Prev-IndexNL-Next

Nederlog

December 5, 2012

The Dutch Universities since 1971: "Chaos on Bullshit Mountain"


At least two-thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity: idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religous or political ideas.
-- Aldous Huxley
   "Préjugé, vanité, calcul, voilà ce qui gouverne le monde. Celui qui ne connait pour règle de sa conduite que raison, vérité, sentiment, n'a presque rien de commun avec la société. C'est en lui-même qu'il doit chercher et trouver presque tout son bonheur."
   --
Chamfort



Sections

Introduction   
1.
Dutch leftist academic fascist terrorism: Morality at the UvA
2. A simple hypothesis to account for KGB, Gestapo, Asva and
     PvdA and much more

About ME/CFS


Introduction:

My title and image are taken from some nice bits from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, who illustrates very well what "bullshit" means:



Click for source

The source is the ever amusing Postmodern Generator, that also inspired my Psycho-Speak.

Today I have some more in the context of - my deconstructuin of - the postmodern destruction of the Dutch universities and the Dutch schools: These have been destroyed over the course of the last 47 years, starting in 1965 with the radical stupefaction of all levels of education below that of the universities - "The Mammoth Law" followed by the
radical stupefaction of the universities in 1971 - "The University Management Reform Law" - [N1] when the universities were effectively handed over to the student activists, and a totally insane 1 man 1 vote system was introduced, in which everyone in the Dutch universities - each of the professors, each of the students, each of the secretaries, and each of the doormen - got precisely 1 vote each, "democratcally", to cast that vote in what I yesterda called the University- and Faculty-Soviets, and thus to determine what the universities would teach, what they would and would not spend money on, whom they would hire etc. etc,:
For thoroughly sovietized is what they were, and from 1971 till 1995 the powers in the Dutch universities have been very firmly in the hands of student activists, mostly if not always from the Dutch Communist Party, who all followed orders from Party Headquarters in Amsterdam, because they were too cowardly not to  (by their own admission, in 1991, when they engaged in public cleaning acts such as Mr Stapel engages in now [N2]), and as far as the Boards of Directors of the universities were concerned nearly all from Dutch Labour or the Dutch Trade Unions.

These folks have since thoroughly poisoned the atmosphere in the Dutch universities, as I will illustrate in a moment, and brought everywhere - that is: everywhere outside the few faculties were some real talent is needed, viz mathematics, physics, and chemistry mostly - their own kind of folks into positions of power and/or pleasure, and leveled down everything, and to such an extent that almost anyone with an IQ between 100 and 115 can easily get some academic degree in Holland, by being taught  what is effectively mostly bullshit, fashionable cant, and useless or harmful pseudoscience.

The grand principle of it all is this:
   

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.
(
On Bullshit, Harry Frankfurt )
By the way, here is a selection of what I wrote about the stupefaction of Dutch education - and the first two are in Dutch, and should be amusing to intelligent readers of Dutch, and helpful to all careerists:
Before turning to the qualities of the UvA and the men who teach in it, let me quote a little from something I wrote last year because the first bit is likely to have been picked up by the Stapel Investigation Committees and the rest clarifies my position quite well

---/q

I wrote in my last Nederlog about it and ended then with these paragraphs:
I may return to this, in Dutch, because the Dutch interim-report is quite interesting, and not quite honest:

The pretense is that it is all Stapel's fault, and everybody else is not to blame, since they all are, as the Dutch universities themselves, falsely, advertise their staff to be: "excellent scientists"; while the truth is that there has been a sick, degenerate, corrupt, political and unscientific climate in very much of the Dutch universities since decades, if only because ALL Dutch universities have been explicitly run - by law, also! - as if they were democratized Soviets from 1971-1995, thereby enabling for some 25 years the careerists from the Dutch leftist parties to be nominated in positions of power or as "scientific staff" in the Dutch universities. (*)

And apart from the few studies that really require talent, these were nearly all political nominations of people with little or no interest in real science, and with strong personal and political interests in pseudoscience, fake "science", and politicized "science".

They were and are truly excellent - as frauds, as liars, as deceivers, as parasites, as whores of reason, as political pseudoscientists, as fakers, as bullshitters and as very willing betrayers of civilization, of science, of truth and of morality.
And I followed this up by a footnote in which I try to briefly explain the veritable Soviet-type of organization of ALL the Dutch universities, by law, approved by parliament in 1971, that ruled supreme from 1971 to 1995, and also put Diederik Stapel in power, quite possibly strengthened by reading my Spiegeloog-columns of 1988-1989 (the link also contain English translations), from which Mr Stapel could have learned at least four things as virtual pragmatic certainties:

1. In the University of Amsterdam and in Dutch universities at large almost no one is really interested in real science, especially not in the so called "social sciences": These were and are the province of political types who had professorships and lectureships for political or personal and not for scientific reasons.
2.
The very few who dare to protest the corruption, destruction and politicization of the Dutch universities - W.F. Hermans, Jan Blokker, Maarten Maartensz, Gerrit Komrij - will be harassed, discriminated, abused sorely, and if possible persecuted with and without law, and risks being slandered as "fascists" for years or decades, as a matter of course also
3. The Boards of Directors of the faculties and universities strongly support and protect fraudulent presudoscientists, because it is very likely they themselves made their career that way, and because these are their very own colleagues in "science", comrades in political parties, and friends since the early years at universities, where and when like found like, frauds recognized careerists and careerists found frauds as alter egos, and all got very soft very well-paying university jobs for life by impostures and frauds and usually for political reasons: for being friends and colleagues and political comrades of those who nominated them.
4. Absolutely "anything goes", in Dutch universities, provided it has the politically correct political smell; almost anyone employed in Dutch universities will protect their own excellent colleagues employed in Dutch universities; and hardly anyone employed in Dutch universities outside very few departments for which real talent and hard work are needed has any serious personal interest in real science whatsoever: They're all in it for the money, for the status, and for having a very soft very easy job for life, in one of the best paying highest status jobs there are, in Holland.

Then again, there is a real difficulty: Very few Dutch scientists, and no Dutch bureaucrats, will agree to the above, for either they have all lied and collaborated for a long time with the essential political institutions that the Dutch universities are and have been since 1971, or else they will be so junior as scientists that criticizing their elder colleagues very seriously risk their jobs and their careers, and will be landed in the dole very soon, like I have been, for the same reason: I dared criticize the decline and corruption of the Dutch universities and educational system when it still could have been stopped, if only the Dutch professors and lecturers had show any civil courage - but instead, like nearly all of their parents and grandparents during World War II, quite unlike my parents and grandparents, they collaborated with the powers that be, looked the other way, whether it concerned razzia's on Jews or fraudulence in science, and made a career by conforming and collaborating, and by smearing the few who did stand up for science and truth and civilization.

The great majority of the Dutch social scientists I have seen since the late 1960ies - hello professor Abram de Swaan, how are you?! - were bullshitters, knew they were bullshitters, and probably took a lot of private pride in being bullshitters, for it gave them the best jobs, the highest incomes, the most status, and incidental access to the media to pour out their on personal career-serving bullshit.

---/uq


As I said, the picture and title of today's Nederlog are from a few bits of
Real Science = Joy Stewart's Daily Show, that make it clear what bullshit is, and how frightfully prevalent it is these days. Indeed, it is a fair hypothesis that ordinary men and women these days read far more carefully crafted PR-bullshit and ads than they read literature or science: The media are full of middle-of-the-road bullshit anyway, often as intros and outros of carefully crafted bullshit from PR-trained political spokespesons.

But that is a wider theme. For the moment, I'll return to considering the sickness that is the UvA, the haven and heaven of the Politically Correct parasite and whores of reason who cater to the Dutch Labour Party.
 
1. Dutch leftist academic fascist terrorism: Morality at the UvA

As I said, I have been removed from the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Amsterdam in 1988 as "a dirty fascist" and as a "terrorist!", "terrorist!", "terrorist!" as was chanted and screamed by 16 academic philosophers there, in May 1988, for asking these questions, as an invited speaker:
Judge for yourself: The reason I have little to fear from Dutch laws, as long as the Dutch police state is not total, is that I provabley have said the above, provably have the family background I have (which would have made me a UvA-professor at 35 at the latest if I were a liar like almost everyone I met there, and namely because sons of real Dutch labourers, let alone a son of A True Communist Hero Of The Dutch Resistance, were admired there as if they were golden calves, and indeed very few sons of working men arrived in the university, and absolutely no one with my background), and provably am very smart and provably have said and written as I do now since 1977, and simply have never been answered, as if I were conplete and utter scum, insane or uninformed.

Indeed, as you can see from the above: I strongly defended real science, real civilization and real universities - amidst an audience of whores of reason, collaborators, careerists, and incompetents.

And I also objected - the most horrible of my crimes - to a mafia drugs dealer who was a friend and protegé of the mayor of Amsterdam, not because I am Don Quixote, but because the mayor had, without asking, put these degenerates in the house where I lived, and they threatened to murder me when I kept explaining that I could not sleep from the noise emanating from their shop. (I admit at the time I was so naive as to expect I had legal or human rights in Holland. This is an illusion: One only has
legal or human rights in Holland if one is a member of the ruling political or economic elite. Und icch bin ja nur ein Untermensch in Amsterdam: My parents must have been heroes of the Dutch resistance against Nazism so as to have me gassed for the benefit of the incomes of drugs mafiosi protected by Amsterdam mayors, clearly.)

As I also said, my father, mother, and grandfather were heroes of the communist resistance against the Nazi occupiers; my father and grandfather were arrested in the context of the Amsterdam February Strike; and I had been told virtually incessantly since remigrating to Holland in 1977, that I was "a fascist" (or "a dirty fascist", or "a fascist swine" or indeed in the heyday of marxist feminism ca. 1981 "a patriarchical swine"), namely for the crime of disagreeing that Marx was a great philosopher, with students who always turned out to have read virtually nothing by Marx [N3] (who I had read fairly well since age 14: My father was the leader of Communist Party Education in Amsterdam, and owed a considerable series of books by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin).

Also, I had started a student party that opposed the communists, radicals, squatters and street terrorists of the ASVA, that even got elected, with 1 seat, in the University Council, which made me fairly well known and intensely hated - namely as an obvious fascist (and sometimes also, but far less frequently, a terrorist).

All these things really happened, but the ASVA and Dutch Labour won the battle, stupefied all of Dutch education and all of the university - except, to a considerable extent at least, the few faculties were real science is done and mathematical gifts are needed - and always did so in the names of "equality" and "democracy", and virtually always with lies, deceptions, and impostures. 

But since they won, and since the law that guaranteed their rule in the universities was undone in 1995, again by a Parliamentary act, they had to reinvent themselves, and to rewrite histories to protect their careers.

And so it happened:

Most of them reinvented themselves, especially after 9/11/2001, as "neo-conservatives" or as "animal rightists" or as "queer activists", and they also rewrote history: Very much of the documentation about the years 1971-1995 has disappeared, indeed to such an extent that I fear this also applies to the libraries: A virtually Stalinesque edited history of the Dutch Soviet years in the university now prevails, that summarizes
1971-1995 as
(I paraphrase) "a time in which there were some minor commotions, but that were quite uninteresting".

Of course, this clean-up and falsification could happen, because the very same persons who had fought themselves into professorships by street terrorism (throwing stones at the police, occupying buildings etc.) and pretended Marxism, after 2000 were still professors and lecturers and now pretended to be conservatives, having a most excellent salary and hardly any duties, while not being cntrolled in any way whatsoever.

T
hey also had the control over the libraries, that were mostly destroyed anyway as "too expensive to keep up", and accordingly were completely at liberty to remove anything that could throw light on their leftist terrorist past.
(Incidentally, when I write "terrorists" in contexts like this, I am ironically returning the honorific I received from them, but I certainly do not wish to suggest they had as much as 1% of the courage of my parents and grandparents, who were convicted in a Dutch Nazi-court, by Dutch Nazi-judges, as "political terrorists". But I do mean to suggest most would collaborat with any regime that promised to advance them.)

But here follows a clear and recent illustration of the morality at the University of Amsterdam. It's a column by the Dutch ex-leftist journalist Theodoor Holman, and it is called Little Jokes. If you read Dutch, you'll find the original by way of the link in the title. I only translate the beginning and the end, that are JUST like what happened to me - not once but hundreds of times, all in the University of Amsterdam, all between 1977 and 1988:

----/begins
:

Little Jokes

23-07-09   11:23 uur
THEODOR HOLMAN

Not long ago, during a debate, I told an old joke: "One madman says to another madman 'I am a lamp'. The other madman says: "Then put your fingers in the outlet, for I need a little light""

Jean Tillie, professor of political science in the University of Amsterdam, member of the Dutch Labour Party, thought it was scandalous that I had spoken of two madmen. He found that very discriminating for people who were in an asylum, and furthermore he thought that I was inciting to murder, because I had let the one gentleman, uhm, "human being" I mean, who was in an asylum, say to another "human being": "Then  put your fingers in the outlet".

He thought my story distasteful and "fascistic". [N4]

(...)

"But Jean," I said, "You said in [the well-known Dutch leftist weekly] "Free Netherlands" that you were part of the kernel of [extreme leftist activists group] "Weed", that you have burglarized in the Provincial Military Command in Amsterdam, and that you have thrown stones at the police. Isn't that also fascistic?

"No, that was leftist, therefore morally right, and I repeat what I said in Free Netherlands: You are allowed to burglarize or in some other way break the law to make your point, if only you are prepared to face a judge. Then it can be resolved within the boundaries of the law." Thus professor Tillie.

----/ends

Here is George Orwell on the moral principle that moves men of the kind of Big Brother Jean - Beria - Tillie, who further their own cause and career with fascist terrorism and call people who make jokes fascists whenever they can:
"Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them, and there is almost no outrage - torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonments without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians, which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by 'our' side." (The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, vol 3, p. 419)
It is because of the existence of men like Jean Tillie that, living in Holland, which is a country that I cannot escape because of my illness, that I am glad I have no children; it is because of minds like Jean Tiliie's (I've met hundreds like him, as I said, in the context of the UvA) that I would flee Holland if only I could - and it becomes a lot clearer to me why I could be gassed in Amsterdam by my landlord who helped deal drugs with the help and signed permission of the Amsterdam mayor Van Thijn, who was in hiding as a Jewish boy at the time and the place my mother risked her life and risked torture by the SS in order to help Jewish children in hiding get falsified or stolen - by the resistance - food stamps.

In fact, Van Thijn, a leading member of the Dutch Labour Party,  also did never thank the very people who risked their lives and those of their family to save his life (people who hid Jewish children were sent to concentration camps), until being forced to by a scandal after the year 2000, when the people who risked their lives must have been long since quite dead - and then he simultaneously slandered them for being Catholics. He is that manner of a protector - the chief of the SS - of Amsterdam dealers in illegal drugs, while The Dutch Labour Party is filled to the brim with minds and personalities like Jean Tillie.

Also, I should point out that the morals of professor Tillie allow great liberties: If you can find him, and if you declare yourself a leftist, you can throw stones at him, burglarize his house, rape his boyfriend or wife (I don't know his persuasions in this regard, but Stalin's Leftists practised these revolutionary leftists principles on a large scale) and lock him, his family, and his fellow professors of the UvA, in a cosy Leftist Gulag, to get at long last some useful work out of him and his fellows.

It's all morally right, provided you declare yourself to be A Leftist. Of course, you have to be "prepared to face a judge", but then the judge may not be A Leftist, so you can do the same to him. For as I learned at the University of Amsterdam "All morality is wholly relative", and only fools like Orwell and me find that despicable, and we are not in Democratic Majority, nor Professors of the University of Amsterdam.  [N5]

2. A simple hypothesis to account for KGB, Gestapo, Asva and PvdA and much more

One important reason for me to study philosophy and psychology was that I wanted to know the explanation for the enormous amounts of concentration camps, torture, repression and abuse in both Hitler's National Socialist Germany, in Stalin's Communist Socialist Russia, in Mao's Communist China (all nominally "socialist" states) and elsewhere too: The 20th Century had an extremely great amount of very frightening police states, and a greater amount of needless human suffering than any other century.

I have for almost 15 years been called VERY many times "a (dirty) fascist" and "a terrorist" sometimes (because I am verbally very agile, and the Dutch rarely are) in the University of Amsterdam, by my political opponents, the lying careerist yahoos of the Asva, who pretended to be Marxists when that seemed to serve their career, and now pretend to be "conservatives" or "animal rightists", so as to keep their professorates.

In that very same period
I was ill but got no help, and was removed four times from the University, most often because I got no grants and no dole, repeatedly on the false pretext that I could not get the one because I received the other, and was, consequently, in 1985 thrown out of my house, while ill and not havig any income, and then was threatened with murder by drugs dealer protected by Amsterdam's mayors, aldermen, municipal police, and district attorneys, in the house I had found after being thrown out, and then was gassed by my landlord, who worked in cahoots with the dealers and the mayor, because I was not frightened into submission by their threats to murder me.

Incidentally, this all has been on line in
since 2001 and was never denied, though all the persons responsible for these events, all from Dutch Labour have known all that is in ME in Amsterdam since 1988. [N5].

Since 1988, when I was both thrown from the University of Amsterdam's Faculty of Philosophy, in May, and gassed, in September, by means of phony "repairs"  to the chimney my landlord insisted on doing, because I complained against the drugs dealers on the bottom floor, and could not be frightened into tacit submission, I have tried to find anyone interested in my being gassed, threatened with murder for several years by drugs dealers, and being thrown out of the university because of my "publicly outspoken ideas", and not getting any help while being seriously.

The Dutch, as one man, do not care: "That is your problem, not mine" is the common Dutch sentiment.

Similarly, since when I arrived at the Amsterdam dole in 1984, and protested when two doormen treated others as if they were racists, which indeed hey were, and was told - after protesting against their behavior - that my mother was "a dirty cunt whore", and I was invited "outside to be murdered and thrown in the canal", which they did because I had told the doormen I was ill, which I was forced to do, I have written letters of protest and tried to find anyone interested, to even answer my complaints.

Nothing happened, nobody cared: Ich bin ja nur ein Untermensch in Amsterdam - I am treated as if I am a sub-human: I may be gassed, I may be threatened with murder by drugs dealers protected the mayors, I may be threatened with murder by racist doormen because they are municipal civil servants, and I am not, and my complaints have not even ever been answered: See, for readers of Dutch

ME in Amsterdam
CV - deel 1 - deel 2 - secties

US readers - and I have many - may like the following, from 2009

The Willing Executioners of  The Truth About Amsterdam - 1
The ideal candidate for The Truth About Amsterdam (Foxnews) - 2

Note that I am - also in the above - strongly for the idea that

TO LEGALIZE DRUGS SOLVES MOST PROBLEMS; NOT LEGALIZING THEM  ONLY SERVES THE INTERESTS OF THE DRUGS MAFIA AND THOSE WHO PROTECT THEM: COMPARE THE PROHIBITION ERA IN THE US.

The reason it does not happen in Holland, where it could have been done since over 40 years - I heard the first such proposal in 1969, following the British Wootton Parliamentary Report, that proposed the same - must be that the political elite also exploits the illegal drugs trade they protect, for the drugs trade is in fact Holland's largest and most profitable core business, since many years. (Turnover: From 10 Billion euros to 50 Billion euros each year, supplying not only Holland but most of Western Europe, with huge profit margins, all wholly untaxed).

In any case: I found hardly anyone outside the circle of my family who cared.

I found very many who explicitly did not care at all: "Those are your problems, not mine". (I am and was talking about the corruption of education, the corruption of the Dutch law, the fact that I have been threatened with murder by drugs dealers who are protected by theb mayor of Amsterdam, and then by the next, and the next, and the next .... but the Dutch do not care.)

Hence, since I wanted to know what is the reason there have been and are so many concentration camps in the world, and why there are so few humane and so many inhuman, plainly stupid, or sadistically sick and eagerly malicious human beings, I have arrived at these two hypotheses
  1. There are much more unintelligent than intellligent folks, and much more bad than good folks (also in terms of their own norms: Most men are bad men in terms of their own publicly pretended moral norms), and the two are independent. See ME+me: A realistic numerical look at human morality + 12 references
  2. There is a subset of psychopaths and/or sadists, who select and help each other, and who find it very easy to rise in political parties, religions, and corporate management, precisely because for them "Anything goes!", although they always pretend to be on the side of the underdog, the mistreated, and the repressed, at least as long as these can be paraded as silent pretexts, in the way dictators love being photographed with cute small children.
Allow me to point out to you - though I fully expect that most Dutchmen will tell me I have just shown again once more I am a fascist and a terrorist, since this is the answer I have been given very many times since 1977 whenever I said something that I had deeply considered and had a legal right to at least express - that neither hypothesis is spectacularly radical:

As to 1: Even now, in leveled Holland, fewer people attend university than not, and it is widely admitted intelligence in any pronounced sense is more rare than its absence.

Besides, unlike the leftist fascists - I'll explain that  terminology in a footnote [N7] and see the moral Leftist Servant of Mankind above - from the University of Amsterdam, I insist that talent or its lack is almost wholly genetic (I have been quite a few times called "a fascist" by former colleagues of Diederik Stapel), and therefore also not something one can fairly praise or blame people for, as no one had any say in being born, or in being born with such - lack of - talents one is born with. (I am also 1.95 m without any choice or merit.)

It's the same with human badness: Most men believe or at least act as if any one who does not belong to their own family, friends, nation or race therefore is somehow humanly inferior and no good, and most religions insist that a large part of mankind belongs to sinners who deserve to go to hell, or to a lower caste that must do all heavy labour.

The points where my hypotheses differ from similar ones by others are especially these: I am no racist, I don't believe in castes, I am not religious, and I don't believe in religious sin - but like Huxley I do believe that
At least two-thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity: idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religous or political ideas.
and like Huxley and Russell I attach great importance to sheer human intelligence, since it seems to me, as it seemed to them, that we are mere apes, and very cruel ones at that, without our powers of rational thought:
"Vice is man's nature: virtue is a habit - or a mask."
   (Hazlitt, Characteristics)
"If mankind had wished for what is right, they might have had it long ago. The theory is plain enough; but they are prone to mischief, "to every good work reprobate."
   (Hazlitt, On the pleasure of hating)
As to 2: The vast majority of mankind knows far less than I do about the horrors that happened in concentration camps, that were all without any rational justification - where I use "ration justification" in the sense: "serving an end that could not have been served better by other means".

Their real - human all too human - justifications were always malice or sadism, joined to the desire to make an example and to frighten a population:

Sadism: pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others or from causing others pain or misery.

The term 'sadism' is derived from the Marquis de Sade, who much exulted in sexual pleasure derived from the infliction of pain and of cruelty to others, and who wrote many books in praise of sadism, especially in the defined sexual sense.

When sadism is defined without necessary involvement of sexual pleasure, but in effect as the human-all-too-human joys derived from malice, it may be seen that sadism, thus defined, accounts for many human acts, especially against those whom the perpetrators dislike, consider as enemies, or believe to be inferior.

Indeed, there is much more sadism in human beings than  most are willing to admit: Very many people derive much pleasure from being in positions of power and by hurting, denigrating, demeaning or displeasing others. It probably does not arouse most of them sexually, but they wouldn't do it if it did not please them. And this kind of pleasure seems to be one of the strongest motivators of those who desire to be boss: To let others feel they are inferior.

"We never hurt each other but by error or by malice." 
   (Sir Robert Chambers, possibly inspired by Dr. Johnson)

Together with stupidity, sadism explains two famous and mostly correct observations on history:

"History is little else but the register of the crimes, follies and misfortunes of mankind"
   (Gibbon)

"Presque toute l'Histoire n'est qu'une suite d'horreurs."
   (Chamfort)

For clearly most of the harm that human beings have done to human beings - millions upon millions killed, tortured, raped, exploited, starved, persecuted - was done on purpose, and willingly, and for the noblest sounding moral pretexts.

It was the same with my maltreatment in Amsterdam, by the sick sadists in the Board of Directors and the Faculty of Philosophy, and by the caretakers of the mafia that are (or were) mayor, alderman, policeman or district attorney there - for it is true that I am quite clearly, and especially when I start speaking, not quite like other men, for which reason I am different, whence, in common minds, "Anything goes", especially in Holland, where the one moral law is "Act normal, for then you act mad enough!".

As I indicated, the points where my hypotheses differ from similar ones by others may be a bit difficult to rationally estimate, though in the case of hypothesis (2) it turns out I agree most with Christian theologians and with people like Milgram, Kohlberg, and Goffman, and also with Bertrand Russell and Aldous Huxley, that was all so well expressed by Hazlitt:

"If mankind had wished for what is right, they might have had it long ago. The theory is plain enough; but they are prone to mischief, "to every good work reprobate."
   (Hazlitt, On the pleasure of hating)
Malice is usually done on purpose, with a moral pretext, but to satisfy the feelings of inferiority, revenge, or group solidarities by its perpetrators.

And what I have definitely learned is that at most 1 in 10,000 will act for a moral principle they mouthed often, if they run personal risks, for nearly all live according to Ovid's observation that most practice
daily video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor; nearly all judge by groupthinking rather than by what they could find out for themselves; nearly all follow authorities, also if these authorities clearly are mere social roles without any good intellectual or moral foundations; nearly all are followers rather than leaders; nearly all are conformists in nearly all things, also where there is no social pressure to conform (but a mere fashion); and nearly all are quite willing to offend, scold, harm, or kill whoever does not belong to the groups they believe themselves to belong to, usually also as a matter of course: He is not one of us - therefore anything is permitted.

Also, I have found - being ill and mostly defenseless - a frightening proportion of sanctimonious sadists and utter moral hypocrites.

---

[N1] The cynical but on the whole factually correct point of both the Mammoth Law (Dutch: "Mammoet-wet") and the "University Management Reform Law" (Dutch: "WUB") seems to have been this, all explicitly in the name of "democracy" and "equality" and "progressive values" and "social relevance":

Offer pre-university education that was of no use real use of anyone with an IQ over 115, and likewise offer a university education in all studies but mathematics, physics, chemistry, medicine and perhaps a few others that was of no real use to
anyone with an IQ over 115. (I was not allowed to the grammar school in 1962, with an IQ over 150, "because his father is a house painter" - actually: because his father is a communist - so I was forced to go to a lower level school that I walked out of in 1967, having seen the new Mammoth school books, saying "this is fit for morons only", so I do know about both the schools and the universities. Already in 1967 it was a frightful drop in then level of difficulty.)

The rationale? It must be presumed that those in power at the time were quite a lot smarter than what corresponds with an IQ of 115, and reckoned along the following lines: "First, we get very popular with the people, if we give them chances to get diplomas and degrees they couldn't possibly get before. Second, it makes the people  almost totally manipulable: We halved all courses, we scratched many, including history, and we teach them very little. They will never be able to know what they missed. Third, yes of course there will be incompetent medical doctors, engineers, school teachers etc. - but thank God that is of no danger to our very find own kind the political and economic Dutch elite: The gifted sons and daughters of the elite get special home education, may study at the best foreign universities. There will be a stupefied population, who believe they are "academically educated" with a masters in "European Studies" and such, but stupid ignorant people are much easier to control.

Note that the Dutch political elite is a self-reproducing elite since Napoleon was defeated: The same family names can be found to rise to prominence again and again, just as the same family industries - Philips, C&A, Unilever, Shell, some banks until very recently - made by far the most profits for several generations.

And so it went... Am I too cynical? (See Edward Bernays - a faithful eager servant of the rich and the mighty in the US: His "Propaganda" is quite revealing, if one has an IQ over 130. He was a very cynical, manipulative and sadistic sort of con man, on an industrial scale, who also made lying, deceiving, manipulation, and misinformation an industry, later named "PR", who seems to have been quite proud showing this off to a few others, on the - sound - understanding that the few who could see through it and protest would never be taken serious.)

I feari I might be a tiny bit cynical only to the extent that I present it as a conscious plan - though I would not be amazed at all if it was done consciously. Apart from that, so it went, and nobody in the ruling economical or political elite cared one bit, although anybody with an IQ over 130 could see the dangers. Indeed, people like W.F. Hemans, R. Kousbroek, G. Komrij, J. Blokker, J. Staal, P. Wesley, dr. Rentes de Carvalho and a few others (very probably all thus afflicted) did publicly protest, and honorably and sensibky so. They were publicly portrayed as "right-wing elitarians", who were "anti-democrats", while those in the universities who protested were pestered constantly until they left.

Incidentally: The best book I know about this is "The Cult of the Expert" by Brian J. Ford, of 1981, still available on the internet. Mr. Ford is an English research scientist and a member of Mensa, and diagnosed it all quite accurately 30 years ago, for the same things happened in England, the US and most Western European countries, which is indeed the reason I gave my cynical explanation: A stupefied population is in the interest of any power elite that does not mean well - and frankly "
power elite that does mean well" is a contradiction in terms, as history shows (now no longer taught).

One reason Ford's book is so convincing is that he cites examinations for nominally  the same 11+ qualifications of the 1970ies, of the 1930ies and of the 1850ies. It is likely that what all 11+ candidates of 1856 were supposed to be able to do, required a B.A. in mathematics in 1978, and it is perfectly evident that the levels of examined competences dropped frightfully. (Richard Feynman also complained in this way, about the "New Mathematics", which was not mathematics. He got no hearing, and so it is hardly surprising that when I protested in Norway in 1975 nobody was interested.)

One simple example for Dutchmen: From 1865 till 1965 the Dutch education was quite good, and in the highest pre-university schools - "HBS" and "gymnasium" - covered 3 (HBS) or 5 (gymnasium) foreign languages.  There were written examinations in ca.  subjects, such as Dutch, English, French, German, Latin, Greek, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, history, geography as subjects all had to be examined in writing and orally, and some others depending. It was this that gave access to the universities until 1967. Since then, one could gain admittance with six written exams, all on a much lower level than before, indeed with the predictable consequences that (1) very many more got formally "qualified" to enter universities, and (2) the university courses were very much simplified and shortened so as to provide most who entered with a degree: Mandarins with an  IQ of 115.


[N2] In a Dutch book entitled "Alles moest anders", that is by and large a bunch of egregious lies by people who made social careers by egreguous ying anhd posturing. The one convincing exception is not Dutch but Chech: She seems the only honest person in the book, and indeed all others made fine careers, and are comparatively rich.

Incidentally, all but that woman and perhaps one other are each and all excellent examples of what is meant by "psychopaths in sheep's clothing" aka covert-aggressive sadists: The kind of intriguer, manipulator and deceiver without a conscience and with a hidden personal agenda who excels at practical politics. (Nurse Ratchet in Kesey's "One flew over the cuckoo's nest" is a fictional example.)

[N3]
Also a real fact: I have never met any student who really had read Marx, except for small parts, though I have met many who pretended they did. I really had, and indeed have read since rather a lot that relates to it (such as Steedman's "Marx after Sraffa" and Morishima's "Marx Economic", that both require more mathematics than most students I have met in my life understood), which I explain by the fact that I am a born intellectual, with a very high intelligence, which most people, including almost all  academics I have met, were not. Also, as I have said before, I consider a very high intelligence a highly desirable human characteristic, both in individuals and for the purpose of doing real science and making a real civilization, but I do not consider it a  personal merit: I was born that way, and never had anything to do with it.

One of the great disappointments in my life is that I had hoped to meet men or women like myself in university. It never happened, and from the many professors I have met in the UvA only three struck me as genuinely intelligent: Jon Dorling, Paul Vitanyi and Peter Molenaar. The rest are what I call the halfly intelligent: Not necessarily stupid, but neither intellectually fast nor really interested, though they pretend to be. (See "Real Science = Joy" in case you're interested.)

[N4] The psychological abberations of this gentlemen are well and clearly explained in this article
And by the way: I have met hundreds of such psychopaths in the UvA, which is in practice for the most part an extension of The Dutch Labour Part PvdA, that to the best of my knowledge only accepts persons with this kind of personality as candidates for high offices, like aldermen, mayor, parliamentarian, minister, or council member: All are covert-aggressive sadist manipulators, which indeed explains why I was so often called "a fascist" in the University of Amsterdam, most often because I insisted truth exists or said the education I and everybody else received was a shame. (They really liked doing it, is the main reason. Other evidently sadistic letters are the letters which which I was removed: The psychopathic sadist Verhoeven, and the psychopathic sadists that made up the Board of Directors, lead by the frightful swine - also in appearance - Gevers.)

Indeed, a fine hypothesis to account - in principle: why do these men and women spout such horrible gibberish, evidently lie so much, and propose clearly idiotic policies - for very much that happens and happened the last 40 years in Dutch politics, not only in the Dutch Labour Party, is this:
  • The Dutch political leaders in almost all parties are psychopaths in sheep's clothing; know they are, though very probably not in those terms, but rather in self-flattering terms like "high achiever", "alpha male" or "feminist leader", and who select both their staff and their colleagues from the same group of folks born without a real conscience but with considerable ability of pretending anything that serves their personal interests.
In fact, this was just the same as it was under Stalin: Stalin was a psychopath who surrounded himself with psychopaths, like Yagoda, Beria, Yezhov, Malenkov, Abakumov, Molotov etc.

Incidentally, there is a fairly easy way to get rid of most of them, which should be applied, but will probably need a revolution: Require that whoever pretends to be capable to lead millions of human beings, is provably the best in terms of education (to be tested not by degrees but by a real examination) and intellectual competence (minimal IQ: 140). This would probably get rid of everybody in both houses of parliament in Holland.

In order not to be misunderstood: I do not suggest highly intelligent persons are necessarily good or useful persons. Not at all - there have been some very smart real bastards. (Stalin is one example, Beria another. I do not think either was a genius in any useful sense, but both were very smart. And please not again that according to what was taught for 25 years in the University of Amsterdam both men are the equivalent of each professor of the UvA and of each Dutch political leader.)

I do suggest that the minimal requirement to lead millions is that you can understand  logical implications without any trouble; that you do have an extensive knowledge of history and real science, namely to know what is humanly possible, and use that as guidance for your ownn policies; and that you are an evident good speaker and writer (and not a PR-educated media-clown with memorized lists of talking points mechanically repeated ad nauseam).

This is the same sort of requirement one should make of persons who are to be one's doctor: That they are truly intelligent, and that they really know medical science. (But I have met postmodernistically educated GPs in Amsterdam who seemed to talk and reason to me as if their IQs were less than 115, and who clearly had no grasp of science, civilization and history. For Dutchies: "huishoudschool-niveau, stand 1962".)

[N5] ME in Amsterdam is on line since 2001, and parts were on line from 1997. I have only once brought this under the attention of a Dutch journalist, Jos Verlaan, for which see my CV, but the treatment I got from this collaborator of Dutch Labour was quite shockingly immoral and sadistic.

I have brought it under the attention of: Three Amsterdam mayors; at least 20 Amsterdam alderman; all Amsterdam council members of 2002; two Amsterdam Ombudsmen; 4 National Ombudsmen; 3 Amsterdam district attorneys; 1 advocate general; the Amsterdam court; 3 Amsterdan commissioners of police; at least 10 Amsterdam policement; and at least 100 Amsterdam and Dutch so called "civil servants".

The general response in Amsterdam and Holland was none: Complete silence. Meanwhile, every year, according to the Dutch Parliamentary Committee Van Traa, at least 10 Billion dollars, merely in soft drugs, mostly in Amsterdam, have been turned over.

I fully trust all those mentioned are extremely rich, and very honorable men,

Meanwhile, it is also true that I do fear for my life - and in fact, that was an important reason to set up my site: There are very many drugs related murders in and around Amsterdam that absolutely never get solved. And I have been very credibly and repeatedly threatened with murder by the dealers in both soft and hard drugs protected mayor Van Thijn - whose life my mother helped save in 1944, risking her own life - and by whose personal permission and above whose signature these criminals were allowed to set up shop in the house I lived, without me or my neighbours having any voice in it, weil in Amsterdam bin ich ja nur ein Untermensch.

Then again, I must assume that Mr Van Thijn is an honorable and rational man, and his refusal to answer, receive, see, write or phone with me - knowing he had superficially known my parents - has a good rational reason, on which I sincerely congratulate himself and his family: my guess is that the Van Thijn family somewhere has a stash of very many millions, I would guess in diamonds: It is most incredible to me that men of his moral, human and mental calibre, when given the chance to demand a percentage of a yearly turnover of billions of euros each year says "O no, I don't do such things! I am a noble politician who is not interested in money, and especially not if this is tens or hundreds of millions each year".

In fact, most Dutchmen I asked - "if you were mayor, and your signature is required for coffeeshops in soft drugs, so that you know where and who they are, would you not somehow try to get a percentage of the trade?!" - all said "of course I would", though it is also fair to add that the widely shared conviction in Holland is that soft drugs are not dangerous nor addictive.

I agree with the conviction - but I insist drugs are probably not legalized in Holland, although they could have been, is that not legalizing drugs is very profitable for some Dutch politicians, since decades also.

In fact: To get a percentage is very easy, if one is a mayor or a high ranking municipal official: When I was helping out a foundation which allowed the dealing of soft drugs in its premises, I got a personal invitation, tendered from City Hall, to go see a high ranking Amsterdam civil servant in the Amsterdam Municipal Tax Office, and was proposed by him - who believed I was a drugs dealer -  that I pay them 250.000 guilders "so that you and I can do our work  without problems".

Then again, it is very likely that the great majority of Dutchmen - see Kohlberg - are sincerely convinced the people from my family are thoroughly insane: Gifted, not afraid, able to get rich by dealing soft drugs - and you refuse?!

