Rebutting Twitter Denial

I really like this source because it refutes all the holocaust denial I used to believe in: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2017/05/rebutting-twitter-denial-most-popular.html?m=1

Some Criticism I made of White Nationalism

in my parapsychology project http://archive.is/ihAcp#selection-13720.0-13720.1

, I referenced this: http://katehon.com/article/rightist-critique-racial-materialism and this: http://breedingbetweenthelines.com/(as counterpoint to Anthony Ludovici's text "The Importance of Racial Integrity") to criticize white nationalism.

Whatever its alleged justifications, this ideology can lead to hatred and exclusion, and does not take into account the full breadth of the counterarguments. Moreover, the racialism refuting viewpoint of Franz Boas has been given recent support. Gravlee et al. state,

"As Boas hypothesized, our results show that children born in the U.S. environment are markedly less similar to their parents in terms of head form than foreign-born children are to theirs. . . . This finding thus corroborates Boas’s overarching conclusion that the cephalic index is sensitive to environmental influences and, therefore, does not serve as a valid marker of racial phylogeny.": 
https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1525/aa.2003.105.1.125

I got into racialism on account of sourced that suggested extreme brutality amongst blacks unguided by colonization: https://archive.org/details/negroesinnegrola00helpiala, and particularly the extreme right text Which Way Western Man? by William Galey Simpson, but further research suggests this is untenable. A major refutation of racialist predicates that further shows this to be the case is given in the following article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886909003675

Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples around 3000 years B.C

Jelte M. Wicherts, , Denny Borsboom, Conor V. Dolan

“In this rejoinder, we respond to comments by Lynn, Rushton, and Templer on our previous paper in which we criticized the use of national IQs in studies of evolutionary theories of race differences in intelligence. We reiterate that because of the Flynn Effect and psychometric issues, national IQs cannot be taken to reflect populations’ levels of g as fixed since the last ice age. We argue that the socio-cultural achievements of peoples of Mesopotamia and Egypt in 3000 B.C. stand in stark contrast to the current low level of national IQ of peoples of Iraq and Egypt and that these ancient achievements appear to contradict evolutionary accounts of differences in national IQ. We argue that race differences in brain size, even if these were entirely of genetic origin, leave unexplained 91–95% of the black-white IQ gap. We highlight additional problems with hypotheses raised by Rushton and Templer. National IQs cannot be viewed solely in evolutionary terms but should be considered in light of global differences in socio-economic development, the causes of which are unknown.”

I have also debunked holocaust denial, citing deniers who changed their minds: http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=27426&p=568586#p568586

I flirted with holocaust revisionism and took it seriously for a while on account of the following resource: http://archive.is/winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.com, but that very resource is by somebody who gave it up (http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=540100#p540100), as the enterprise is untenable.

A good debunking of holocaust denial appears here: http://mailstar.net/holocaust-debate.html

Of interest in circles where these things are brought up, and also of interest to me, were Zionist conspiracy claims. For me this led to a consideration of the aforementioned, which I later rejected. Sadly though, in spite of the potential for overreaction, these claims are not without some merit. To provide just one example:

Here Chaim Weizmann explains the real nature of Zionism. As noted on p.4 of the January 16, 1920 edition of the Judische Rundschau (Jewish Review) a Zionist newspaper published in Berlin [This paper was the organ of the Zionist Association of Germany, according to this description: http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/cm/periodical/titleinfo/2651273, a pdf of the full newspaper can be downloaded here: http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/cm/periodical/titleinfo/2652232]:

During a speech in Jerusalem in December 1919, Chaim Weizmann, who months later would become president of the World Zionist Organization, and would later become the first president of the state of Israel, stated the following: "Lloyd George once said: I know the Palestinian front much better than I know the French front, for every patch of land and every stream is familiar to me from the Bible. Palestine is, above all, a matter of the Bible for England. The English believe in the Bible more than many groups in Jewry. Thus, first came the idealistic grounds, and only afterwards the material. We are the ones who have made clear to the English political leadership that it was in England's interest to join with us, to spread the British protectorate over Palestine. We reached the Declaration not by miracles, but through persistent propaganda, through unceasing demonstration of the life force of our people. We told the responsible authorities: We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not. You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world. We demand neither a charter nor concessions, but rather a complete national edifice that meets the following preconditions: the right to acquisition of ownerless land, the facilitation of land acquisition in general, the prerogative of developing public works, complete autonomy in the spiritual and intellectual sphere, and last not least, a direct influence upon the English administration in the territory. The regulation of immigration by us is, for us, likewise an unconditional demand." — Judische Rundschau, January 16, 1920 (No. 4). (emphasis added)

The original text, in German, of the article, is as follows:

Eine große Rede Weizmanns in Jerusalem Vor der Abreise aus Palästina Spezialbericht der „Jüdischen Rundschau“.

Am ersten Chanukkahabend sprach Prof. Weiz-mann vor seiner Abreise aus Palästina in einer öffent-lichen Versammlung in Jerusalem.

Er begann mit einem Rückblick auf die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Zionismus. Der Judenstaatsbegriff Herzls war im Laufe der Zeiten vielfach und verschiedentlich kommentiert und blieb trotzdem unklar. Selbst das Basler Programm war nicht eindeutig genug. Was heißt eine „öffentlich-rechtlich gesicherte Heimstätte?“ Wir wollten uns gar nicht mehr in die Deutung dieses Begriffes vertiefen, wir benutzen ihn als Schlagwort, als Parole, deren Deutung wir den kommenden Tagen überließen. Ja, manchmal wünschten wir geradezu in gewisser Entfernung von diesem erhabenen, aber nebelhaften Ziel zu bleiben, und stemmten uns gegen praktische Verwirk-lichungarbeit in Palästina. So irrte das Basler Programm gespenstartig von Kongreß zu Kongreß. Am vierten Kongreß versuchte Herzl selber, der abstrakten Parole Blut und Fleisch zu verleihen. Auf die Frage, was wollen wir, antwortete er: einen Charter. Seitdem wurde das Wort „Charter“ zum neuen Schlagwort, bis endlich am sechsten Kongresse die Krise ausbrach, als Herzl erklärte, wir „stehen vor einer eisernen Wand“. Es kam Uganda und daraufhin kehrten wir zur praktischen Arbeit in Palästina zurück. Professor Weiz-mann verweilte bei einer Episode, die von historischer Tragweite geworden ist. Es handelt sich um ein Gespräch zwischen Weizmann und Balfour zur Zeit des Ugandastreites. Balfour verstand nicht, warum die russischen Juden so gegen den englischen Vorschlag verbittert sind. In langen Auseinandersetzungen hat Weizmann versucht, den Standpunkt der russischen Zionisten plausibel zu machen und dieses Gespräch wurde die Brücke zu den politischen Verhandlungen während des Krieges, die zur heutigen Konstellation geführt haben.

Professor Weizmann betonte, daß die Schönheit des Ideals der jüdischen Renaissance das Entscheidende für die englische Deklaration war. Es sei eine irrtümliche Auffassung, daß England uns den Vorschlag nur aus eigenem Interesse heraus machte. Lloyd George sagte einmal: Ich kenne die Palästinafront viel genauer als die französische, denn jeder Flecken und jeder Bach ist mir aus der Bibel vertraut. Palästina ist für England vor allen Dingen ein Gegenstand der Bibel. Die Engländer glauben an die Bibel noch mehr als manche Schichten im Judentum. Zuerst kamen also die ideellen Gründe, nachher kamen die materiellen hinzu. Wir sind es, die den englischen politischen Führern klargemacht haben, daß es im Interesse Englands ist, sich mit uns zu vermählen, die Fittiche des britischen Adlers über Palästina auszubreiten. Wir erreichten die Deklaration nicht durch Wundertaten, sondern durch beharrliche Propaganda, durch unaufhörliche Beweise von der Lebenskraft unseres Volkes. Wir sagten den maßgebenden Persönlichkeiten: Wir werden in Palästina sein, ob Ihr es wollt oder es nicht wollt. Ihr könnt unser Kommen beschleunigen oder verzögern, es ist aber für Euch besser, uns mitzuhelfen, denn sonst wird sich unsere aufbauende Kraft in eine zerstörende verwandeln, die die ganze Welt in Gärung bringen wird.

