His paternal grandfather was John Christian Bullitt, whose statue stands at the city hall of Philadelphia. But his mother was Louisa Gross Horwitz, whose name indicates that she was a Jewess.

As the Jewish scion of a prominent and reputable Anglo-Saxon family, this William Christian Bullitt, Jr. was like a cuckoo in a robins’ nest. Newspaper-columnist Jack Stinnett wrote of him:

William Christian Bullitt revolted against the conservatism of the Philadelphia society into which he was born before the New Deal was ever heard of, and was an enthusiast for the U.S.S.R. before the blood of the revolution had been mopped up. [Jack Stinnett, Reading Eagle, 14 December 1941]

Westbrook Pegler described Bullitt’s early diplomatic career as follows:

In 1917 at the age of 26, Bullitt having family connections was an “assistant” in the State Department. God knows why. When Saint Woodrow went to Paris, Bullitt somehow became an “attaché” of our peace mission. But he soon found himself in Moscow with the Communist Lincoln Steffens, on a mission of which Steffens reported, “We have seen the future and it works!”

Wickham Steed, the editor of Northcliffe’s London Times, learned that Bullitt and Steffens were working for recognition of Lenin and Trotsky so he wrote a loud editorial which queered that deal. Steed learned that Wilson’s Rasputin, Col. E. M. House, had sent Bullitt and Steffens on this trip for this purpose. Steed reported that Jacob Schiff and Felix Warburg, the New York bankers, were “prime movers” to bolster the Trotsky regime to “secure a field for exploitation of Russia.” [Westbrook Pegler, Reading Eagle, 17 May 1961]

Thus, already at the time of the First World War, William Bullitt was a trusted emissary of International Finance-Jewry.

In 1933, upon the election of President Franklin Roosevelt,  the Soviet Union was granted diplomatic recognition and William Christian Bullitt was made the first US ambassador to that government. Bullitt’s stay in Moscow ended in 1936 after it was revealed that Bullitt had been involved in illegal trading of Soviet currency. Unbelievably, Bullitt was reassigned as ambassador to France.

A famous passage in the diaries of Admiral James Forrestal contains an important revelation from Joseph Kennedy (US ambassador to Britain and father of the future President John F. Kennedy) about Bullitt’s activities as ambassador to France:

Played golf today with Joe Kennedy. I asked him about his conversations with Roosevelt and Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. He said Chamberlain’s position in 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she could not risk going to war with Hitler. Kennedy’s view: That Hitler would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it had not been for Bullitt’s urging on Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt, he said, kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn’t fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war. In his telephone conversation with Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 the President kept telling him to put some iron up Chamberlain’s backside.[The Forrestal Diaries, entry dated 27 December 1945]

Given that the conquest of Poland happened in the last three weeks of the summer of 1939, Bullitt’s urging “in the summer of 1939” that the Germans be “faced down about Poland” seems to refer to the situation before the outbreak of military hostilities. In that period, the issue was Germany’s military vulnerability due to the long border with Poland, and Hitler’s attempt to reach an accommodation with Poland that would ameliorate this, which was met instead with belligerence from the Polish side, emboldened by empty guarantees from Britain and France. After the conquest of Poland, the issue was whether to accept Hitler’s peace-offer to Britain and France, which included restoring a reduced Polish state. Facing down Germany about Poland after the conquest of Poland was blatantly hypocritical, since the eastern half of the country had been seized by the Soviet Union. There was no time when inflexibly facing down Germany about Poland was a reasonable course of action.

Forrestal’s note is unambiguous that it was Bullitt who prevailed upon the elderly invalid President Roosevelt (who, if his son-in-law Curtis Dall may be believed, was easily manipulated), with the result that Britain was coerced to take a hard line against Germany, on the unlikely (at least insofar as Kennedy protested that it was unlikely) premise that the Germans would back down.

If not for Bullitt’s influence on Roosevelt, in the assessment of Ambassador Joseph Kennedy Germany would have destroyed the Soviet Union — which to most of the world would have appeared as a benefit — without ever fighting Britain or France. There would have been no repetition of the World War.

Hadding Scott

For refutation of some nasty rumors about Koehl, see my article, “Rick Cooper’s ‘Brief History’ and the Defamation of Matt Koehl.”

