Category Archives: Netflix

The Pedophile Propagandist Roots of Netflix And The Depraved Bernays/Freud Social Engineering Legacy


NETFLIX Has Not Only Replaced Commercial Television, The Premier Home Of Pop Culture, But It Is Also Continuing The Degenerate Depraved Social Engineering Of The Bernays/Freud Legacy.


Co-Founder of Netflix, Marc Randolph, is directly related to both Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays. Both tied to psychology, propaganda, & pedophilia.
Cuties is an OP.


From Sigmund Freud to Edward Bernays to Marc Bernays Randolph, the anti-human propaganda agenda continues on in the modern era.

Freud was a pedophile advocate, who taught that children sexually lusted after their parents. And that children who reported sexual abuse by adults had either imagined or fantasized the experience. He believed that women were the problem with society and all their problems stemmed from not having a penis.

Freud’s grandson, Sir Clement Freud has been accused of molesting multiple young girls and was suspected in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Sigmund Freud’s sister, Anna Freud whom Feud claimed was regularly molested and abused by their perverted father, gave birth to Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda. Bernays took his family’s work in psychology and used it to help governments and corporations manipulate the minds of the public.

Hired by the American tobacco company, Bernays manipulated women into buying more cigarettes, by convincing them that smoking was a form of feminist liberation. During this propaganda campaign, he dubbed cigarettes “Torches of Freedom.”

Thanks to Bernays and his family’s twisted legacy, social engineering became big business. Modern psychology was used to exploit mankind’s mental weaknesses, nurture the public’s lower desires and turned people into mindless consumers. Is it any surprise, then that the great-nephew of Edward Bernays is none other than Marc Bernays Randolph, the co-founder and original CEO of Netflix.

Does anyone really think that this is a coincidence? Netflix has not only replaced network television as the premiere home of pop culture, it is also continuing the degenerate, depraved social engineering of the Bernays-Freud legacy. In ’13 Reasons Why’, Netflix was accused of romanticizing suicide during a recent increase of teenage suicide. In ‘The Devil Next Door’, they were accused of re-writing history to deceive viewers into believing that Poland was responsible for establishing Nazi death camps. In ‘The First Temptation of Christ’, Jesus Christ is depicted as a homosexual. And a Texas grand jury indicted Netflix for depicting child sex in the movie, ‘Cuties’.

“Netflix and Chill”. The new, preferred method for brainwashing the masses, brought to you by one of the most depraved, degenerate families of the modern era. Turn it off and wake up.


7 disturbing facts about Sigmund Freud


Warning. This might change your whole idea of who the “Father of Psychology” really was.

Say the name Freud and almost everyone will know who he is and the fundamental part he played in the creation of psychotherapy. That is, they will know the official image projected of him.
But few of us really know what kind of man he was, how he lived his life and what kind of thoughts and concepts he harbored.

For most people, when in need of help, they turn to what they believe to be the dubbed professionals in matters of health. They trust their minds and inner world to the professional and hope to come out of the session clearer and saner than before entering. But doesn’t it matter what foundational theories the psychologist base their work on and what effects those theories might have on the treatment of those in need?

To become a psychologist or therapist one is obliged to enroll in university studies and graduate with a degree. During these studies the student is made to study and memorize the theories of the founding father, Sigmund Freud. His theories are neatly compiled in edited and reviewed textbooks. What these textbooks intentionally exclude though, are the dark and destructive aspects of his practices and theories.

But does it really serve society to cover up the nasty bits and only present the presentable parts? How are we to make informed decisions when the full truth is not available to us?

1. Avid drug user

An enthusiastic user and promoter of cocaine, he used the substance frequently until his death in 1939. In fact, he was so fond of the drug he actively distributed it among his friends and associates which in some cases resulted in drug addiction, as with with close friend Ernst von Fleischl-Marxow.

