February 2, 2011

A historical report on ideas – dejavue to enlighten the new age – seen from Europe

Filed under: Dollar, Europe, History, Ideology contra Reality — jensn @ 9:41 am

The Middle Age

The Middle Age is the timespace in World History lasting for about 1000 years between the Ancient Age or Classical Antiquity depending on which contribution to the later periods and their descendants you give priority – and the Renaissance. Traditionally the year 476 AC, the year when the Western Roman Empire comes to an end, points out the beginning of the Middle Age, and includes the period of the great migrations with all its dismantling and transformation of the antique culture as the overture to the Middle Age. The ending of the Middle Age is on the threshold to the 16th Century: The discoveries, the Reformation, the time of Humanism (belief in the human being), where all relation in Europe underwent great changes. Some say 1492 (at least the second discovery of America, Leif the Lucky One (one of first Christian Vikings) and the son of the Viking Erik the Red One, reached New Foundland in the Ancient Age about 500 years before on his voyage from Greenland, and other say 1517, the year of the appearance of Martin Luther. The Middle Age is characterized by Feudalism, the orders of Chivalry, the temporal power of the church, monastic orders with the Scholasticism a.s.o. The fictional understanding of the Middle Age is the time of Mysticism, of the Romantic, of the great, strong uncomprehensive feelings. The romantic poets late in the next age borrowed examples for their motives of the Middle Age. Take Scholasticism. The ecclesiastical and theological philosophy from the 9th til 15th century. The teachers at those of Karl the Great’s monastic schools were called scholastics (from the Greek scholastikos, teacher), later on the word was use for teachers and learned generally. The characteristics of the Scholasticism are that it was extreme orthodox (in contrast to the so-called free thinking in the next age), and the result of the thinking and teaching was given apriori to be those of the church officially approved dogmas, the duty was to prove them with the help of the intellect. To be projected into the next age was especially the religious psychology, and their stringent logical reasoning. The last mentioned became the foundation of philosophical thinking later on. The breaking throught of free thinking from the late 1600s was very much inspired by Descartes, but Luther, Bruno and Bacon had fought against this free thinking as you will see below.


Means rebirth or redescent of the classical spirit, the rebirth of the interest of classical, Greek and Latin literature and art. That is a single and also a minor essential part of the Renaissance. When the interest of classical languages and cultures expanded to the wider circles outside the circles of the learned, it was more a consequence of the Renaissance, than it was its cause. You could perhaps say that Renaissance was the rediscovery of the human being itself and of the world. After school discipline lasting for centuries in the monastic schools, a natural maturation, and then a jump out into the light of history and life to conquere themselves and the world. The personal right and duty must claim oneself his individuality. The distinctive character has value, is not a sin. Artists, poets and scientists aim at originality. At the same time a ferucious interest of the nature, and of the objective world around the individual. Where the Middle Age saw sin and temptation, the Renaissance find new eternal values, objects and jobs and study, sources of pleasure and delight. Also new foreign countries and peoples are studied, a lot libraries, botanic and zoological gardens are founded. It is not a new paganism. It is solid founded on Christianity, its art selects only religious motives, its greatest men are believing Christians. The Pre-Renaissance (before 1500), the High-Renaissance (1500-1550), and the Late-Renaissance, the first with the starting point in Florence (or Firenze) concentrating on the awakening life to fight, and to find expression, and conquere the means of expression, intoxicated by spring, the next in full display, and then the harvest. In the humanism we have a single, common very doctrinaire and barren expression of the Renaissance, but the breaken through of the both the Reformation and the sciences has been prepared in this period. The evolution in the interior, exterior life, and the society as we would call it today, takes place as an interaction.

The universe and the relation between celestial bodies are investigated and compared with dogmas from the ruling Catholic Church. The typical assumption was that God must have created the world in complete accordance with perfective and simple mathematical formulas and geometric figures. So-called true causes – the physical causes, the causes shown in nature – replaced the former explanations that for example the movements of planets were to be explained by the souls of the planets. The mathematics and the experiment gave epoch-making results, but the Catholic Church was threatened. The so-called knowledge of the human being, and its power are the same. With the Renaissance the thought of the human being as a total independent being arises. Only by obeying nature you can conquere nature. The atmosphere of life was an overwhelming feeling of possessing unlimited and intiring possibilities, a deep feeling of being fully at home in the world, and to be the unrestricted master of everything, what the world may offer. You felt as if the world has just being created, and as if it suddenly had appeared from the darkness of the Middle Age, and now it was offered to the human being. At the same time the great rupture of unity of the Church happened. The personal relation with God. The human is being justified by faith, alone. The purpose of knowledge is to increase the control over nature because only in this way the nature can be utilized in the service of mankind (according to Francis Bacon). Here you already reach some clear contrast to the Scholasticism, and also to the Renaissance itself.

