Alison Chabloz

By Gerard Menuhin, reproduced with kind permission.

ABOUT TRUTH and HATE

“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”

(George Orwell)

We all know the expression ‘the truth hurts’. The truth can indeed be hurtful, but secure, grounded people can accept it and even grow when they hear the truth.

However, truth doesn’t mean the same to everyone. Whereas to the overwhelming majority of the world’s population ‘truth’ represents what actually happens or has happened and is therefore vital to all relations and transactions, to a minute, rootless but vociferous minority of professional victims, ‘truth’ is a flexible concept, to be used expediently.

As a matter of policy, to gain an approximation of the truth, it’s usually wise to invert everything this minority says. That is to say, when they claim something, particularly when they accuse others of something, that assertion must be assumed to define their own actions and attitudes. They don’t invariably lie in the accepted sense of making something up, they just stand the truth on its head. How to explain this?

Let’s take it step by step.

As career victims, they must eternally insist on their victimhood, true or false. Yet, their truth is what we would call lies. If you call their truth lies, they say you hate them. That is their reflexive reaction. It might be more honest and more productive, if their often bizarre claims were understood to mean that they are declaring their own desires and their own behavior, past, present, or future. Take any of their more outlandish assertions of ‘You did this to us’ and simply reverse it to mean ‘We did this to you’.

How on earth do normal people get this way? Well, for a start, they’re not normal.

Some people are emotionally immature, they’re driven by their emotions, not by reason. Emotionally immature people are egocentric; they blame others for their own faults and yet are dependent on their relations with others. This particular faction is congenitally trained to distort the truth. They believe the world revolves around them; they blame their inherent dissatisfaction on others, yet without these others, they would have no one to attack for their own faults.

So they fling hysterical accusations at anyone they dislike. For example, they might accuse others of planning to kill them, when it is they who would like to kill others. They accuse others of hating them, when it is they who hate all others.

Adolescent language is often emotion-driven, limited and simplistic: e.g. ‘I hate spiders’, ‘I love ice-cream’. Grown-up, fully developed, legally responsible persons who haven’t graduated from this stage and still speak or write so childishly are an embarrassment to themselves, they’re retarded in their outlook and their expressions. Unfortunately, a small coterie of adult society is not only caught in this juvenile mode, they live by it, and their racket is successful. So their behavior may be immature, but it is not unreasoning.

What they particularly ‘hate’ is criticism of any kind. By their immoderate reactions to criticism, they betray their heritage as members of the above minority. When they open their mouths, out come all kinds of flagrant distortions. As such, they’re prone to defame anyone they dislike as a ‘hater’. When they open their mouths, out come all kinds of flagrant distortions. Anything remotely critical of them may be interpreted as ‘hate’. (If one of their own kind wakes up sufficiently to tell the truth, they’re accused of self-hating.)

So, when they accuse others of ‘hate’, as in ‘hate speech’ or ‘hate song’, it’s necessary to deconstruct their meaning. What they actually claim, crazy as it sounds, is: ‘Spiders hate me’ (the reverse of the above example). Only an extreme mentality would endow others with its own extremism. They know perfectly well, of course, that most normal people don’t have their capacity to hate. Normal people may have strong likes and dislikes, but they rarely hate, and they certainly don’t make a career out of hating. How to explain this curious inversion?

The most likely explanation of their mindset derives from their recognition of their own inferiority and insecurity, but conversely, also from their conviction of their superiority (both equally signs of emotional immaturity) and their consequent aversion to all grounded and secure beings. Because they’re literally ‘hate-full’, it suits them to believe that others are similarly hate-filled towards them. This enables them to assume their victim status.

Fear and envy of grounded beings feed their perception of perpetual injustice, and drive them to resort to their own allegedly holy texts, which comfort them with the assurance that all other (grounded) people are only there to serve them. This enables them to assume their superior status.

This collective schizophrenia has impelled them for centuries to capitalize alternately on being victims or culprits, harassed or harassers, as it suits them. Because they’re foreign wherever they live and whatever nationality they assume, they’re unhindered by sympathy for native peoples. It’s important to realize that their psychology preceded and was instrumental in, their ascendancy. They are not defined by their alleged proficiency in business, but by their character.

