These posts explore the themes developed in my monograph, Narcisso-Fascism, which is itself a real-world test of the central concepts of the Biocognitive Model of Mind for psychiatry.
If you like what you read, please click the “like” button at the bottom of the text, it helps spread the posts to new readers. If you want to comment, please use the link at the end rather than email me as they get lost and nobody sees them.
****
Last week, I did an interview with Pascal Lottaz on his channel Neutrality Studies, available here. Pascal is from Switzerland but now works at Kyoto University where he seems to have the dream job of talking to interesting people around the world. He posts 3 or 4 fairly long interviews each week, worth watching as you will not get that sort of information from the mainstream.
****
The massive “No Kings” marches in the US and elsewhere came and went but it doesn’t seem as though much has changed. Herr Drumpf is still king, still camped in what’s left of the White House; American and Israeli forces continue their unprovoked and illegal attacks on Iran; Cuba is facing death by strangulation and half a dozen other countries are under threat. Meantime, the Epstein saga rolls along with no end in sight; Wall St is up and down depending on the king’s mood but it now appears that lots of his courtiers are cleaning up to the tune of hundreds of millions; allies are enlisted and dumped willy-nilly; and life is about to get much worse for half the people on the planet, the poor half who can’t do anything to defend themselves. In the US, inflation is up, employment is down, costs are up, farms are going broke, health care is unattainable, hundreds of smaller rural hospitals will be forced to close, travel largely paralysed … all in all, not a good place to be. All this from the wannabe-king who was elected to stop inflation and the Ukraine war on Day 1, bring back jobs, make everybody a winner and launch no more foreign wars. As a result, his approval rate is the lowest ever recorded for a president, but 33% still support him. What would he have to do for them to turn against him? Who knows, we’d rather not find out.
Politicians usually make at least an attempt to do what they promised in their campaigns but Trump hasn’t, quite likely because he doesn’t remember what he promised in 2024. Other politicians declare what they’re going to do and do it, but everybody is outraged because nobody believed them. One such honest fellow was Frau Schicklgruber’s little boy, Adolf, better known by his stepfather’s name, Herr Alois Hitler. In November, 1923, believing that the Bavarian state government was likely to secede from Germany and unite with Austria, forming a large Catholic state in central Europe, Hitler and his group attempted a putsch. This quickly collapsed and he was sentenced to five years in prison but served only about a year. During this time, he began dictating what became the two volumes of Mein Kampf [1]. This was published in 1925-26 and sold well, especially after he became Reichskanzler in 1933. There were a few pirated English translations but they didn’t sell. The authorised version, translated by James Murphy, wasn’t finished when war broke out, meaning very few British politicians read it until the bombers were overhead. That was a problem because in it, the author had set out in considerable detail his plans to build the Thousand Year Reich.
Most of those who had read it were very supportive of everything he had said, especially the tirades against Bolshevism and the USSR. And Jews, of course, because the English upper classes were fierce racists themselves. In Vol. I, he expanded on his version of race science, the core of which was the idea that there is a hierarchy of races, with northern Europeans at the top and all the rest down below. The Aryan races, he believed, had given humanity everything worthwhile; the other races would never amount to anything and were useful only as labourers. They had to be kept in their place and definitely not allowed to interbreed with the higher races as that would lead to racial dilution and thence to social collapse. His racial views meshed neatly with his nationalism, that each country had to be racially pure otherwise it would decline and he wanted Germany to be at the top. This led to his particular hostility for Jews as he believed they formed Bolshevism in order to dissolve nations into a single world state that they would govern for their benefit, all the while polluting the gene pool with their inferior blood. Because of what has happened since, that sounds bad today but at the time, this sort of talk was pretty standard throughout Western Europe, North America and the former British colonies such as Australia, Canada, South Africa etc.
If this were all, the rest of the world could have lived with it but he had economic ideas as well. Germany was a great nation but it was kept from its rightful place at the top of the hierarchy by not having enough land. Britain and France, the other great nations, were also quite small but they had their huge overseas empires which allowed them to become wealthy and thus to bestride the world. By contrast, the German-speaking peoples were stuck in a narrow strip of land and unable to expand. Without more land, they must decline; there were no decent territories overseas; therefore Germany must look east, to the vast tracts of Eurasia occupied by the second rate Slavic nations. In order to fulfil her destiny, Germany must take control of the under-utilised Slavic territories, thin out the excess population and keep the rest as labourers for the farms, mines and factories that German ingenuity alone could build. As Darwin said, life is a struggle in which only the fit survive which Hitler took to mean that anybody who wasn’t prepared to fight for his race didn’t deserve to survive, much less to breed and spread his defective blood. What we would call defective genes, such as criminality, mental disorder, addictions, uncontrolled violence, homosexuality, prostitution, etc, along with other defective races, had to be eliminated for the good of the nation.