Added December 6, 2012: I forgot this yesterday, though I had intended to include it:

Some persons get a strong emotional kick out of calling other people "a fascist". Professor Tillie, presumably A Leftist Revolutionary in his own estimate (forget it Jean: Compared with my father and some of his communist friends, true revolutionaries all, you are a moral infinitesimal and a major impostor and fraud, who founded a career on slandering anyone who contradicts you, indeed just like the leftist fascists and terrorists from the ASVA did: Sick degenerate careerist yahoos all, also willing - no: eager (*) - betrayers of civilization, science and humanity) is one of the kind, of which I have seen and heard many in Holland, but there indeed also is the rightist extremist Bill O'Reilly of Fox News: I have seen him called professor Richard Dawkins "a fascist"; call the president of the US atheists "a fascist"; and also a third person whose name I forgot, who was as little "a fascist" as the other two.

It would be nice - in a bitter but revealing way - if someone puts these O'Reily choice bits on video, if only because it is clearly sick and something Mr O'Reilly gets a kick out of. (He is too intelligent to believe his own imputations, indeed like those who called me a fascist because I disagreed with them about science, truth and morality.)

[N6] Am I satirizing Mr Tillie? God forbid, reader: There are - as Stalin's and Mao's leftist states show - a 100.000 Tillies (conservative estimate) for one man like my father (very probably "a political terrorist" in the moral metric of a mind like professor Jean Beria Tillich : My father was convicted by Dutch judges in the year 1941 as such) but it's also quite true professor Tillie may have an IQ of 102 and may regard himself as the equal of that famous leftist liberator Lavrenti Beria. (I really don't know, except that I have briefly met and seen and heard hundreds of Mr Tillies in the University of Amsterdam, and they all insisted that "all men are of equal value", and that "everybody knows that truth does not exist" - so when I say that it seems to me that professor Tilly is of equal value as Beria, I only apply what I have learned in the University of Amsterdam where professor Tillie instructs Holland's youth in what he regards as the science of politics.).

[N7] There are several reason for the combination "leftist fascism". I will not enter into them all here and now, but two are that (1) I have been very many times called "a fascist" by people who posed as leftists (and maybe were: I can't see inside their minds, and most certainly they were far more stupid and ignorant than I am, and clearly loved offending me), while (2) the type of psychopath or sadist I have in mind, that flourishes so very well in Dutch Labour, but indeed also in the US GOP (see above, Jon Stewart) does tend to combine a pretense of immense good will for "the common people" with a great facility of rising in corporate organizations and using any kind of institution for their own advancement, regardless of the consequences to others.

(*) The "no eager" in [N6] is added because I think that a main motive of very many - not all - "leftist" revolutionaries in the universities, that I have seen in Holland, at least, is envy, namely of those who, unlike them, have or had a real intellectual or artistic talent. An important motive of many of these folks was:  "Nobody has the right to be better than we are - better off financially, more powerful, more intelligent, or more gifted: Let's destroy everyone who excels us, so that we can excel all." (In fact, I first got aware of this in May 1968, in revolutionary Paris, when I found that "the revolutionary students" were not at all like my - genuinely - marxist parents, had completely different motives, and all got noticeably horny from the sight of a media-camera. This was also the event that started my giving up Marxism, a process I had finished by the autumn of 1970, also helped by books by Bertrand Russell, Evert Beth, Alfred Tarski, and Aristotle, and by my experiences as the leader of a municipal Sleep-In in the summer of 1970, when I first ran into the drugs-corruption of the aldermen of Amsterdam, which was then starting as well, and to which my report about the Sleep-In may have contributed: I made it clear there were great chances of making much money with illegal drugs by corruption ...
and soon was fired in the name of "Mayor and aldermen of the City of Amsterdam", who ever since then have been drugs corrupt. I was also denied access, again
in the name of "Mayor and aldermen of the City of Amsterdam", to any Sleep-In in Amsterdam, of which there were 3 in 1970, because the staff - mostly students, making money in the summer - trusted me and thought I had done a really good job. So I have excellent grounds to know that Mayor and aldermen of the City of Amsterdam have been very willingly corrupted by drugs money since 1971. It was also from the Sleep-Ins that the selling of soft drugs to foreigners started, as a official policy of Mayor and aldermen of the City of Amsterdam, though I grant that, at that time, that was the least unreasonable option, and I know that I bought the supplies for it on the illegal drugs market, with money provided by Mayor and aldermen of the City of Amsterdam for that purpose: They knew, they knew the costs, they provided the money, they knew the profit margins, which at the time was 50% or more. The profits in 1970 were used to fund the losses on the Sleep-In.)
----

Backgrounds:

December 6, 2012: I have straightened out the links today - 23.45 - and apologize for having to work with two horribly bugged editors: Composer and KompoZer. Better there is not on GNU/Linux/Ubuntu, which is a much better OS than Windows, but for me meanwhile is thus: All the time I save by using
GNU/Linux/Ubuntu I loose because of these truly awful editors, to which I am condemned on this OS, with the site I have. Besides, I still have problematic eyes - keratoconjunctivitis sicca- which makes things even more difficult for me. I do what I can, but not what I want, alas.

About ME/CFS (that I prefer to call M.E.: The "/CFS" is added to facilitate search machines) which is a disease I have since 1.1.1979:
1. Anthony Komarof

Ten discoveries about the biology of CFS(pdf)

2. Malcolm Hooper THE MENTAL HEALTH MOVEMENT:  
PERSECUTION OF PATIENTS?
3. Hillary Johnson

The Why  (currently not available)

4. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2003)
5. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2011)
6. Eleanor Stein

Clinical Guidelines for Psychiatrists (pdf)

7. William Clifford The Ethics of Belief
8. Malcolm Hooper Magical Medicine (pdf)
9.
Maarten Maartensz
Resources about ME/CFS
(more resources, by many)



       home - index - summaries - mail