2. Defender of child molestation

As Freud embarked on the journey of psychoanalysis he came across numerous cases of so called hysterical individuals that showed alarming symptoms and behaviors in adult age. Unsurprisingly most of his patients in the mid-1890s reported early childhood sexual abuse. Initially he proposed that most mental illnesses were related to early sexual abuse (known as the seduction theory) but a couple of years later he took a 180 degree turn and instead concluded that his patients memories of sexual abuse were mere fantasies and completely made up. The new theory instead was named infantile sexuality.
He actually, seriously presented a theory where the cause was not adults preying on children but that the child itself is lusting over his/her parents and seeking bodily/sexual pleasure thereof.
As the Internet Encyclopedia of Psychology describes it: “From his account of the instincts or drives it followed that from the moment of birth the infant is driven in his actions by the desire for bodily/sexual pleasure, where this is seen by Freud in almost mechanical terms as the desire to release mental energy. Initially, infants gain such release, and derive such pleasure, from the act of sucking. Freud accordingly terms this the “oral” stage of development. This is followed by a stage in which the locus of pleasure or energy release is the anus, particularly in the act of defecation, and this is accordingly termed the ‘anal’ stage. Then the young child develops an interest in its sexual organs as a site of site of pleasure (the “phallic” stage), and develops a deep sexual attraction for the parent of the opposite sex, and a hatred of the parent of the same sex (the “Oedipus complex”).
So the kids are fantasizing sexually over their parents and that’s why they have distresses in adult age… oh, thats why…

Talk about total gaslighting.

3. Serious women issues

His relationship to women was disturbed, to say the least and he never really developed any kind of healthy relationships with a significant other. He considered women to be weak, vain, jealous and lacking a good sense of justice. He believed that women’s problems in essence stemmed from them not having a penis. He even went as far as claiming that women are the problem in society. Nice.

In fact, a lot points towards him having more than just “friendly” relationships with his male friends and judging by letter correspondence uncovered with for example Wilhelm Fliess it appears the relationship was passionate, intimate and most probably of homosexual nature. In a letter written as a response to an acquaintance that shared that he had dreamed of Freud naked he responded, “You probably imagine that I have secrets quite other than those I have reserved for myself, or you believe that (my secret) is connected with a special sorrow, whereas I feel capable of handling everything and am pleased with the resultant greater independence that comes from having overcome my homosexuality,’’.

4. Generational abuse in the family

It’s a little known fact that Freud’s father molested his own children and that they all showed distinct symptom of distress and trauma. Something that troubled Freud deeply and probably another reason as to why he dropped the seduction theory and proposed the infantile sexuality theory. A convenient way of explaining away abuse.
As he writes in one of his letters during a time when he was engaging in self psychoanalysis. ‘’Unfortunately, my own father was one of these perverts and is responsible for the hysteria of my brother (all of whose symptoms are identifications) and those of several younger sisters.’’

Today its commonly understood that victims of sexual abuse, when not having addressed and resolved the trauma, tend to in higher frequencies pass on the violence to the next generation.
Freuds first and favorite daughter Anna showed signs of distress and mental illness which later gave her the description of a “jealous, depressed, masochistic, anorectic, latent-homosexual teenager”. In early adolescence she developed a severe psychopathology, consisting of sado-masochistic fantasies accompanied by compulsive masturbation, an eating disorder, and depression. Symptoms of child abuse anyone?

5. Relentless addict

Smoking up to 20 cigarettes a day he eventually developed mouth cancer 1923. For the next 16 years he went through a whooping 33 surgeries and had a large prosthesis inserted to separate his sinus and jaw. Despite all of this, he never stopped smoking and consequently that nasty habit led to his death.

6. In safe hands?

In the book ‘’The Assault on the Truth, Freud’s Suppression of the Seduction Theory,’’ by author Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson he courageously presents chocking new material from letters and documents issued by Freud and his circle. Mr Masson should know, he was formerly the project director for the Sigmund Freud Archives and was to become its next director, but was dismissed in 1981 in a dispute over interpretation of other controversial Freud material. As the brave man he is he choose to not keep quiet about the information he came across and at the expense of his own career he instead spoke the truth on the matter.

Several disturbing facts have been unraveled under his research such as:

1.A patient treated by him in 1900 and then dismissed as a case of paranoia ended up hanging herself in a hotel room.

2.Freud was overly preoccupied and lustful over money. In one letter he wrote that money is ‘’laughing gas for me.’’

3.On numerous occasions he attempted to manipulate his clients into donating money to him, in effect abusing the trust given. In an article published in New York Times its revealed “In one little-known case that barely missed becoming a major scandal, researchers say, Freud induced two patients to divorce their spouses and marry each other. In addition, he hinted that the man should make a generous donation to his psychoanalytic fund.”
How professional.

7. Something to hide?

Much of the coveted Freud material held by the Freud Archives still remains unavailable to scholars. This includes at least 75,000 items stored in the United States Library of Congress and to which public access has been prohibited, in some cases, into the 22d century. One might wonder what the Freud estate has to hide, going though such extreme measurements to keep such a large quantity of documents secret to the public.