That’s it, there’s his plan, set out in Chap.14 of Vol II of Mein Kampf. There were no apologies because none were needed. What he planned was simply reenacting the spread of the British and French overseas empires according to standard eugenic principles, the only difference being that he would be colonising white people. The few Englishmen of influence who had read it were generally supportive because their loathing of Bolshevism was at least as intense as his. They would support anybody who opposed the Reds, as Churchill said after meeting Mussolini in 1927:
If I had been an Italian I am sure I would have been wholeheartedly from start to finish with Fascismo’s triumphant struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism … I could not help being charmed, as so many other people have been, by his gentle, simple bearing and his calm, detached poise, despite so many burdens and dangers. Any one could see he thought of nothing but the lasting good, as he understood it, of the Italian people …
Churchill also believed in eugenics, including sterilisation of the ‘feeble-minded’ as part of a program to improve the English race. In these respects, Churchill was not an extremist. He became the prime minister, dear friend and confidant of kings and queens, the beatified hero of the 20th Century but when it came to racial hierarchies, Churchill and Hitler were on the same page, as they say. People may object that Churchill was a minor player in the race game but he wasn’t: in 1942, he called Indians “a beastly people with a beastly religion.” In 1943, for the purpose of feeding its armies, Britain engineered a famine in Bengal that killed 3.5million people and left untold millions of children damaged for life. Churchill knew exactly what the British policies would do and pressed ahead with it.
The Nazi invasion of the USSR in June 1941 began with the largest army ever assembled in human history. Over the next four years, between 25-35million Soviet citizens died, including deliberate genocidal programs in the occupied areas. The unspeakable horror of that period is burned into the Russian soul but most people in the West know next to nothing about it. They don’t know that 80% of German casualties were on the OstFront, the Eastern War. Post-war, the Soviet leadership swore: “Never again. Nobody will ever threaten us again,” a vow the US and NATO have completely ignored (the period is captured in the book Khatyn by Ales Adamovich, and the film Come and See, based on the book, also on YouTube; anybody who hasn’t seen it needs to but be warned). It came about entirely because one group of humans decided they were superior beings who had the right to dominate another group, slaughtering them and taking their land for their own glory. Needless to say, the people deemed “inferior” decided otherwise. At the Nuremberg trials, it was agreed that aggressive war is not permissible under any circumstances, that the Nazi leaders who committed that offence were guilty of the gravest crimes and had surrendered their right to live.
The urge to dominate and its equal and opposite urge for freedom are built into us but they are not biological absolutes. Dominating other people feels great but we don’t have to give in to that urge. If we choose, we can resist it and still lead perfectly satisfying lives. The very idea that one group is superior to another and has rights and privileges denied to others is not compatible with a peaceful world. Since the advent of nuclear weapons, and with the ever-growing threat of global warming, we could go further and say that the very idea of superiority is an unacceptable danger to the safety of the planet.
Unfortunately, the twin ideas of racial superiority and racial inferiority live on and have pushed the world into another war. Eighty years after the last great racial war, a group of humans has decided they are superior beings who have the right to dominate another group, slaughtering them and taking their land for their own glory. Once again, the aggressive group has openly declared their intention to invade other nations, to slaughter their people or drive them out while enslaving enough to provide labour, in order to build a glorious empire in which they will reign supreme. Starting in 1896 with the publication of the pamphlet Der Judenstaat, the group known as Zionists have broadcast their belief that, as the “Chosen People,” they are superior to other human beings and thereby have an right inalienable right to the lands and livelihoods of the indigenous people of the Levant. Their starting point is some writings they regard as divinely inspired in which their tribal deity promised them all the land from the Nile to the Euphrates (Genesis 15:18–21). Atheistic Zionists, of whom there are plenty, rely on what they call “historical reasons” to claim the territory although they never specify what legal basis that provides. It has no basis, of course. There are plenty of very wealthy Jewish people in Australia. Imagine that tonight, a group of Aboriginal people knocked on a Jewish door and said: “Hey man, this is our land, you mob stole it from us. We got a real strong historical claim on this land so you lot can just go an’ camp on the street, we’re takin’ over this place.” I doubt very much the occupants would want to move.