They have made such a financial success out of this duality that they have cornered the market in money: converted money from a means of exchange into a debt-based commodity. This allowed them to buy up much of industry and entertainment, including all the major channels of communication. So, if we want to watch, say, the news, we’re forced also to hear, twisted into ‘news’ — it could be anything from politics to entertainment, it could be an entire country — what or who these folks happen to ‘hate’ today.

By contrast, we are either so conscience-stricken by their alleged victimization, or so intimidated by their proclaimed and practiced omnipotence, that our response has become ‘anything for any easy life’. We have accommodated them and have yielded to their constant nagging. While they labour industriously, day in and day out, to curtail our freedoms, to control every aspect of our lives, we have chosen a kind of apathy over full consciousness. We pay lip service to concepts like a free world and an open society, and freedom of thought and speech, without perceiving that these are not mere expressions, they define the world as it should be. That’s why all oppressors seek to crush such concepts. These essential attributes of a liberated life and individual human fulfillment don’t appear by themselves; they must be fought for.

These particular oppressors and their minions remain a minute minority of the world’s population. We should be able to disregard them in our desperate need for a peaceful world. It’s only their mastery over all externals, their censorship of all opposition, and their mantra-like repetition on all electronic media of their delusions, which, like any advertising, after a while clog the mind. After repeated reiteration, some of us may well begin to ask ourselves if there isn’t some truth to these lies; if we don’t in fact hate these haters. We tie ourselves in knots by trying to agree with this aggressive self-portrayal. This means that we lie to ourselves.

Ultimately, these foreigners have bought politicians and therefore the governments they serve, in order to pass laws contrary to the majority’s interest, for instance, by importing hordes of migrants whose habits are dangerous to the native population, but who are intended to undermine and eventually destroy the indigenous people’s attachment to their homeland, and render them rootless like their oppressors. At the behest of their owners, these governments go so far as to imprison their citizens for protesting these conditions or expressing contrary views.

It follows that the laws under which dissidents are prosecuted are also foreign laws, or, more properly, laws which are only on the books because they have been forced through by those who benefit from them – the foreign owners of government. If the owners of government are foreign, the country must be occupied. We have therefore become vassals in an occupied country – what used to be our country.

Everyone has the right to speak their mind in Britain: all kinds of civil rights organizations and minorities, feminists, LGBT persons, Africans, Asians, all manner of newcomers and quasi-newcomers — only the normal British must muzzle themselves. They must submit and knuckle under. Doesn’t that tell us something about ‘our’ government?

Raucous demonstrators can always be rallied to shout ‘hate’ messages against presumed ‘Rightists’ and gain publicity, but these rent-a-crowds don’t represent the majority of the British people. When it comes to the common good of a people, Left and Right are just divisive terms. Normal people sense what is good for them. They can distinguish justice from injustice, justness from the law. They understand that what is good for a foreign power may be bad for them.

Remember:

‘The reason people are silenced is not because they lie, but because they tell the truth. When people lie, their own words can be used against them. When they tell the truth, there is no other countermeasure except violence.’

Theodor Fontane (19^th German author).

If we respect ourselves, we must speak truth to power. ‘Might makes right’ is power’s only ‘right’ or entitlement. No government owned and run by foreign powers should strip us of our rights. If we’re shrewd enough, we can still distinguish truth from hate. However, even if we’re capable of this perception and openly declare how transparent these powers are, they won’t stop. They won’t stop interfering in the organic development of grounded peoples’ lives. They don’t mind how contemptible they are, how embarrassing and monotonous their whining is. They can do it forever, it’s in their genes and they don’t know any other way. They devalue justified criticism by calling it ‘hate speech’ and call us ‘haters’ for recognizing them for who they are. The truth hurts, so they call it hate.

George Orwell wrote: ‘Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. If that is granted, all else follows.’ That’s how simple it is. Those that seek to forbid such logical freedom of thought are psychologically crippled.

But let’s not be beastly to civil servants and elected officials and those who serve other powers, let’s just treat them as if they were handicapped. We wouldn’t be beastly to a handicapped person, would we? We must just make clear that we unconditionally reject them and everything they stand for, and stand up and say, “You have the means to fine and imprison me, but I don’t recognize your authority to judge me because you represent a foreign power”.

Gerard Menuhin’s book ‘Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil’ is available from CODOH, click here to purchase.