Rationalism (The Age of Enlightenment)

In the 17th and in the 18th century you find the great attempts to give a comprehensive explanation of the life by using the new concepts of scientifice. They wanted to replace such concepts of Aristotle (born 385 BC) with concepts from science. Movement was no longer something requirering a teleological explanation, and was no longer to be percepted as a possibility that by help of the formal cause was being made real. The new science required a new picture of the universe. The same mechanical basic laws for movements of the celestial bodies and the earthly bodies. All change is movement. Movement means a body changes its place in space, and such a movement has only one cause, the so-called caused cause. The statement of the law of inertia growing from Galilei, was experimented in the circle of Descartes and Huygens. And then the first law of Newtons dynamics. Newton operates with an absolute space, in relation to which every movement can be described. It is for this even movement, and even movements seen from this starting point which is expressed by a straight line relatively to the absolute space that Newtons mechanic laws have validity. The law of Inertia is a breach with the Ancient Thinking. A body can move even and along a straight line in a initial system without any exterior influence, that means without any influence of a power. Logic based on incontrovertible truths but on limiting assumptions. Assumption based on the senses can be doubted but “Cognito ergo sum. I think ergo I am”. The consciousness and the extent, both depending on God. Nothing comes from nothing. So it began.

The leading minds of Europe assumed from the definition of the human being that it was a rational being and attributing to the development of the intellect, and the exaggarating meaning of it. A rational human being has to live in rational state and in a rational world. That was what they were tending towards.

To get information, to look for all inherited views and examine and revise all of them in the light of a huge number of scientific discoveries was needed. It was necessary to do this in the interest of truth. But it was also claimed as long as a large part of life, and nearly all the people were mastered by the old agenda. For a great deal of the participants of the enlightenment, propaganda and agitation were also used to get consent to the attack on all antiquated – not at least the visible power brokers. The two aims are naturally often difficult to separate. And a lot of the published writers wrote very clear and understandable, and at the same time often so subtle teasing that the writings became common readings much more than anything else earlier. They wrote with warmth and enthusiasm, and knew how to spread their ideals. They caught the interest and incited the unaccustomed readers.

The most common ideas among the writers of rationalism was tolerance, freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Most of the published writers of Enlightenment forgot the debate about a theme originating from the thinkers of natural law, but Montesquieus wrote about how to limitate the power of state, and introduced the tripartition of the power in a so-called democracy. What troubled him was especially, what the Englishmen had achieved in 1679, the Law of Habeas Corpus – the suspect individual had to be shown in court before he could be charged.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau 

(1712-78) gave – among few in the 18th century – a very personal and passionated contribute to an understanding of the state, its so-called nature, its beginning and its objects. Rousseau even call enlightenment and culture in question. His thoughts have had a tremendous effect on the Western societies in the 19th and 20th century. Later on in his life he began to distinguise between false and true culture and between what is natural in the “natural state” and in the “state of community”. He claimed that a natural urge is in the human being – a dominating power – to be open, spontanious, good, sympathetic and thankful. That these instinctive and real feelings are more original than (and before) the reason, its the emotional life alone that makes the human being great and good, it is certainly not the brain. Rousseau’s writing are filled with contradictions and obscurities. But also his way of writing made a tremendous impression on the readers, even today. Rousseau got a least three children with different women outside marriage. The Scottish philosopher, minister and economist David Hume found three of Rousseau’s children in an public institution for orphans in Paris, France, and took them into his private care.

The end of philosophy and idealism – or the beginning of industrialism and ideology

The relatively short period 1750-1810 is one of the most fateful range of years in the ages of mankind. The previous ages had been charactericed by a considerably immutality in both the mental and the material life. Inventories, a new economic system and a reformed Christianity including a changed wealt-distribution are categories of exterior changes while the dominating (selected) philosophical contribution, and the general way of thinking among people will be charactericed as interior changes. I shall not postulate how causes and effects precisely are to be distributed, the sections about (selected) dominating philosophical thinking certainly support this omission. Already from the late 1600s and even more in the 1700s the cranks had golden times, government, influential figures and also the public were swamped by often pure phantastical proposals of new inventories in all areas of exterior life, but above all in the technical-economic. Industrialism changes nearly everything in the material world and “gave birth” to peoples.