As seen above the father of psychotherapy could hardly be considered a healthy, balanced man with good morals and wholesome behaviors. If he was practicing today he would surely be robbed of his license and questioned for his dubious behaviors. As we move forward in our meetings with the school of psychology, it is helpful to have the whole picture.
A healthy dose of common sense and critical standpoint is appropriate to apply for both the practitioners of Freudian theories and the recipients.

Netflix = Deep State

Cancel Your Netflix Today !!!!


Netflix is normalizing pedophilia

Netflix Cartoon Pushes Pedophilia, Sexualizes Kids, Demonic Hollywood Trash

https://theirishsentinel.com/2019/12/10/netflix-cartoon-pushes-pedophilia-sexualizes-kids-demonic-hollywood-trash/

Netflix goes all-in for pedophilia with new “Dancing Queen” series that glorifies the sexualization of children

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-06-12-netflix-goes-all-in-for-pedophilia-with-new-dancing-queen-series.html

Netflix: Pandering to pedophiles everywhere

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/20/netflix-pandering-pedophiles-everywhere/


All the more reason to cancel. Is there a cultural revolution taking place right before our very eyes?
Is there an agenda to normalize pedophilia? You be the judge.


If you want to view the “Big Mouth” trailer from Netflix, click on the link below.


The Grand-Uncle of the Co-Founder of Netflix on Propaganda


Intelligent men must realize that propaganda is the modern instrument by which they can fight for productive ends and help to bring order out of chaos…Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind. — Edward Bernays, Propaganda (1928), pp. 9-10 This originally appeared in a Reddit post by user 7katalan, which is being reproduced below for archival purposes.

The Netflix Connections

TL;DR: Netflix’s two founders are heavily related to those in fields of weaponry and war, information, signalling and detection, television, politics, brain waves, public broadcasting, intelligence agencies, psychology, and propaganda. THIS IS PROBABLY NOT A COINCIDENCE. I’ve been thinking a lot recently about how Netflix has a lot of really fucked up programming that seems designed to enculture us to certain things. Prison being fun is a big one I’ve been noticing. So I was looking up their original shows and thought it was strange that their very first bit of original programming was House of Cards. Then I decided to look up the founders and HOO BOY does it get fucked up. It was founded by Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph. The first of the founders, Hastings, is the great-grandson of Alfred Lee Loomis and Ellen Holman Farnsworth. Loomis was an investment banker and scientist involved in development of radar and the atomic bomb, and also helped develop the electroencephalogram and studied brain waves with it. His laboratory was a meeting place for many very famous scientists like Einstein, Fermi, Bohr, Heisenberg. His cousin was Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary of War for Taft, FDR, and Truman, and Secretary of State for Hoover, and who oversaw the Manhattan Project which created the atomic bomb. One of Alfred Lee Loomis’ children–Henry Loomis, Reed Hastings’ grand-uncle, was the director for the Voice of America under Eisenhower, and president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting under Nixon, both of which are public broadcast arms of the U.S. government (foreign and domestic, respectively.) . Henry Loomis also directed research for the United States Information Agency and served on the board of the Mitre Corporation, who worked with the CIA and DoD. Alfred Lee Loomis also predicted the Great Depression and bought a ton of gold beforehand, then got even richer by buying the stocks of companies at their lowest. In a final point that I need to confirm his wife, Ellen Holman Farnsworth, has the same surname as Philo Farnsworth, inventor of the television, and I’m pretty sure they are related. The second founder, Randolph, has connections that are perhaps even crazier. His great-granduncle is Sigmund fucking Freud, pioneer of psychology, who studied unconscious desires that control people, the effects of trauma, the effects of childhood incidents, etc. Even more insane is Randolph’s grand-uncle, Edward Bernays, an Austrian-American who was heavily involved in the field of propaganda, and who basically started the modern field of ‘public relations’. He worked in PR for the United Fruit Company, who was involved with the CIA’s overthrow of Guatemala’s democratically elected government in 1954. Here are some quotes about how Bernays felt about propaganda and the common man (direct quotes in bold): “Bernays argued that the covert use of third parties was morally legitimate because those parties were morally autonomous actors.” “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it? The recent practice of propaganda has proved that it is possible, at least up to a certain point and within certain limits.” He later called this scientific technique of opinion-molding the engineering of consent*.” *“This phrase quite simply means the use of an engineering approach—that is, action based only on thorough knowledge of the situation and on the application of scientific principles and tried practices to the task of getting people to support ideas and programs.”“instead of a mind, universal literacy has given [the common man] a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of tabloids and the profundities of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man’s rubber stamp is the twin of millions of others, so that when these millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints…The amazing readiness with which large masses accept this process is probably accounted for by the fact that no attempt is made to convince them that black is white. Instead, their preconceived hazy ideas that a certain gray is almost black or almost white are brought into sharper focus. Their prejudices, notions, and convictions are used as a starting point, with the result that they are drawn by a thread into passionate adherence to a given mental picture.” “Bernays’ vision was of a utopiansociety in which individuals’ dangerous libidinal energies, the psychic and emotional energy associated with instinctual biological drives that Bernays viewed as inherently dangerous, could be harnessed and channeled by a corporate elite for economic benefit. Through the use of mass production, big business could fulfill the cravings of what Bernays saw as the inherently irrational and desire-driven masses, simultaneously securing the niche of a mass-production economy (even in peacetime), as well as sating what he considered to be dangerous animal urges that threatened to tear society apart if left unquelled. Bernays touted the idea that the “masses” are driven by factors outside their conscious understanding, and therefore that their minds can and should be manipulated by the capable few: “Intelligent men must realize that propaganda is the modern instrument by which they can fight for productive ends and help to bring order out of chaos…Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” “Propaganda was portrayed as the only alternative to chaos.” Sound like coincidences to you?