Five Came Back by Mark Harris (a columnist for Entertainment Weekly) says that film-directors John Ford, John Huston, Frank Capra, William Wyler and George ­Stevens faked scenes for propaganda-films that they made for the government of the United States during the Second World War.

Mark Harris on how John Huston faked The Battle of San Pietro:

“San Pietro was seen as a new pinnacle of realism. In some ways it was, insofar as John Huston’s faked war-footage looked more like what we now think of as war-footage than anything that Americans had seen. He knew that you needed to have a shaky camera. He knew what a kind of vérité-style for war-footage should look like. But the fact is, it was all faked. He and his crew got to the battle after it was over. They had gone to Italy with the assigned mission to find a town that the Allies were about to liberate, and to film the victory, the liberation of the town, and the joyous return of the villagers. And when they got to San Pietro what they found instead was an abandoned town that had been shelled to bits, the Germans already in retreat, corpses of American soldiers all over the place, and mines and boobytraps everywhere they looked. So, the movie that became San Pietro was a restaged version of that battle that was shot over the next six weeks.” [Mark Harris, NPR 22 February 2014]

Harris suggests that a realistic representation of what was happening might have damaged public support for the war:

“When you take away the whole question of fakery, it makes the combat look rough and frightening and punishing and makes the advance of a line of ­soldiers look slow and ­hesitant in ways that set it apart from Hollywood war movies and even from a lot of other documentaries.” [Express, 9 March 2014]

There are aspects of film-fakery during the Second World War that Harris likely does not discuss to any great extent in his book.

In addition to simulating battles, the directors would simulate atrocity-footage. Frank Capra used footage of Chinese Nationalist troops executing Chinese Communists to portray Japanese troops wantonly killing Chinese civilians. He accomplished this by cropping the frames and adding dramatized segments that induced viewers to interpret what they were seeing as a Japanese atrocity rather than what it was. (Details here.)

Capra was also not above misrepresenting clips from German newsreels, showing the suffering in eastern Poland under Soviet rule, as scenes of suffering under German rule.

At the end of the war, professional film-directors were also employed to make the Germans appear as monsters, thus justifying the war. Alfred Hitchcock was engaged to make a film that represented Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, and Buchenwald as places where gassings had occurred — which is officially acknowledged now not to be true — but Hitchcock (not a Jew) never finished the film and it was never shown until PBS Frontline got hold of it in the 1980s, a few years after Hitchcock’s death. Billy Wilder, a Jew who had left Germany a few years earlier to become a famous director in Hollywood, was similarly engaged.

There are mainstream accounts of the political career of Senator Joseph R. McCarthy that make no bones about the fact that the overwhelming majority of federal employees that he exposed as posing a security-risk were Jews. McCarthy had hardly gained notice as an anti-Communist before he was being called anti-Semitic and compared to Hitler, for example by a syndicated columnist who described McCarthyism thus:

This plot was anti-Semitic in origin and intention, following the crooked logic of the fascist-minded, who say that all Communists are Jews and, therefore, all Jews are Communists. [Marquis Childs, 27 December 1950]

Obviously there was a widespread perception that a very large portion (of course not “all”) of Communists and pro-Communists were Jews; otherwise the complaint that McCarthyism was intrinsically anti-Semitic would make no sense. For some reason, however, it has been the practice of lame conservatives, when writing about McCarthy, to avoid mentioning that fact, as if it were not long-established common knowledge.

Whom do these lame conservatives think they are fooling by not saying that many Communists were Jews? Certainly not Jews, who already know it. This kind of tippy-toeing around key facts only leaves the non-Jewish majority in the dark.

As a matter of fact, the overwhelming Jewishness of Communism in the United States is the central fact in Senator McCarthy’s rise and fall, and the key to understanding what happened to him. This excerpt from George Lincoln Rockwell’s This Time the World recounts DeWest Hooker’s explanation of how Jews set up and then brought down the anti-Communist crusade of  Senator Joseph McCarthy:

My first meeting with Hooker was on a Thanksgiving Day, when he was due at a family dinner, but we got so totally absorbed in our discussion that he kept his wife waiting hours, until she was very angry at him. As we talked, he told me one amazing thing after the other.