Along with or contemporary with the war between England and France a Scotsman David Hume wrote “A treatise of Human Nature”. The Radical Empirism with all its consequences, written with literal elegance (might be the reason why it was published). It was “stillborn from the press”, Hume wrote in his selfbiography. In a way the contrary to Descartes. To observe, watch, to feel or percept something is to receive perceptions. Most of these perceptions are, what you will call of complex character. First premise: To say something exists, that something is existing, is to say that a certain perception, complex or not, are available or can be made avaiable. Second premise: The relationship of the language to the existing – the avaiable so (relevant or potential) – perceptions are deciding. The words of the language are understood as names of the different perception, Hume claimed. What is essential in this connection is that the language is secondary in relation to the perception. You may say that things and the facts of the world exist independent of the language. To maintain that the perceptions are present, ready to be given a name, is the same as to maintain that perceptions can be understood, identified and even be recognized as this or that quite certain independent of the language. And this is certainly not true as we shall see, but it is important, and an important discovery for the coming end of philosophy.


Idealism (and philosophy) at an end:

Hume’s radical empirism consist of three things, a theory of existence – everything existing might be presented as perceptions – , a theory on the relationship between language and reality – that the language comes after reality that already has been perceived, and has been understood – as a theory on the meaning of word. Words only have meaning if they are names of perception. This means that several word can given up – inclusive the word “I”. If the word “I” is an assumption of all consciousness it is an assumption of every language. Even therefore Hume’s radical empirism certainly has to be rejected.

A deciding difference between Emmanuel Kant and David Hume is their understanding of the relation between the language and that what the language is on. According to Hume the role of language was exhausted by being the names of the perceptions. But Hume failed. The use of concepts takes place in the language, alone. The smallest element of the language, according to Kant is the verdict, a statement where you state something (the predicate) on a thing (the subject). The concept and its use is the work of the intellect. The role of the intellect to understand reality by use of its concepts. It is imported to understand according to Kant that the concepts is the work of the intellect, and just by manipulating the reality to fit to the concepts of the reality, it is understood by the intellect that is different from the reality that is not decided by concepts – Das Ding an Sich.

Kant uses a distinction between empirical concepts and categories. Empirical concepts are concepts that make me understand the things I observe as being any certain kind of things. A cat can be understood as a mammal. By categories Kant understand concepts included in the assumptions of having and of using empirical concepts. The assumptions of language. Without getting further towards the categories of Kant it could be interesting to mention, one of them: the categories of substance. Hume rejected substance, because it was not possible to find perceptions connected to the substance. But understand, to Kant as well as to Hume the substance is not a part of reality, an existing extent. Kant has the language as an assumption. The logical structure of the language is alone deciding the existing facts. An example: Deciding to a scientific observation is that it is prepared and described in such a way that it can the reproduced by others, and an observation can not have value if it with the same observation made by others gives a different result within the accepted limits of accuracy of measurement. The scientific area of experience has to be independent of the observing individual. Whether the objective experiences are independent of the existence of common treats of perception and of consciousness is another matter. When it is understood that the object that is understood, by you understanding of it, is subject to the conditions of the understanding, the Kantician problem is inevitable. The recognition is viewed upon and investigated as if it was a tool which qualities – nature and limits – it is nescessary to investigate. If you have found out the qualities, you are perhaps tempted to make an experiment with the tool outside its qualifications and limits. Kant’s investigation of the pure reason was exactely such an investigation. The pure reason was the tool by the help of which we were able to recognize. The Kantician model involves that categories are used in time and space on given. The concept application or use has the implication that the categories (the tools) have to be used on something (the substance). Only when the categories have made their work recognition has any meaning, and it implies that the substance before the use of the categories is outside the recognition. But do not reject Kant’s philosophy because Hegel understand even the philosophical history as an dialectical process, and that is God’s consciousness before creation. Here you perhaps recognize the clear analogy Hegel’s understanding of philosophy of history and and the Jewish-Christian understanding of history.