Margo Kaplan: Pedophilia Is Biological and Not a Choice

edward-bernays-propaganda

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Pedophilia is no longer a choice, says Margo Kaplan of Rutgers University. It is simply a mental illness and seems to be biological. Kaplan proceeds to say that pedophilia has

“neurological origins. Pedophilia could result from a failure in the brain to identify which environmental stimuli should provoke a sexual response. M.R.I.s of sex offenders with pedophilia show fewer of the neural pathways known as white matter in their brains.

“Men with pedophilia are three times more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous, a finding that strongly suggests a neurological cause. Some findings also suggest that disturbances in neurodevelopment in utero or early childhood increase the risk of pedophilia.

“Studies have also shown that men with pedophilia have, on average, lower scores on tests of visual-spatial ability and verbal memory.”[1]

I certainly would love to see those studies and how those researchers arrive at those conclusions. As we shall see in a moment, Kaplan was quick to formulate a morally deficient idea but quickly stay away from its implications in the political and historical world. It is like Einstein postulating that “I know that philosophically a murderer is not responsible for his crime, but I prefer not to take tea with him.”[2]

I simply could not hold my laugher after I read Einstein’s hysterical statement here. Didn’t Einstein left Germany on the eve of the Third Reich? Didn’t he say that “Because of Hitler, I don’t dare step on German soil”?[3] Didn’t Einstein view Hitler as a “cold, barbaric, animalistic resoluteness”?[4]

If Hitler was not responsible, why do the Dreadful Few hate him so much? Why can’t they understand people like Ernst Zundel who happen to admire Hitler?




Kaplan locks herself in the same kind of argument, which is intellectually vacuous and morally repugnant. She argues that pedophiles “remain responsible for their conduct.”[5] Yet in the same paragraph—yes, same paragraph!—Kaplan moves on to say that people “do not choose to be pedophiles.”[6]

How in the world can they be held accountable for their actions? And doesn’t responsibility entail the power to choose?

Here Kaplan and genetic theorists (those who believe that Jewish behavior is genetic and not moral) run into the same moral and philosophical problem. They both end up saying indirectly that the mistake of the typist is not the typist’s mistake—a logically impossible and impressively incoherent argument from which moral death inexorably flows.

To be fair, I contacted Kaplan to get her response, and it was pretty obvious that she was running away from the implications of her article. She quickly admitted that she did not write the title of the article, but the principles which flow from the essay are right in line with the title itself. In one particular response, she brought up a point which indirectly and subtly destroys the Holocaust project:

“You are confusing pedophilia (the attraction) with child abuse (the act)…Pedophilia is not the act. It is the attraction. The attraction is not chosen. The act is chosen. You are not morally responsible for your attraction. You are morally responsible for your act.”

Kaplan, of course, did not deal with other definitions of pedophilia, which include: “Sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object.”

