Robert Oppenheimer and Zhou Enlai in the Summer of our Discontent

Communist tyranny: Made in America

Copyright©2023

RevisionistHistory.org

“Thank God for the Deep State.” —Former acting CIA Director John McLaughlin, in an October 30, 2019 comment on the impeachment effort against Donald Trump, spoken at the Michael V. Hayden Center at Schar School of Policy and Government. (The Schar School trains aspiring functionaries for placement in the D.C. bureaucracy’s swamp. Its namesake, Hayden, is the only bureaucrat to have served as director of both the NSA and the CIA).

No one, not John McLaughlin, Michael Hayden or Niccolo Machiavelli himself could hold a candle to Mao Zedong’s left hand man, Zhou Enlai, the politician’s politician:

“He had a talent for telling blatant lies with angelic suavity.  He was the kind of man who could stick a knife in your back and do it with such disarming grace that you would still feel compelled to thank him for the deed…He repeatedly and literally got away with murder. No wonder politicians from all over the world unanimously worshipped him.” (Simon Leys)

What Mr. Leys observes of Zhou can also be said of Biden, Obama, Trump, Clinton, George H.W. Bush and son, Ronald Reagan, Lyndon Johnson, Harry Truman, George C. Marshall and a legion of politicians, whether big shots or small fry.

As I write these words another motion picture of virtuoso artistry, “Oppenheimer” by Cryptocrat Christopher Nolan, who co-wrote and directed the occult-signaling “Dark Kight” movies (cf. Twilight Language), is debuting in theaters across America. One of its main themes is the supposed despicable hollowness of the attempt to detect and bring to justice the Communists who had infiltrated the Federal government at all levels, dating from the 1930s and then propelled on steroids when the U.S. allied with the Soviet Union in 1941.

The seminal prophecy of modern Left-wing terror is Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s novel, The Possessed, where theorists justify the right to kill civilians, and then as now, searched for a judiciary that would enable it.

The Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters and bomb-throwing insurrectionists in cities like Portland, Oregon where the Federal building was attacked, and Washington D.C., where President Trump’s life was briefly under threat and Secret Service and police were assaulted, have never actually been punished at any level of retribution, other than token. Nothing that the January 6 mob perpetrated, as reprehensible as in some cases their acts were, approaches anything like the aforementioned Leftist uprisings.

There are many reasons for this state of affairs, one of which is the Hegelian notion of being “on the correct side of history and progress,” a direction that constitutes permanent revolution.

And yet that extreme zealotry almost always manages to consume its own activists as they begin to turn on one another, whether by cancelation or execution. In France the entire gamut was run in five years: the Bastille overthrown in 1789, the monarchy extinguished in 1792 and the revolution’s once most favored leader, Maximilian Robespierre, executed by the same guillotine by which he had begun to exterminate the revolution’s inner circle, including his former top comrade, Danton.

Stalin did the same. His old “Bolsheviks” were put on show-trial and shot. His most prominent rival and quondam comrade, Leon Trotsky, was beaten to death in Mexico.

Stalin was saved from Robespierre’s fate by the West, and in particular, elements in the governments of Britain and the United States who looked the other way as his espionage ring, among them Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Harry Gold, David Greenglass and Klaus Fuchs, conveyed the secrets of the atomic bomb to the mass murderer in Moscow.

“Oppenheimer” falsifies this history, reducing it to a “Red Scare” hysteria which allegedly led to irrational suspicion directed at the movie’s eponymous darling, Robert Oppenheimer, the chief of the White Sands/Trinity Site project, which led to the incineration of some 200,000 Japanese, most of whom were civilians, in two cities, Hiroshima, and the metropolis with the largest Christian (Catholic) population in Asia: Nagasaki (bombing it was no coincidence).

There is no depiction in the movie of the atomic bombing of Japan or its aftermath. Even a glimpse of the unimaginable carnage would be too subversive of the “Good War” moral of Mr. Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” tale, which was filmed through the gauzy haze of Left-wing mythography where fantasy becomes fact, although the Right wing Wall Street Journal (WSJ) joined the applause, offering a depraved encomium for the mass murder of women and children:

“…Amid the ensuing celebration of the grim deployment in Japan of the two A-bombs, instruments of slaughter that, nevertheless, probably saved hundreds of thousands of lives…” (Kyle Smith, ‘Oppenheimer’: Explosive History, WSJ, July 21, p. A10).

