Are all people born mentally equal?
Yes, said the French revolutionaries, introducing the French word égalité — “being no worse than anyone else.” Children are born mentally equal (égalité), but if they are born to aristocrats, they receive education and seem mentally superior, while if their parents are commoners, they may be unable to give their child any education, and he or she does physical work.
Some Americans regarded independence from England not as Canada (which is not independent) does, but as a revolution against the English monarchy, similar to the French revolution against the French king, who was executed.
On May 10, 1940, England was endangered more than at any time in its modern history. (Just six months later came the first all-Nazi blitzkrieg of Coventry.) Before, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain believed that Hitler had been appeased. But he was not. It had been generally believed that wars are never conquests, but only quarrels, and it is possible to appease the quarrelsome litigant. Yet suddenly, contrary to all appeasement, Hitler invaded the Low Countries. Chamberlain resigned and advised the king to “call Churchill to be prime minister.”
Winston Churchill was a Nobel Prize-winning historian and social thinker. After Hitler came to power in 1933, Churchill began to explain him and his wars as we see them today. Churchill was mentally superior to all British politicians, and was far more aware of the danger of Nazi Germany that Chamberlain was.
Some of us in Russia heard Churchill’s radio address, while Stalin had concluded a peace agreement with Hitler and proposed to him to let the German troops go through Russia to India and thus conquer it. After Hitler invaded Russia, Stalin was confined to bed for several days. As a friend of mine gloomily joked: “Stalin did not trust anyone except Hitler.”
Nevertheless, when Hitler attacked Russia, Churchill promised aid to the country. Churchill’s radio appearances showed how personally he was involved in the defense against Nazi Germany:
“. . . we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. . . . But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted by the lights of perverted science.”
Well, according to General Chi Haotian of China, one-third or two-thirds (or perhaps three thirds?) of Americans should be killed by China’s first blow at the United States.
Today, for the first time, the United States is endangered as much as England was in 1940. But the danger is different in its distribution in time. Hitler’s invasion of the Low Countries was a death knell for England. But the appointment of Churchill as prime minister turned Hitler to the invasion of Russia, where he perished.
Today, “Communist” China is a worse threat to the U.S. than was the “National-Socialist” Germany to Britain in 1940. But what is the reaction in the United States? Nonentity Barack Obama, elected by a majority of voters, that is, psychiatrically healthy nonentities, declared post-1949 China a partner of the United States!
As a response to my column of Aug. 13, an American voter sent me an e-mail on Aug. 14 -- a kind of mental self-portrait of an American voter. His e-mail is signed: “Chris Surmeier, 1stSgt USMC (Ret.).”
In the first paragraph of his page-long e-mail, Surmeier declares that “President Obama is smart enough to realize that China is home to nearly 1/5 of the world’s consumers.” And Surmeier says that I “don’t understand why the U.S. might want to forge a partnership” with China.
Yes, why? Surmeier decided to study Japanese to improve his commercial performance. But his Japanese friend advised him instead to study Chinese because the Chinese “would be the key to business in Asia.”
In other words, wars do not exist. When you hear some people speaking of war (as in Peter Navarro’s bestseller “Coming China Wars”), whisper to yourself, “money,” and rush to make it.
That is, concludes Surmeier, “your arguments certainly suggest your [you are] NOT qualified.”
His second long paragraph attacks my remark about the fundamental difference between medicine in places like ancient Athens, which gave the word “democracy” to our times, or the United States, where a patient has the freedom to choose his or her doctor, and medicine in countries of “state” slavery — countries like post-1949 China, where medicine is “collective” for everyone, except “communist” millionaires or top members of “the government and the party.”
One point of Surmeier’s criticism is his conviction that there was no medicine in ancient Athens — why, there was no penicillin there, for example. “What the hell are you talking about?” exclaims Surmeier.
In conclusion, he asks me to give him “the name and contact information for the person who allows [!] you to post on this site.”
One word follows in the next line: “Ridiculous.” Presumably, he will try to convince those in charge of all Web sites that they should not post my columns (which, let it be known, I have been publishing since 1972).
The day earlier I received the following response to the same column of mine of Aug. 13:
Hello Lev Navrozov!
You keep telling the truth about the Chinese Communist Party aka “Owners of China” and I thank you for that. I hope that soon many other writers will join you, certainly Writers Without Borders should be speaking out more effectively.
All the best,
Now, suppose voters like Surmeier instead of Gillis are in the majority in the United States. They will elect a president at their respective mental levels. What does this mean for the United States? A murder inflicted by the “People’s Republic of China” and generals like Haotian, who, as the minister of national defense of China, demanded publicly that China be the first to attack the United States.
You can e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.org
© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.