“Die Phänomenologie des Geistes” by G. W. F. Hegel (1807). An explanation and an understanding of the result involves concepts themselves that are just understood by the help of concepts that have been used by the preparation of the philosophical system. An example: before the flower there is a bud. When the bud breaks the flower unfolds, and finally after the flower comes the fruit. According to the understanding of Hegel the bud, the flower and the fruit do not belong each to three different philosophical systems. The three formations cannot be separated, they constitute a whole. The problem for philosophy is therefore not the result of philosophical thinking. The truth is neither the result nor the process that leads to the result, but the result understood as the end result of a process that began with the bud. Hegel’s phenomenology includes philosophical considerations and philosophical arguments that are relevant for the understanding of the identity of subject and substance, and for the desciption of the dialectical process.When Hegel set out his views on the subject he means neither the empirical nor the individual subject but the universial. There is an identity between recognizing the universial subject and the object that are recognized. The dialectical process that leads to the recognition of the identity is a historical process where the universal subject actualizes the recognition. The Absolute of Fichte and Schelling (not further refered to here) was the basic on which all recognition build and the assumption of all recognitions. According to Hegel the absolute is on the other hand nothing different from the philosophical thinking or from the philosophical system. The Absolute is the actual philosophical system from its beginning to its ending.

How can an actual existing process of development (or dismantling) be understood only by the logic of the concepts? The cave parable by Platon gives much of the liberation by increasing metaphysical understanding. The dialectical process is similiar.

The founding idea of history is like everything else Hegel handled a concentration of ideas in which every imaginable phenomenon in life has its place and its explanation. Hegel understand life as development, the changes are the interior reality in everything. The principle of changes has a schedule in which life makes its own development. This schedule is Thesis, Anti-thesis, Synthesis.

To explane the use of this schedule let’s take the basic concepts of all life: to be, nothing. All existing must be, and the only sentence that in every sense is true about everything is to be. If you think of this concept to be, you find out that it is empty, without any content. This means according to Hegel that the concept is transformed to its complete contrast: nothing. The most extraordinary about the most positive word to be without content is the immidiate transformation to nothing. Is there a third word, in which the two word to be and nothing meet? When you at same time are and are not , what are you then? You are coming into existence. All existence is coming to existence. Every given state is Thesis that with interior logic nescessity turn into Anti-thesis, but these two contrary states then meet in Synthesis, that include both the two other states. The new synthesis is becoming the new thesis in a new threeparted development and so on. This Hegelian Principle is a deciding element of Hegels dialectical process. The history of mankind is understood by this schedule, Hegel claims. The single cultures have by logical nescessity developed from each other, and the historical cource could not have been another than the actual course. Every single epoke is as long as it exists, the reality, and beyong any critics a view suiting the ruling class in the State-Absolutistic Germany and especially the Prussian authorities in Berlin, where he gave his lectures in the 1820s. But there is a hope, everything most transforme into its contrast. The inventiveness of people and their effort do not lead the historical development, but the the interior logic of the historical course, by the name the dialectical process. In the Middle Age we had Thomas Aquinas who tried logically to prove the existence of God. Now God has got a new name serving the same purpose. This dialogical process has come to an end according to Hegel. W.G. F. Hegel, himself, appears to have been a very genuine man. Put very simple, the modified version of his thinking has been adopted by the controlling elite. The idea might perhaps be to create a war, and then win the peace in the way you restructure the devasted post-war world.

The Hegelian Principle.

The dark history of freemasonry


(an extract of Jüri Lina article (1999) with same title. Jüri Lina is an exile Estonian in Sweeden, member of the Swedish Society of Authors)  



“As early as 926 the free bricklayers grounded their lodge in York, England. In the free bricklayers lodge you taught the apprentices secrets of the geometric in the art of building. In the year 1375 was written in a document later found in the London archives that the free bricklayers were workmen who were subjugated by the feudal masters, but they were free go around in the country and in Europe. The mason’s guild had so-called free-letters with extensive privileges…..

In the beginning of the 1600s (Jakob IV of Scotland became Jakob I of England. He belonged to the family, the Stuarts. Their coat of arms was a bricklayers trowel and a sword that refers to ’Freemasonry and to the Templars Order) the mason’s guild began systematically to accept members who was not worksmen mainly caused by their extra economic contributions.

The modern political Freemasonry began in London 24. juni 1717 when a grand lodge was founded by joining four smaller lodges… To mislead the public they selected builder Anthony Sayer as Grand Master. Later on the workmen were shut out. The old mason’s guild came to an end. The corporative Freemasonry took their place. The next Grand Master was the lawyer Jean T. Desaguliers, who began in the year 1719. A new Grand Master was selected every year. In the years 1721-22 John, Duke of Montague, became Grand Master. At the same time he was a spokesman of the Hellfire Club, where he was busy with Satan worship, homosexuality and black magic rituals. In 1728 this Duke Montague was even Grand Master in the French-Scottish Freemason in Paris…(Unquote)

Another source

(among others fully specified sources David Icke’s ..and the truth shall set you free. David Icke is a former BBC-reporter, and Dr. John Coleman’s Conspirators’ Hierachy: The Story Of the The Committee of 300. John Coleman is a former MI6 employer, London)


