But they certainly do have the will. You might not believe this, but the last slavemaster I worked with – that was his saving grace. That’s what was still showing of the real person – that incredibly strong will-power. I know, it sounds like an oxymoron, or like I just contradicted myself. Really, I didn’t. Their will is strong, but strong on the wrong things. This hamstrings them to a degree, compared to the real thing – they just need to see the difference.

Walsh, harkening back to Galton and “cures” here, talks about how it will be “strong and painful”.

But the question is : Have we the will to adopt the strong and painful measures that alone are the cure? Have we even the desire? It may be, but it also may not be. It may be that we prefer to consider only ourselves, and to let the future take care of itself. This, however, is not our duty.

I should probably note, that there is a segment where, I kid you not, Walsh basically portrays that the entire reason for the fall of the Egyptian empire? Was because of making women have equal rights under Rameses III.

I love how in this next part, he tries again to act like America is just some “copycat” manifestation of previous Roman society. WRONG. But it is fascinating how important this is to denigrate it in the same way repeatedly.

That is exactly what Thomas Jefferson was talking about, in the quote I included in my article about declamatio sock-puppets such as Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, and so on. That same quote would do well to be seen here, I should think.

He was writing about that various anglophiles and other agenda’d people were trying to say what America was doing was not a new idea, it was the old Greek Philosophy. Thomas Jefferson’s answer to that was just classic –

* * * The introduction of this new principle of representative democracy has rendered useless almost everything written before on the structure of government: and, in a great measure, relieves our regret, if the political writings of Aristotle, or of any other ancient, have been lost, or are unfaithfully rendered or explained to us.

Jefferson Cyclopedia p.51 (nbr 486)

With that in mind – now look at what Walsh says “it’s just a common…” repeatedly.

… We Americans to-day are apt to boast of our so-called ” self-made ” men, who have risen from poverty and obscurity to wealth and conspicuous station. We forget that such is the common feature of all semi-democratic, semi-plutocratic eras. In Rome this was a common occurrence from the days of Marius, the plebeian consul, to those of Maxi- min, the peasant emperor. Several other emperors were of humble origin; freed slaves were not unknown among the councillors of the state; and the senate became filled with men of servile descent. For poor men made fortunes, and thereby acquired high position, since position was adjudged with respect to wealth.

It’s really sad to see this poor guy making his argument from sock-puppet history, don’t you think? I almost feel sorry for him.

And of course, he just had to add again, that when women “entered politics” oh well now – down goes the civilisation.

L. Ron Hubbard said the same thing, by the way, that when women are made equal to men “that civilization was on it’s way out.” Pretty clear by whom and with what he was “educated” by his mentor Commander “Snake” Thompson, as well as British intelligence man Ian Macbean.

Like I said – this book was THE guide for all up-and-coming slavemasters and slavemaster agent provocateurs.

… A phenomenon accompanying this outburst of plutocracy was the appearance of women in politics.

… Of course in both these civilisations the advent of women to power was in consequence of the transfer of property to them from men, who thereby weakened their own position.


And finally, in Chapter six, we have a few more reiterative gems to leave the reader with.

Chapter 6 –

How bad peace is again –

… Peace brings ease, and ease saps energy. Appeased, the people suffer mischief to be imposed ; and dreaming, they fall into vain ways themselves.

Understand that this next part – is NOT viewed by Walsh as being good things happening. I am including it just to illustrate what I said earlier. That these people know what is right, but when they talk about it, it is as poison in their mouths!

… This democratisation of the western world is an economic and political result almost everywhere (west of Berlin), to some extent, accomplished. Another actual result is social, consisting of the greater humanisation of the people, or up growth of the humanitarian spirit, so characteristic of our age. The milder attitude of nature toward us has caused us to assume a milder attitude toward one another. The manners and dispositions of men have grown softer and gentler. Punishments are less cruel. War, to repeat, pace the present one raging, is less indulged in: it is not needed for existence, it interferes with wealth, it hardly gives any pleasure in itself. The fall of an old and the rise of a new class to power, that of the middling rich, has broken down old prejudices, mixed classes up, and enhanced the appearance even be yond the reality of democracy, by disguising plutocracy. Women are accorded a freer status. Children are given more play. Education and enlightenment are extended to the masses. Religious intolerance is almost banished.