In any event, I would grant her premise, which goes like this: “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it.”[7] But the real question which I pointed out to her is this:  “Why do we begin and end at pedophilia?” Why don’t we explore this idea in other possible worlds?

Kaplan’s logic was that since pedophilia is an attraction, it cannot be a crime if the attraction remains a thought. Kaplan did not know that she was undermining her own mines.

What about people who have “illicit” and “perverse” thoughts on the so-called Holocaust and express those thoughts out loud without acting upon them? Why are they being persecuted when they have not acted upon their thoughts?

Why have Jewish thought police such as Alan Dershowitz literally stripped people like Norman Finkelstein of their livelihood for having “illicit” thoughts on Dershowitz and the whole Zionist project?

Again, why has my good friend Fredrick Toben been literally humiliated and imprisoned for just thinking that the Holocaust establishment has hijacked serious history and scholarship? Why has he been punished for simply asking historical questions and making rational points such as,

“Show me the evidence and I’ll believe you completely—my philosophical training does not allow me to accept extraordinary claims without rigorous testing and irrefutable evidence”?

How did the Dreadful Few end up holding the Germans by the balls and criminalizing anyone who even probes serious questions about the Holocaust narrative?

Why did Steven Salaita get fired from his academic position? Why did Denis Rancourt get fired after teaching at the University of Ottawa for more 25 years as a physicist? Why has Bishop Williamson been charged for saying that no Jew was gassed in a gas chamber?

To push the envelope even further, why has Ernst Zundel been literally crushed by the Dreadful Few for his thoughts on Nazi Germany and the Holocaust? If Zundel and others suffer from some kind of “mental disorder,” should not Kaplan make a case arguing that we ought to protect them and not burn down their houses or harass them?

Zundel lived in Canada for more than 40 years, but the government refused to give him citizenship because he had committed one of the most horrible crimes in history: he denied the Holocaust narrative.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Zundel incited “racial hatred” in Canada. Let us suppose that this was true. If we use Kaplan’s logic, Zundel never acted on that thought and he has not committed any crime. So, he needs protection. Will Kaplan help?

Perhaps what angered the SPLC was that Zundel had some “perverse” thoughts on the Jews:

“The Jews are particularly adept at seizing or insinuating themselves into strategic positions in our society where they wield power far beyond the extent of their numbers.”

Once again, suppose we place this thought in the category of “mental disorder.” Where, then, is Kaplan? Isn’t she supposed to defend people who have “mental disorders”?

Zundel would not be the only person on the planet to suffer from this kind of disease. Jewish historian Yuri Slezkine does have the same “mental disorder” when he postulates in the first paragraph and on the first page of his study The Jewish Century that

“The modern age is the Jewish Age, and the twentieth century, in particular, is the Jewish Century…Modernization, in other words, is about everyone becoming Jewish.”[8]

In the same vein, Jewish propagandist Edward Bernays, known as “the father of public relations”[9] and whose uncle was none other than Sigmund Freud, declares that “we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons—a trifling fraction of our hundred and twenty million—who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.”

America, according to Bernays, is like a scientific lab, where people are being experimented like animals. Who are “the scientists”? Bernays moves on to say that they are “invisible governors” who covertly “pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.”[10]

Bernays took the Jewish cat out of the bag when he said:

“If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it? The recent practice of propaganda has proved that it is possible, at least up to a certain point and within certain limits.”[11]

The war in Iraq proved that Bernays was right. The Dreadful Few used propaganda to sell the poison to the American people—and this will cost us all at least six trillion dollars.

So, the twentieth century alone proves that Bernays’ theory was true: the rich and the powerful, namely the Dreadful Few, began to control and manipulate the masses for their diabolical end.

Slezkine, who is a Russian Jew, got great accolades for publishing The Jewish Century (Princeton University). Bernays’ book is still in circulation. Zundel, however, has been imprisoned, harassed, and beaten for basically saying almost the same thing that Slezkine and Bernays have articulated. Zundel said,

“I was incarcerated in six different prisons on two continents in three countries—the USA, Canada, and Germany—without relief of any kind. Throughout my imprisonment, basic human rights principles were trampled underfoot repeatedly and with impunity.

“The worst prisons were the Canadian detention centers at Thorold, Ontario and at Toronto West, where I was held for two long years in isolation cells, ice-cold in the winter, no shoes or socks allowed. The electric light in these cells, bright enough to be able to read, was kept on 24 hours a day.

