Author Comment    
Umm Jack



Feb 28, 05 - 8:11 PM
Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

I was quite uplifted by the recent essay dismissing any crude political speculation on the sources of Aristasian symbolism. However, is the Embassy aware that the speculation can be removed at the source? Any pette (or any em ee an for that matter) can make changes to the entry in question. The Embassy can rewrite the entire entry if they choose.
Princess Mushroom



Feb 28th, 2005 - 9:33 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Thank you for the tip.

I don't think one is suppoed to excise whole bits, but one of the girls has popped in a sort of rejoinder from the Aristasian perspective, and also a link to the flag page.

Incidentally, we found a very early archive piece on the symbolism of the Cross and the Fora (from long before Elektraspace days) and have popped it up here.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 1st, 2005 - 9:50 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

A more thorough revision of the article has now been made, leaving the original allegations intact but replying to them fairly thoroughly. It does make the whole thing a bit bulky. On the other hand, if they were deleted they would likely reappear and it might be a good place to tell the truth about these stories, which float about from time to time, and which the Aristasia site generally disdains to notice.

Anyway, what do you think? An perhaps we could al keep an eye in the article for further tamperings.
Umm Jack



Mar 1st, 2005 - 8:54 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

I would replace "practicing Jewess" with "observant Jew," ma'am.
Umm Jack



Mar 1st, 2005 - 9:16 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

This is one of those instances in which it is very difficult for one who has received a bongo education to distinguish between a healthy dislike for what it is unwholesome and indoctrination. I was myself extremely distressed by the mentions of "manipulators of international finance," in the otherwise lovely Christmas radio story on the Harmony Point, and elsewhere. I do make the assumption that that phrase is code for "Jews" and it is upsetting.

However, my reading of Aristasian material has led me to believe that if I find support for racialist ideas in that material, I am bringing it in along with my own assumptions, and it is not there in the material itself. I think that when an Aristasian says "manipulators of international finance" she means precisely that, a manipulator of international finance, whose ethnic and religious identity may be anything at all, and is most likely to be a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant American, for heaven's sake.

However just as the word "Jewess" raises hackles that I am not completely certain are bongo in nature, so does the phrase in question, especially for Americans. Deferral to American sensibilities is of course not a moral imperative. However, I do think that there is something very different going on when an American expresses discomfort with racism, or racialism, than when a European does. When Europeans express this discomfort in my experience they are trotting out the noises they were expected to make in university to prove that they are toeing the party line. But American manners included a total prohibition on anything that could be mistaken for racialist bigotry long before the Eclipse, and the persistance of this prohibition is a healthy strain native to my culture. Unfortunately my culture also contains a strong tendency to mistake its own mores for universal laws.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 1st, 2005 - 10:29 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

The issues you raise are interesting. As a seceded Aristasian I am aware of some of these matters, but not all. I am sure there is no objection to the replacement of "Jewess" if anyone finds it offensive. It just never occurred to me that aynone might find it offensive. We tend to prefer authoress to author, poetess to poet and to resist the bongo tendency (strong once, but I believe declining) to call actresses "actors". It goes a little against the grain to use the masculine form, but if the feminine could really cause offence, I suppose one ought. Have any of our Jewish girls any thoughts on this?

As for "manipulators of international finance", a much more serious question is raised. Many Aristasians believe - and there is good reason to believe - that international finance is precisely the lever which is used to operate the whole corrupt mechanism of the Pit. The very fact that every nation has a national debt and there are no creditor nations should give one pause for thought. To whom are the debts owed, and how do they use this enormous power?

We would suggest that they use it to bring about the aberrant society we see about us.

To us there is nothing racial about the question. Some of the shadowy individuals concerned may well be Jewish, others undoubtedly are Anglo-Saxons, Germans, Italians or whatever. Whoever the are and whatever race they are, they are the enemies of traditional culture and civilisation everywhere, including traditional Jewish culture and civilisation.

The notion that "the Jews" as a people are somehow part of this is not only monstrous, but nonsensical. How could they be? The thing seems so ludicrous as to be scarcely worthy of discussion, though I realise there are people who believe it. In any case, religious Jews are often among the staunchest opponents of the cultural assault. When a Rabbi called television "an open sewer in the living room", he was speaking against the manipulators of international finance and for their enemies everywhere.