“As illustrated there is fundamental difference between Freemasonry and what I will term ’Illuminised’ Freemasonry, those parts of the order which have been infiltrated by Illuminati agents. The word Illuminati – ’the Illuminated Ones’ – goes back into the ancient world. It is a covert force which has created or taken over groups and organisations to manipulate the world in the desired direction, but I believe it is a part of the globale Elite, a leading vehicle for manipulation, rather than very peak of the pyramid. finding out what happens at that level, above Illuminati, and identifying the people involved is a life’s work. The Illuminati’s greatest weapon is the advanced esoteric knowledge it has passed on through its initiation ceremonies and the misuse and abuse of that knowledge. The most obvious expression of Illuminati was the Bavarian Illuminati created by the German professor, Adam Weishaupt, in May, 1776, and supported financially by the House of Rothschild, the bankers to endless revolutuions and wars. It was Weishaupt who used his wing of the Illuminati to infiltrate and take over Freemasonry.

Weishaupt was trained as a Jesuit, which is short for the Society of Jesus. The founder of the Jesuits, the Spaniard, Ignatius Loyola, formed a secret society within this apparantly Catholic order and the initiates were called the ’Alumbrados’ which means the ’enlightened’, the ’illuminated’. Conflict followed between the jesuit ’illuminism’ and Weishaupt’s German version, battles which the traditions of Weishaupt mostly won. He created 13 degrees of intiation in his Illuminati and the key personnel were to be found in the top nine degrees. The Illuminati is a pyramid, too. The members were given special Illuminati names, inspired by the anscient Rome and Greece. Weihaupt was called Spartacus. These people became members of other secret societies like the Freemasons, and then ’illuminised’ them. – took them over and used them to destabilise nations and hasten the New World Order. They did the same within governments, banking, commerce, military, and the media, on behalf of the Elite.

So there is Freemasonry and Illuminised Freemasonry. The former manipulates at one level, but it too, is manipulated by another covert force, the Illuminati, which, in turn, answers to the global Elite. There are organisations within organisations (say, Freemasonry network within a government) and another organisation within those organisations (the Illuminati membership within the Freemason). This Illuminised form of Freemasonry became known as The Grand Orient Lodges or fraction. It followed the modified Hegelian tradition of infiltrating two extremes and playing one off against the other to create the desired change. Using these methods, it was pledge to overthrow the rule of the monachies, destroy faith in God, put an end to patriotism and nation states, abolish the ownership of property and dismantle traditional social order…”.

Beast die, Kinsman die,
One I know that never dies,
the Judge against the dead.  

 Some of the more silent coordinationed actions with an tremendous mental effects beginning in the 1800s

 American education in the first quarter of the 1900s becomes Danish and European pedagogy, marketing and the like in 1970s

In the following a short extract from a reading that is founded centrally on the well-documented facts of the ‘The Leipzig Connection’ by Lance J. Klass and Paolo Lionni, published by The Delphian Press 1978, Sheridan, Oregon, USA …..

The Leipzig Connection

But did this so-called “rational civilization” overstep the mark, you might ask?

The Danish Georg Brandes visited Berlin on his journey in 1870-1871, but with poor results for himself, and he had to be helped by influent people at the University of Copenhagen to come home and to enter upon a post at the university.

The so-called ‘Modern Breaking Through’ in the Danish intellectual life in 1870s started, when he returned. Oh, I remember the intellectual arrogance of this man (his readings). The head-master of the Gymnasium of Svendborg tortured us with this author nearly every day in the period 1967-1969. At last I thought (as a country boy) I was not apple to learn anything, perhaps I could not even understand anything essential of what was needed, especially in the disciplin literature.

Georg Brandes repaid the missing results (perhaps just his karma) to write to his family: “I hate Christianity to the marrow of my bones”. The head-master did not tell us this. Now I understand a little better, and I am apple to correct a little of, what I learnt in fear by heart by looking in ‘Explanation of Literature’ by Politiken.

 Charles R. Darwin’s

(1809-82) so-called pioneering work “On the Origin of Species by Means of natural Selection”, 1859, shall not be ignored though Darwin himself admitted late in his life that he had written it for spirit of time. Science or Myth? “Surviving of the fittest” and “The Master Race”. Could you reconsider debates over social and public policy issues from the 1870s through the 1910s with an openness and sensitivity they would wish for their own statements without Darwinism.

