Dear Mr. Mondo:

Thank you for your letter of 22 September. I am re-sending the packet of articles returned to me by the post. When you unwrap it, you will note the original mailing cover.

In regard to Zündel and Irving, their egotism is such that they don't want to collaborate with any persons of competence, for they fear to be eclipsed by others' talents. A proper leader puts those talents to use on behalf of his cause, for the leader is the 'first servant' of his cause. Great men work on behalf of great causes, and 'the cult of the personality' can only apply to those whose personalities are worth cultivating. 'Mini' Mussolinis need not apply.

I would recommend your reading Elmer Pendell's "Sex Versus Civilization", for it addresses eugenics in a non-racial context. I think he could solve many of your puzzles He even offers a voluntary negative eugenics programme for the gradual improvement of society's breeding stock. Pendell's reading of the history of fallen civilizations mentions the 'institutionalization of sentimentality', once the makers of civilization (the problem-solvers) have made things safe for mental defectives. Liberalism, Communism and Christianity would be examples of such institutionalized sentimentality, which confers 'rights' on the unfit and 'duties' on the fit, so as to assure the accelerating multiplication of the unfit (the problem-makers).

You propose a valid and rational solution to mankind's problems . Those people over the ages who have tried to be mankind's saviors, rather than mischief-makers, have proposed similar ideologies and plans for the preservation or societies and races. The fact that races have survived their willful disregard of such well-intended ideologies is a factor of nature, rather than human will and intellect. It is nature's rhythm of predator and prey, which are brought into balance whenever one species exceeds the other in population growth.

As I see it, Dynasophy will fail to preserve races, as well as White civilization. Ideologies can outlast biology, even though their creators had intended them to preserve their particular species of humanoid, just as the law of gravity applies to one and all. Let us ask a lemming to consider the rational logic of his urgent desire to go swimming with the mob. You may have attempted this futile task yourself with featherless bipeds, to no avail. Try telling a love-struck idiot that the woman of his life is in every way a liability to him, one can use every fact which he can observe, and every logical explanation of what those facts mean for him, but you will generally find that the idiot proceeds like a moth to a flame, and immolates himself.

We find ourselves in a situation similar to a drunken orgy for alcoholics on the behalf of criminal bootleggers. This is the Zeitgeist or spirit of the age. In such a time, a message of sobriety will not heeded, no matter loud one can shout it. Desires are rarely, if ever, rational. Until one desires to survive, there is no use offering him all the means necessary for his survival. One colleague of mine went to quite a bit of effort composing a programme for the salvation of White South Africa. He advanced ideas for encouraging White immigration, etc. Aside from a polite acknowledgement of his suggestions from the South African government, no such changes were made. Since I had lived in White-ruled southern Africa, I explained that the White governments are not pro-White, so advancing pro-White policies is an exercise in futility.

Racial separation is and has been occurring in North America. It is called "White-flight". Obviously, this policy of racial retreat will be ineffective, if it is not combined with "White fight" to exclude non-Whites from our livingspace. Obviously, there is a limit to the space we have available for this retreat, so flight alone is no solution. The point is that people prefer to be with their own kind. In India, where there are no Whites, unless they come from other counties, one sees brown mongrels living within the same cities and towns. As you mention, Parsees, Sikhs, Moslems, Hindus of different castes keep to themselves. Social contact is mainly doing business and walking down the same streets. The entire society is divided into exclusive groups of "them" and "us", and people are fully conscious of their own ethnic, religious and communal identities. The peoples of the Balkans also share the same biology, but they strongly identify themselves with their fellow Serbs, Croats, Albanians and even Moslems, which is neither a nationality nor an ethnic group, except in Bosnia. People always seem to be combining and separating in an often violent sort of dance.

Education can be used to preserve or to destroy races and ethnic groups, along with ideologies and religions. When alien influence predominates, education destroys; when people are educated by their own kind, education can preserve.