“Through a glass slot in the door I was checked every 20 minutes, and my activities were meticulously noted by the guards: one sheet for every day.  No dignity, no privacy.

“My toothbrush was kept in a plastic bin in a hall. I was not allowed to speak to other prisoners. Bed sheets were changed only after three months. No pillows. No chairs.

“When I wrote to my wife or to my attorneys, I had to sit on a makeshift pile of my court transcripts. No radio, no television, not even an electrical outlet to sharpen my pencils. No ball point pens, only pencil stubs, cut in half with a saw. No spoons, forks, or knives were permitted; only a white plastic spoon with a fork called a “spork” that had to be returned every time at the end of the meal.

“With very few exceptions when furtive guards showed me some kindness away from the surveillance cameras, I was treated as though I was the worst of criminals. That’s Canada for you, where I have lived and worked without a criminal record for more than 40 years.”[12]

The SPLC has a section on their website entitled, Zundel’s “Criminal History,” which includes “‘knowingly publishing false news’ in connection with his pro-Nazi propaganda.” The ADL declares that people like Zundel are “poisoning the web.” Again, will Kaplan write an article defending those people?

As it turns out, Kaplan does not seem to lack moral sophistication to address those important issues. She is a law professor and was certainly trained in logic. But her weltanschauung, which is Jewish and essentially Talmudic, does not allow her to see the obvious. It is no surprise that she never tackled those issues in our correspondence.


For Kaplan, pedophilia is not a moral choice but a “mental illness,” which she says is compatible with the definition of “mental disabilities.” Kaplan continues, “Our currently law is inconsistent and irrational.”[13]

How?

Well, in order to understand Kaplan’s weltanschauung better, one needs to go back to what she has written in the past. In 2013, she declared in the Washington Post:

“[O]ur courts and legislatures are still strangely squeamish about sexual pleasure, tending to treat it as a topic to be avoided or an immoral indulgence the state should prevent.

“When they address sex, they often reveal their embarrassment by using Victorian-sounding euphemisms such as ‘an intimate relation of husband and wife’ or awkwardly clinical terms such as ‘the physical act.’ Other times, they express outright disgust.”[14]

The courts are “squeamish about sexual pleasure”? Kaplan is trying to be clumsy here because no court denies sexual pleasure. What she meant by “sexual pleasure” was same-sex marriage or “the criminalization of sadomasochistic activities.”[15]

Kaplan concludes her Washington Post article by saying, “I’d like to think that courts, legislatures and voters are up to the challenge. So, let’s talk about sex.”[16]

Again, why doesn’t she move that “free speech” argument elsewhere? Do the Dreadful Few allow free speech when it comes to examining the Holocaust, Zionism, Israel’s extermination of the Palestinians? Why have Jewish Neocons and others equated anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism?[17] Why has the Israeli-run NSA been snooping on virtually much of the entire world? Will Kaplan ever address those issues in a future article?


Kaplan concludes her New York Times article by saying,

“Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.”[18]

Kaplan, whether she likes it or not, is indirectly proposing an idea that can only work for her Jewish brethren. If pedophilia and its offshoots are not crimes, then people like Dominique Strauss-Kahn,[19] Brian Singer,[20] Woody Allen,[21] and perhaps even Alan Dershowitz[22] can get away with their immoral acts.

Harvey Weinstein for example (thanks to a reader who pointed this out) has been accused of groping a 22-year old Italian model in his office. But if this behavior has a biological origin, how are we going to hold him accountable? It gets worse. Listen to this:

Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg—who is 63 with a long, graying beard—recently sat down with me to explain what he described as a ‘child-rape assembly line’ among sects of fundamentalist Jews. He cleared his throat. ‘I’m going to be graphic,’ he said…

“‘I opened a door that entered into a schvitz,’ he told me. ‘Vapors everywhere, I can barely see. My eyes adjust, and I see an old man, my age, long white beard, a holy-looking man, sitting in the vapors. On his lap, facing away from him, is a boy, maybe seven years old. And the old man is having anal sex with this boy.’Rabbi Rosenberg paused, gathered himself, and went on:

“‘This boy was speared on the man like an animal, like a pig, and the boy was saying nothing. But on his face—fear. The old man [looked at me]without any fear, as if this was common practice. He didn’t stop.

“I was so angry, I confronted him. He removed the boy from his penis, and I took the boy aside. I told this man, ‘It’s a sin before God, a mishkovzucher. What are you doing to this boy’s soul? You’re destroying this boy!’