Wes explained the Jews to me more clearly than I had ever figured out before. He described, with dramatic gestures, how they operate like a snake with different skins, which they crawl out of or into as the strategic need may arise.

When Jewish Communism begins to get too “hot,” as it has here in the U.S., because of the millions who saw the parade of Jew Communist spies, they slide out of that skin and become Zionists. And when this also gets too hot, then they molt and become “anti-communists” or something else. In the excitement, nobody ever seems to notice that it is always the same snake.

Even more enlightening, he gave me a sparkling clear picture of the mess I had come to know on my own as the “movement” — the cowards, the loud-mouths, the hobbyists, the ADL agents, the “prostitutes” who make money out of it — the whole depressing lot of them.  

This energetic young genius then told me the astonishing and accurate inside story of Joe McCarthy, completely winning me with his way of fathoming and presenting the vital information about enemy operations which had so far baffled me. Every step of the way, he showed me documents, newspaper clippings and photostats to back up the story about how Joe McCarthy got started, rose, and was finally ruined.

He told me that Bernard Baruch had started it all, when too many Jew spies were becoming prominent. Baruch called Joe up to his New York apartment — here, Hooker showed me a clipping from The New York Times — and told him that there was need of an anti-communist crusade, but that there was an unfortunate idea getting around that Communism was Jewish, because of so many Jew spies. Would Joe conduct a good, exciting Red hunt, being a little “fairer” by digging up some non-Jewish spies? If Joe would do this, Bernie would see that there was good publicity and advancement in it for Joe. McCarthy could smell the aroma of this deal, but, like many a shabbez goy before him, he imagined he could out-fox the Jew. When the time came, he would use the publicity and backing to drag out ALL the Communists, Jew and Gentile alike.

So Joe agreed to conduct the great hunt and began in Wheeling, West Virginia. He promised to identify the “master Red agent” in America, and made a lot of charges about Communism in the State Department.

Then he was approached by his “good Jew” friend, George Sokolsky, the columnist, who warned him of the danger of being accused of being an “anti-Semite,” because of the “fortuitous” presence of so many Jews in the Communist apparatus. “Why not guard against this by taking a ‘good’ Jew on as head of your staff?” wheedled George. “Then they couldn’t say you were anti-Semitic!”

Joe thought this advice was pretty good and George just “happened” to have in mind the right Jew — Roy Cohn. The matter was soon arranged and Cohn the Jew became the organizer of “McCarthyism.”

Then Cohn approached fighting Joe and suggested that, since they needed contributions and more help, and wanted to be doubly sure they would not be accused of “anti-Semitism,” it might be wise to hire a wonderful, rich young Jew friend of his, Dave Schine, for the staff. Again, McCarthy went along with this brilliant stroke.

When all was in readiness, McCarthy duly brought out his “big red fish,” as promised, which turned out to be a college professor named Owen Lattimore — a Gentile! Nobody had heard much of him, before or since, but in the middle of the trials of more than twenty Jewish Soviet spies, Lattimore was dragged back and forth in the press as the real red herring, a Gentile herring, with suitable screaming back and forth by both “sides.” Bernie had done a fine job.

McCarthy, through all of this, figured he was smarter than his manipulators and, when a Republican got into power, he would then go after ALL the reds, Jew and Gentile, and let the chips fall where they might. However, for the moment, he rested on his laurels as the man the Jew papers and the Communist Daily Worker were screaming about, the man who had been set up by a Jew, advised by a Jew, and staffed by two Jews.

The loyal and hard-working staff now set about displaying “McCarthyism” to the world. Cohn and Schine, the two Jews, made a whirlwind tour of Europe, visiting libraries of the U.S. Information Service which are, as a matter of fact, loaded with red and pink propaganda. But they did not do a responsible job exposing and stopping this rotten use of U.S. taxpayers’ money to spread Marxism. Instead, they threw tantrums for the press, threw books on the floor and acted like two idiots. Nobody noticed that they were two Jews, but everybody came to equate “McCarthyism” with insanity, thanks to the wide press coverage these two received! 

The presidential election was now in full swing and McCarthy went to bat for Ike, dreaming sneakily of the day he would not have Truman to stop him — the day he could really dig out Communists, no matter how many of them were Jews! Sure enough, Ike was elected and McCarthy pulled the plug, floored the accelerator, touched off the boosters and let go with all he had.