The major semitic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) claim that man is exempt from natural laws, since their big sky-jew can feed his 'sheep' or starve then as he chooses. Believers in such religions consider this to be reality, not over-population, over-logging and over-grazing, over-fishing, etc.

Perhaps I did not mention that my Master's thesis encompassed the work of F.S.C. Northrop who devoted seven or so books advocating a universal morality for mankind. His reasoning was simple: by discovering what "is", man can derive a true basis for what "ought" to be done, in accordance with reality. Although he received major financial backing for his idea and his books are to be found in university and college libraries around the world, the response was nil, except for one thesis written by a graduate student in International Relations (myself). The simple truth is that men are so different, even within the same races and ethnic groups, that they cannot agree on either facts or 'reality'. Since there is no general agreement on what "is", there cannot be any agreement on what "ought" to be. Read "Two Worlds" by C.P. Snow.

As we learn through observation, the vast majority of humanoids don't give a damn for what "is", as long as it feels good for the moment. If you tell a turd-worlder that his family is causing the depletion of natural resources on the land he depends upon for his survival; that his livestock are destroying the topsoil, along with his firewood cutting, he will do nothing to change his ways (1) because he thinks only of himself, as do all the rest of his people, and (2) because his god will provide or not, just as he sees fit. I've heard such arguments from the Chad in Africa to Chimbote, Peru.

The only people who seem to limit their numbers out of social responsibility are Whites. This means that more space and resources are available to the mindlessly multiplying non-Whites. As one president of Mexico proclaimed: "To govern is to populate!" He was certainly not referring to Mexico, but to "Aztlan", the lost territories of North America which the mexo-mestizos want to re-annex. The same programme is evident in Canada, where Whites do not reproduce and the coloureds invade and multiply.

If you are willing to sacrifice the White race on behalf of an ideology of 'survival of the fittest', we then must consider one's time-frame. The Hindus think in terms of one hundred thousand years or more in every time cycle. The Chinese think in terms of thousand year periods. Judeo-capitalists think in terms of quarterly balances. If one is positing a philosophy of cosmic truth, as Dynasophy seems to do, then changes occurring within our own life-spans are discountable, for all of us are actors on the cosmic stage who carry out our roles according to our cosmic scripts and genetically-encoded play directions. One proponent of eugenics said, if, by definition, the fit will survive. If they don't, then no one will survive."

What I strive to accomplish is finite and linked to my own human existence. Through ny finite efforts, I hope to influence the infinite on behalf of those whose survival I hold dear in the present and in the future. The past heros are still present in our genes, if we care to heed them. When one does not care, no appeal to reason can change his behavior. That is the present situation, but all situations change, and views can change with them, if one has the ability to see and comprehend the nature of those changes. Principles can exist without people to perceive or enunciate them.

Principles need no advocates nor defenders. Our adherence to valid principles defends us and our adherence to invalid principles destroys us. It is a matter of preference, not logic, which occurs most often in human nature. For whatever reasons, many people are motivated by masochism and self-destructive urges which they fulfill unconsciously, but consistently. Christians and alcoholics are paragons of self-abnegation and self-destruction, and so are liberals. Religions do not yield to facts nor to reason, as we have seen. Reason is the servant of emotion and emotion is the servant of instinct. When we strive to influence 'mankind' by reason, we are attempting to fill a container by using the small end of the funnel.

However they might strive, the fit cannot preserve the unfit; the problem-solvers cannot preserve the infinitely-multiplying problem-makers. To use a Randian analogy , Atlas will either shrug off his parasitic burden or he will collapse beneath it. Atlas may survive, but the problem-makers, the unfit and the parasitic will not. One writer observed that man never uses his reason to avoid crises. He merely survives, like other 'dumb' creatures. He also observed that many creatures including dinosaurs and dodos do not survive. There is no guarantee. Unless you see a financial profit in Dynasophy, my advice is to let Nature take her course, and enjoy life while you can. I strive because my cause is more immediate.

ORION

Eric Thomson