Herman Melville’s The Confidence Man—His Masquerade

Is the Indicative Mood Safe and Effective?

But first a quote from financier Bill Browder:

“Met with Sen. Tim Scott, Republican candidate for President. When I asked about his position on US support for Ukraine, he was unequivocal, ‘It’s in the US national security interest that Ukraine defeats (indicative) Russia.’ A breath of fresh air. All candidates should repeat those words.”

If there be (subjunctive) one Thing that we all suspect, it is that Man knows nothing, virtually, about the Universe in its vastness, having explored nothing, virtually, of its time and space. Unsatisfactory as that may be, it can only wax, er, worser and worser, the Universe wending its way outwards as we speak.

To be brief, what this means for the form of language referred to as “speech”—as opposed to other forms we call physics, mathematics, music—is that the more readily it express (subjunctive) domains such as doubt, uncertainty, speculation… the closer it will likely reflect the frightening indefiniteness of Reality as the Universe would (indefinite form—subjunctive? conditional?) have it.

Of course, there are scary definite indicatives around and about as well. As the Scamdemic and its cortège of unending confidence-tricks torch the Western world, those scientists and public figures who express Doubt in the face of Safe and Effective Received Opinion (rather more dangerous than was ever Received Pronunciation, which one could at least FAKE) find themselves at best shadow-banned, at worst

Doubt, uncertainty, speculation ! Stifle it! Stifle hypothesis! Criminalise private conversations (private member’s Bill in process of being voted up in Parliament, that very venue where citizens argue with one another, and have to accept being contradicted. Creep into every man’s consciousness, inhibit thought by instilling fear—head hypothesizing off at the pass ! Keep fear alive, dixit Stephen Colbert in his halcyon days.

So, before the Azov Battalion’s fan club in London, Brussels and elsewhere gets round to burning Herman Melville’s books, or why not, Papa Mendelssohn himself, now for outing a damn’d spot of hypothesis.


Melville’s strangest work is likely The Confidence Man: His Masquerade (1857); it is absolutely bizarre and in theory, makes no sense unless read with the hindsight of the late Safe and Effective Scamdemic hoodwinking the world. In other words, The Confidence Man perhaps, prophetic as a study in how one may abdicate judgment and ignore that faint, doubting voice of Reason, in favour of a chimera: “confidence” in a meretricious authority.

Rather than a plot, the novel is a string of ghoulish and extremely unfunny Strange Interludes (reverse gear into funny: “Pardon me whilst I have a Strange Interlude”—Groucho.

On the steamer Fidèle, drifting down the Mississipi from Saint-Louis to New Orleans, a shape-shifter, adopting disguises and pretexts each more unlikely than the next, variously begs, wheedles and swindles monies from his fellow-passengers – including the desperately sick and lame – by weasling out in close conversation precisely what they wish to believe.

Though perhaps a touch florid and self-aware, the prose shows Melville to be a master not only of the psychology of self-interest but above all, of the English language, its syntax and verbal forms, no lesser than Edgar Allen Poe or Dickens. (What holds him back, well below the level of Shakespeare, is his dreadful pessimism, but for today’s purposes, that is neither here nor there. For a look at the brighter side of the moon, readers are encouraged to read Professor Philip Davis “The Shakespeared Brain.”

On to today’s purpose—Melville’s use of the subjunctive mood. As we are all terribly busy, what with War, Pretty Vikki Nuland on the rebound and the Jabotinskian shape-shifters, Papa Mendelssohn will make it snappy.


Eschewing linguist’s terminology—with which in any event, he is only faintly conversant—Mendelssohn has selected a few of the many passages where Melville goes over to the subjunctive mood.

NB: The page references to one of the few available editions: Prometheus Books, Amherst (NY), 1995.


Stared at, but evenly pursuing the path of duty, lead (subjunctive) it through solitudes or cities…. (page 19).

Here, the text- book example of a clause which our contemporaries would likely consider either a spelling mistake, or lacking words forgotten by the compositor.

All it means is “despite being stared at, the shape-shifter, unperturbed, pursued his path, whether that path might lead him through…” etc.

….taking him for some kind of a simpleton, harmless enough, would (subjunctive) he keep to himself (page 20).

Which means “harmless enough, provided that he were disposed to keep himself to himself.”

Here, the meaning cannot be “translated” into current Nulandian “plain English”, without recourse to another subjunctive “provided he were…”

…“would (optative subjunctive) it had been possible”… (p. 42).

As the English language now stands, it lacks visible forms for the Greek moods known as the optative/putative (“I hope, I imagine”) and the subjunctive. Which is not to say that the moodsdo not exist. The English optative has simply borrowed the subjunctive form, which itself – some would suggest, regrettably – shares the form of the past tense, whilst remaining identifiable, unmistakeably, by the context. Just as one could make even Socrates look ridiculous, by putting him next to Vikki Nuland in an itsy-bitsy-teeny-weeny bikini, and have him chant along with Bill Browder “It’s in the US national security interest that Ukraine defeats (indicative) Russia.”

Meaningless, the indicative mood here, since the Ukraine has not, cannot, and will not defeat Russia, however much it be in the perceived neo-con interest that she defeat (subjunctive) Russia.

So here, the clause ”would (optative subjunctive) it had been possible” means “how one would not have wished, that it had been possible!”, noting, en passant, that the negative NOT is often used as a marker in English for an optative, exhortative, putative or subjunctive mood. As for “had been possible”, that is a classic subjunctive.

In Nuland-Speak, one would translate into the conditional and infinitive, thusly: “I would have liked for it to be possible”.

“the Man with the Weed makes it an even question whether he be (subjunctive) a Great Sage or a Great Simpleton”—title to chapter 5, page 43.

Melville has outdone himself in ambiguity here. Use of the subjunctive “be” in the title with the present tense, can be taken to mean two markedly different things, owing to the lack of a comma before the word “whether”.
Either : “no matter whether he might be a sage or a simpleton, the man with the weed has made (whatever the issue is) a fifty-fifty toss-up.

Or, “one simply cannot decide whether the Man with the Weed be a sage or a simpleton”. In fact, Melville intended the latter, but neglected the comma before “whether”. In this instance, there is fairly faint advantage to using the subjunctive. And as it happens, languages which make a liberal use of that mood would likely avoid it here “este señor nos hace dudar si nos enfrentamos a un sabio o a un imbecil”… “ci fa dubitare se ci troviamo di fronte ad un uomo saggio od …”

Little profit derives from the subjunctive here, because the mind’s eye imagines the passengers on deck physically before the shape-shifter, asking “Is he … or is he?” It’s the clear-cut either/or quality that tends to make the Doubting Mood undesirable, indeed superfluous.

“Call him back, and let me ask him if he were really in earnest,” page 51.