Wir verlangten nicht einen Charter und nicht Konzessionen, sondern ein ganzes nationales Gebäude, das folgende Vorbedingungen hat: Das Recht auf Erwerb von herrenlosem Boden, die Erleichterung des Bodenerwerbs überhaupt, ein Vorrecht bei öffentlichen Arbeiten, eine vollständige Selbstverwaltung auf geistigem Gebiete und last not least [English in original] einen direkten Einfluß auf die englische Behörde im Lande. Die Regulierung der Einwanderung durch uns ist für uns ebenfalls eine unbedingte Forderung.

Es muß aber vor einer überstürzten Einwanderung gewarnt werden. Mit Wehmut müssen wir der Tatsache ins Auge sehen, daß der Zionismus nicht ein Heilmittel gegen Katastrophen ist. Als wir vor der Friedenskonferenz von einer Einwanderung Zehntausender jährlich sprachen, war es hochgegriffen. Nicht, weil es unmöglich ist; das Land könnte diese Zahl wohl auf-nehmen, aber bei uns sind die gewaltigen aufbauenden Kräfte, die dafür nötig sind, heutzutage nicht da. Vielleicht werden wir nach zehn Jahren mehr leisten können. Zur Verzweiflung aber liegt kein Anlaß vor, denn die Hauptsache ist, wir sind nicht vom Wege abgewichen, im Gegenteil, wir gehen langsam aber sicher vorwärts. Der hie und da auftauchende Pessimismus ist eine Folge der maßlosen Sensationen, die wie immer im Zionismus (erinnern wir uns an das Gespräch Herzls mit Wilhelm II), so auch jetzt die Phantasie der jüdischen Massen erhitzen. Wir müssen demgegenüber immerzu darauf hinweisen, daß die englische Deklaration eine Schale ist, deren Kern von uns geschaffen werden muß. Wenn wir das tun, werden wir am Ende finden, daß unsere Taten die richtige Deutung des Basler Programms sind.

Der Redner wandte sich am Schluß der arabischen Frage zu. Er warnte vor der schädlichen und falschen Auffassung, wir könnten unser Gemeinwesen über den Arabern bauen. Wir können unser historisches Recht auf das Land nur neben der arabischen Bevölkerung verwirklichen. Durch gemeinsame Arbeit werden wir sie hoffentlich zum Verständnis dafür gewinnen,daß wir hierher nicht als preußische Junker, sondern als Menschen kommen, die einem heiligen nationalen Ideal folgen, denen das Recht und die Gerechtig-keit als oberste Richtlinien gelten.

Die Rede Weizmanns wurde mit stürmischen Ovationen begleitet. Der Vorsitzende der Versammlung, David Yellin, und Ussischkin sprachen im Namen des Jischubs den Wunsch aus, Weizmann möge es vergönnt sein, schon in wenigen Monaten nach Pa- lästina zurückzukommen, mit der Freiheitsrolle in der Hand. — Judische Rundschau, January 16, 1920 (No. 4), p. 4.

In the past, I held the warped and over the top view that "Judaism [culture, not race] is a sociopolitical mental illness that has wreaked immense havoc via communism, Zionism, and the Rothschild Banking system", on account of such sources which I used to attempt to corroborate Douglas Reed's book The Controversy of Zion. I will not list such sources here as I do not wish to further this enterprise, but the Weizmann quotation was typical of what I was looking at. Unfortunately I went off the deep end a little bit with all of this for a while.