Note that the human toll is calculated by the Journal only with regard to the Allies. The bombings of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki “saved lives”? A Wonderland statement like that is only logical if the Japanese are considered less than human: the slaughter of humanoids saves lives.

Actually, the two cities were immolated on the altar of the doctrine of unconditional surrender. Had Washington accepted the peace feelers Tokyo had been transmitting since 1943, including conditions for surrender, there would have been no need for GIs to invade the home islands, thus eliminating the legerdemain rationale for the atomic genocide.

Oppenheimer’s Code of Conduct

As for Oppenheimer’s character, he was a hard-bitten genocidal agent of the U.S. government who subscribed to the mass-murder-as-duty code of the ancient Hindu text, Bhagavad Gita. (In its defense, Mohandas Gandhi stated that the Gita was an allegory which was not to be taken literally. Fair enough. Oppenheimer however, interpreted it verbatim et literatim, in the context of the dementia and extremism of his scientism (as opposed to science).

In the Bhagavad Gita the warrior Arjuna is having second doubts about committing mass murder. The god Krishna overcomes his reluctance:

“Krishna’s arguments include three basic ones that Oppenheimer would take to heart: (1) Arjuna is a soldier, so it is his duty to fight; (2) Krishna, not Arjuna, will determine who lives and who dies, and Arjuna should neither mourn nor rejoice over what fate has in store but should be sublimely unattached to such results; (3) ultimately, the most important thing is devotion to Krishna…To Oppenheimer the message would have seemed equally clear. If it was proper for Arjuna to kill his own friends and relatives in a squabble over the inheritance of a kingdom, then how could it be wrong for Oppenheimer to build a weapon to kill Germans and Japanese whose governments were trying to conquer the world?” (James A. Hijiya, The Gita of J. Robert Oppenheimer, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, volume 144, number 2, June 2000, pp. 131 and 133).

Condemned are “those who place their own reasoning above the authority of tradition. ( Cf. Klaus Klostermaier, A Survey of Hinduism [1989], pp. 50, 53).

From the Bhagavad Gita came Oppenheimer’s unforgettable evocation of the demon of atomic fire at the Trinity Site:

“If the radiance of a thousand suns

were to burst into the sky,

that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One—

I am become Death, the shatterer of worlds.”

Though he is often portrayed as a chastened Frankenstein (as Roger Shattuck memorably described him in the book Forbidden Knowledge [1996]), Oppenheimer was a chameleon who adapted his coloration according to the specific needs of the propaganda self-image he was crafting at the time.

In November, 1945 he truthfully testified in the pages of the Saturday Review of Literature that when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan was already “essentially defeated” and nuclear weapons were instruments “of aggression…and of terror.” Oppenheimer was even going around saying he had blood on his hands (“Harry S. Truman to Dean Acheson, May 7, 1946,” President’s Secretary’s File, Truman Library).

Perhaps he was, after all, a kind of existentialist saint haunted by self-doubt?

If you believe that, then you have succumbed to Oppenheimer’s intellectual dishonesty and Nolan’s camouflage.

“You wouldn’t believe that such a man would advocate the use of the bomb on Hiroshima—on civilians—and yet he did.” (Jonathan Schell, “The Gift of Time,” The Nation, February, 1998, p. 28.)

Not only was he instrumental in constructing the means for the mass murder in the cities of Japan, , for the remainder of his life—Oppenheimer insisted that he had acted correctly and morally. (Cf. New York Times Magazine, August 1, 1965, p. 8).

Hijiya relates that when “Edward Teller was asked to circulate a petition by his fellow Manhattan Project scientist Leo Szilard, cautioning President Truman against dropping the atomic bomb on a Japanese city, Oppenheimer advised Teller not to do so. ‘Our fate,’ Teller later recollected Oppenheimer explaining, ‘was in the hands of the best, the most conscientious men of our nation. And they had information which we did not possess.’ (Edward Teller with Allen Brown, The Legacy of Hiroshima [Doubleday, 1962], pp. 13–14.) Oppenheimer forbade the circulation of the petition at Los Alamos. (Alice Kimball Smith, A Peril and a Hope: The Scientists’ Movement in America: 1945–47 [University of Chicago Press, 1965], p. 155.)

Leo Szilard and sixty eight other scientists addressed a letter to Truman beseeching him not to drop the atom bomb on civilians. Oppenheimer did all he could to obstruct their plea. He would countenance no target other than Japanese cities. (Alice Kimball Smith, A Peril and a Hope : The Scientists' Movement in America, 1945-47 [MIT Press, 1971], pp. 53–55).