It is one thing to argue (as have Robert Young and others) that Darwinian science was ideological from the start, but another to demonstrate that the science was then pressed back into ideological service. The capitalism (no ism because it is not based on any ideology – but defined and named by Karl Marx) in the Gilded Age defenders of free market mechanisms, individualism, and laissez faire (so-called “conservatives” but in reality liberals by mid-19th century standards) rarely laced their prose with appeals to Darwinism, and virtually never in the way described in conventional accounts. What should the New Deal-defenders in the 1930s by characterizing the so-called laissez-faire policy have done without Dawinism, ditto the New Marxism in the 1970s, and ditto New-liberalism in the beginning of the 1980s.”Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt was born 1832 in a little town in southern Germany. At university in Tübingen, when he was 19 years old, transfered to Heildelberg after half a year and appointed to doctor of medicin at the university in the year 1856. He stayed in Heidelberg for the next 17 years. At first was employed as a professor assistent, later on he was appointed professor in psychology. At this time the word psychology meant the study (ologi) of the mind (psyke).

In 1874 Wundt left Heidelberg to take over the charge as professor of philosophy at University of Zürich. He stayed there for only a year, as he agreed to tak over the chair in philosophy in Germany at the University of Leipzig . He stayed in Leipzig for the rest of his academic carriere i Leipzig, eventually to be appointed to Principal of the university. Wundt died in 1920.

  The period of Wundt. How was this?

After the defeat of the Prussians (Germans) by Napoleon at the battle of Jena in 1806, it was decided that the reason why the battle was lost was that the Prussian soldiers were thinking for themselves on the battlefield instead of following orders. The Prussian philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814), described by many as a philosopher and a transcendental idealist, wrote “Addresses to the German Nation” between 1807 and 1808, which promoted the state as a necessary instrument of social and moral progress. He taught at the University of Berlin from 1810 to his death in 1814. His concept of the state and of the ultimate moral nature of society directly influenced both Von Schelling and Hegel, who took an similarly idealistic view.

Using the basic philosophy prescribing the “duties of the state”, combined with John Locke’s view (1690) that “children are a blank slate” and lessons from Rousseau on how to “write on the slate”, Prussia established a three-tiered educational system that was considered “scientific” in nature. Work began in 1807 and the system was in place by 1819. An important part of the Prussian system was that it defined for the child what was to be learned, what was to be thought about, how long to think about it and when a child was to think of something else. Basically, it was a system of thought control, and it established a penchant in the psyche of the German elite that would later manifest itself into what we now refer to as mind control.

The educational system was divided into three groups. The elite of Prussian society were seen as comprising. 5% of the society. Approximately 5.5% of the remaining children were sent to what was called realschulen, where they were partially taught to think. The remaining 94% went to volkschulen, where they were to learn “harmony, obdience, freedom from stressful thinking and how to follow orders.” An important part of this new system was to break the link between reading and the young child, because a child who reads too well becomes knowledgable and independent from the system of instruction and is capable of finding out anything. In order to have an efficient policy-making class and a subclass beneath it, you’ve got to remove the power of most people to make anything out of available information.

This was the plan. To keep most of the children in the general population from reading for the first six or seven years of their lives.

Now, the Prussian system of reading was originally a system whereby whole sentences (and thus whole integrated concepts) were memorized, rather than whole words. In this three-tier system, they figured out a way to achieve the desired results. In the lowest category of the system, the volkschuelen, the method was to divide whole ideas (which simultaneously integrate whole disciplines – math, science, language, art, etc.) into subjects which hardly existed prior to that time. The subjects were further divided into units requiring periods of time during the day. With appropriate variation, no one would really know what was happening in the world. It was inherently one of the most brilliant methods of knowledge suppression that had ever existed. They also replaced the alphabet system of teaching with the teaching of sounds. Hooked on phonics? Children could read without understanding what they were reading, or all the implications.

In 1814, the first American, Edward Everett, goes to Prussian to get a PhD. He eventually becomes governor of Massachusetts. During the next 30 years or so, a whole line of American dignitaries came to Germany to earn degrees (a German invention). Horace Mann, instrumental in the development of educational systems in America, was among them. Those who earned degrees in Germany came back to the United States and staffed all of the major universities. In 1850, Massachusetts and New York utilize the system, as well as promote the concept that “the state is the father of children.” Horace Mann’s sister, Elizabeth Peabody (Peabody Foundation) saw to it that after the Civil War, the Prussian system (taught in the Northern states) was integrated into the conquered South between 1865 and 1918. Most of the “compulsory schooling” laws designed to implement the system were passed by 1900. By 1900, all the PhD’s in the United States were trained in Prussia. This project also meant that one-room schoolhouses had to go, for it fostered independence. They were eventually wiped out.