Current usage would translate this as “and let me ask him if he actually said (indicative) that in earnest”, or alternatively, “if he was (indicative) in earnest, when he said that.”

Observe how the subjunctive mood leaves little doubt but that the speaker doubts, whereas the indicative mood would more or less assume that the absent party could not have been in earnest.

These things are rather examples of wonders that were (subjunctive) to be wished, than wonders that will happen.” page 62.

We are all now, I imagine, getting the hang of it: these are wonders, that, in current-speak, “one can only dream of materialising” – the economy and suggestive power of the subjunctive “were to be wished” is in itself quite wonderful.

I were (subjunctive) inhuman, could (conditional/subjunctive) I take affront at a want of confidence,” page 102.

Translated into current speak, this yields “should I be the sort of person to be offended by a lack of trust in me, I would qualify as a nasty piece of work”. Melville’s use of mood packs as much or more meaning, into half as many words.

But whether it involve (subjunctive) honour or otherwise might be mooted…”—page 92.

In current-speak, this gives the following: “It may be questioned whether this matter involves (indicative) honour, or perhaps something else than honour”. Perfectly humdrum, the indicative mood is blah – a matter of fact question.

Here, with Melville, we have a present-subjunctive, as the moot point is being mooted before our eyes; other writers might prefer a comma after “honour,” and/or after “otherwise,” but Melville’s delving into the brackish waters of dishonour is nevertheless plain.

Ah, did anyone make such a bed for himself, instead of having it made for him, it might be just...”—page 95.

Melville refers here to the wildly swaying hammocks in which third-class passengers were expected to fitfully “rest.” This translates as “rather than being forced by circumstance to lie in such a hammock, if for some strange reason, someone should purposefully decide to make so miserable a bed for himself, one might deem that fair.”

Again, the economy and force of that subjunctive “did,” raising the shadow of the unlikely, surpasses whatever the indicative mood might achieve in its descriptive blandness.

Now, one does find, perhaps surprisingly, instances where Melville’s inclination to the subjunctive causes us to be startled by asudden and perhaps inappropriate use of the indicative. For example,

but this notion, that science can play farmer to the flesh, making there what living soil it pleases (indicative, rather than the subjunctive/putative, “please” one had expected,,,”—page 101;

you will see the word confidence, which is the countersign of the medicine, as I wish it was of the world” (“was”—indicative—rather than the expected “were” subjunctive)—page 107;

and other instances where in a single sentence, he oscillates between the two moods:

Because, either he spurns (indicative) the powder, or, if he take (subjunctive) it…“—page 104, where one would expect two subjunctives.

Melville’s intent here is open to question; is “spurning” more likely, ergo indicative mood?

Taking the powder may be unlikely but intriguing nonetheless. Ergo, shall one gingerly entertain that possibility, by the putative/subjunctive mood? Or might a desire for euphony simply have prevailed, the sound of “if he takes it” being less attractive in this environment than “if he take it” which trips readily off the tongue?

As if nature were (subjunctive) aught but health, as if through nature disease is (indicative, rather than the expected subjunctive were) decreed!”—p. 104.

In this sentence, Melville has used the subjunctive “were” to stress the preposterousness of contending that nature might be something other than health. Uncertainty attends on his decision to follow with the indicative “is”. Did he mean to portray disease as something both all-too-real, impending and contrary to nature, the latter not being the responsible actor of disease?

In the interest of brevity but in hopes of provoking inquiry, we shall stop here for today.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France.

The New Euthanasia Act?

To sit in solemn silence in a dull, dark dock,
In a pestilential prison, with a lifelong lock,
Awaiting the sensation of a short, sharp shock,
From a cheap and chippy chopper on a big black block!
(Gilbert and Sullivan, The Mikado)

The New Euthanasia Act? “A fine, a splendid, Republican law” (une grande belle loi républicaine). Olivier Falorni, MP, May 24th 2024.



Doubtless to celebrate the fifth anniversary of the M….. of Vincent Lambert on 11th July 2019, what passes for a Government in a country reduced to desperation, giggles whilst ramming through Parliament a euthanasia law so permissive that it may one-up the Canadians.

In September 2022, the fop masquerading as President announced that what the country had been waiting for was a debate on “help with dying,” as though the Rivotril Decrees; had not shown how Useless Eaters are henceforth being dealt with.

And so the fop had set up a Citizen’s Convention, run by the Economic and Social Council (December 2022 to April 2023), further to which a Bill was drafted, intitled “projet de loi relatif à l’accompagnement des malades et de la fin de vie” (Bill on asisstance to patients and end-of-life ), and sent up for debate to Parliament.

In the meantime, in March 2024, the fop, in a comically ill-fitting suit which he likely thought lent him an air of King Charles, called in the purportedly Catholic La Croix to interview him; the interview appears under the fetching title, “Thanks to this Act of Parliament, we shall stare Death in the Face”: “We have conjured up this Act as a an Act of fraternity, an Act to reconcile the individual’s independence with national solidarity.” Big words, Babe, for that pillow on the face, eh!

Be that as it may, after studying the Bill on May 17th and 18th 2024, the Parliamentary Commission suddenly inserted a series of amendments which, in a country which had not gone off its rocker, would be mind-boggling.

Amongst the innovations introduced by Parliament last week, is a fascinating new criminal offence (it is already a criminal offence to discourage pregnant women from a—–g : délit d’entrave à l’interruption volontaire de grossesse). Henceforth, dissuading persons eligible for a Short Sharp Shock, would, assuming the amendment get past the Constitutional Court, become an offence known as délit d’entrave à l’aide à mourir.

Proposed by Caroline Fiat MP, whose pre-parliamentary qualifications boil down to working in call centres and as a caregiver in old peoples’ homes, now elected to the obscure 6th Riding henceforth to be notorious as Meurtre et Moselle, the Fiat amendment has been backed by the Minister for Sickness and Death, Catherine Vautrin. And the penalties are heavy : a year’s imprisonment and 15,000 euros’ fine for “preventing or attempting to prevent someone from practising or garnering information by any means available, on help with dying.” The usual gaggle of “assisted-suicide” clubs will be authorised to join the prosecution as an interested third-party (partie civile). That should allow such clubs to pull down a nice fat subsidy in the form of “damages,” ordered against Catholic or other dissident groups—as we have seen in Italy in a slightly different context.

The original wording of the text had moreover required that a candidate for the Short Sharp Schock must necessarily be affected with a serious and incurable disease, one likely to lead to death (pronostic vital engagé) in the “short to medium term,” although naturally, without defining what might be meant by “short” or “medium.” Should the latest amendment go through, there need be no “likelihood of death,” only “advanced stage or terminal” disease.

Amongst other games played in the Parliamentary playpen, one discovers an amendment relating to Living Wills. If a Rich Uncle be foolish enough to demand the Short Sharp Shock in a Living Will, and later fall unconscious, a Wise and Prudent Heir in his entourage will be able to point to Uncle’s written wishes and get the job done.