He went to Fort Monmouth, to our most secret radar laboratories and discovered 41 people with atrocious security records and red backgrounds. Of these 41, 39 were Jews! Then he found a Jew dentist named Irving Peress, who had been caught red-handed committing perjury in denying his red record. McCarthy asked the Defense Department to look into it and report the circumstances. Instead of doing this, the Anna Rosenberg-dominated Army promoted Peress and mustered him out, beyond reach of court-martial — in one day!

McCarthy, righteously lusting for blood, went after Irving and demanded to know who promoted this Communist. He would have eventually found his way to Anna, the writer of articles for The New Masses and a member of a Communist John Reed Club. Perhaps the trail would have led him up to Secretary Marshall, who boasted that he personally disarmed the Nationalist Chinese with a stroke of his pen, thus turning China over to Communism.

So McCarthy’s two Jew “assistants,” Cohn and Schine, went into action again. Schine was drafted into the Army and Cohn, in McCarthy’s name, called and tried to obtain favors for him by influence. This corrupt action was a perfect red herring to take the heat off those who promoted a Communist Jew dentist, guilty of perjury, and who mustered him out before he could be court-martialed.

Once more, the two Jews who had created “McCarthyism” and given it a bad reputation — not Joe McCarthy — were the source of dirty dealing which caused the downfall of a truly brave and great-hearted man.

When Hooker had finished this utterly devastating and unanswerable display of the manipulative genius of the Jews, and his own genius at figuring it out, I was staggered by the enormity of it all![Rockwell, This Time the World, ch. XI]

]]> https://www.anglinarchive.com/2013/11/04/a-psychiatrist-examines-the-negro-1921/ Mon, 04 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0000 Hadding Scott
National Socialist Worldview
November 4, 2013

W.M. Bevis was a psychiatrist at Saint Elizabeth’s Hospital in Washington, D.C., where he presumably had extensive experience in treating Negroes. This article for the American Journal of Psychiatry (1921) summarizes his observations about mental peculiarities of the Negro.

The Negro race evinces certain phylogenetic traits of character, habit, and behavior that seem sufficiently important to make the consideration of these peculiarities worthwhile; especially as these psychic characteristics have their effect upon and are reflected in the psychoses most frequently seen in the Negro. Forming so large a part of the population and living as he does under conditions, climatic and otherwise, that are favorable and natural, the Negro of the Southern states forms the basis of the observations and deductions of this brief article.

Less than three hundred years ago the alien ancestors of most of the families of this race were savages or cannibals in the jungles of Central Africa. From this very primitive level they were unwillingly brought to these shores and into an environment of higher civilization for which the biological development of the race had not made adequate preparation. In later years, citizenship with its novel privileges (possibly a greater transition than the first) was thrust upon the race finding it poorly prepared, intellectually, for the adjustment to this new social order. Instinctively the Negro turned to the ways of the White man, under whose tutelage he had been, and made an effort to compensate for psychic inferiority by imitation the superior race. Thus we see in this people a talent for mimicry that is remarkable. Efforts to imitate his white neighbors in speech, dress, and social customs are often overwrought and ludicrous, but sometimes sufficiently exact to delude the uninitiated into the belief that the mental level of the Negro is only slightly inferior to that of the Caucasian.

The insidious addition of White blood to the Negro race has produced significant effects upon the latter. This racial admixture of blood has been between the Negro female and the White male, with practically none between the Negro male and the White female. But we cannot agree with Hoffman when he says that there is probably no true-blooded Black man in the United States today. A limited observation and study of the Negro families in the South will reveal the fact that there are still hundreds of the pure Black African stock untouched by any possibility of miscegenation, thought as the years go by they are passing. If the original White parent were always even an average representative of his race, mentally and morally, the hereditary effect upon the more or less mulatto offspring would naturally be that of improvement of the traits and mentality of the colored race, but unfortunately the White man by whom this fusion of blood starts is most often feeble-minded, criminal, or both. “This miscegenation appears to have effected the longevity of the race, and the changed social environment has brought about a moral and mental deterioration, together with a diminished power of vital resistance. Information has been brought out by some writers that the mulatto more nearly approaches the White in the contour and shape of the cranium; that the facial angle in the mulatto is larger than in the Negro; that the cranial capacity has been increased, but that the race may have gained in an intellectual way but not in a moral.” – according to O’Malley.