“‘He had a sponge on a stick to clean his back, and he hit me across the face with it. ‘How dare you interrupt me!’ he said. I had heard of these things for a long time, but now I had seen.”

One rabbi even

“forced his victims to eat feces, claiming that this cruelty was necessary to ‘purify’ the children he abused.”

Rosenberg continues to be graphic:

“I have children come to me with their parents, and the blood is coming out of the anus. These are zombies for life.”

We know that pedophilia is a big issue among ultra-Orthodox Jews. Back in 2008, the Jewish Daily Forward reported,

“Sexual abuse of children has periodically arisen in the ultra-Orthodox community through high-profile cases like that of Yehuda Kolko and Avrohom Mondrowitz, a teacher and a youth counselor, respectively, who were accused of abusing their students.

“Leaders in the community told the Forward that they generally treated those cases as isolated incidents. But both the Kolko and Mondrowitz cases have bubbled back up, and in the past few months a number of community leaders have forcefully taken the issue to a new plane.

“Perhaps the most influential voice has been of Brooklyn Assemblyman Dov Hikind, who over the past year — and, particularly, over the past two months — has started a somewhat personal campaign and argued that the ultra-Orthodox community has become a haven for child molesters…

“The largely Brooklyn-based ultra-Orthodox community, which spans many different sects, has seen a handful of explosive cases, beginning with that of Mondrowitz, who was indicted in Brooklyn on five counts of sodomy and six counts of sexual abuse in 1985, but fled to Israel during the scrutiny.”[23]


 In short, pedophilia is a not a crime for the Dreadful Few, but it is a crime for Catholic priests. Listen very carefully to the words of Jewish medical doctor Gustav Schonfeld,

“When these priestly misbehaviors, which in fact are punishable crimes, were brought to the attention of their priestly supervisors, the bishops either did nothing, counseled the priests in house, or sent them to friendly psychologists or psychiatrists for treatment, and forgave them their sins.

“Then, the Church transferred the priests to other parishes or schools where they had continuing access to children for abuse.  The crimes were not reported to the police.  Somehow the stories leaked out and created a media storm. Hundreds of children reported having been abused…

“Recently, similar reports have emanated from Europe.  One particularly disturbing set of news stories reported that the current pope permitted more than one pedophile priest to continue contact with children.  The size of the legal costs in Europe for the Church is not yet known.”[24]

Isn’t that lovely? Here is a man who keeps pointing out that Catholic pedophilia is wrong but has written zero articles on Jewish pedophilia. And he wants us to take him seriously! Moreover, he forgot to tell his readers that the Dreadful Few were very influential in the sexualiztion of the West and even Catholic priests.[25] As E. Michael Jones pointed out,

“the trouble started in the ‘60s with the sexualization of the culture in general and the culture of the Catholic clergy in particular. Carl Rogers set out to liberate the Immaculate Heart order in Los Angeles, and the result was Lesbian Nuns.  The same sort of thing happened at Notre Dame summer schools for the clergy during the ‘60s…

“When it comes to sexual abuse, the rich Jew is innocent until proven guilty, but the Catholic priest is guilty until proven innocent. The same legal system that is used to exonerate Woody Allen is used to destroy Catholic priests. The double standard is impossible to ignore.”[26]

Jones meticulously documents that Catholic priests largely got seduced by the sexual philosophy of Wilhelm Reich, who postulated that quite explicitly that masturbation and sexual corruption could be used to destroy the Catholic Church.

When Catholic priests began to mimic the sexual mores of their oppressors, it was an infallible sign that they were on the brink of prostrating before the enemies of all mankind and therefore lost their moral ground. Once that was done, a flood of sexual misbehavior came on the scene, which largely destroyed the effectiveness of the Church in the culture.[27] As Jones continues to point out,

“The next fatal step occurred when the Church substituted counseling for traditional Church discipline. This was a major source of the problem in Chicago.

“When ‘a 13-year-old boy reported in 1979 that a priest raped him and later threatened him at gunpoint to keep quiet,’ the Archdiocese of Chicago did not investigate the matter and punish the perpetrator.

“Instead, they ‘assured the boy’s parents that . . .  the cleric would receive treatment and have no further contact with minors.’”[28]

Put simply, Kaplan is implicitly treading on Wilhelm Reich’s philosophy with a slightly different spin. But the end result is always the same. Reich wanted to change the sexual milieu and even entitled one of his books The Sexual Revolution. Kaplan is now asking for “sexual pleasure.” In other words, the West had to wait for thousands of years to learn about sexual pleasure from Kaplan.

