And Just Who are the Useless Eaters?

MC’s latest essay looks beyond the Holocaust to consider the other programs of mass murder during the 20th century, and the general tendency of socialism to engineer slaughter on an industrial scale.

Famine in the USSR, 1933. Areas of most disastrous famine are marked with black. Explanation of symbols on the map:

A   grain-consuming regions
B   grain-producing regions.
C   former land of Don, Kuban and Terek cossacks
C1   former land of Ural and Orenburg cossacks
 

And Just Who are the Useless Eaters?

by MC

The killing did not start immediately. The Nazis came to power in 1933 and the world watched in awe as they imposed a new kind of socialism on Germany. The world had watched Marx-Leninism from 1917, and had viewed the killing sprees of the Bolsheviks in much the same detached way as we read about Boko Haram murders and kidnappers in Nigeria. “Bring back our girls” or else…

It was a very insubstantial ‘else’. As in all things, the red line is elastic.

The ‘good men’ of the Administration had other priorities.

The actual killings started in earnest some five years later, with the extermination of ‘useless eaters’ in the true socialist pattern. This idea had been kicked around in the discussions of Fabians and Liberal/socialist/progressive groups since their foundation. The National Socialists in Germany went ahead and started a practical process of elimination of the eugenically challenged in gas chambers and by fatal injection, just as suggested by the Fabian leader George Bernard Shaw.

Murder has never presented much of a problem to humanity. The much greater problem has been the disposal of the corpses in such a way as to keep the murders below the horizons of perception and without endangering the health of the murderer. The bigger the murder, the bigger the logistics problem posed. The Srebrenica massacre has a huge credibility issue; there should be the remains of 7,000 bodies which have yet to be found. Serbia was bombed based on satellite photographs of the victims in a field, who disappeared and were assumed to have been murdered. 400 or so bodies of fighters killed in the battle for the city were found, but where are the 7000?

In any real massacre there are always survivors, even at Babi Yar a young woman was able to climb out of the ravine. So the ‘useless eaters’ theory goes: the tough, the intelligent (and the lucky) will survive. These are the beliefs of the Georgia Guide Stone edicts.

The definition of a ‘useless eater’ is vague, Felix Dzerzhinsky of Cheka fame regarded humanity as little better than cattle, and was thus able to slaughter people without remorse. His was an extreme but not uncommon view.

The theory of the ‘useless eater’ is this: If one creates chaos and mayhem, then those who survive will be the cream, those worthy of life. The agencies of survival being strength, intelligence/cunning and luck. The elites who are manipulating things see themselves as the epitome of this credo, and have thus earned the right to launch this genocidal mayhem upon the rest of us.

It looks as if the first tremors are beginning now, and the beginning of the eruption is likely to be the debt implosion. We, as societies, are in so much debt, both personal and national that we can never pay it off. If interest rates were to rise just a few percent then many, many people would find themselves in a default situation. The real question here being: What will the consequences be?

Will the debts be written off? I doubt it; the consequence will be some sort of debt slavery. It will not be called that, of course, but people will become ‘property’ of some sort. Much like the communist doctrines of the kolkhoz (collective farm), ‘to each according to his needs’ is most wonderfully fuzzy and capable of gross manipulation. In many ways the Holodomor outstrips even the Holocaust in terms of sheer bestiality and numbers*. The map at the top of this post is significant: the ‘famine’ was only in the grain-PRODUCING areas.

The idea that each individual life matters is intrinsic to Judeo-Christianity and is very much embedded in Western culture. Take away the Judeo-Christian element, and we are left with a hotch-potch of competing and conflicting value systems, of which only the most ruthless will survive.

So, we look around ourselves at the realities. I am sitting at my computer writing in a small town in Slovakia about 25 kilometers from the capital Bratislava. For me it is Shabbat, but next door is the local produce market, it is colourful, and somebody is playing traditional music on an accordion. Life has been little changed for many years (no immigration problems here).

