The Majority is Always Wrong.

Month: July, 2013


I am coming to the conclusion that this Emanuel Josephson fellow is probably one of the five most important historians that America has ever produced. His career spanned the 1930s through the late 1960s, and boy did he ever tell unpopular truths, the kind the oligarchs and their corporations don’t want people to know. Be advised though: His works, like later important conspiratorial writers such as John Coleman, do have the flaw of being under-footnoted.

The title of this book is somewhat inappropriate in that only one of twenty-six chapters actually deals with the strange death of FDR. It is a most interesting and alarming chapter and raises some significant questions and relates some extremely suspicious factual history surrounding the death of FDR that almost no American alive today knows about.

The majority of this work is divided up along three lines of investigation:
1) The hidden and scurrilous history of the Delano-Roosevelt clan, what Josephson refers to as “America’s Dynastic Clan” since–get this–he says that this family, up to the time of FDR anyway, had provided more than 1/3 of all U.S. presidents. Genealogical charts are provided. Yikes.
2) The hidden and scurrilous history of the rise and reign of FDR. Shocking stuff. The man never worked a day in his life, was given everything he ever had by super-rich banksters, was constantly fleecing and being used to fleece ordinary people of their money. Here is a political picture of the consummate “steal from the poor and give to the rich” banker’s boy.
3) The hidden and scurrilous history of the Rockefeller clan’s and the DuPont clan’s domination of FDR and their intermingling with the Delano-Roosevelt clan. Name the war, and the Rockefellers and/or the DuPonts were at back of it. And whether it was Teddy or FDR or whichever other Delano or Roosevelt, they were obedient servants to the money powers.

Josephson also explains the real diabolical nature and purpose of FDR’s New Deal program which he equates with Communism and Nazism and for very justifiable reasons. Interestingly, Josephson maintains that New Dealism, as well as those two other “isms,” all stem from Bismarkian Germany. I’m not sure about that one, but I admit it is intriguing. What is interesting is that it is known that the current government (public) education system in America came from 1800s Prussian Germany, and the same banksters and oligarchs who were backing FDR’s New Deal program also are known now to have established control over the present American education system by the mid-20th century through vast money grants and purchases derived from their tax-exempt “philanthropic” foundations.

Oh, get ready to be quite surprised over what Josephson relates regarding that “angel of mercy” Eleanor Roosevelt, FDR’s wife. Today we are told she was some kind of compassionate Lady Diana-type; the truth according to Josephson, who was of course a contemporary for almost all of this history, is very, very different, but apparently quite in keeping with her family’s (hidden) history.

Josephson, being an M.D. but an M.D. who didn’t exactly go along with the A.M.A.’s prescribed dogmas, also relates a lot of hidden and shocking history about ugly medical scams that occurred during the 1930s surrounding FDR, polio, and FDR’s “charitable” Georgia Warm Springs therapeutic center.

In the final chapter, and after excoriating throughout the entire book the ruthless oligarchical spoils system which moronic Americans have been conditioned to call “capitalism,” Josephson outlines a model for an economic system that would end depressions and inflation and perpetual warfare and, believe it or not, would probably work, and has in fact already worked once before in American history. But just don’t look for it anytime soon; actually don’t look for it to happen again ever. Not while the Rockefellers and the DuPonts, et al, are in possession of everything, including each and every president, legislator, and judge.

This book is extremely–no, EXQUISITELY–recommendable for anyone seeking to understand real 20th-century American history, as well as contemporary events.

I guess it goes without saying that this book, which was published in 1948, is long out-of-print. Where have we heard that before?

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ



The Good: First published in 1963, later revised in ’75, this is very well researched and from cover to cover the author consistently cites the works of numerous previous historians and theologians. This is recommendable as a primer for any Christian who is at the initial stages of waking up from the narcotic ether of Churchianity, Inc. and is beginning the process of learning more about his/her Middle Age antecedents–16th century Anabaptists–who went through the same process in droves, and all the history that went along with that that practically no one, least of all evangelicals, appreciates anymore.

The Bad: Although the contention of scriptural “believer’s baptism” vs. the institutionalized churches’ practice of infant baptism was at the center of the firestorm of controversy surrounding the Anabaptist movement, nevertheless this reader came away feeling as though the author spent just a little too many pages explaining this issue and history, and it is this reader’s opinion that one very basic reason for the verbosity overkill on this subject is because it is nowadays a very “safe” issue to talk about, which of course was very far from true in the 16th century.