“Barbenheimer”

Christopher Nolan’s glorification of this war criminal is partnered with a movie about a blond doll: “To Americans eager for signs of life in an ailing cinema culture, the simultaneous box office success of the “Barbie” movie and the biopic “Oppenheimer” has been cause for celebration, with filmgoers embracing the jarring juxtaposition of the two very different blockbusters… ‘Barbenheimer’ double features and online mash-ups of Barbie’s pink fantasia with images of Oppenheimer-era nuclear explosions…” (New York Times, August 1).

When dehumanized people such as low status, World War II era Japanese women and children are incinerated to ashes, out the window go the solemn American pieties attendant upon the genocide of victims of higher status.

With “Barbenheimer” the basic norms of human rights are flouted by a depraved and indifferent Hollywood commercialism. It’s a disgusting display of perverse obliviousness that makes one ashamed to be living in the same country as Nolan and his media flacks.

The U.S. government effectively “poisoned its own people”

According to the 1940 US Census, the most recent that pre-dated the blast, a half-million Americans resided within 150 miles of the Trinity Site. For some, the proximity was as little as twelve miles. These unknowing civilians were left to roast in radioactive fallout, having received no advanced warning or evacuation order.

According to the Associated Press, “The movie about a man who changed the course of the world’s history by shepherding the development of the first atomic bomb is expected to be a blockbuster… On the sidelines will be a community downwind from the testing site in the southern New Mexico desert, the impacts of which the U.S. government never has fully acknowledged. The movie on the life of scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer…sheds no light on those residents' pain.

“They’ll never reflect on the fact that New Mexicans gave their lives. They did the dirtiest of jobs. They invaded our lives and our lands and then they left,’ Tina Cordova, a cancer survivor and founder of a group of New Mexico downwinders, said of the scientists and military officials who established a secret city in Los Alamos during the 1940s and tested their work at the Trinity Site some 200 miles (322 kilometers) away.

While film critics celebrate ‘Oppenheimer’…downwinders remain frustrated with the…movie producers — for not recognizing their plight.’

“Lilly Adams of the Union of Concerned Scientists stated, “The human cost of Oppenheimer’s Trinity Test…We have to reckon with this human cost to fully understand Oppenheimer’s legacy and the harm caused…In developing and testing nuclear weapons, Adams said the U.S. government effectively ‘poisoned its own people…”

“According to the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, large amounts of radiation shot up into the atmosphere and fallout descended over an area about 250 miles (402 kilometers) long and 200 miles (322 kilometers) wide. Scientists tracked part of the fallout pattern as far as the Atlantic Ocean…For Cordova and younger generations who are dealing with cancer, the lack of acknowledgement by the government and those involved with the film is inexcusable” (end quote from AP).

Shameless Hollywood is hell-bent on embroidering the legend of the benevolence of Julius Robert Oppenheimer, revered saint of the Cryptocracy. The movie is being celebrated from coast to coast, and politically on the Left and the Right. The American victims of his atomic bomb don’t rate a mention.

Lest we imagine Oppenheimer to be some cold-hearted war criminal, Nolan portrays the enabler of the extermination of the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a sensitive soul, much troubled in mind by the “become death, shatterer of worlds” he had been instrumental in unleashing.

Oppenheimer’s Atomic Bomb Karma: Hanford

Another neglected chapter in the chronicle of the consequences of the making of the bomb is the legacy of nuclear waste produced by Oppenheimer’s atomic weapons production, which has been a curse for Americans in Washington state, but about which director Christopher Nolan demonstrates the same conspicuous lack of interest he exhibited toward the poisoning of the people of New Mexico. The requirements of truth oblige us to travel to a remote region of the Pacific Northwest.

According to Ralph Vartabedian’s report in  the New York Times of May 31, at “the Hanford Site in Washington State…engineers…discovered 54 million gallons of highly radioactive sludge left from producing the plutonium in America’s atomic bombs, including the one dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki in 1945.

“Hanford, some 580 square miles of shrub-steppe desert in south-central Washington State, is the largest and most contaminated of all the weapons production sites — too polluted to ever be returned to public use. But the problem is urgent, given the risk of radionuclides contaminating the Columbia River, a vital lifeline for cities, farms, tribes and wildlife in two states.