Didn’t we learn our lesson from Oscar Wilde, Michel Foucault, Friedrich Nietzsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, Guy de Maupassant, Gustave Flaubert, Jean Paul Sartre, and even Franz Shubert[29]?


[1] Margo Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014. Thanks to Laura Lee Solomon for sending me Kaplan’s article.

[2] Quoted in Walter Isaacson, Enstein: His Life and Universe (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008), 393.

[3] Ibid., 404.

[4] Quoted in Jurgen Neffe, Einstein: A Biography (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2005), 287.

[5] Quoted in Victor Fiorillo, “Q&A: Rutgers Law Professor Who Says Pedophilia Is Not a Crime,” Philadelphia Magazine, October 6, 2014.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Margo Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014.

[8] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 1.

[9] “Edward Bernays, ‘Father of Public Relations’ And Leader in Opinion Making, Dies at 103,” NY Times, March 10, 1995.

[10] Edward Bernays, Propaganda (New York: Ig Publishing, 1928), 38; For cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000).

[11] Bernays, Propaganda, 71.

[12] Kourosh Ziabari, “Testing the Limits of Freedom of Speech: Ernst Zundel Speaks Out,” Foreign Policy Journal, April 30, 2010.

[13] Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014

[14] Margo Kaplan, “Why the Law Should Recognize the Joy of Sex,” Washington Post, November 22, 2013.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Sam Sokol, “Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism, Says TAU Director,” Jerusalem Post, May 21, 2014; Robert Wistrich, Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism,” Jewish Political Studies Review, Fall 2004; Emanuele Ottolenghi, “Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism,” Guardian, November 29, 2003; Judea Pearl, “Is Anti-Zionism Hate?,” LA Times, March 15, 2009; Eylon Aslan-Levy, “Why Anti-Zionism Is Inherently Anti-Semitic,” Times of Israel, December 8, 2013.

[18] Kaplan, “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime,” NY Times, October 5, 2014

[19] “Dominique Strauss-Kahn DNA ‘linked to maid,’” BBC, May 24, 2011; Philippe Sotto, “Strauss-Kahn Denies He Knew The Women At His Orgies Were Prostitutes,” Huffington Post, February 10, 2015; Dan Bilefsky, “Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s Defense: He Didn’t Know Prostitutes Were at the Orgies,” NY Times, February 10, 2015.

[20] Ted Johnson, “‘X-Men’ Director Bryan Singer Accused of Sexually Abusing Teenage Boy,” Variety Magazine, April 16, 2014; Anthony McCartney, “Bryan Singer Accused Of Sexually Assaulting Underage Boy,” Huffington Post, April 17, 2014.

[21] See for example E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 996-1003; 1007-1010; E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.

[22] “Alan Dershowitz Denies Sexual Assault Allegations As ‘A Complete And Total Lie,’” Huffington Post, January 3, 2015; Ann Oldenburg, “Dershowitz on sex slave case: ‘I’m hiding nothing,’” USA Today, January 23, 2015.

[23] See for example Lana Gersten, “Haredim Begin Confronting Pedophilia,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 2, 2008.

[24] Gustav Schonfeld, “Pedophilia, the Pope and the Jews,” History News Network, April 26, 2010.

[25] For a cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000).

[26] E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.

[27] See for example Patrick Guinan, “Modern Psychology and Priest Sex Abuse,” Culture Wars, May 2004.

[28] E. Michael Jones, “Woody Allen and the Double Standard,” Culture Wars, March 2014.

[29] See for example Franz Schubert, The Music and the Man (Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999).

The Century of the Self – Part 1: “Happiness Machines”



The story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays. Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud’s ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn’t need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires.

Bernays was one of the main architects of the modern techniques of mass-consumer persuasion, using every trick in the book, from celebrity endorsement and outrageous PR stunts, to eroticising the motorcar.

His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom. But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile.

It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today’s world.

Originally broadcast on 29th April 2002.


Sources

https://rumble.com/vhlt4v-netflix-and-the-depraved-bernaysfreud-legacy.html

https://archive.vn/jxEpA

https://archive.vn/ZZ2NF

http://www.cabaltimes.com/2019/06/02/netflix/

https://archive.vn/fWG2q