In two weeks’ time I will return to Sderot, where war is once more brewing. I may go to UK for a week to see my grandchildren in the meantime. But If I do go to UK I will not be able to transmit any writing I do because I must assume that I will be monitored, and might endanger my son’s family by committing ‘hate’ crimes from his house.

The England I grew up in is now unrecognisable. There would be no produce market where I could get a large bag of cherries from a tree in someone’s garden for 40 cents, and the (unlicensed) accordion would not be appropriate either. The communities of the UK have been diluted and broken up over the 60 or so years of my lifetime.

At the heart of this breakup is the idea of welfare, where communal responsibility is removed from the community and centralized into a remote bureaucracy. Thus I no longer rely on my neighbours for mutual support, or for those non-physical benefits with which a community ‘spirit’ endows us, especially the feeling of belonging. England is now full of isolated individuals who can no longer identify with their circumstances. And that includes me.

This isolation renders me a ‘useless eater’ not because I do not provide, but because I do not/cannot fight back:

One day I was ordered to drive my truck out of town. I had a Ukrainian with me. It was about 10 a.m. On our way, we passed Jews marching in columns in the same direction, we were going. They were carrying their belongings. There were whole families. The farther we drove away from the town, the more people we saw in the columns. There were piles of clothes in a wide open field. My job was to fetch them…

They were supposed to put all their belongings together in a pile. Everything happened very quickly, the Ukrainians hurried those who hesitated by kicking and pushing them. I think it took less than a minute from the moment a person took off his coat before he was standing completely naked.

No distinction was made between men, women and children. The Jews who were arriving could have turned back when they saw those who had come earlier taking off their clothes. Even today I cannot understand why they didn’t run.” [emphasis added]

Now I can understand why they did not run, after 100 years of total cultural erosion: after Czarist pogroms, Stalinist famines and Nazi predations they were culturally isolated and their communal identity destroyed. They were ‘useless eaters’ unable to justify their existence to the ruling Nazi elite.

They make cars cheaper in Nanking and Shanghai, more cheaply than in Detroit, so the people of Detroit are now ‘useless eaters’, and for Detroit read Baltimore, Cleveland and Ferguson. So where next?

The truth is that Black lives don’t matter, and White lives don’t matter either. What matters is that the ‘useless eaters’ are eliminated, but without threat to the elite itself. It’s that problem of corpse-disposal again, but if one can create the conditions where more ‘Blacks’ die than are born, then the black community dies too. So enter Planned Parenthood to facilitate exactly that. It seems that more black babies are aborted than actually live. Black lives do not always matter, apparently.

White communities too, see falling birth rates. It is just excruciatingly expensive to keep and educate children. Our food is now poisonous, our medicines are poisonous, our vaccines are poisonous and even our water appears to be laced with a cocktail of micturated oestrogen and cocaine.

So who are the useless eaters?

The answer seems to be that they are anybody who can be killed without a comeback. There are now no individuals, and murder is a matter of moral relativity and social Darwinism. And then there are those four-man coffins. They effectively solve the corpse problem, so who are they for?

*   Because the Holodomor was not obviously race-based, and was carried out by fellow leftists, it does not figure in the leftist catalogue of crimes against humanity in the same way that the Shoah does.
 

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

26 thoughts on “And Just Who are the Useless Eaters?

  1. It comes as a relief, MC, when someone writes intelligently on the subject to which I’m always pointing out how news stories are linked. This post of yours is very rare indeed.
    Thank you.

    From my blog’s masthead: Where rulers never utter a harsh word towards Malthusian, Utilitarian and Green nutcases [the Godless mix we come to recognize collectively as Sustainability worshipers], the ruled are at grave risk.

    To the Jeopardy answer, “Their pilot Program,” the correct question is: “What do ‘Progressives’ call the 150 million subjects murdered by 20th Century Statist governments?”