He simply couldn’t resist yet again trying to lay claim to the magnificence of the Americans gaining their independence and introducing the NEW concept of self-government – AS BEING CAUSE BY the slavemasters “renaissance” period – which is completely not true. Lest we forget, we only even know of from British/Catholic Church fostered history presentations. And we know how that goes, don’t we.

… This humanitarian movement, it is true, has its roots further back than the beginning of the nineteenth century. It may be traced to the Renaissance which preceded, and to the Reformation which followed, the discovery of America. But it has come to its bloom only in our days.

Now, after listing all the cool things that have happened BECAUSE OF AMERICA – now he’s going to piggy-back the two evils that come from all this “damn” democracy and humanitarianism.

… Now along with these two actual accomplishments of democracy and humanitarianism, have come the tentative beginnings of the two evils which have been signalised, — beginnings which seem not evil and perhaps may not be if they go not too far.

… For the future, while the employers lie low and do not formulate their plans, the employees look forward to their own supremacy. They promise, however, that all shall be admitted to their ranks, that is, all may become labourers, all owners of the means of production with which they labour. This is socialism.

Watch him here, he can barely contain himself in describing the exact right civilisation that we should have (and did have, prior to the slavemasters). It’s like he’s got 10 lemons in his mouth here – it “tastes” that sour to him. Worse? He tries to portray this as “socialism” a term that they invented.

It flatters by a picture of future peace and happiness in a millennium and more of plenty, bountiful nature continuing to supply mankind in return for less and less labour with all the good things of life, so that strife for them will no longer be necessary, and with the triumph of man over nature the struggle of man with man will cease, and mankind will live in a Christ-like brotherhood and become perfect on earth without waiting for translation to heaven.

Dis-illusioned much there, Mr. Walsh?


… In the place of the old dove tailing of the sexes, with their apportioned relationship to the common offspring, there is an aspiration after equality of the sexes in all things, and a demand that every one, man or woman, shall be recognised only as an individual, as ” a human”; wherefore in the present industrial conditions, so long as they last, women are to be admitted into rivalry and competition with men, and in the coming regime of socialism into complete coadjuvancy, copartnership, and companionship.

Oh my GOD!  People living in coadjuvancy, copartnership and companionship?

How horrible!

Man, this guy is on a roll. He continues with more ideas that are exactly right, and spits nails while saying them.

That’s a slavemaster for you.


The present inequality, among men, of wealth and of political power, has come altogether from contention, and though of late perhaps mostly, by the shrewd, from acquisition through the use of fraud, yet originally, it is alleged, chiefly from seizure, by the strong, through the use of force. So also the present supremacy of men and subordination of women is owing, it is maintained, only to the greater physical strength of men and their taking advantage of the physical weakness of women, originally to subdue them, and still to keep them in subjection.
[yep, that’s true. Correct idea]

The future is to be an era of peace and good will, in which nothing shall be permitted to be gained by fraud, and force shall no longer be employed, but over all justice shall reign, which gives to every one his due, — and every one’s due is considered the same, since no one is responsible for the virtues or defects with which nature endows him. If any distinction shall exist, it will be only that of intelligence, in which, it is claimed, women are by nature equal to men.
[excepting that virtues and defects part – yep, correct idea]


Women, therefore, will have as much to say about the management of the world as men, and weak men as much as strong men, “say” in fact being everything, strength nothing. Only children and idiots will be excluded from the common councils, because of their lack of intelligence.

And his point is – this is all a really, really, REALLY bad way to live.

Now he portrays all the above as being a “fairy tale” and couldn’t possibly be “realised” because of nature.

No, because of slavemasters.


Not “nature”.