I have given up any attempt to go further into this, as doing so makes one emotionally toxic and is potentially far off base. And however troubling , there is a great deal of positive Jewish contribution that counterbalances conspiratorial attacks - this one item is sufficient as a powerful refutation of anti-Semitic sentiment: http://jinfo.org/

My past conspiratorial mindset got me into conspiracy theories that I went to far with, and mental illness exacerbated an over-reaction. This unbalanced approach is something I can only at present apologize for.

Narcissism

"Narcissism", 2011

Current Interests

The following statement seems resonant:

"To live the spiritual life, a reversal of consciousness is needed. This cannot be compared in any way with the different faculties or possibilities one has in the mental field. It may be said of someone that he hasn't much mental, vital or physical capacity, that his possibilities are very limited; in that case it may be asked how these capacities may be developed, that is, how new ones may be acquired, which is something rather difficult. But to live the spiritual life is to open to another world within oneself. It is to reverse one's consciousness, as it were.

The ordinary human consciousness, even in the most developed, even in men of great talent and great realisation, is movement turned outwards — all the energies are directed outwards, the whole consciousness is spread outwards; and if anything is turned inwards, it is very little, very rare, very fragmentary, it happens only under the pressure of very special circumstances, violent shocks, the shocks life gives precisely with the intention of slightly reversing this movement of exteriorisation of the consciousness.

But all who have lived a spiritual life have had the same experience: all of a sudden something in their being has been reversed, so to speak, has been turned suddenly and sometimes completely inwards, and also at the same time upwards, from within upwards — but it is not an external "above", it is within, deep, something other than the heights as they are physically conceived. Something has literally been turned over. There has been a decisive experience and the standpoint in life, the way of looking at life, the attitude one takes in relation to it, has suddenly changed, and in some cases quite definitively, irrevocably.

And as soon as one is turned towards the spiritual life and reality, one touches the Infinite, the Eternal, and there can no longer be any question of a greater or smaller number of capacities or possibilities. It is the mental conception of spiritual life which may say that one has more or less capacity to live spiritually, but this is not at all an adequate statement. What may be said is that one is more or less ready for the decisive and total reversal. In reality, it is the mental capacity to withdraw from ordinary activities and to set out in search of the spiritual life which can be measured.

But so long as one is in the mental field, in this state, as it were, on this plane of consciousness, one can't do much for others, either for life in general or for particular individuals, because one doesn't have the certitude oneself, one doesn't have the definitive experience, the consciousness has not been established in the spiritual world; and all that can be said is that they are mental activities which have their good and bad sides, but not much power and, in any case, not this power of spiritual contagion which is the only truly effective power.

The only thing that is truly effective is the possibility of transferring to others the state of consciousness in which one lives oneself. But this power cannot be invented. One cannot imitate it, cannot seem to have it; it only comes spontaneously when, one is established in that state oneself, when one lives within it and not when one is trying to live within it—when one is there. And that is why all those who truly have a spiritual life cannot be deceived.

An imitation of spiritual life may delude people who still live in the mind, but those who have realised this reversal of consciousness in themselves, whose relation with the outer being is completely different, cannot be deceived and cannot make a mistake. It is these people the mental being does not understand.

So long as one is in the mental consciousness, even the highest, and sees the spiritual life from outside, one judges with one's mental faculties, with the habit of seeking, erring, correcting, progressing, and seeking once again; and one thinks that those who are in the spiritual life suffer from the same incapacity, but that is a very gross mistake! When the reversal of the being has taken place, all that is finished. One no longer seeks, one sees. One no longer deduces, one knows. One no longer gropes, one walks straight to the goal. And when one has gone farther - only a little farther - one knows, feels, lives the supreme truth that the Supreme Truth alone acts, the Divine Will...[and it's not "you" who acts and wills but the Divine through you as the instrument for Divine Will].

For our mistaken vision these are perhaps incomprehensible actions, but they have a meaning and an aim and lead where they ought to lead.

If one sincerely wants to help others and the world, the best thing one can do is to be oneself what one wants others to be - not only as an example, but because one becomes a centre of radiating power which, by the very fact that it exists, compels the rest of the world to transform itself."

~ The Mother, "Collected Works of the Mother" - Sri Aurobindo Library