    • 150 million is an excessively low number. Leftists killed at least 270 million that we know of and figures of well over 325 million are plausible when factoring in deaths attributable to leftist policies in general.
      And do not think for one second that the modern left looks at that number as anything other than a record to be broken.

      • In order to get from 7 billion to 500 million, they gotta break a lotta eggs. Hence last century was only them testing how do get it done.

  2. It shouldn’t be surprising that people might be suspicious of socialism especially considering how hard the neo-Marxist “scholars” have tried to deny any connection between neo-Marxist philosophy and the Nazis.

    This idea that the National Socialist Worker’s Party had “nothing to do with socialism” (and thus nothing to do with Marxism or neo-Marxism) is the form of holocaust denial that has persisted and succeeded in infecting most of the population at this point. While it doesn’t deny the holocaust outright, it denies the way it happened which is just as bad if not worse.

    Neo-Marxist philosophers no doubt noticed the problem and thus created a new rule: a numerical minority is never the bourgeoisie because that would be a Nazi belief. So the Jews were proclaimed proletarians again and many Jews signed on to the neo-Marxist conflict philosophy.

    Then Muslims started making their case for being “more victimized” than Jews. Now the attitude is that Muslims are “more proletarian” than Jews are, thus in any Muslim-Jewish conflict, the Muslims are the proletarians and the Jews become the bourgeoisie again just like Nazi Germany!

    The leftists who usually “think locally, act globally” in contradiction to their bumper stickers might observe that “white people” (whatever that means) are also part of the bourgeoisie and wonder if the “neo-bourgeoisie minority” rule has thus been maintained. But since they are thinking locally, they fail to consider the situation of places with a 99% Muslim population.

    The real issue is that these idiotic Marxist and neo-Marxist ideas will always lead to situations of gross injustice at best and genocide at worst. The whole mode of framing things leads to logical absurdity plus the mental and physical abuse of people.

    Like Islam, the de facto religion of neo-Marxism will continue to mindlessly spread as long as it is whitewashed by cultists masquerading as educators. But this continues to happen with both because both have political utility for rulers and despots masquerading as leaders.

  3. Lock and load, boys and girls.

    ………..and if you don’t have ’em BY NOW, you’re an (derogatory pejorative and expletive deleted) idiot.

    • OK. Speaking as “an (derogatory pejorative and expletive deleted) idiot,” what should I be in possession of? I have diminished hand strength due to carpal tunnel syndrome (not repaired by surgery). I have two partially torn rotator cuffs which are, my knee-replacement surgeon tells me, “questionable” for repair approval. I also have hip injuries from a long-ago bicycle accident, and the two aforementioned replaced knees, damaged in a 1995 car accident but not taken seriously by the med. establishment until 2007, when irreversible tissue damage had taken place.

      Where do I start with…ah…asserting my Second Amendment right to bear arms? thx

        • Thank you. And (probably) a gun safe and a storage system for appropriate ammunition, yes? Estimated necessary outlay is (approx.) $____US? (not to include lessons/shooting range fees, which I’ll incur separately)

          (Told you I was a beginner.)

          thx again 🙂

          • But I *think* automatic weapons aren’t allowed in city limits….not sure here…. 😉

          • Cynthia, a revolver of .22 caliber should cost you no more than $300. A box of bullets less than $20. Forget about a safe, get a gun lock that looks like a small bicycle lock. It has a wire that feeds down the barrel and locks into itself. The cylinder of the revolver can not be closed then and the gun can’t be fired. Cost for the lock $20. Range time can cost $10 or more an hour. Prices go up if you want an instructor. But a revolver is pretty self explanatory. I wouldn’t worry about long range accuracy by law you are only allowed to shoot someone who is less than 21 feet away from you and most gun fights happen even closer.

          • Thank you, moparman. Our lot is 50′ x 100′, so I’m more interested in *not* hitting my neighbors should they be in line of sight when an Unauthorized Person tries to enter the house (over the protests of my 100-lb dog, too) or similar.