One of the reasons that the self-appointed elite brought back the Prussian system to the United States was to ensure a non-thinking work force to staff the growing industrial revolution. In 1776, for example, about 85% of the citizens were reasonably educated and had independent livelihoods – they didn’t need to work for anyone. By 1840, the ratio was still about 70%. The attitude of “learn and then strike out on your own” had to be broken. The Prussian system was an ideal way to do it. One of the prime importers of the German “educational” system into the United States was William T. Harris, from Saint Louis. He brought the German system in and set the purpose of the schools to alienate children from parental influence and that of religion. He preached this openly, and began creating “school staffing” programs that were immediately picked up by the new “teacher colleges”, many of which were underwritten by the Rockefeller family, the Carnegies, the Whitney’s and the Peabody family. The University of Chicago was underwritten by the Rockefellers.

The bottom line is that we had a literate country in the United States before the importation of the German educational system, designed to “dumb down” the mass population. It was more literate that it is today. The textbooks of the time make so much allusion to history, philosophy, mathematics, science and politics that they are hard to follow today because of the way people are “taught to think.”

Now, part of this whole paradigm seems to originate from an idea presented in The New Atlantis, by Francis Bacon (1627). The work described a “world research university” that scans the planet for babies and talent. The state then becomes invincible because it owned the university. It becomes impossible to revolt against the State because the State knows everything. A reflection of this principle can be seen today with the suppression of radical and practical technologies in order to preserve State control of life and prevent evolution and independence. The New Atlantis was widely read by German mystics in the 19th century. By 1840 in Prussia, there were a lot of “world research universities”, in concept, all over the country. All of them drawing in talent and developing it for the purposes of State power and stability.

Experimental Psychology

The great Wilhelm Wundt asked and answered the question:

What is will?

“To Wundt, as it developed, ‘will’ was the direct result of the collection of experienced influences, not by a independent intention of an individual of causal relations”. “His intention was to prove that the human being is a sum of its experiences, of the influences that push his consciousness and unconsciousness..” “What decide the difference in time of reaction between individual and other things?” “Why do some individuals experience the influences different from others?”… To the experimental psychologist education is the process which gives meaningful experiences to the individual to secure correct reactions…”

“Wundt’s thesis laid the philosophical foundation for the principles that later on became deciding to the development of Pavlov’s animal-experiments and to American psychologists of behaviorism… in addition decisive to the development of schoolchildren, who were orientated more towards socialization than towards the development of the intellect of the child with the intention to continue the culture, but in favor of the development of a society that more and more submit to the satisfaction of sensual wishes on behalf of conscientiousness and endeavor for perfection.”

The young Americans who had learnt by Wundt, returned and established departments of psychology all over their own country. All of them were successful and they got respected on influential posts, especially at the American Universities. Each of them educated big crowds of students to the American doctor’s degree in psychology. New periods and other publications, new societies and clubs emerged, and every psychologist was pulled into another subject too at once, and here there was opened for the new urgent German psychology everywhere.

Some of he first American students at Wundt’s institute were G. Stanley Hall and John Dewey. The first were known for a lot things, as a great inspirator at the John Hopkins University that was founded on the German model, and he were known as the founder of the American Journal of Psychology.

After he had been taught by Hall for a year at the John Hopkins University, Dewey should start an exceptionally intensive and deep influence of the American sector of education. In 1886 Dewey published the first textbook of psychology with the same title. In 1895 he was invited to join the faculty at the Chicago University that was supported by Rockefeller. He became the leader of the department of philosophy, psychology and pedagogy.

In 1904 he published his master work: Upbringing: Its psychology and its relation to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion and education. With Dewey’s words: “Upbringing consists of either to use ones own force in a social direction or in the ability to share the experiences of others, and in that way expand the individual consciousness to the consciousness of the race” (Dewey, John, “Lectures for the First Course in pedagogy”, unpublished, No. 1 (1896) pg. 1)…..

…..Of other most well-documented readings I must mention ‘Klokke (Bell) Roland’ in Danish by Johannes Joergensen, published by Pio’s Book-Shop, Copenhagen 1916. In this most special reading 93 German personalities of culture are exposed. They certainly did not tell the truth to the public about World War I in ‘Proclamation to the world of culture’, when they said they did so.Johannes Joergensen proves this mostly with himself as an primary source. On page 155 in ‘Klokke Roland’ you can read:

‘What do Beethoven and Goethe have to do with those, who burnt Louvain and bombarded Rheims. And also Kant – ‘Kant’s Vermächtniss’ you dare to allege – Kant’s Testament to the world. But an Eucken, a Wundt (mine: 2 of the 93 named) must know that Kant’s Testament, Kant’s Perspective was the united states of Europe and the eternal peace (mine:naive,but), Johannes Joergensen wrote in 1916. (unquote) Never mind Johannes Joergensen verified and told the truth about, what was happening in contrast to what the peoples all over the world were told about the World War I.