“The search for a solution has dragged on so long that there is pressure to produce some result for all the massive (government) spending, even if it does not meet past expectations. That could mark a dramatic retreat from longstanding promises to nearby residents — who experienced thyroid, reproductive and nervous system tumors linked by researchers to exposure during the era of plutonium production — that the government would adhere to the highest possible cleanup standards.

“Cleaning out the underground tanks that were leaching poisonous waste toward the Columbia River just six miles away and somehow stabilizing it for permanent disposal presented one of the most complex chemical problems ever encountered. The government now appears to be seriously evaluating the need to leave thousands of gallons of leftover waste buried forever in Hanford’s shallow underground tanks…

“As it stands, the job of treating the tank waste at Hanford alone carries an official price tag of up to $528 billion. Congress sent about $2.8 billion this year to the site, with about $1.7 billion allocated to cleaning up the tanks. But there has been relatively little real progress. Gary Brunson, the Energy Department’s former engineering director at the waste treatment plant, said the cleanup had been a failure. He and two other technical managers filed a whistle-blower suit in 2013 against the chief cleanup contractor, Bechtel and its partner, accusing the company of doing defective work and then illegally lobbying for budget increases” (end quote; emphasis supplied).

“George P. Shultz…was secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan. Before joining the Reagan administration, Mr. Shultz, who also serve(d) as a senior counselor to Bechtel, was the company's president, working alongside Caspar W. Weinberger, who served as an executive at the San Francisco-based company before his appointment as defense secretary….(In 2003) President (George W. Bush) appointed Bechtel's chief executive, Riley P. Bechtel, to serve on the President's Export Council” (cf. NY Times, April 18, 2003).

The American Deep State rescued Maoist Communism from defeat in China. Ronald Reagan spared the Taliban subjugation by Russia. Donald Trump provided the same service to the Christ-hating Saudi regime, while he was enthusiastically cheered by “evangelical Christians” for having moved the US embassy to Jerusalem, in obedience to Israel-First billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. Mr. Trump’s son-in-law subsequently did millions of dollars of business with the “Kingdom.”

Mao’s Communist Tyranny: Made in America

The Deep State’s mission is to create enemies for the military-industrial complex to fight, as part of the perpetual-war-for perpetual-peace launched by President Woodrow Wilson 106 years ago. A case in point is China.

The China we face today would not exist were it not for the administration of President Harry S. Truman. His agent in that covert Communist cause was the highly esteemed General George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff under both Franklin Roosevelt and Truman, and future U.S. Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense under Truman (and a paradigm of Lincoln-esque statesmanship and probity in Steven Spielberg’s celebrated movie “Saving Private Ryan”).

The Truman administration’s treason was documented in 2005 by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday in their indispensable book, Mao: The Unknown Story.

Truman ordered Marshall to China in December, 1945 and thus began Marshall’s alliance with Mao Zedong, the bloodiest butcher of the sanguinary 20th century.

Few of us seem to remember that in the Chinese civil war of 1946, the army of the anti-Communist Kuomintang (“Nationalist”) forces of Chiang Kai-shek, had Mao’s Communist army on the run and cornered in Manchuria.

Chiang was closing in and about to deliver a crippling blow to Mao’s “People’s Liberation Army.” The American Deep State made certain that he did not.

General “Marshall put heavy—and decisive—pressure on Chiang to stop pursuing the Communists into northern Manchuria, saying that the U.S. would not help him if he pushed further.” On May 31, 1946 Marshall wrote to Chiang as follows, “Under the circumstances of the continued advance of the Government (anti-Communist) troops in Manchuria I must...request you again to immediately issue an order terminating advances, attacks or pursuits by Government troops...” (Mao: The Unknown Story, p. 295; emphasis supplied).

At the very moment in June, 1946 when Mao’s Communist army was on the verge of dispersing into scattered guerrilla units, Chiang, under intense American pressure, declared a unilateral truce and ceasefire.

“Marshall’s diktat was probably the single most important decision affecting the outcome of the civil war. The Reds who experienced that period, from Lin Biao to army veterans, concurred in private that that this truce was a fatal mistake on Chiang’s part.”

Thanks to the Marshall-brokered ceasefire, Mao was able to establish “a secure base in Manchuria on the Soviet border, with rail links with Russia, over which huge amounts of heavy artillery were brought in...Chiang then found Marshall proposing that it (the truce) be extended to nearly four months and cover the whole of Manchuria—and that the Communists be allowed to keep northern Manchuria” (Mao, 295-296).