Not to leave any stone unturned, euthanasia will also be accessible for prisoners in gaol. I thought I’d a word for that, but as Heine once said, Damn it, I’ve forgotten the word.

Du sagst mir heimlich ein leises Wort,
Und gibst mir den Strauß von Zypressen,
Ich wache auf, und der Strauß ist fort,
Und das Wort hab ich vergessen. (Schumann, Dichterliebe N° 14)

Statutory private insurers known as Mutuelles are in ecstasy, since French law requires that they issue policies to everyone insured on the National Health regardless of age or health, and there are something like 2.5 million people over 80 in France.

Owing to massive austerity against the health service, the National Health no longer responsibly covers health risks, with private insurers compelled to take up the slack and pay out. The new Bill will thus be an, er Godsend to them. Matthias Savignac of the MGEN enthuses: “by eliminating the requirement that the beneficiaries be of French nationality, in the interest of solidarity we may even become a Promised Land for those deprived of help to die in their own country.” Euthanasia without Borders, comments the magazine Genethique.

And, as Vincent Tremollet de Villers has just stressed, euthanasia has now been written into the French Public Health Code, as though the Short Sharp Shock had anything to do with Public Health.

Not everyone has climbed on board the ship of fools.

However, neither the Catholic Church, nor any vaunted expert in Ethics, seem especially exercised by the complete collapse of the French health system, where over 100,000 hospital beds have vanished in 25 years, women give birth at the road-side; and where patients regularly die while waiting 12 hours in A & E (emergency wards: 27% increase in deaths and serious harm since 2021), and the suicide rate amongst the elderly is the highest in Europe, likely due to the appalling treatment meted out in old people’s homes.

As for “staring death in the face,” well in 1900, Frenchmen died at about age 45, of “incurable” diseases most of which are now curable. Life expectancy stands at about 80 years of age. However, between rich and poor in France, the life expectancy gap is comparable to that in the UK (twenty years).

Plainly, the merchant banks and investment funds whose simpering minions run this country, are moving ahead with their roadmap for the impecunious Useless Eaters. I believe there’s a word for it, Aber das Wort hab ich vergessen.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. 

Featured: Cain and Abel, by Titian; painted ca. 1542-1544.

Clothes Make the Man, or: Jolly! Whilst One Still Can

“And how spruce you are, too!” said Mr. Pinch, surveying him with great pleasure. “Really, I didn’t think you were half such a tight-made fellow, Mark!”

“Thankee, Mr. Pinch. Pretty well for that, I believe. It’s not my fault, you know. With regard to being spruce, sir, that’s where it is, you see.” And here he looked particularly gloomy.

“Where what is?” Mr. Pinch demanded.

“Where the aggravation of it is. Any man may be in good spirits and good temper when he’s well dressed. There an’t much credit in that. If I was very ragged and very jolly, then I should begin to feel I had gained a point, Mr Pinch.”

“So you were singing just now, to bear up, as it were, against being well dressed, eh, Mark?” said Pinch.

Charles Dickens, Martin Chuzzlewitt.

Jolly! As Dicken’s Mark Tapley was ever wont to say in the face of adversity. And to suggest that France is now faced with adversity, well, the word is weak, very weak.

In the world at large, as opposed to the bell-jar purportedly shielding French officialdom from the people the sartorial judgment or lack thereof, exhibited by the barnaclescurrently clinging to power’s rock has been the subject of much hilarity – or might one say, amused contempt.

As a foreigner though, far be it from Papa Mendelssohn to join the chorus, or even to suggest that so consistent a pattern might reveal something of the wearers’ inner self. Rather leave it to the reader to wonder at the extent at which the “sow is being let out.” (OOPS! ! Sorry! Wrong Nord Stream country!) in what was formerly called the French Republic.

Here, a Secretary of State (Young Global Leader) appearing in public in what would appear to be a discoloured, heavily-used nylon négligé; there, the President of the French Parliament wearing a bullet-proof vest and crumpled ill-fitting clothing, posing in October 2023 alongside the Israeli “Defence” Forces, during a visit of questionable constitutionality; another Minister of middle age arriving for official meetings in a skimpy mini-dress and stiletto heels (Young Global Leader); the former Elysée spokesman (Ministerial rank) in what was formerly referred to as “come hither” clothing; and lest we forget, the eminently forgettable sixty-year-old Prime Minister laced up in black boots and skirts well above the knee… Now, Papa Mendelssohn has made it a point of honour to refrain from gossip, failing which a remark or two on the above individuals’ « private » life might not be amiss…

As for what passes for a gentleman in this country, well here we have suit-jackets so narrowly cut as to fail to close, revealing ill-cut, tissue-like shirts gaping over a belly; and below, skimpy trousers cut with a short, tight and narrow rise. One might as well wear diapers. As for grace in walk and gesture … . Of special note is the aristo-cat parading as Prime Minister, a chubby little chappie going by the name of Gabriel Nissim Attal de Couriss (Young Global Leader ; BTW, in the WEF, the proportion of European aristo-cats to plebes is off the charts). Whose number Wolfgang von Goethe had called a couple of centuries ago:

FAUST I, Scène de la Taverne d’Auerbach

Mephistopheles (sings)

Es war einmal ein König
Der hatt’ einen großen Floh
Den liebt’ er gar nicht wenig
Als wie seinen eig’nen Sohn.
Da rief er seinen Scheider,
Der Schneider kam heran;
“Da, miß dem Junker Kleider
Und miß ihm Hosen an!”


Vergeßt nur nicht dem Schneider einzuschärfen,
Daß er mir auf’s genauste mißt,
Und daß, so lieb sein Kopf ihm ist,
Die Hosen keine Falten werfen!

Mephistopheles (sings)

In Sammet und in Seide
War er nun angetan,
Hatte Bänder auf dem Kleide,
Hatt’ auch ein Kreuz daran,
Und war sogleich Minister,
Und hatt einen großen Stern.
Da wurden seine Geschwister
Bei Hof auch große Herrn.

Und Herrn and Frau’n am Hofe,
Die waren sehr geplagt,
Die Königin und die Zofe
Gestochen und genagt,
Und durften sie nicht knicken,
Und weg sie jucken nicht,
Wir knicken und ersticken
Doch gleich, wenn einer sticht.

English translation by Bayard Taylor (1825-1878)


There was a king once reigning,
Who had a big black flea,
And loved him past explaining,
As his own son were he.
He called his man of stitches;
The tailor came straightway:
Here, measure the lad for breeches.
And measure his coat, I say!


But mind, allow the tailor no caprices:
Enjoin upon him, as his head is dear,
To most exactly measure, sew and shear,
So that the breeches have no creases!