“Bell Roland is my name
“when I peal, it is fire
“when I ring, it is victory in Flanderland!”

To read more on:

Experimental-Psycology exported to USA –  US-dependence in full scale 1776

How EU and UN among others accomplish this project today:

 A New Human Being

 How many enemies fight in wars?

  Trading with the enemy

 The shortest version I have heard: “Figureheads are lying”


 (don’t forget Rousseau and his belief in the human being, and later on the Modernism from the midd 1800 making plans for the ideologic state in the next century after having succeded with the so-called democracies as an experimentation playground with partly privatised partly government (and therefore false) influented central banks in advance)

 Freemasonry today represents the reality-advancement of the multiculturalism

General Wesley Clark, high ranking freemasoner and commander-in-chief for NATO-forces in Kosovo. He admitted to CNN in June 1999: ” In the modern Europe is no room for homogenious national states. They were an idea from the 1800s, and we shall carry it (the multiculturalism) through in the 2000s, and we shall create multietnical states”.

 The final step in dialogical process?

 Myths and superstition can be benevolently, Z. Brzezinski wrote in 1970. “Short of a benevolent world dictatorship bent on reform, we must work within the bounds of an ineffective, adolescent international system, with all the pains, crisis and irrationality, which adolescence dictates”, Z. B. wrote in the mid 1970s. The half secret Trilateral Commission, which shall gather the world in three blocks first, was established 1973 by the C.F.R-organization of 1919 with Professor Z. Brzezinski as its first director. Zbigniew Brzezinski (Z.B.) points out in his book from 1970, ‘Between Two Ages’ his and Robert Baily’s view on the changing of the European time-spirit:

“We shall from today live through a phase of time with the following aspects, 1st There is no progress, 2nd Social evolution is cyclical, 3rd Western civilization is in period of disintegration and decline, 4th Man is non-rational or irrational, 5th Society is composed of masses who, being non-rational and easily influenced, shall reduce mankind to mediocrity, 6th Scientific truth and knowledge may be harmful for society, 7th Myth and superstition can be beneficial, 8th A society is composed always of conflicting, 9th The society is ruled by the elite, 10th Democracy and humanitarian social values are unfortunately misundertakes that results in the rule of the uneducated masses. And he also adds that mankind has to live through the following phases in the long historical perspective, The phase with a religious clarification, the socialistic phase, then the era of the nations, and in the end The One-World-Society to crown the achievement”.

 Notes:1. Every thinker have to be accepted by the top to be known, so even Karl Marx’s, who was baptized Mordecai with the helper Albert Pike to manage his writings, and still including a bunch of mistakes for example that he forget the internatinal division of labour discovered about 100 years earlier; he build throughout his entire writings on Hegel’s dialectrical process, in the Marx-version dialectrical materialism; all in all suited to take the power assumed that the subjects were completely indoctrinated. Also Adolph Hitler’s thoughts had to be accepted by the top in order to be known.

 John Maynard Keynes’ thoughts were used from the 1930s in last phase of paving the way to turn the ordinary Liberal thinking into its Socialistic end:


The Truth Is (That) What You Believe In (?), that among other issues proves this.  

 When I select some of contributing figures in this file, they all, their ideas, and way of dividing up the last 1500 years have been chosen in advance by the top, except from a few figures in the end (we were not meant to know them, their influence and especially their connections. I have even reduced the number of reported ideas and contributers very much further to end up with a brief resumé that as far as I can judge is fair.

 I then had to give a supplement on freemasonry and Illuminati, and point at the Experimental-Psycology which have had an enormous influence which the reader perhaps can judge by realizing reality (not TV), and other documented sources. These issues have been closed country, but with amphetamines used on Danish school children, if they don’t fit into the systems, and school classes with one half of the pupils consulting a school-psycologist I have to tell the truth. And not at least the perspectives made by EU and UNESCO that you can read about on the link “A new human being” above.

1 Comment »

  1. Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as though you relied on the video to make your point. You obviously know what youre talking about, why throw away your intelligence on just posting videos to your weblog when you could be giving us something enlightening to read?

    Comment by Thanh Aspegren — March 1, 2011 @ 10:08 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: