Wednesday, November 3, 2021

How evil flourished then and does again now

Clifford D. May wrote an article about Bernard-Henri Levy’s book (and films) in which the author described the misery he witnessed around the world during his travels.

 

An acknowledged self-promoter, Levy attributed to himself the character of being “Baudelairean,” about which Clifford May said: “I don’t know what that means either.” Well, that’s too bad because, had May tried to be informed about what that is, he would have given his readers a much richer description of Levy, as well as the subjects he discussed in his book and films.

 

“Baudelairean” refers to Charles Baudelaire, a nineteenth century French poet and essayist who lived a difficult family life, and sought to escape his personal misery as well as that of his country (caught in the throes of the Industrial Revolution’s early years) by travelling abroad where he witnessed an equal amount of human misery, but also the pristine beauty of the Middle East that was endlessly celebrated by the romantics of nineteenth century Europe.

 

Baudelaire met and befriended Jean Nicolas Rimbaud, a fellow traveler, commodity trader and arms dealer who inspired the Hollywood series Rambo. All of that contributed to the insight that motivated Baudelaire to write and compile his work into a book he called “Les Fleurs du Mal,” which was translated literally as “The Flowers of Evil,” but I would have translated as the flowering of evil because it better reflects the content of the book.

 

Thus, you can see why Bernard-Henri Levy saw similarities between himself and Charles Baudelaire. You can also detect something crucial about the Levy character. It is the pessimism that led him to conclude the Jewish ideology is so irredeemable, the only way the Jews will be saved, is to have humanity develop an unquestionable love for them, and never try to understand why.

 

Instead of us retaining any of that, here is what Clifford May wants us to retain about Bernard-Henri Levy (BHL) and his escapades:

 

“We should give credit where credit is due: BHL uses his celebrity to bring attention to people and places in severe distress yet ignored by the major media, politicians and bureaucrats often referred to as ‘the international community’”.

 

This is the moment when we need to realize how loaded the word “credit” is, and how much it can contribute to the distortion of reality. And so, to give the word itself the credit it is due, we need to recall the misery of the most unimaginable kind, that has befallen Libya because BHL used his celebrity to bring attention to a non-existent distress in that country.

 

Not only did the people of Libya suffer horrendous pain, but so did their immediate neighbors, and so did countries as far away as Nigeria where groups such as Boko Haram and the Fula people that were never heard from before, were heard from now. They suddenly appeared on the scene armed with weapons that came from Libya’s arsenal, now broken into, and looted of its deadly content that was sold all over Africa, including to Nigeria’s Fulani whom Clifford May accuses of despicable crimes. He does not associate BHL with any of those crimes – not even indirectly – but praises him for bringing the horrors of Nigeria to the attention of the international community.

 

This is a display of the Jewish method for causing a calamity and blaming it, not on the root causes which can easily be traced to the Jews and to Israel’s activities in Africa and elsewhere, but on the victims who bear the brunt of its consequences. Indeed, Clifford May neglected to mention that the calamities of Africa were due not only to what Levy brought to Libya, but also what Israel brought to Nigeria.

 

In fact, it happened that when oil was discovered in Nigeria, the only thing that the poor people did in response to being kept away from the wealth pouring into the country, was to steal some of the oil when they could, and sell it for a few dollars to buy food for their families. This being the sort of thing that Israel’s merchants of death look for, they offered to sell American-made helicopter gunships to Nigeria so that the country can hunt the poor people (most of whom turned out to be Muslims) and kill them. That’s what prompted the Boko Haram and Fulani violent movements to take roots in Nigeria.

 

Needless to remind the readers that Israel receives about 4 billion dollars-worth of the newest weapons from America every year. It decommissions this much-worth of the older equipment, sells it to buyers in Africa, Asia and Latin America, and uses the money to carry out its genocidal policy in Palestine. And this is how America’s hand drips with the blood, not only of the Palestinians, but also that of the Africans, Asians and Latin Americans. Like it or not, Israel carries the bloody hand of America everywhere it goes to sell surplus American instruments of death.

 

Clifford May’s article goes on like that for a while longer, always assuming that the image of Bernard-Henri Levy is being further polished when in reality, it is being further stained.

 

This happens because the article brings into focus how Levy’s activities leverage the might of America and the other Western nations, doing damage to the emerging world by exploiting it more subtly than when the colonial powers were doing the dirty work for themselves, and doing it openly.

 

It must be said again that the more things change the more they stay the same except that they become more devious. And this happens to be the chief reason why emerging nations, containing billions of people, see in China a breath of fresh air they can count on to develop without being eaten alive like the bad old days.