In silk and velvet gleaming
He now was wholly drest–
Had a coat with ribbons streaming,
A cross upon his breast.
He had the first of stations,
A minister’s star and name;
And also all his relations
Great lords at court became.

And the lords and ladies of honor
Were plagued, awake and in bed;
The queen she got them upon her,
The maids were bitten and bled.
And they did not dare to brush them,
Or scratch them, day or night:
We crack them and we crush them,
At once, whene’er they bite.

And to end on Jolly!

Es war einmal ein König (FAUST, Goethe/Beethoven)

Three versions:

Mikhail Golovushkin, bass

Hermann Prey, baritone

(piano accompaniment)

Peter Schreier, tenor

(piano accompaniment)

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. 

Featured: Mephistopheles, by Paul Mathey; painted in 1888.

Musician? Mathematician? Or Murderer?

Der Prinz.
Was ist sonst? Etwas zu unterschreiben?

Camillo Rota, his secretary.
Ein Todesurteil wäre zu unterschreiben.

Der Prinz.
Recht gern.—Nur her! geschwind.

Camillo Rota (stutzig und den Prinzen starr ansehend).
Ein Todesurteil—sagt’ ich.

Der Prinz.
Ich höre ja wohl.—Es könnte schon geschehen sein. Ich bin eilig.

Camillo Rota (seine Schriften nachsehend).
Nun hab ich es doch wohl nicht mitgenommen!—Verzeihen Sie, gnädiger Herr.—Es kann Anstand damit haben bis morgen.

Der Prinz.
Auch das!—Packen Sie nur zusammen; ich muß fort—Morgen,
Rota, ein Mehres! (Geht ab.)

Camillo Rota (den Kopf schüttelnd, indem er die Papiere zu sich nimmt und abgeht).
Recht gern?—Ein Todesurteil recht gern?—Ich hätt’ es ihn in diesem Augenblicke nicht mögen unterschreiben lassen, und wenn es den Mörder meines einzigen Sohnes betroffen hätte.—Recht gern! Recht gern!—Es geht mir durch die Seele dieses gräßliche Recht gern!

Anything else, anything needs signing?
A death warrant, subject to Your Highness’s signature.
Perfectly happy to do so! – Show here ! Quick!
CAMILLO (starting, looking fixedly at the Prince).
A death warrant, I said.
I’ve quite understood. It might have already been dealt with. I am in haste.
CAMILLO (looking at his papers).
It seems I haven’t the warrant with me. Begging Your Highness’ indulgence. Tomorrow will do.
Let it be then. Gather these papers up. I must away. We’ll see to the rest later, Rota.
CAMILLO (shaking his head, as he collects the papers).
“Perfectly happy to do so!”–A death warrant, Perfectly happy to do so! At such a moment, I would not have had him sign, had the murderer struck down mine own son.–“Perfectly happy to do so!” The words cut through my soul. (Exit.)

Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, Emilia Galotti.

Until the 20th Century, when Palestine suddenly found herself a target to thousands of usurpers, likely Aryan in origin but purportedly adhering to an ancient Semitic belief, others of our “tribe” had been celebrated throughout the world for two disciplines: music, and mathematics. Residing as he does on the art world’s fringes, Mendelssohn has little acquaintance with the latter science. But music…

Today, faced with the jubilation amongst the Jabotinski soldiers brought up on the Holocaust Education Project as they raze Gaza and put her people to the sword, it may not be otiose to review the thoughts, feelings and intimations of immortality once prevalent in Europe and more especially in Judaism. Bearing in mind that our tiny sect of dissidents, day-dreamers and free-thinkers sheltered under the wing of a more advanced religion eschewing the notion of vengeance, nämlich Christianity, which, before sinking beneath the waves in 1914, permeated life both East and West of the Urals.


Can one imagine Franz Schubert joining the Jabotinski forces to perpetrate obscene murders in Gaza? Obvious perhaps the answer, less obvious the cause, which lies in the structure of the musician’s mind.

Without a word, an image, without surface, weight or volume, the greatest space-time density of all human activity occurs in classical music.

Breasting the waves between the pre-conscious and conscious, it is in music that thought manifests its changes, almost unobstructed.

Spurred on by love for one’s fellow man, swayed by no authority other than himself, the composer sets out a challenge with which he struggles, before inventing the next. Meanwhile heeding Wilhelm Furtwaengler’s warning to avoid outright abstraction, a domain where few men will care to follow.


In order to keep to actual matter that the reader can himself hear and judge, we propose to listen to Richard Tauber, an Austrian tenor of Mendelssohn’s er, “tribe,” in the tricky Lied number 8, from Schubert’s Winterreise, “Rückblick”—tricky, as making use of the technique I call S’legato—a quasi-legato where each note is detached as though spoken and nearly as distinctly as though it were staccato. In this recording made sometime in the 1920s, chosen for its singular qualities (although the wax imprint is fresher on other recordings), Tauber’s pianist is probably a Russian coreligionary, Mischa Spoliansky.

Straight off, one acknowledges that Tauber’s marked Austrian accent, flamboyant personality and above all, style of singing—idiosyncratic perhaps but rock-solid—are completely out of the fashion, in favour of the current impersonal-arbitrary; but, as Forbes-Robertson said, “I know only the BAD old style, and the GOOD old style.”

Be that as it may, “Out of the fashion” is a conceit, while Richard Tauber is still considered to be amongst the most eminent singers of all time.

Unlike Fritz Wunderlich, for example, Tauber’s voice is neither notably beautiful nor melodious but rather proteiform, “all Things, to all Men” (1 Corinthians 9).

Although the song-line seems enormous, moving at will from the faintest ripple to a tiger-like bound, that is an illusion proper to a great artist: Tauber was no Heldentenor. The true volume was quite unsuited to Verismo or Wagner, not something Mendelssohn would deplore.


Now to “Rückblick” (Winterreise, Lied 8, Franz Schubert to Wilhelm Müller’s cycle of poems).

In Tauber’s interpretation—and Spoliansky hardly qualifies as a spare wheel!—the listener’s attention is drawn neither to the interpreters, the voice, the keyboard, the words of the poem nor even the score in and of itself but rather to the whole—”a single ardent thought,” as Alastair Macaulay once wrote. The Lied becomes a “thought-object,” an idea that takes to the open seas relative to Müller’s text, an idea intangible—but intelligible. The two artists’ submission to the idea allows the shifts (Schattierungen, Zwischentöne) that characterise Schubert to manifest; shifts that guide one’s thought to indefinite unknowns, the metaphorical “ferne Geliebte.” This, despite each word, each note, being clearly enunciated and given proper weight.