“The four month rest the American Deep State granted to Mao Zedong’s military forces contributed significantly to the Communist victory against the anti-Communists and the founding of the mass-murdering People’s Republic of China that we face today.

In February, 1948 General Marshall testified to Congress that “in China we have no concrete evidence that (the Communist army) is supported by Communists from outside.”

This was a disgraceful lie. Marshall was aware that U.S. intelligence had been intercepting cables from Stalin to Mao containing information about huge supplies of aircraft, tanks, artillery, being shipped to the Chinese Communist tyrant from Russia through Manchuria.

[Seemingly ignorant of the clandestine US support for Mao on the part of Truman and Marshall, Christopher Rufo, in his new book America’s Cultural Revolution (p. 36), credits Mao’s victory to his military prowess. I submitted a note to Mr. Rufo’s blog referencing the crucial role of the US government in betraying the Kuomintang’s anti-Communist military forces, but it was not published).

According to The Black Book of Communism (1999), at least 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s rule in China. In the Korean war (1950 to 1953) in defense of South Korea against Communist North Korea and its ally Communist China, nearly 40,000 American youth died and more than 103,000 were wounded. The Deep State helped build Communist China and then ordered America’s youth to fight and die to oppose it. This pattern remains in place.

“In 1985...the Reagan administration arranged for the sale of six major weapons system to China for more than $1 billion. This program aimed to strengthen China’s army, navy and air force and even to help China expand its marine corps. In March 1986 the Reagan administration assisted China’s development of eight national research centers focused on genetic engineering, intelligent robotics, artificial intelligence, automation, biotechnology, lasers, supercomputers, space technology and manned spaceflight.” (Michael Pillsbury, The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy [2015], p. p. 78).

When dealing with China we encounter a popular culture expressed in books, television shows and movies in which Chinese heroes are skilled at “concealing their motives, misleading enemies and veiling their true intentions until the end...valuing highly deceptive stratagems.”

The sui generis personification of this was Mao Zedong’s second in command. Mao’s dictatorship was achieved and maintained in partnership with that master of the false-face, Zhou Enlai (1898-1976, also known as “Chou En-lai”). Artifice was the essence of this virtuoso actor.

Simon Leys’ brilliant profile of this veiled Chinese genius who operated in the Deep State’s web of uber-deception. Zhou Enlai is an archetype of the cunning “Empty Boat.”

The Empty Boat

Zhou Enlai

“Alone among the Maoist leaders, Zhou Enlai had cosmopolitan sophistication, charm, wit and style. He certainly was one of the greatest and most successful actors of the 20th century…Zhou was a compulsive seducer. For him no interlocutors ever appeared too small, too dim or too irrelevant not to warrant a special effort on his part to charm them and to win their sympathy and support.

“Zhou was also the ultimate Zelig of politics: showing tolerance, urbanity and a spirit of compromise to urbane Western liberals; spitting fire and hatred to suit the taste of embittered Third World leaders; displaying culture and refinement in front of artists; being pragmatic with the pragmatists, philosophical with philosophers, and Kissingerian with Kissinger.

“Besides these strange and absorbing social activities, he was also directing the entire administration of the most populous nation on earth. He personally solved a thousand problems a day, having to substitute in practically every matter for a timorous bureaucracy forever reluctant to take any decision or bear any responsibility.

“He dispatched the affairs of the state with the supreme efficiency of an old Taoist ruler who knows that one should govern a large empire in the way that one cooks a little fish. He seemingly never slept and still looked relaxed. He could display simultaneously an exacting attention to minute detail, worthy of a fussy housewife, and a breadth of vision that awed the greatest statesmen of our time.

“Although he permanently occupied the center of the stage, his public activity was a mere sinecure compared with the other show–far more intense, absorbing and momentous–that was running non-stop offstage in the dark recesses of inner-Party politics: there, he had to perform incredible acrobatics in order to remain on top of the greasy pole–eliminating rivals in a relentless power struggle, dodging ambushes, surviving murderous plots hatched by old comrades, etc.

“His task became more and more superhuman as he had to lend single-handedly an impressive facade of humanity, intelligence and sanity to a regime whose increasing cruelty, ineptitude and madness were finally to come out into the open during the last ten years of the Maoist era.