Healthy Negro children are bright, cunning, full of life and intelligent, but about puberty there begins a slowing up of mental development and a loss of interest in education as sexual matters and a “good time” begin to dominate the life and have the first place in the thoughts of the Negro. From this period promiscuous sex relations, gambling, petty thievery, drinking, loafing, and a carefree, prodigal life, full to the brim with excitement, interspersed with the smallest possible amount of work, consume his time. The female of the race begins promiscuous heterosexual relations, even with grown men, at a remarkably early age, resulting in illegitimacy and the spread of venereal diseases. Many mulattoes do not conceal their pride in being the paramour of a White man or becoming the mother of a quadroon. With their low moral level and as free agents, no wrong is felt in gratifying their natural instincts and appetites. The untoward effects of their excesses and vices are potent factors in the production of mental diseases.

Motion, music, excitement, or a combination of these make up much of the life of colored people. Their natural musical ability of a peculiar type, and their sense of rhythm, are too well known to make comment necessary. Motion pictures especially delight but the modern dance has little or no charm for them. The “cake walk, shuffling, strutting, buck and wing,” and such dances as give a wide range of motion of the arms, legs, and feet, suggestive of dances and orgies of the original African tribes, are executed in great style.

Naturally, the Negro lacks initiative; takes no thought for the immediate future, living only in the present, without recalling with any degree of concern the experiences of the past and profiting by the same; does not worry [about] poverty or failure; distrusts members of his own race, and shows little or no sympathy for each other when in trouble; is jolly, careless, and easily amused, but sadness and depression have little part in his psychic make-up.

All Negroes have a fear of darkness and seldom venture out alone at night unless on mischief bent. Even when two or more are out together there is always fear and much caution. This noctiphobia is closely associated with the superstitions of the race, is akin to actual cowardice, so easily demonstrated, and emphasized by the constant reiteration of stories of the ante-bellum system of patrol of the plantations, of ghosts and impresive nocturnal performances of the Ku Klux Klan.

It is the conscious or unconscious wish of every Negro to be White. This is brought out in his dreams, the hope of being a white and snowy being in the eternal life, and in psychoses in which he is or was white.

Very dear to the heart of the whole race is the privilege of belonging to a secret order. The more lodges to which he belongs, the greater citizen he is considered. The secret work with its mysticism, ceremonies of initiation, parades and marches in highly colored uniforms and regalia on holidays or on funeral occasions greatly fascinate and attract both the men and the women.

The religion of the race is unique in that it is not taken as seriously as is superstition. It is difficult to determine where one ends and the other begins. Original tribal worship, the queer racial awe of the mysterious, and associations with the White race have affected their religion. Prior to emancipation, the slaves attended the churches of the planters, occupying galleries especially prepared for them. Doctrines thus inculcated formed the background for their religious activities of later years. To these have been added such sounds, motions, and residual forms and ceremonies as have been left them by their African forefathers in efforts to appease the wrath and do honor to many deities. From time to time are added features that have proven successful in religious matters by their White friends. In their religious services, whether it be in singing, prayer, testimony, or sermon, there is always a varying accompaniment ranging from an occasional grunt, groan, or exclamation to an almost continuous volley of all these, with continuous motion by the congregation, increasing in volume as the service progresses until a point is reached where their emotional fervor reaches its climax in wild disorder. During a single service a congregation of colored worshippers may work themselves into an hysterical state of emotional exaltation in which “the real world disappears from sight and the supernatural alone exists for them.” Behavior at these times appears to be only a step from the manic phase of manic-depressive psychosis or a catatonic excitement. The service is never complete until a reaction from this state back to comparative quietude takes place. Meetings often last five or six hours and continue every night for several weeks. Sermons and exhortation delivered and received with such emotion and enthusiasm bear little or no fruit in their everyday life and conduct, affecting favorably the morals of very few.