Most likely, song preceded spoken language, and thus at first, most languages were doubtless tone-languages, i.e., the same phonemes produce two or more words of different meaning, depending on the frequency. In the Indo-European group, although Swedish and Norwegian are readily acknowledged to be tone-languages, English is notoriously so. Black bird and blackbird are differentiated only by tone. As for words thought to be single-tone (cat, dog, day…), if one listen carefully, they have two or more tones. Within the Western system of tonal music, the singer remains within the perimeter traced by the overtone, halo, aura, Oberschwingung around each note, without exceeding a quarter-tone; the aura nevertheless exists, nor is it entirely under conscious control.

In the recording with Tauber here, while each verse has its fullness, the arrow necessarily falls on the verb. Take the words “glühten” and “geschehn.” In theory, F sharp/E on “glühten,” and G/ D on “geschehn.” However, around each of the verbs’ two notes, flits an aura. Whereas the nouns “Krähen” and “Bäll” (harshly stressed by most singers apart from Tauber) are marked with the little symbol for “accented,” these accents are less telling than the verbs “glühten” and “geschehn,” to which Tauber lends the halo or aura, faint, fleeting but there nevertheless.

A further, capital aspect pointed to by our coreligionary, the musicologist Elam Rotem: before the War, the strong beat on the melodic line—here, the voice-line—was not mechanically pasted onto the orchestral strong beat—here, the keyboard. There was nearly always a tiny and deliberate gap, a hiatus, leaving the soloist a certain freedom.

Plainly, rhythm and melody are the two more primitive components of music, while harmony and counterpoint occupy the higher planes. The moment a soloist aware of what he decides “staggers” the vocal line relative to the keyboard, a slight syncopation occurs and a slight dissonance as well. For example, the syllable “Krä” of Krähen, on E; rather than placing the Krä on the A-E chord of the keyboard, Tauber presses it closer to the dissonant E/F sharp of the keyboard chord—which adds something like a further “voice” to the keyboard + vocal lines.

With many such moments within scarcely two minutes’ space, Rückblick quits the domain of “charm” and “melody” for that of thought, where out of the dusk appear ideas and emotions which now strike us as quite foreign. Indeed, under the massed blows of Hollywood, video-games, pop-rock-techno pseudo-music and GAFAM entertainment, what Schubert and his like once represented have vanished from the Earth, rather like sparks flying towards us from stars and planets extinct thousands of years ago.

If, amongst our purported co-religionaries one were to meet up with an Artur Schnabel, a Richard Tauber, a Clara Haskil only… or perhaps even an Elam Rotem who sticks to his own kale-patch, namely, early Italian music… well, a Man may Dream! As it happens, more’s our rotten luck, we are saddled with the Recht Gern faction, the Hélène Gordon Lazareffs of this world who according to her magazine’s designer Peter Knapp, was wont to invite to Sunday fêtes at Louveciennes, most excellent company such as the pilot who dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki. And a Knapp can be found to boast of it.

Text of the Lied “Rückblick.”

Es brennt mir unter beiden Sohlen,
Tret’ ich auch schon auf Eis und Schnee,
Ich möcht’ nicht wieder Atem holen,
Bis ich nicht mehr die Türme seh’.

Hab’ mich an jeden Stein gestoßen,
So eilt’ ich zu der Stadt hinaus;
Die Krähen warfen Bäll’ und Schloßen
Auf meinen Hut von jedem Haus.

Wie anders hast du mich empfangen,
Du Stadt der Unbeständigkeit!
An deinen blanken Fenstern sangen
Die Lerch’ und Nachtigall im Streit.

Die runden Lindenbäume blühten,
Die klaren Rinnen rauschten hell,
Und ach, zwei Mädchenaugen glühten. –
Da war’s gescheh’n um dich, Gesell!

Kommt mir der Tag in die Gedanken,
Möcht’ ich noch einmal rückwärts seh’n,
Möcht’ ich zurücke wieder wanken,
Vor ihrem Hause stille steh’n.

The soles of both my feet burn,
Though I tread upon ice and snow,
I will not again catch my breath,
Until the towers I can no longer see.

I stumbled on every stone,
As I hurried out of the city;
Rooks threw bits of snow and hail
Upon my hat from every house.

How otherwise you greeted me,
You city of impermanence!
At your bare windows sang
The lark and nightingale in quarrel.

The round lindens were in bloom,
The clear gullies rippled brightly,
And, ah, two eyes aglow of a girl!
It was all over for you, my friend!

That day comes again to mind,
And I want to look back,
I want again to stumble back,
And stand still before her house.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. 

Featured: Richard Tauber, cigarette card, ca. 1932.

Of Standard Bearers and their Contempt

A disgrace to my country, England’s counterpart to the ghastly Indro Montanelli was Peregrine Worsthorne (1924-2020), adoptive son to the Bank of England Governor Montagu Norman.

Seething with contempt and hatred for Slavs, “inferior races” and generally, People Not like Us, most especially the Enemy within, i.e., the British working class, Peregrine saw himself as standard-bearer for those who have for centuries succeeded in living oh-so-enviably off pirate-wealth and pillaged colonies.

Although “inferiority” has manifestly switched sides, Peregrine’s faction, counting on US armed might and flying in the face of reality, has most certainly not laid down arms as one sees in the ex-Ukraine and the Middle East. Accordingly the article dated 1995 below, A POLICE STATE BEATS A WELFARE STATE, which might have struck one as a mere Blast from the Past, suggests that the British élite did not need the World Economic Forum to shew the way. Here, Peregrine baldly sets out the way forward for the Great and Good, now played out before our eyes as Western Governments take their orders and attempt to crush the rising swell of mass-based dissent on all fronts.

Mendelssohn Moses


By Peregrine Worsthorne

23rd July 1995
Sunday Telegraph

‘The key question facing 20th Century politics is how to provide our people with security during an era of quite revolutionary economic, technological and social change’, declares Tony Blair.

If an unanswerable question can be a key question, then I suppose he may be right. Not being a politician, however, I would myself put the question differently. Since the state will be unable to provide ‘our people’ with security in a revolutionary age, should politicians go round pretending that it can? To my question there most certainly is an answer: a resounding negative. My question and my answer really would be ‘new politics’, – i.e. honest politics.

For there will be no state-guaranteed security for ‘our people’ once China and the rest of Asia get their act fully together, come on stream, or what have you. That era has gone for good. Just possibly it could have continued if the West were still prepared to use force – neo-imperial force – to maintain it, but such has been the sapping of the Western will that nobody thinks the security of ‘our people’ – let alone that of any other people – is worth killing and dying for.

In fact I very much doubt if most people ever make a connection between a willingness to use force and the continued enjoyment of our relatively lavish social services. They assume that the West can get rid of the evils of domination and hang on to all of its agreeable consequences, one of which was enough wealth to provide ‘our people’ with security. For a time, of course, the Cold War provided the West with an excuse to carry on a form of covert imperialism. But with even that motivating force gone, nothing the West is minded to do will stop China and the rest of Asia seizing their place in the sun, regardless of how many shadows this casts over Western horizons.