The Ugly: Now, the other main foundation underpinning the 16th century Anabaptist movement besides believer’s baptism was the concept that we have come to call today the “separation of church and state,” and though this author does cover this revolutionary Anabaptist issue, he only devotes about four or five pages to it in the whole book. This reader is of the opinion that there are two reasons for this, and that the second is the logical extension of the first. Those reasons are as follows:
#1) The author makes the mistake of assuming that today’s American church-attending evangelicals are enjoying the blessings of a “separation of church and state.” In doing this, the author demonstrates his ignorance of the anti-scriptural covenants that almost all American evangelical churches have signed today in the form of the secular 501c3 tax exemption and state incorporation contracts. Even from the scant amount that the author writes about this subject, it is clear that there is no way the 16th century Anabaptists would have ever rendered to Caesar that which is the Lord’s as have today’s American evangelicals. The author does not consciously apprehend this.
#2) However, given the extreme brevity with which the author writes about this important issue, this reader cannot help but wonder if the author doesn’t perhaps subconsciously sense that something is indeed wrong with today’s American counterfeit of separation of church and state but he just can’t put his finger on it. Perhaps this might explain the headscratching oversight of only devoting four or five pages to this foundational Anabaptist issue, because such a realization would mean that the scriptural separation of church and state is, in our day, the unsafe issue to talk about, as opposed to scriptural believer’s baptism which is now accepted by most.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ


Though this one is a more recent work, nevertheless FACING LOVE ADDICTION, by this same author, is a much more valuable work than this. There are some occasional exceptional insights and advice here, but really, this book seems to have been written for professional therapists as opposed to those who (haplessly) find themselves in such dysfunctional relationships as the disastrous addict/avoidant mess. This is mainly a bunch of too loosely organized anecdotes–apparently both fictitious and non-fictitious–and a bunch of procedural advice for shrinks. Skip this and read FACING LOVE ADDICTION. See my review on that other book.

Rating: Δ Δ

LEGALIZING MISANDRY by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young

This is the second book in an apparent trilogy by these two authors, the first being the exquisitely recommendable SPREADING MISANDRY. Whereas that first book dealt with ubiquitous misandry (hatred of men) in all venues of pop culture throughout the 1990s, this book, LEGALIZING MISANDRY, examines in detail the sundry ways in which the Canadian and American judicial and law enforcement system, along with a complicit major media of course, unfairly vilify and persecute men via, as the title suggests, the legal system itself. Since this second book therefore sometimes deals with legislation and court practices and legalese, it is a bit harder to get through than their first book, but it is nevertheless well worth the effort and I eagerly anticipate obtaining their third installment which continues their uncovering of the general hatred against men in our culture, the only general hatred that is politically correct in our time.

The authors often document herein that the most acute critics of misandric feminism (what these authors call ideological feminism) sometimes come from their own ranks: it seems there are a few renegade feminists out there. They also show that, at bottom, when all the smokescreens are blown away, what ideological feminism really is all about is not only overall hatred of men, but also the inevitable, concomitant promotion of lesbianism. It is about time somebody from academia said that. Actually, Nathanson and Young give credit to feminist Daphne Patai for saying it! Kudos to Ms. Patai.

The statistics these authors give are often shocking. They challenge mainstream misandric gender assumptions repeatedly, and sometimes they demonstrate that the statistics the mainstream media is using–taken unquestioningly from this or that misandrist whom they also take unquestioningly to be a respected “women’s advocate”–oftentimes these statistics which promote ideological feminism and bash men at the same time turn out later to be have been flat-out hoaxes or lies. And yet that still doesn’t stop the courts and media from continuing to use these bogus statistics.

The insights these authors come up with regarding the roles of men and women in a healthy society, as opposed to our sick society, are incisive and desperately needed in our culture. They demolish the misandric dogma of ideological feminism which propagandizes that violent men are the result of men who have been too empowered. Actually, the truth is the complete opposite, as these authors more than explain: men in fact grow more violent when they are disempowered and threatened with emasculation, which is of course the raison d’etre of ideological feminism.

This book is extremely valuable and I could go on and on about what a rare and meritorious service these authors are performing. To understand the plight of men today, and the horrible destruction that ideological feminism causes, there are probably not very many sources of information on the entire planet more worthy and important than this.

I do have one criticism of this book, though. Just one. But it’s not insignificant: The authors get off to a rocky start because they chose to begin by examining the Satanic Ritual Abuse phenomenon of the 1990s until now. Their idea was to show that this phenomenon was/is nothing more than an attack on men. Personally, I never got that impression, not even from the misandric major media, and I am still not convinced of that after having read what these authors have to say in support of this claim. But more to the problematic point: here these authors are writing about something of which they know nothing of much value because they are relying solely upon reports from the mainstream media. So naturally these authors come down on the side of the False Memory Foundation. Never mind that the False Memory Foundation is a shill organization designed to suppress the truth about Satanic Ritual Abuse. I really wish these authors hadn’t gone into this. They are not yet equipped (nor do most people ever equip themselves) to understand “the Pedophocracy,” as Dave MacGowan calls it. They needed to have read the work of authors already deprogrammed in this area; yes, authors such as Dave MacGowan, or William Ramsey, or Alex Constantine, etc., or else they should procure a suppressed book like THE FRANKLIN COVERUP to first deprogram themselves before tackling such a surreal subject as this.

Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