Nothing in the life of the Negro stands out more prominently than his superstition. It influences his thought and conduct more than anything else. In no other trait or peculiarity do we find more plainly the imprint of primitive African life and customs. A monograph might be written describing and tracing the origin of this psychic weakness of those of “ebony hue” but we mention only the most common and strongly believed superstitious ideas, born as they are of fear, credulity, intellectual poverty, and childlike imagination. Even the most talkative of the race are reticent and ashamed to talk about their superstitions, and make great effort to conceal all traces of it in ordinary conversation. It is best understood by hearing conversations between individuals of the race when they think it impossible toe be heard by a White person. Under these circumstances they discuss what they have heard and believe and match experiences freely with each other. Frequently this trait comes to the surface in delusions and obsessions but is even then disclosed with reserve.

Buried deep in the nature of this people is the belief that souls wander around not far from the interred body during twilight and at night as spirits, ghosts, or “hants,” to trouble and disturb the peace of mind of those who have been unkind to the deceased when living. This belief and fear are sufficient to occasionally bring about optical illusions, especially if the moon is shining just a little, that are always without question taken as “hants.” It is also believed that the left hind foot of a rabbit found in a “graveyard” is a charm or “fetich” that will make them successful at dice and in many ways ward off misfortune. Teeth of animals, snake rattles and skins are said to possess magic power of protection. Great faith is placed in witchcraft, palmistry, and divination. Persons who claim power to give information about the future, as in the fortune-telling of these fakers, are considered great and all-wise representatives of the “Most High,” especially if they present a weird appearance, use words that are difficult to pronounce and hard to understand, and do some sleight-of-hand tricks. The moon, particularly a new or waning moon, is ever to the colored man a sign of time and a reminder of death. This “time of the moon” is considered unfavorable or any doubtful or dangerous undertaking. It is also unlucky to start on an errand and turn back, but if such must be done, it is necessary to make a cross-mark on the ground and spit in one of the angles. Of interest to the psychiatrist is the belief in the ability of certain members of the race to “conjure” or place a “hoodoo,” “voodoo,” or “spell” upon another. The victim things that his enemy uses this power very secretly at will and for his own benefit. All sorts of bad luck, persecutions, disease, and mental conditions can be called down upon the person who is under the spell. This unfortunate condition can only be relieved by the intervention of some person having a greater power to “conjure” than the original enemy. Persons supposed to possess great power to break these spells and to ward off the evil operations or the power of the enemies are referred to as “Witch Doctors,” or as “Night Doctors,” and are held in great reverence. Parents of a young patient having a psychosis often contend that all that is wrong is that he or she is suffering from a “spell” placed on by a jealous or disappointed lover. The colored patients themselves often give being under a “spell” or “hoodoo” as explanation for their mental difficulties. They will often say, “He controls my mind.” “Love Powders” to change one’s luck in winning the affection fo a person of the opposite sex or to break the power of a rival are much in demand, if guaranteed. With all the handicaps resulting from fears, low ideals, and primitive notions, it occasionally happens that the Negro youth is fortunate in having the proper guidance and sufficient work to prevent him from amking a complete wreck of his physical and mental life. Spurred on by a good example and a wholesome desire to be an exception and a leader who can help the race, many profit by the opportunities offered even in the South to secure a good education and develop into most excellent citizens.

After this, Bevis discusses forms of mental illness that are prevalent among Blacks, comparing their occurrence among Whites. Blacks suffer from schizophrenia much more than Whites.

This is not surprising when their racial character make-up and the atmosphere of superstition in which they move are considered. Much of their usual behavior seems only a step from the simpler types of this classification. The catatonic form predominates, occurring almost twice as often as among White patients.

Alcoholism and suicide, says Bevis, are rare among Negroes.*

If we consider the psychoses of the Negro from the mechanistic viewpoint, it will be found that practically all may be correctly included in the following classes, named in the order most frequently observed: dissociation, compensatory, and repression. Most of such psychoses are benign and acute, but may become chronic if improvement does not relieve the situation in time to prevent it. The most common causative factors in the dissociation types are: “inability to prevent repressed disguised cravings from breaking through the ego’s resistance,” as mentioned by Kempf; toxic elements, and real or imaginary domination by others. Conflicts or situations becoming almost unbearable, with no suitable means of sublimating or otherwise avoiding, make a psychosis of this character an easy avenue of escape from the field of reality. An example is the case of a woman who was under the influence of a “spell” put ipon her by another, committed a crime, asserting that it was not she that did it but that under this uncontrollable influence she became the helpless agent.