Welfarism, in short, is an idea whose time has passed. This does not mean that there will be no welfare, simply that such welfare as there is will in general be enjoyed only by those who have the gumption and ruthlessness to forge it for themselves. It will be individual, not collective, welfare. This won’t be a matter of ideology but of necessity. Given that the state won’t be able to afford security for ‘our people’ from the cradle to the grave, all but a small minority of hopeless cases will have no choice but to fend for themselves. This is how it is going to be. Life for many of ‘our people’ in the late 20th and 21st Century is going to be nasty, brutish and even short – judging by last week’s dire predictions about the nation’s poor health.

Against this background one really cannot wonder, still less complain, about the frenzy of so-called greed. In fact I am beginning to understand and even sympathise with the likes of British Gas’s Mr. Cedric Brown. For most than most, these top businessmen know what lies ahead; can read the warning signals.

Their acquisitiveness, in short, is not so much greedy as responsible. Knowing that in the revolutionary times ahead, the State cannot provide security – whatever the politicians may promise – they are doing everything necessary to provide it for themselves: doing what everybody with family responsibilities ought to be doing if they possibly can. So today’s unbridled amassing of wealth does make sense. Instead of deploring it as a decline of morality, we should be welcoming it as an increase in realism.

Nobody accuses the farmer who rushes to garner the harvest before the storm breaks, of being materialistic. Nor should they the businessman who rushes to cash his share options – today’s form of good husbandry.

Once the hard times strike, it will be too late, rather as once the Second World War began it was too late to start hoarding food. But those who had the foresight to start hoarding well before the war were able not only to augment their own rations but also those of their less provident relations and neighbours. Who ere then the greedy materialists? – a question which Mr. Cedric Brown’s relations and neighbours, of which I am one, may soon have reason to ponder.

Newt Gringrich’s approach strikes me as more much honest than Tony Blair’s: brutally honest. No nonsense about how the state can guarantee security in a revolutionary age. He simply takes it for granted that it can do nothing much except one most important negative thing. It can promise not to get in the way of those who have it in mind to fight for their own survival. Because collective security cannot be realistically considered, the only responsible thing the state can do is to remove obstacles to the individual’s own search for security.

Neither of Britain’s two new young hopefuls, Mr. Blair or Mr. Redwood, has this degree of honesty. They talk as if through wise men putting their heads together there will eventually emerge some way in which welfarism can survive the withering of the welfare state.

To this end Mr. Redwood sets up a new think tank, and Mr. Blair confers with Rupert Murdoch – anything rather than admit the ugly truth that the aforementioned revolution is going to do what revolutions always do: release explosive social forces which will have to be contained by force.

No, I am not suggesting that we are going to have to move straight from the welfare state to the police state, but such a suggestions are nearer the mark than all the alternative systems of welfare churned out by such gurus as Frank Field, on the side of New Labour, and David Willetts, on the side of New Civic Conservatism. For, like it or not, public order holds the key to the way Britain weathers this oncoming revolution. Can it be maintained or will it break down?

Even Lady Thatcher is evasive on this score. She still goes on about monetarism and suchlike panaceas, rather than telling the public that the real key to the Thatcherite revolution was her determination, if need be, to use force to push it through. In her memoirs, she likes to cast Keith Joseph as Thatcherism’s most important ally. If fact it was the mounted police, without whose efforts the miners’ strike would never have been broken, and she would have proved as much a broken reed as did Edward Heath.

So far as Britain is concerned, there may be some greater assurance of security for ‘our people’ to be found by sheltering under the great German oak, which is presumably the euro-enthusiasts’ hope. One understands their enthusiasm. Seldom has the British Establishment looked less impressive – one display of indecisiveness after another – even more unlikely to guarantee security for ‘our people’ than Chamberlain’s crowd in the 1930s. But theirs is a pretty desperate hope: less doomed than old-fashioned nationalism but only by a whisker.

So this is the bottom line. In revolutionary times the only form of security for property and the bourgeoisie comes not from think tanks, but from tanks proper. Gingrich, like Richard Nixon, wields a mail fist, much disguised in an ideological glove, but clear enough for any but the blind to see. That is the real strength of new politics in America. No sign yet of anything comparable here, which is both a relief and a worry.

“Massaging” Children’s Minds in the Jabotinski State

The Ten-Year Run-Up To The Massacre In Gaza: The Great Kindergarten Project Of 2013.

To repent? The hour has gone. There will never be another Yom Kippur.

“But Jesus said: Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:14).

At Years’ End, one is wont to think back on childhood scenes.
Jet-setters before ever there were jets, flitting hither and thither, Mendelssohn’s parents perhaps too readily delegated the detail of their progeny’s days to a Scots governess. That said, self-centred dandy though he was, the pater familias had one great quality: a free-thinker himself, he respected the course of others’ thoughts—including his children’s—and declined to meddle. For which reason, most likely, the pater forbade television, cartoons and all things Disney, being in his view, US brain-poison. As for chewing-gum… NYET.

But the pater went further.

We are shortly after World War II.

Though beset with an incurable nervous ailment which erupted during the events of 1933, at no point did the pater ever refer to the holoxxx… while the governess had been instructed never, in his absence, to allow his children to look at film or images of the horrors. Never did he seek to present the fate of the Jxxx during the War as unique or “worse” than that which struck the Slavs, Romanians or Hungarians. A dilettante violinist before 1933, he venerated the true Germany, the true Austria, listened to their composers every night, and appointed two German Catholics as godfathers to his children.

In a nutshell, and despite glaring flaws, the pater familias upheld a certain idea of Man, and shrank from polluting the mind with ideology of any stripe.


Turning to our problem.

How can it be, that persons heretofore variously known as tailors, scientists, musicians or – God forbid – idle dreamers or Groucho Marx (with a banker or two for good measure …), having once seized far-off lands and property from their rightful, ancient inhabitants, should suddenly set to the gruesome murder of the latter in their tens of thousands and call it “war?” Without remorse, and as for repentance—there will never be another Yom Kippur.

Once arrived in the Jabotinski state, something has slithered into the mind, akin to what Professor Mattias Desmet has described as “mass formation,” this time, as demonic possession, mass psychosis to the psychiatric profession. Psychosis sporting a Janus Head, with the face of victim and tormentor being interchangeable. On the scale of the Jabotinski state, the battered child syndrome, whereby the victim grows up to inflict upon others the torments he has suffered—or merely imagines, in this particular case, to have suffered.

No-one would suggest that the Jabotinski state’s citizens, going about their lucrative affairs orstrutting in the altogether on beaches robbed manu militari from others, might be fully compos mentis, but over the past decade, those citizens have shape-shifted. As one learns from our friend Ovid’s Metamorphoses, where the guilty shape-shift into a feral beast, such as that Lycaon, turned into a wolf by Zeus, to whom he had served up a roasted hostage(!).