“...Zhou’s relations with his master did not reflect a straightforward subordination but something far more complex. For many years before Mao reached supreme power, Zhou had actually been running the Chinese Communist Party behind the screen of a series of ineffectual or unlucky nominal leaders who were purged one after another. He weathered these successive crises, practically unscathed.

“He developed methods that made him unsinkable: always exert power by proxy; never occupy the front seat; whenever the opposition is stronger, immediately yield.

“His unique competences made him indispensable; and he cultivated at the same time a quality of utter elusiveness: no one could pin him down to a specific political line, nor associate him with any particular faction.

“He never expressed personal ideas nor put down his own theoretical views on paper. Where did he really stand? What did he actually believe? Apparently, he had no other policies but those of the leader of the moment, and nourished no other ambitions but to serve that leader with total dedication.

“Yet, the brilliance of Zhou’s mind, the sharpness of his intelligence, his personal magnetism, his eloquence and authority constantly belied the kind of bland selflessness which he so studiously displayed in the performance of his public duties. Zhou’s enigma lay in this paradox: that, with all his exceptional talents, he should also present a sort of disconcerting and essential hollowness.

“Some 2,300 years ago, Zhuang Zi, giving advice to a king, pointed out to him that, when a small boat drifts into the path of a huge barge, the crew of the barge will immediately shout abuse at the stray craft; if however, coming closer, they discover that the little boat is empty, they will simply shut up and quietly steer clear of it. He concluded that a ruler who has to sail the turbulent waters of politics should first and foremost learn how to become an empty boat.

“History provides few examples of statesmen who were as successful as Zhou Enlai in mastering this subtle discipline. It enabled him to become adept at survival. There was no limit to his willingness to compromise.

“Once, when the Communists had to co-operate again with Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists, a local Party cadre rebelled against this ‘shameless fraternization with fascist butchers,’ and indignantly asked Zhou, ‘Should we become mere concubines?’ Zhou coolly replied: ‘If necessary, we should become prostitutes.’

“Yet he was not seeking survival for survival’s sake: he survived in order to win. He combined utter fluidity with absolute resilience, like water, which espouses instantaneously the shape of whatever container it happens to fill, and never surrenders one atom of its own nature – in the end, it always prevails.

“Zhou made history for half a century and wielded enormous power over one quarter of mankind; yet he apparently never succumbed to the temptation of self-aggrandizement and the lust for supremacy to which none of the other Chinese leaders remained immune.

“He withstood countless trials, crises, humiliations and dangers. Yet he never wavered in his commitment to Chinese Communism. Where did he derive his strength from? What motivated him?

“Like many intellectuals of his generation, in his youth he was fired by intense patriotism; in his early twenties, while in Europe, he seems to have identified the salvation of China once and for all with the victory of Communism. We know nothing more about his evolution.

“Zhou’s enigma was thus compounded by a paradox: this man who dedicated himself, body and soul to the service of [supposedly] China, ended up as the staunchest pillar of a regime that managed to kill more innocent Chinese citizens in twenty-five years of peace than the combined forces of all the foreign imperialists in over one hundred years of endemic aggression.” (End quote from Simon Leys).

Whether Mr. Leys is given to hyperbole we leave to the reader to decide, but there is much truth in his profile of the extraordinary Zhou and in analyzing Zhou’s life, success and numerous victories one gains insight into the lives of the personnel of the Cryptocracy. The same character and psychological traits manifest consistently across the centuries.

Next year, bamboozled by the hoax of poll ratings (which were disastrously inaccurate in 2016 and 2020 but still manage to have credibility now), befuddled American voters will troop off to choose between Biden (if he is not in a nursing home or the bone orchard), Trump (if he’s not incarcerated) or some “alternative choice.” American politicians have the criminal mind of Zhou Enlai, if not his genius.

A fundamental swindle at work and almost entirely missed

In The Federalist Jordan Boyd writes, “The deep state’s incessant attempts to undermine the 2024 presidential election by throwing President Joe Biden’s number one political enemy in jail is getting old. It seems like every day, Biden bureaucrats and Democrats manufacture new justifications for why former President Donald Trump deserves to be behind bars.”

Mr. Boyd is not alone in missing the point of the Justice Department’s stunning multiple indictments of a former president who pollsters allege is the Republican Party’s leading candidate for the top job.