Fear is the all-pervading cause in the compensatory type, “fear of fear, fear of sexual impotency, and fear of loss of the love-object” being the most noticeable elements. These manifest themselves in grandiose, unreasonable claims, persecutory ideas, and pathological lying. An example is the case of a man, though Black, said that he was the commissioned representative of God to protect White women and that he might be more efectual in his mission was made White and for all these reasons has been grossly mistreated by both Black and White.

The repression type makes up the smallest part of the racial psychoses under consideration and is more of a compulsion-neurosis than a psychosis. There are phobias and obsessions suggestive of psychaesthenia. As so clearly expressed by White, “there seems to be an alternation between love and hate with no possibility of the formation of a working compromise.” This type is more often seen in those who show an appreciable proportion of White ancestry.

In our observations the following points are evident:

(1) The Southern Negro has certain psychological traits that are reflected in his psychoses.
(2) Motion, rhythm, music, and excitement make up a large part of the life of the race.
(3) Naturally, the most of the race are care-free, live in the “here and now” with limited capacity to recall or profit by experiences of the past. Sadness and depression have little part in his psychological make-up.
(4) Of all his peculiarities, fears and superstitious ideas stand out most prominently.
(5) The number of cases of alcoholic psychoses is surprisingly low.
(6) Suicide and suicidal tendencies are almost absent in colored patients, the ratio being about one to three thousand in state hospitals.
(7) The incidence of cerebro-spinal syphilis and paresis is relatively low in the Southern Negro.
(8) Manic-depressive psychoses are observed to occur in higher percentage than that given by Green in 1916 (17 per cent). The manic phase is the one nearly always seen.
(9) Dementia praecox [i.e. schizophrenia] stands at the head of the list of the psychoses of the colored, catatonic form occurring about twice as often as in the White, and paranoid form coming next in importance.
(10) Mechanistic classification of the psychoses of this race show that nearly all are dissociation, compensatory, or repression types.

_____________________________________
* What Bevis wrote about the rarity of alcoholism among Blacks in 1921 is contradicted by the prevalent stereotype about Black alcoholism in 2013. But a  report (R. Caetano, C.L. Clark, T. Tam, “Alcohol Consumption among Racial/Ethnic Minorities”) published by the NIH in 1998 states that the stereotype of alcohol consuption among Blacks is  exaggerated, that alcohol-consumption is still more prevalent among Whites: “Results from the 1984 National Alcohol Survey showed that several sociodemographic factors (e.g., age) helped shape blacks’ drinking patterns, degree of alcohol-related problems, and attitudes toward drinking and that these influences differed from those observed among whites (Herd and Caetano 1987). For example, rates of heavy drinking among blacks were highest among men in their 40s and 50s, whereas the rates among whites were highest among men in their 20s. In the 1995 National Alcohol Survey, however, rates of heavy drinking among white men in their 20s have dropped, such that black and white men now show similar drinking patterns until they reach age 49. Moreover, in the 50- to 59-year-old age group, rates of heavy drinking are substantially higher among whites than among blacks (16 percent versus 3 percent, respectively). The causes of these changes in alcohol consumption patterns between 1984 and 1995 remain unclear. Finally, the abstention rate currently is higher among black men than among white men (36 percent versus 26 percent, respectively), further contradicting common assumptions about blacks’  drinking patterns (Caetano and Clark 1998 a). Other research also has indicated that the attitudes of blacks toward drinking and drunkenness are not overly permissive and, in some cases, tend to be more conservative than those of whites (Caetano and Clark 1998 c ). For example, many studies have documented relatively high abstention rates among black women compared with white women (Caetano and Kaskutas 1995; Herd and Caetano 1987). The results of the 1995 National Alcohol Survey further support those findings, with abstention rates of 55 percent among black women and 39 percent among white women (Caetano and Clark 1998 a ). In summary, recent research has contradicted many of the stereotypes of alcohol consumption patterns among blacks.”

Paul Dutton of Cambridge, England says that he has been shopping twice a week for three years at Asda — wearing an SS dress-uniform.