97 % of the Jabotinski state’s citizens have never known the holoxxx nor even been subjected to racism, since they have little or nothing to do with persons other than Themselves, and certain nothing to do with those dreadful Semites, the Palestinians.

Accordingly, the Usual Suspects swiftly gathered that if – nigh on a century after the holoxxx—the Anglo-US military platform in the Arab world known as the Jabotinski state were to be massively aggrandised, the youth must needs be polluted—pardon, saturated—with an aggressive ideology amounting, in a word, to a cult of death and of the dead.

It was in 2013 – year of the Maidan events – that the current project’s “live”, so to speak, phase, kicked off, Miliekowsky-Netanyahu having again been voted in as Prime Minister in 2009.

How does it work ?

Although earlier, in extra-curricular gatherings, millions of children had been dragged through memorials, holoxxxx musuems, forced to watch terrifying documentaries on the “real” Germany or goggle at ghoulish images… most Jabotinski state school teachers were repelled by any suggestion they should “teach” the holoxxx (Holoxxx “Educator” Miss Richler-Friedman told the press that “I see teachers and they say, ‘Don’t speak with me about it… It will take me to dark places. I don’t want it”’), to the effect that the events were dealt with in history faculties alone. That said, memorial ceremonies were being held in schools, with holoxxx survivors invited to speak to pupils, teachers and especially, soldiers.

Shape-shifting in 2013: Ovid’s Incubi Emerge from the Woodwork

Suddenly, in 2013, massaging the childish mind becomes the Order of the Day.

The Jabotinski state’s “Education” Ministry then announced that all schools would thenceforth be given formalised holoxxx lessons, throughout the 12 years’ compulsory school attendance. Said project was drafted with “experts” from the International School for Holoxxxx Studies. In 2023, these individuals are of military age.

In 2016, unbelievably, unless one acknowledge that the purpose be reversal of the psychoanalytic process, i.e., designed to provoke psychosis, the programme was injected into kindergartens as well under the whip-hand of the aforesaid Yael Richler-Friedman (also here and here).

According to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance: “Training courses in Israel and in Poland are also offered to soldiers and security personnel.”

In 2015, on Holoxxx Remembrance Day, tinies came back from kindergarten with a yellow star pinned to their jumpers, whilst in a Tel Aviv school, pupils were asked to describe a typical day in a concentration camp and imagine a conversation with an NSDAP member. Not everyone was a happy, er, camper: ““The teaching of the Holocaust to toddlers is not only inappropriate pedagogically, but it’s part of a cynical policy by Benjamin Netanyahu’s governments that instills fear and entitlement through indoctrination, to raise a generation ready for endless war,’ said Yossi Sarid, a former Education Minister and an ex-leader of the liberal Meretz Party.”

In what is the most Americanised state on earth after France, stuffed to the gills with techno-electro-rap, Red Bull, fast food, video games, drugs, porn, organised crime and Netflix, and, lest one forget, US ARMS AND US TAXPAYERS’ BILLIONS, this gigantic fallacy of composition has latched onto the minds of the targetted generations like bats into long hair.

Research, with which the Holoxxx “education” clique is undoubtedly all too well acquainted, has proven a thousand times that the voyeur who contemplates monstrosities puts himself into the role of tormentor.

Thus, by being first obliged to goggle at horrors, the child will come to “enjoy” them, and pass from imaginary victim to real-life tormentor.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. (Revised and amended from the original French on Réseau International).

Should Turkey and the Arab States Continue to Do Nothing?

For once, Mendelssohn addresses a warning to Turkey and to the Arab states, having now, on all-too many occasions, attempted to shake sense into his self-professed “co-religioniaries” in the Jabotinski state.

A Bright and Bountiful Future for All?

(NB: Iran is a case apart. As the main target of Anglo-American hatred, she has no option other than to protect her people and ancient culture against a fire-storm which would set off World War III).

Back to Turkey and the Arab states.

Sackcloth and Ashes—An Excellent Disguise?

In their lamentable majority, the latter’s elites are rentiers and bazaris, dependent on Anglo-American largesse, gliding along in the belief that their foreign investments will sleep soundly, provided they play both sides against the middle. Discreetly, one safeguards all financial, commercial and of course arms deals with the Jabotinski state and its masters in England and the USA, while beating one’s breast and tearing one’s hair whenever the extinction of the Palestinians be raised in a public forum.

Blind Greed

Once exterminated the “Useless Eaters” of Gaza, What Next, sleek elites? Have you but thought of that?

Armed to the gills by the USA, the Jabotinski state’s armies are about to occupy the entire “ex” Palestinian coast line and seize the Palestinian off-shore oil fields, yielding limitless access to fuel, before pounding into dust the indigenous peoples still clinging to East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

What was, in 1948, merely a nasty Anglo-American bridgehead, has grotesquely swollen to become a slime-mould platform, borderless and bristling with every advanced weapons system on the planet including nuclear missiles, all of which point straight towards the Arabo-Muslim world.

The Jabotinski state is about to hatch the serpent’s egg: a gigantic military platform open to the sea, dripping with oil, and answerable solely to that state’s “Aryan” masters.

If, for the sake of their well-fed elite’s creature comforts, Turkey and the Arab states continue to tolerate that, I prefer not to think of the consequences.

A Warning, from a God-Fearing Jx: Reverse Aliyah—Flee The Jabotinski State Whilst You Yet May

Amongst the few million on this planet who yet call themselves “Jxs,” still fewer are those who believe.

One speaks to you now.

Should you be a citizen of the Jabotinski state, your vital interest dictates you leave that state now. Whilst you yet may.


Under the NSDAP regime, the great mass of Germany’s people, not to speak of her intellectuals, lived in terror. By 1937, one million non-Jx dissidents were held in concentration camps.

So great was the number of dissidents (one hundred attempts, no less, having been made on Hitler’s life, inter alia) the NSDAP strove to disguise or even to completely cover its turpitudes, to the effect that once the War broke out, unless living next to a death camp, most Germans were but faintly aware of the truth. Those who tried vigorously to ferret it out, disappeared.

A contrario, if we are to go by the polls published in the West—biased perhaps, but still—most purportedly “Jx” citizens of the Jabotinski state support the massacre in Gaza.

Under the pretext of “rooting out all ground for fear,” or whatever.

Fear, of the very racial and geopolitical conflict which the Jabotinski state itself provoked ab nihilo.


When the mob cried out before Pontius Pilate (Matthew 27:25): “His blood be on us, and on our children,”

A bon entendeur, salut.

The Jabotinski has destroyed itself. The stench of death pervades its interstices.