The real problem - the rather sinister problem - here is that I was unaware that "the manipulators of international finance" cannot even be mentioned without raising the bogey of "anti-semitism". If this is the case, what an enormous triumph for the said manipulators. What a tactical masterpiece! Through the deft use of their mass-media they have made the central problem of the Pit unmentionable!

So what does one do? Just say "the people running the show don't want us to discuss what they are up to and have cleverly fixed it so that we can't" and leave it at that?

This is not a rhetorical question. I really am wondering.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 1st, 2005 - 10:36 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

I have pro tem replaced "is a practising Jewess" with "attends the Synagogue regularly", though this phrase, in context might seem to have an unintended air of flippancy.

Might I ask one of the Jewish members of this Club to make the final adjustment if she deems it necessary?
Umm Jack



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 12:12 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Actually this is not a problem at all. I once took an informal poll among my friends and we all agreed - "international financial interests" always means "Jews;" but "multinational corporate interests" never does. Blame "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and its continued influence, I suppose.
Miss Belleanne



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 12:53 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

It never occurred to me, either, that "manipulators of international finance" would be read by most people as code for "Nasty Evil Jews" -- let alone that the "Jewess" might be offensive. And I'm not entirely neutral on the subject, nor am I entirely ignorant.

There are so many things one cannot say in the Pit! I came across another example only this afternoon. The president of Harvard University recently made a speech that was supposedly off the record in order to facilitate the free exchange of ideas. But feminists put him on the record, and savaged him, when he spoke of biological differences as one of several possible reasons why there are few women at the top of fields such as engineering and science. The feminist establishment considers this the worst sort of heresy.

A biologist and feminist activist from MIT described her feelings when she heard his speech. "I felt I was going to be sick. My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow. I was extremely upset." She fled the room before he'd even finished speaking.

How very... feminine of her. What man would have reacted that way? DoesnÕt that tell you something about biological differences that an eminent MIT biologist ought to know? But no! In the topsy-turvy world of the Pit, black is clearly white, and up is without a doubt down.
Umm Jack



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 1:01 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

That is very, very funny, Miss Belleanne.
Princess Mushroom



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 9:09 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

It might have been funny, except that Miss Belleanne tells me that the Harvard President has been forced to apologise repeatedly for his comments and is still hounded by feminists.

This Soviet-style censorship of scientific enquiry isn't awfully funny. One might wonder why the said president was such a weed as to apologise for his honestly-held and almost certainly correct beliefs. But then, as would have been the case in the Soviet Union, he undoubtedly has to choose between being a weed and being an ex-President.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 10:16 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

I have made a quick poll of a few District friends. All have read Children of the Void and heard The Toyshop (which got a bit sidetracked last Nativity, but we hope to record complete for next!) and none had even thought of the idea that "international financial interests", or whatever, might mean anything other than what it said. However, if some people do make that assumption, it is probably better to make the matter clear.

Dear UmmJack, your suggestion is very helpful. The only problem is that "multinational corporate interests" actually does not mean the same thing and its use might tend to imply socialistic ideas in the shadow-fight between the "left" and "right" tentacles of the Octopus. If only people would take one as meaning what one says rather than playing word-association games! But then language has become a rather blunt instrument in the semi-educated Pit and people tend not to use it with any great precision.

What about "global capital"? How does this strike us all? The phrase is actually quite precise (provided one says "capital" and not "capitalism") and "globalisation" is quite near to the root of the problem, as "corporatism" is not really and is a bit of a distraction.

"Global capital" probably still carries the danger of being associated with sophomoric "anti-capitalism" but perhaps that is the lesser of two evils, since one cannot expect to be taken simply at one's word - at least not by everyone at the same time!

What do we all think?
Umm Jack



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 12:13 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Your Highness, what I thought was so funny was Miss Belleanne's perception of the feminine quality of the lady's reaction.

But actually the rest of it is very funny as well. Being hounded by feminists would make me laugh and laugh. And the idea that a president of what passes for an elite university nowadays either didn't know what a fuss such a comment would make, or was willing to make it but then changed his mind when he experienced the consequences, is high comedy. I personally believe the entire incident was staged - by spooky manipulators of international gender politics, perhaps!
Princess Mushroom



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 12:26 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

It is more likely to have been staged by Messrs Barnum and Bailey. However, a world would have to have been very spookily manipulated indeed before anyone - far less a University President would take such nonsense remotely seriously.
Annya



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 12:44 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Surely the most serious problem here is that, as long as academic enquiry on such subjects is rigorously suppressed by the Red Guards of bongo Policed Consciousness - to the point where University Presidents are forced to apologise for thinking the "wrong thing" - everyone in academia is forced to believe (or pretend to believe) that so long as women are not equally represented with men in departments of mechanical engineering and nuclear physics, this is "proof" that they are being discriminated against.

The corollary of this is that further discriminatory measures are introduced to "rectify" the "problem"; because no one is permitted to discuss whether there actually is a "problem" for fear of saying the "wrong thing".
Miss Huntingdon



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 1:18 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

May I interpose a scientific note here? I have been closely associated with a young lady doing a PhD in neuroscience brain-scan research.

What we are discussing here is not a matter of "academic enquiry" or "debate". It is a matter of simple fact. Modern brain-scans show the electronic patterns of the brain. When an old person loses portions of her memory, one can see the black, dead patches where electronic activity has died. When one compares brain-scans of men with those of women, they are quite notably different. An expert would no more confuse a female brain with a male one than a forensic doctor would confuse a female skull with a male one. Different brain-scan patterns correspond directly to different ways of thinking: different mental make-up.

To say that women and men have no mental differences is not like debating the highly questionable theory of evolution. It is like declaring the earth to be flat. It simply isn't the case and this can be seen by anyone with access to brain-scan technology. No one, however feminist, in the sphere of neuroscience has ever attempted to deny this, because it is undeniable.

The widespread belief that femininity is "socially conditioned" is a truly extraordinary example of the supresson of known facts in favour of political mythology.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 2:36 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Meantime, the Encyclopaedia amendment saga rolls on with Aristasian amendments being re-amended by other hands. Members may be interested to see what they think of the current compromise.

The "Miss Martindale Birching Case" has been removed from being tacked onto the end of her supposed communication with Proscribed Persons (where various liberal journalists have put it as a sort of vague confirmation of her "fascism" and general villainy) and given a paragraph of its own where the real circumstances are briefly explained.

What I really do need is comment from Umm Jack as to whether "global capital" seems a good replacement for "international finance". If it does, I hope to place the matter before the Ambassadress.
Miss Adabelle Milton



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 6:07 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

In agreement with dear Miss Belleanne's delightful report of the foolishness at Harvard:

This poor dear girl from MIT has every reason to feel ill, though she of course has a twisted idea of the real problem. What a pity that this perfectly understandable physical reaction to so much bongo idiocy (not limited to the so-called "discriminatory" remarks of the hopeless little man playing at "president") is considered pathological. I certainly can think of no more appropriate, womanly, sane and wholesome response than horror and flight! Perhaps, after all, she's on the road to a healthy understanding of femininity.
Umm Jack



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 8:26 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Ma'am (I confess my ignorance as to the proper mode of address) forgive my digression into amusement at the Harvard circus.

"Global capital" carries no connotations for me. I find the word corporate to be more exact, as I think it addresses the issue that corporate groups have usurped the power that ought to belong to superior individuals, thus producing a world in which there is much raw power but little responsibility. It seems to me that we do find ourselves arrayed in battle against corporations, specifically, and not capital, but I am open to correction on the subject.

The problem seems to be that by referring to our shadowy masters, we align ourselves with one or more groups of their enemies, in whose camp no sane person would like to find herself. The desire to avoid being grouped with socialists on the one hand and fascists on the other reminds me of the problem I continually have in discussing the Pit's attack on normal family life in stable households, as many seemingly innocuous terms have been co-opted by rabid neo-Calvinists obsessed with regulating the intimate behavior of private individuals ("family values," for example), while others have been sullied by the groups responsible for the attempted erosion of sexual difference.
Miss Drusilla



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 11:50 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Speaking of Women in the Sciences, this exchange was overheard today between two District blondes:

"I can't help thinking that if more blondes were at the top of the scientific professions, there would be a Lose Weight Pill that really worked and had no side effects except perhaps to make a girl's hair shinier."

"I am sure brunettes think that if blondes were at the top of the scientific professions nothing would work. But what do they know?"

"They know how things work."

"How very true."
Annya



Mar 2nd, 2005 - 11:55 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Oh, Miss Drusilla! We have been talking about the biological basis of the difference between women and men. Could you tell us a bit about the much more interesting biological differences between blondes and brunettes?

I think it really needs a brunette to explain such things.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 3rd, 2005 - 4:36 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Socialists, fascists, neo-Calvinists. It seems everyone in the pit wants to pop people into their little pigeonholes (usually ending in "ist"), and instead of listening to what one is actually saying siezes on a few key-words for pigeonholing purposes.

Corporations are certainly a part of the problem, though I think what Miss Snow had in mind was the manipulation of money itself - literally the control of capital (rather than the goods and services that form the real wealth that gives capital its value) on a global scale.

Without going into the economics of the distinction, I think "global capital" would seem to be a phrase that describes this phenomenon without entailing unwanted and unintended connotations for some people.
Miss Devenish



Mar 3rd, 2005 - 9:14 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

An economic purist might object that "capital" does not actually mean "money" but can also mean goods, plant, equipment etc.

However if "finance" is read by some people as meaning "Jews" (Which seems to me about as reasonable as reading "candles" to mean "Catholics" - but never mind), perhaps "capital" is, as you say, the lesser of two evils.
Annya



Mar 4th, 2005 - 12:33 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

When, of course, only Roman candles are Catholics.

Teehee!
Miss Huntingdon



Mar 4th, 2005 - 12:42 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

The premiss of most of these witch-hunting allegations against Aristasia (mostly made by left-wing newspapers) is that we will all be running round like scared little rabbits trying to hide what we really think for fear of risking the Dreadful Disapproval of Daddy Octopus.

So we are supposed to be using "code words" for this when we mean that and "secretly" believing something else when we say we don't.

What they don't seem to realise is that we like nothing better than treading on Daddy Octopus's pet corns, and many more irresponsible Aristasians tend to talk more "right-wing" than they really are just for the fun of shocking liberals and showing their contempt for Policed Consciousness.

When faced with witch-hunting allegations, one's first temptation is to say "Yes, that's right. What are you going to do about it, bongo-boy?"

It is only because fascism is so very far from what we actually believe that we are able to resist the temptation.
Sushuri Novaryana



Mar 4th, 2005 - 6:58 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

It is very true. I remember that when this rather silly affair was in the press, Miss Martindale would rarely tell a journalist that she did not like fascism without also mentioning that she did not like democracy either - in order to make it perfectly clear that she was not apologising or "boot-licking".

Of course, this gave a somewhat false impression too, as the average Johnny Bongo - who has been taught to think in terms of "political programmes" and parties - would believe that she was making some sort of anti-democratic political recommendation for Telluria.

In fact, Aristasians believe in a Sacred monarchy and Empire which has no relevance at all to modern Western Telluria, but try explaining that to a lefty journalist - and imagine what a garble he would make of reportng it!

Lesser of two evils again I suppose. At least she did not look as if she were toeing the Pit party-line and meekly apologising to the witch-hunters.
Umm Jack



Mar 4th, 2005 - 8:55 PM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Two separate issues seem to have gotten mixed up on this thread.

On the issue of whether "international finance" is read as code for "Jews,"while I appreciate the willingness to concede the possibility, I would ask that I am not required to go trudging through a lot of dreary National Socialist material to prove that this is a pre-Eclipse phenomenon and very wide-spread, and sensitivity to it is not entirely a product of post-Eclipse policed consciousness. There is established things coded language for these things precisely because outright bigotry was already unacceptable among superior people well before the Eclipse. The wonderful film "Gentleman's Agreement," about anti-Semitism in elite East Coast American circles, for example, was made in 1948, and the making of a Hollywood film indicates that the shift in attitudes had already taken place long before.

The second issue is the issue of censorship in the Pit in general and the Harvard circus in particular. Yes, there are things that cannot be said in the Pit. There is severe censure for any displays of bigotry against certain groups (but not all; it is always open season on poor whites) and for any deviance from the social construction theory of gender identity. However the difference between inappropriate and excessive punishment for a social crime on the one hand, and thought policing that attacks the heart of what it means to be human on the other ought to be plain.

And if it is not, let me explain further: expressing bigotry is not nice. It is like picking one's nose - barely mentionable ever at all (I apologize for my own mention) and absolutely inappropriate in public. However, acceptable methods of dealing with bigotry in the Pit resemble lopping a person's nose off - and not only for the actual social crime, but also for having one's finger close enough to one's nose to be mistaken for it - and perhaps one was just adjusting one's glasses, or was about to sneeze!

But no matter how excessive the punishment, bigotry, like nose-picking, remains indefensible in itself. And so the policed consciousness aspects of the Pit involving bigotry differ from those involving complete nonsense, like the Harvard circus.

The social construction theory of sexual identity could only have arisen and taken hold after the Eclipse. It is a complete Pit-creature, thoroughly illegitimate, and should be given no quarter. Anyone who is willing to indulge it or its deluded minions in the slightest is a collaborator with evil. I am not seeking rhetorical effects with this language. No language is too strong to deplore the hideous results of forty years of domination by this toxic set of ideas.

Expressions of bigotry and expressions of the essential difference - the mere existence - of masculinity and femininity both fall into the category of "things one may not say in the Pit." However, the former are things one really shouldn't be saying, no one wants to hear, and are just fundamentally not very interesting; while the latter are things we should be proclaiming from the rooftops.
Lady Aquila



Mar 5th, 2005 - 11:03 AM
Re: Bongo Encyclopaedias and the Imperial Flag

Thank you, most honoured Umm jack for your eloquent remarks, which are indeed well taken.

A few random points which may or may not be relevant.

1) The accusations against Aristasia took place in Europe where (whatever may be the case in America), as you so rightly point out, anti-racialist excess is not a pre-Pit phenomenon but an imported propaganda of dubious intent.

2) The instigators of these attacks were journalists of The Guardian a very left-wing newspaper, whose real motives were a dislike of Aristasia's anti-feminism and general criticisms of the degenerate society that they live to perpetuate and worsen.

The "fascist" smear is the standard ploy used against anyone who says things these people don't want said. Such people use the fact that their victims have no right of reply to use use half-truths and heavy insinuations to present them in a nasty light. Fortunately Elektraspace renders these tactics rather obsolete as the monopoly of information is broken and full truth can be made available to anyone wishing to know it.

3) Politeness and social decency are very far from the minds of these people. They are simply promoting a very limited number of inhibitions that serve purposes very far from those of social grace and charm. While it would be considered the height of bad taste to offend a person on grounds of her race or background (all bongos are aliens to us in any case), one has no compunction about riding roughshod over the phoney mores of these intellectual thugs.

4) Curiously, one of the chief objections to the Jewish people among people who do object to them would seem to be that whatever nation they are in they have another and primary loyalty.

From the Tellurian point of view this is true a fortiori of Aristasians. Whatever part of Telluria we may inhabit, our first and ultimate loyalty is to the Motherland. Tellurian nationality and race take a very distant third place (if a place at all) to the questions "Is she One of Ours?" and "Is she a friend to the Motherland".

There is a curious coda to this conversation. After these discussions, and consulation with H.E. lhi Conitessa lia Marenkhela, we proceeded to change the phrase "the manipulators of international finance" in the Speech Lesson piece as agreed. To our surprise, the phrase appears nowhere in the passage. It was misquoted by the person at the encyclopaedia (probably the same one who called our use of the flag "surreptitious"). The actual phrase is "international capital" --- one used often by Marx, who was himself Jewish.

This is particularly remarkable in view of the fact that a link is given in the encyclopaedia to the piece from which the phrase is misquoted. Any one could have checked it, but we suppose the fellow was relying on people not to --- as we, indeed, did not. Or perhaps he genuinely misread it. Just to make certain we returned to the original text in the printed edition of Children of the Void. Sure enough, the phrase does not appear there either.





Back