Finally it appears that somebody has complained about it, with the result that Mr. Dutton was expelled from the store,  but for three years shoppers were habituated to the fact that a man wearing a swastika was harmless.

This is good desensitization, tending to erode the effect of decades of conditioning. If you can arrange for people to see some forbidden symbol or hear some taboo utterance on a regular basis, it is good to do so, using discretion about how far you can go without incurring a severe reaction. 

How much you can do safely will depend on factors like the depth of respect for freedom of speech where you happen to be, whether there happens to be a degree of local sympathy for your speech, and whether you are perceived as dangerous apart from your actual speech: a man who is perceived as dangerous will have less freedom because of it. For maximum freedom of expression, you must appear harmless.

If a swastika is too much for you where you live, maybe you could display a Confederate battle flag (which has tacit popular support in much of the USA), just to show that somebody is not intimidated, and to show others that they don’t need to feel intimidated either.

The reaction that Mr. Dutton incurred, being told in effect that he can’t wear his uniform in that store anymore after three years of doing so, is far from ruinous, and meanwhile he has probably done some good with his three-year stint as the harmless SS-man.

By contrast, people who don swastikas for the purpose of spouting overheated verbiage and general scary posturing tend to reinforce stereotypes. Don’t do that.

As a matter of fact, if you intend to engage in rational communication about political ideas, it is better not to use a swastika or any shocking symbol, because it will tend to stop people from thinking about what you are saying. 

But if you are in a situation, like a state university, where you have other things to do than devote your time to political discussion,where furthermore you would be dragged into pointless arguments with people who share none of your interests, a symbol can be a good substitute for speech, just to demonstrate that you have the right to your view.

In 1994 ABC News’ Sam Donaldson tracked down Erich Priebke in Argentina, where he was a schoolteacher (obviously posing no danger to anybody) to ask him some accusatory questions about events of 50 years earlier. Priebke even at age 81 was unruffled.

In this incident, 335 Italians were shot in reprisal for the murder of 33 German soldiers by guerrillas. Priebke was involved in 80 of these executions. 

Reprisals for guerrilla-activity in war are hardly unique to Germany, and 10-to-1 (as alleged in Priebke’s case) is not even a high ratio for such reprisals. (Cf. the 1000-to-1 ratio that the Bolsheviks applied to the Russian “bourgeoisie” whenever a Bolshevik was killed.) The US military these days tends to disguise its reprisals against civilians in the form of bombardment, e.g. the bombardment of Fallujah, Iraq in 2004. 

In fact the whole US policy of sanctions on Iraq during the 1990s represents reprisal against civilians on a colossal scale, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths. Perhaps this was what Priebke meant when he said, “Many civilians died … and still they are dying” (in 1994). 

Sam Donaldson makes much of the allegation that some 14-year-old boys may have been shot in reprisals for guerrilla-activity in 1944, but it was only two years later (1996) that US Secretary of State Madeleine Allbright gave the notorious interview in which she said, “We think the price is worth it,” in regard to the deaths of half a million Iraqi children that resulted from economic sanctions intended to force “régime-change” in that country.

The infamous helicopter gun-video leaked by Bradley Manning shows what seems to be more or less random killing of civilians on a street by US forces in Iraq, based on the premise that one or two of those present seemed to have weapons. How does reprisal for killings by guerrillas compare to that?

When the country that suppresses guerrilla-activity through reprisals loses a war, actions of this kind become “massacres” in the parlance of the victors, and since 1945 those who carry out such actions become “war-criminals” — if their side loses the war. 

Because of the attention that ABC News focused on Priebke he was extradited to stand trial in Italy, where he was kept under house-arrest until he passed away recently at the age of 100. 

But Priebke never backed down. In a written interview released after his death, Priebke defends National-Socialism, and he explicitly rejects the “Holocaust” as victors’ propaganda:

“To lock up people that were a threat to national security was a normal thing during the war. Russians and Americans did the same. [..]

“The activity carried out by a gas chamber is invasive towards the environment and terribly dangerous, deadly, also on the outside. To kill millions of people this way, in the same place where others work and live, without them to notice anything is absurd.”

And that is the thing that has Jewish-dominated media howling the most about Priebke, the fact that he expressed disbelief in their Holohoax.