Putting that aside, after an absence of 2,000 years, the Zionists decided to occupy what they say is their promised land. Particularly since 1948 when the UN granted them a sizeable part of the region, they have constantly engaged in aggressive activity intended to drive the indigenous population out and/or wipe them out. Because they have managed to gain the unqualified support of the ruling class in the US, they have been able to pursue their goal without let or hindrance and now feel sufficiently encouraged to attack a distant country, Iran, which was never part of the supposed “birthright.” That this takes us to the brink of nuclear catastrophe is dismissed by the Zionist clique and their fanatical supporters in the US as somehow “antisemitic.”
Lost in the noise is the point that, even by their own bloodthirsty standards, the Zionists are acting duplicitously. The covenant or contract between the Judaic tribes and their deity is repeated at different points in their holy book but the core message is crystal clear: “I will give you this land if you keep my law” (e.g. Deuteronomy 28:63). There were something like 613 laws in their book, one of which explicitly states: “Thou shalt not kill.” However, as we watch the world’s first genocide broadcast in real time, it is equally clear that the very people professing to be observant of their religion are committing mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide, and thoroughly enjoying it. How do they sleep at night? The answer is very simple: by a process of verbal trickery, they have convinced themselves that the indigenous Palestinians are not actually human, so they can be killed as we kill rats and cockroaches. That is, they have adopted the very belief system that allowed the Nazi SS to commit the defining crimes of the 20th Century, and are now working hard on the defining crimes of the 21st Century. They believe: “We are superior beings, you are inferior. We therefore have the right to invade your land, to conquer you, to drive you out or slaughter you, and to take your land in order to build a glorious empire.” That is precisely what the Nazis said in 1925, and acted on in 1941. In fact, Netanyahu has openly stated that his plan is that Israel will become a global superpower, potentially dominating the world.
Evil is as evil does. If this was a crime against humanity in 1945, it remains a crime against humanity in 2026. In fact, more so as Israelis are far better educated than the barely-literate German farm boys who followed the swastika to a brutal death on the steppes. The justifications offered by the very sophisticated Zionist propaganda machine are irrelevant. If the death of Anne Frank was a grievous crime, then so too was the death of Hind Rajab. It doesn’t matter how many Jews were killed in Europe so many years ago, the Palestinians were not involved, as the first Israeli prime minister, David Ben Gurion admitted in 1956:
Why should the Arabs make peace ? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them ? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them ? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that ? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations’ time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it’s simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipe us out [1, p99-100].
Goldmann was clear: “…Ben Gurion is the man principally responsible for the anti-Arab policy … He had no consideration for anyone, friend or foe.”
The urge to dominate is human, it is in all of us. However, the notion that one group of humans is superior to another and therefore has privileges not available to the other and has the right to act on them without restraint leads to atrocities. The US believes it is a nation of superior humans with rights and entitlements not available to others, including the right to attack other nations when it chooses to do so. That supremacist national ethos is not compatible with the safety of the planet. Zionism is a supremacist belief system which is equally destructive of human rights. Combined, these two countries threaten the future of every living thing on earth, and it all comes about because their leaders lack the insight that while dominating others feels wonderful for them, it does not feel good for the oppressed people who must eventually fight back.
1. Hitler, Adolf (1925). Mein Kampf. Tr. James Murphy, 1939. Facsimile edition (2011): Henley in Arden: Coda Books.
2. Goldmann N. (1976/78). The Jewish Paradox. Weidenfeld & Nicholson: London.
****
My critical works are best approached in this order:
The case against mainstream psychiatry:
McLaren N (2024). Theories in Psychiatry: building a post-positivist psychiatry. Ann Arbor, MI: Future Psychiatry Press. Amazon (this also covers a range of modern philosophers, showing that their work cannot be extended to account for mental disorder).
Development and justification of the biocognitive model:
McLaren N (2021): Natural Dualism and Mental Disorder: The biocognitive model for psychiatry. London, Routledge. At Amazon.
Clinical application of the biocognitive model:
McLaren N (2018). Anxiety: The Inside Story. Ann Arbor, MI: Future Psychiatry Press. At Amazon.
Testing the biocognitive model in an unrelated field:
McLaren N (2023): Narcisso-Fascism: The psychopathology of right wing extremism. Ann Arbor, MI: Future Psychiatry Press. At Amazon.
The whole of this work is copyright but may be copied or retransmitted provided the author is acknowledged