Biden and Garland are “manufacturing new justifications” to ensure that Trump will be nominated the GOP standard bearer in 2024. Mr. Trump caused the Republican Party to lose the Senate in 2020 and again last year; they very nearly failed to gain control of the House of Representatives, all because Trump had a penchant for endorsing dimwits as long as they were willing to swear that he actually won reelection in 2020. Nothing else mattered to him—not the good of the country or his party. It was all about Numero Uno.

Democrats know what the Republican base doesn’t. The Donald cannot win in 2024. His defeat will drag down dozens of the GOP’s Congressional candidates, handing another huge victory to the woke revolution on Capitol Hill. Joe Biden’s reelection will result in a Kamala Harris presidency at some point before 2028, after Joe’s health leads to his incapacitation or death. She may be a mediocrity but her Obama-era handlers are astute political players. A Kamala Harris presidency will make the Biden years look like a model of moderation.

The more Trump is indicted the more he’s likely to be a shoo-in at the nominating convention; that’s the principal objective of all the criminal charges, to have Biden run against the only candidate he can beat.

The fact that Biden can and most likely will beat Trump if the latter receives the Republican nomination, is evidence of the extraordinary decay of the mind and spirit of the occult-enchanted American electorate. I mean, for God’s sake, Biden actually laughed when he was asked last spring about the massacre victims of the Nashville trans shooter. It’s on video.

Furthermore, he refuses to acknowledge his seventh grandchild, the result of his son Hunter’s tryst with a former stripper, which Hunter said he couldn’t recall, until a court-ordered paternity test refreshed his memory. President Biden’s innocent grand-daughter is receiving financial support from Hunter only as the result of a legal battle that ended with her mother agreeing not to use “Biden” as the child’s last name. She’s a pariah.

[Update: “President Biden publicly acknowledged his 4-year-old granddaughter, Navy Joan Roberts, for the first time on Friday, July 28, saying in a statement that he and the first lady, Jill Biden, ‘only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.’ The statement came as Mr. Biden faced increasing pressure from critics who said that failing to acknowledge Navy publicly went against the image of a loving patriarch that he has nurtured since the beginning of his political career” (New York Times; emphasis supplied].

You’re cognizant of the rest of “our” president’s record of treason. It doesn’t differ markedly from that of Reagan or George W. Bush. But what puts Joe Biden in Dante’s Ninth Circle of Hell is that smirk you see him express after being asked if he thought the six victims of the Nashville Presbyterian school massacre were targeted because they were Christians.

Biden, certified as a “good Catholic” by “His Holiness Pope Francis,” demonstrated the exceedingly low status which those murdered children and adults possess in liberal media and high society. Their deaths don’t register. One may laugh in connection with them, and continue to retain a semblance of being “presidential.”

Joe is so certain of the insignificance of those murdered Christians that he can laugh when queried concerning the motivation of their killer — between that and dismissing — up until July 28 — the humanity of his born-out-of-wedlock grandchild, like some doddering reactionary aristocrat hurtling imprecations about the “illegitimacy” of the “bastard”— these footnotes afford us a more penetrating glimpse into Mr. Biden’s charnel house of a soul than headlines do.

There are no end of Zhous in this world. Or Bidens.

In the hot summer of our discontent we witness the cinematic canonization of St. Julius Robert Oppenheimer—yet another totem on the pole of victimhood to which we are required to make obeisance.

Hollywood induces a historical amnesia that causes us to deny the 20th century Communist infiltration of the Federal government, forget the incineration of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people, and shrug our collective shoulders as a plutonium monster slouches daily, yard by yard, toward the Columbia River and environmental catastrophe.

“The external world could take care of itself. In the meantime it was folly to grieve, or to think. The prince had provided all the appliances of pleasure. There were buffoons, there were improvisatori, there were ballêt-dancers, there were musicians, there were cards, there was beauty, there was wine. All these and security were within.”

—Edgar A. Poe, “The Masque of the Red Death”

FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE CONTRA CANCEL CULTURE

Copyright ©2023 Independent History and Research, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816-0849

I am grateful to the paid subscribers who make my writing and research on Substack possible. Thank you. —Michael

Michael Hoffman is the author of Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare (2001), The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome (2017) , Twilight Language (2021), six other books published in the United States, as well as overseas in Japanese and French translation, and 122 issues of Revisionist History® newsletter, 1997-2022. Since January, twenty-eight of his essays have been published on Substack. He is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press. His podcast, Michael Hoffman’s Revisionist History,® is heard around the world.

Twitter: @HoffmanMichaelA

Please let others know about this column.