That these dreams are a product of the last hundred years’ peace and ease and plenty, needs only to be stated to be recognised. And they are furthered by an imperfect induction about the indefinite continuance of peace and increase and extension of comfort, — which opinion, in America at least, the present rude shock in Europe has not yet shaken. And if nature were to behave as prophesied by Isaiah and as sung by Virgil, there is no reason why these imaginings should not be realised. But so far is nature from giving any promise of such behaviour, she is rather likely, after a continuance of increasing prosperity for some years to come, to discontinue her bounty ; and if the people of the most advanced nations and races carry out these plans, they will, by the mistake of preparing only for good times when hard times are coming, meet with many obstacles and obstructions, and expose themselves to great perils.

Ha! We’ll expose ourselves to great perils if we actually carry out these terrible plans that he so hates? Wow.

This next part is so disgusting, I think it should stand on it’s own, with nothing else said.

… These words were penned before the outbreak of the war now raging in Europe. This war is due primarily to the comparative overpopulation of Germany and the consequent need which the Germans feel for expansion. It does not mean the end of civilisation, but it may be the beginning of the ending, which is a long process, and a terrible process, and most terrible to those nations which suffer it first — those nations which are first defeated in the struggle for existence.


Next –

Chapter 7 –

War is GOOD!


There is also an ill-advised over-praise of peace as the sum-mum bonum, and disparagement of war as the maximum evil. People speak of war as retarding progress in civilisation. The reference to the destruction of property is mere materialism. Rather does it retard progress in decay: it is a moral purgative. As for the loss of life, it seems to be overlooked that every one must die somehow, and that violent death is generally less painful than natural death. In war, contention is frank and open; in peace, underhand and fraudulent. If the prevention of over-population be left to natural death, especially if this be artificially delayed, the increase must be checked at its source, at birth; and this means an interference with nature’s method of selecting the fittest.

… Conscription should cover all who can be fathers, and if under the hardships the unsound perish, the world can get along without them.

I see, so now we know why the British slavemasters arranged WWI. TO KILL the overpopulated Germans.

They were “helping” them and the world! <choke>

And what was that? Peace is only war gone covert? That’s what he’s saying here:

In war, contention is frank and open; in peace, underhand and fraudulent.

Walsh’s plug for a New World Order Goverment.

… Instead of a Hague court of peace, it would be wiser if there were formed a United States of Europe. Europe would then be invincible over against the rest of the world. This would be of benefit even to us in America, who would then have to mind our p’s and q’s, and would not, for instance, so light-heartedly break a treaty as we recently did, until better second-thought withdrew.

We’d have to mind our p’s and q’s? Oh really. That’s a good thing apparently – we need to be brought down a peg because after all – we dared to not agree with the LEAGUE OF NATIONS treaty.

Mind our p’s and q’s. Pfft.

But, see that? They want to array the rest of the world (more or less) against America. There’s that grudge thing again.

He then brings things back around AGAIN to the two most threatening things ever to the slavemasters – socialism and feminism.

… War being still not only a possibility but a probability, … it is most necessary for every nation that would remain one among the nations of the world, to see to it that there be no failure of its virility, and that the control of its affairs slip not out of the hands of its mentally and physically strong men. Hence especially two things with which we are now threatened we need with all our might to shun: socialism and feminism…

Here he split apart the Eugenics solution they are actually applying, from where he first talked about it. I think he did this to try and make it hard for the reader to see just how much he supports those insane ideas – thereby killing his credibility.

… It cannot be the purpose of the ensuing volumes to solve the problem just stated by investigating the means of improving and perpetuating our civilisation. Eugenics alone, as we have seen, will not be sufficient. It may be that to put such means as are necessary into effect would require the excision of some gangrene already formed; to undergo which painful operation our people may not have sufficient courage and strength, there being no anaesthetic for the public at large. But at least we can set our faces resolutely against supporting and promoting measures that would increase the evils.

To aid in encouraging resistance to such deceptive schemes is the humble task of the present series. Its object is the negative one of helping to preserve our civilisation from the dangers it is exposed to from the two proposed panaceas.

That, ladies and gentleman, was what WWI and WWII were really about – Cutting off those “gangrenous” limbs by killing huge sections of the human race – and taking all their combined wealth and property for the Slavemasters to have.

The Climax of Civilisation by Correa Moylan Walsh, 1917


Join the conversation! 2 Comments

  1. Very interesting blog! Where did you find the pictures of the Reform Club? Thanks.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.