            In extremis, of course, although I hope it doesn’t come to that, I would want to take out as many attackers as I could, then myself. DH would need to have made a clear statement prior, because he’s the King of Non-Committal.

            There are no small children or even teenagers in the house, so yes a trigger-type lock would probably be fine. Now I need to find a place to put it where DH won’t dig it up (packrat that he tends to be) but that I can get to when needed.

    • Cynthia, leave Ca. if possible! But if you want a fire arm I think a .22 revolver would be a good gun for you. Don’t listen to people who say a .22 is to small. .22’s have killed a lot of people. But don’t buy a gun if you don’t intend to kill someone. If you buy a gun to scare a bad guy away you will only be killed by your own gun. That happen to a family member. Also when the evil people come for you remember to shoot the first person through your door. It’s better you die in your own home than in a prison or death camp.

  4. MC, I always enjoy your words. I mean I like reading your words, I don’t necessarily enjoy them. But as always, you say it well. I do like that.

    Thank you.

    • Yes, I am afraid that the worst is yet to come, as we leave behind the age of the bible, and move once more into paganity so the body count rises.

      I find it incredible that people are blind to the bloody history of 20th century socialism, each new generation of socialists always thinks that they have the ‘new’ answer which is going to work this time.

      It never does,

      • And the thing is, as Solzhenitsyn informed us, after those useful idiot socialists are used up and deemed useless eaters, they could still “believe,” murmuring as their last breath “if Stalin only knew.” Such is the effectiveness of the dreamy indoctrination taking over where faith in God used to be.

  5. >> Holodomor was not obviously race-based, and was carried out by fellow leftists, it does not figure in the leftist catalogue of crimes against humanity in the same way that the Shoah does. <<

    Extermination is extermination. There was a Nazi holocaust, a Russian holocaust, a Chinese holocaust, a Khmer Rouge holocaust, a Japanese holocaust, and a Turkish holocaust. The rest is just detail about "rationale," method, timing, location, and actors.

      • Indeed. I think you have noted the deliberate distortion of characterizing National Socialism as a thing of the “far right.” Locating it where it should be on the far left would upset a lot of leftist apple carts, not least of which would be the rationale for the E.U. as a remedy for “nationalism.” The reality of the E.U. is that it is a patently authoritarian, dirigiste entity “with plans.”

        We are long overdue for a rectification of names. For example, “multiculturalism” = “betrayal”; “diversity” = “fewer white people”; “far right” = “far left”; “comprehensive immigration reform” = “indiscriminate importation of foreigners”; “AntiFa” = “government shock troops”; “refugee” = “parasite”; “investment” = “pay off”; “progressive” = “communist”; “mainstream media” = “Democrat propaganda corps”; “journalist” = “shill”; “Secretary of State Project” = “vote fraud facilitation”; “university” = “lunatic asylum, wimp farm”; “feminist” = “spawn of Satan”; “edgy” = “filthy”; “lead from behind” = “clueless, reactive, meddling”; “free trade” = “enrichment of China, immiseration of American workers”; “open borders” = “treason”; “amnesty” = “treason”; “Supreme Court” = “action arm of ‘living constitution’ faction”; “U.S. state bar associations” = “poodle ranches”; “foreign policy” = “Saudi foreign policy”; “common core” = “incomprehensible, unexplained, needless educational initiative devised by nameless, faceless strangers at the national level”; “election” = “pointless exercise.”

        • that wiki was fascinating and a bit scary…“Rectification of names also implies the promotion and development of an elaborately differentiated system of status based on social obligations”

          That sentence turns the Western way of thinking upside down.Our own “elaborately differentiated system of status” is based on social distinction rather than “obligation”. For example, what obligations would be due, say, from the wealthy famous sports star to their many fans? In what ways would those obligations be demonstrated and/or paid?

          I’d like to see your list made into a table. Tabular form would avoid confusion. Additionally, some of these forms flow into one another, e.g., …= lunatic, asylum, wimp farm -> feminist = “spawn of Satan” which leads to a melt-down of free associations.

          In other words, for someone with severe astigmatism, listing in this form causes severe overload…almost said “overlord”, which further ‘proves’ its power.

          In Genesis, when Adam was given the task of naming all the animals, he also has dominion over them (theoretically). This has proved to be a double-edged sword in our Cartesian world.

  6. According to that Wikipedia link, Confucius taught that there are five basic relationship:

    1. Ruler to subject,
    2. Parent to child
    3. Husband to wife
    4. Elder brother to younger brother
    5. Friend to friend

    I don’t think they played basketball in ancient China (:-)) but merchants, soldiers, farmers, and craftsmen would appear to owe a duty of righteous, kind, and benevolent treatment according to their roles as parent, husband, etc.

    I’m not well versed in Confucianism but it does seem odd that there isn’t a separate, sixth duty owed by individuals to other members of society, namely, strangers. On second thought, perhaps “friend” is meant to cover all other relationships. Righteous treatment among friends would entail exact observance of contract terms. A famous performer, were there such, would simply be obligated to deliver to his audience per agreement (and the ever present obligations of kindness, etc.) and that would be the end of it.

    I assume subjects, children, etc. had a reciprocal duty of respect and obedience. Obedience to the ruler would entail respect for the laws, leading to civic harmony (and social harmony per the other relationships).

    The duties owed according to one’s relationships is not that strange to us. “Honor thy mother and thy father” and the other commandments of the Decalogue are bedrock principles to us and very clear obligations are owed to others based on status. I would welcome a little more righteousness and benevolent treatment from our rulers and the present state of affairs on that score is notable for the absence of same. Similarly, obedience to the ruler would cover a lot of territory anywhere you want to name. If my attempt at showing how the names are all wrong now has any merit, it’s no accident that our societies are fractured and disordered.

    My list can’t be made into a bulleted list in this comment window but adding paragraph spacing does make it more legible:

    “Multiculturalism” = “betrayal”
    “Diversity” = “fewer white people”
    “Far right” = “far left”
    “Comprehensive immigration reform” = “indiscriminate importation of foreigners”
    “AntiFa” = “government shock troops”
    “Refugee” = “parasite”
    “Investment” = “pay off”
    “Progressive” = “communist”
    “Mainstream media” = “Democrat propaganda corps”
    “Journalist” = “shill”
    “Secretary of State Project” = “vote fraud facilitation”
    “University” = “lunatic asylum, wimp farm”
    “Feminist” = “spawn of Satan”
    “Edgy” = “filthy”
    “Lead from behind” = “clueless, reactive, meddling”
    “Free trade” = “enrichment of China, immiseration of American workers”
    “Open borders” = “treason”
    “Amnesty” = “treason”
    “Supreme Court” = “action arm of ‘living constitution’ faction”
    “U.S. state bar associations” = “poodle ranches”
    “Foreign policy” = “Saudi foreign policy”
    “Common core” = “incomprehensible, unexplained, needless educational initiative devised by nameless, faceless strangers at the national level”
    “Election” = “pointless exercise.”

    • Strangers would mostly fall into the “Elder brother to younger brother” category. This is embedded in the way language is used. For example, calling strangers “brother”, “sister”, “uncle” etc. It’s also embedded in the etymology of the word for “everyone” which is da jia (大家) which when deconstructed literally means “greater family”.

  7. MC says:

    “The idea that each individual life matters is intrinsic to Judeo-Christianity and is very much embedded in Western culture. Take away the Judeo-Christian element, and we are left with a hotch-potch of competing and conflicting value systems, of which only the most ruthless will survive.

    They make cars cheaper in Nanking and Shanghai, more cheaply than in Detroit, so the people of Detroit are now ‘useless eaters’, and for Detroit read Baltimore, Cleveland and Ferguson. So where next?”

    There’s a problem in your etiology.

    There’s a difference between “discounting lives” and “not seeing people who are suffering”. If every human being is viewed as being valuable, then are we less obligated to the parasite-ridden masses of Southern Africa than we are to the neighbor next door who is down on his luck but normally a dependable worker?

    And what do you propose to do with the many children of irresponsible ghetto-dwellers, who impregnate indiscriminately, and the women who have babies to collect welfare? Either give them support, let them starve, or eliminate them. There are no other alternatives.

    The Catholic Church, by and large, has chosen the route of local and global socialism. Society is obligated to support the indigent, and wealthy countries are obligated to contribute to poorer countries. Anyone suffering in poverty has a claim on anyone with resources.

    “It’s that problem of corpse-disposal again, but if one can create the conditions where more ‘Blacks’ die than are born, then the black community dies too. So enter Planned Parenthood to facilitate exactly that. It seems that more black babies are aborted than actually live. Black lives do not always matter, apparently.”

    Ok, MC. So, what would you do with the many, many irresponsible baby-generators in the black community? Support them unconditionally? Put them in jail for having babies without a means of support? Let the babies starve?

    Would you consider it immoral for a private group to say to unwed mothers: “We’ll support you, but as a condition of our support, you have to get sterilized so you have no more babies. And if your children get pregnant and need support: they will face the same decision.”

    The alternative is to allow babies to starve or die of disease and neglect…unless, there is always that socialist solution beckoning, where the babies have a claim on productive people’s resources through the responsibility of the state.

  8. I think you have answered your own questions

    “At the heart of this breakup is the idea of welfare, where communal responsibility is removed from the community and centralized into a remote bureaucracy. Thus I no longer rely on my neighbours for mutual support, or for those non-physical benefits with which a community ‘spirit’ endows us, especially the feeling of belonging. England is now full of isolated individuals who can no longer identify with their circumstances. And that includes me.”

    The religion of Socialism tries to tell me that I am responsible for other people’s follies. I disagree with this. If an unsupported girl, black, white or turquoise decides to get pregnant, or is careless, then it is her, and her partner’s fault not mine, and society has no right to FORCE me to take responsibility for the consequences of other people’s bad decisions. That said, the deliberate targeting of black communities by Planned Parenthood is disgusting. Personally I am not convinced by the idea that human life is only ‘sacred’ after birth, and the idea of late pregnancy abortion of viable foetuses, on demand, rather sickens me.

    But my God tells me not to do as the pagans do, and at no point does He tell me to inflict my religious ethics on others. The religion of Socialism uses FORCE to make me abide by its religious beliefs, much as you have expressed them, but which I do not share. I would ask you to look at the hypocrisy which is religious socialism. If I choose to render support in my community, I must do it in such a way that it solves the problems not exacerbates them. Bleating about starving babies is all very well, but the real question is how do we deal with irresponsible parents indulging in emotional blackmail. The only real answer is to bring back the workhouse, and thus to make sure that BOTH parents take their parental responsibilities seriously, there should be no free rides. There is no such thing as ‘recreational sex’, all methods of birth control carry risks of pregnancy. If one is not prepared to be burned, one should not play with fire.

    It is enlightening to have a read of Karl Marx’s communist manifesto as a recipe for bringing down a civilization, and yes, if necessary, the babies die, but put the responsibility for that squarely on the shoulders of the delinquent parents, and by all means put them in prison for murder.

  9. Very good article, but they say that a spoon of tar can spoil a barrel of honey… the second from the end paragraph reads: “Our food is now poisonous, our medicines are poisonous, our vaccines are poisonous and even our water appears to be laced with a cocktail of micturated oestrogen and cocaine”.
    Sorry, but these are exactly sustainability worshipers’ mantras, and they are not true, or at least vastly exaggerated.
    Otherwise, I repeat – excellent article.

Comments are closed.