If a stranger come up to you in Europe and say, “Where are you from? You’ve got an accent I don’t recognize,” you will not tell. Should you, he will turn on his heel.

Wherever you be in the world, if anyone hear you speak in the Jabotinski state’s ersatz tongue, he will cross to the other side, to avoid being polluted by some murderer, accomplice to murder, or abettor to the murders in Gaza.

When on holiday, you leave the Jabotinski state to spend “your” money—perhaps “harvested” on December 28th by you men in uniform from the West Bank currency exchange counters?—in some swanky resort hyped by the US media, you will listen for every footfall in the hotel corridor, look over your shoulder in the street, fear everywhere to be “recognized,” taken for what you are:

murderer, accomplice to murder, abettor to murder.

Everywhere on earth, capital crimes, often attended by the death penalty still.

But, perhaps you are none of those things.

In which case, flee.

Reverse Aliyah.

Return whence you came, whether to Russia, the USA, Austria, Poland, France…

Unless you suspect that the citizens of those nations decline to take you back.

Need one ask, why?

A final remark: The thorny issue remains of what may become of the millions of Sef. Jxs who to their misfortune, were compelled to settle after 1948 in the Jabotinski state. These individuals are Middle-Eastern i.e., Arab in culture; the Jabotinski state being a Golem, molded by the USA and England, the least one might expect, is for the Golem’s handlers to fold these unfortunates into their, so to speak, motherly bosom.

Featured: Expulsion of the Moneychangers from the Temple, by Cecco del Caravaggio; painted ca. 1610-1620.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. (Revised and amended from the original French on Réseau International).

1682: Oh Happy Day! Where the Stuarts Learn to Weave the Narrative

Not without cause, impenitent monarchists amongst my countrymen are dismayed at our Monarch Charles having adopted precisely that kingly name – bearing in mind that his sons by Diana Spencer descend directly from the Stuarts. Might this be some ploy to woo Scotland’s many Catholics, or perhaps the throngs of Anglicans veering towards Roman Catholicism, as the Church led by Charles drowns in Wokism?

Whatever the reason for Charles’ move, the Stuarts have brought little but mayhem whether to Scotland or to England herself.

Nonobstant historical fact, continental Europe remains bewitched by the “romance” of it all—Maria Stuart as a lay-Saint in Friedrich Schiller’s otherwise superb play; the Defeat at Culloden (1746) as the Highlanders’ moral victory rather than an act of self-serving Stuart incompetence; a pure-as-beaten-snow Catholic monarch thrust aside in 1688 by the vulgar Hannoverians… and so forth.

At the end of the day though, the Stuarts have ever been a litany of disaster. The first Charles, having danced round the rim of civil war, was executed in 1649 by a Puritan Parliament, whilst his son Charles II (1630-1685), a Protestant libertinewithout heir, was succeeded by a perfect prodigy of vanity, his brother James, Duke of York, who ruled as James II. Wedded to Maria of Modena, a paragon of beauty, James converted to Catholicism despite the glaring risk of yet another civil war.

Trademarks, Then and Now: Branding other Human Beings with One’s Own Personal Initials

Africa, however, is the continent which had the most to suffer – understatement – from the Stuart reign. In 1660, the very year of Restoration, Charles II founded the Royal African Company (RAC) or Company of Royal Adventurers Trading into Africa, setting up his brother James as Governor.

Owing to the RAC’s monopoly over all African trade, great revenue accrued thereby to both princes.

Established to take control of the African gold mines, in 1663 the RAC issued a fresh Charter which refers explicitly to monopoly and to the slave trade. That Charter denies third-party rights over trade in “redwood, elephants’ teeth, negroes, slaves, hides, wax, guinea grains, or other commodities of those countries.” In 1672 a further Charter allowed for proclaiming martial law in West Africa, so as raise any untoward obstacle to such trafficking

For avoidance of strife over “ownership” of the captured human beings, the RAC took to branding slaves with the Duke of York’s initials, i.e., DoY, not to be confused with Do it Youself, or alternatively with the Company’s letters RAC. In all, it is believed that something like 200,000 persons were transported from Africa to the North American colonies. Ill treatment, terrible food, lack of water—at least 40,000 Africans perished on board ship.

(Nomen est Omen: the present Duke of York is Prince Andrew, brother to King Charles and erstwhile frequent visitor to the late Jeffrey Epstein’s abodes, stocked with a selection of female slaves. But that is neither here nor there…)

Where we Return to Find the Gloucester Wrecked

Back to the Gloucester. For her misfortune, James Duke of York, having been made Lord Admiral of the Fleet (the inanity of his portrait as the God of War beggars belief), was persuaded that his navigational science necessarily matched an Admiral’s title.

In May 1682, recalled to London by his brother Charles, the Duke of York embarked on the newly-refitted frigate Gloucester and tacked towards Scotland; he was to bring Maria de Modena back to London. The Gloucester’s escort included four or five warships and four yachts, which were to supply many witnesses to the disaster about to befall.

Notoriously perilous due to shifting sandbanks, Norfolk’s ill-mapped Northern coastline scarcely qualified as a suitable route for the RMS Titanic-style headlong race on which the Duke-Admiral insisted. Intent on reaching London swiftly to quell “anti-Catholic” factions, James threatened the weather-beaten expert navigators who had proposed an alternate course and pulled rank, obliging the Gloucester’s captain to press in hard against the coastline at 6 knots an hour at dead of night—great speed and great risk for that period.

On May 6th 1682 at five-thirty in the morning and as all passengers slept, the Gloucester struck the parallel Leman and Ower sandbanks and sank in the space of an hour, with the loss of over half her crew and passengers, including several Scots noblemen – although there was no ship’s register, it is thought that no less than 250 souls perished.

Whereas protocol forbade his retinue from quitting the ship before the Duke, the latter, intent on recovering a trunk with private papers, would only quit the ship shortly before it went under, thus ensuring that most on board would drown. Thereupon the Duke gracefully stepped into a waiting lifeboat, where sat his page John Churchill (later Duke of Marlborough), waving a naked sword. Churchill’s assigned rôle was, at swordpoint, to thrust back into the sea passengers and crew attempting to clamber to safety.

A Study in Perfecting the Narrative

So ghastly an event, harshly commented upon by so many and prominent eyewitnesses, could scarcely remain hidden; the uproar swelled and looked to shake Stuart rule. Upon which, the Duke had recourse to the Usual Procedure: firstly, charge the seamen with his own fault. Mr. Ayres the Gloucester’s pilot, Mr. Gunman captain of the signal-yacht preceding the Gloucester along with his second officer, were court-martialled (though discreetly freed shortly afterwards…). Cf. this detailed study.

Secondly, in hope of perfecting a narrative for the world’s eye and ear, the Dutch painter Johan Danckerts was commissioned to weave over the events’ warp-and-woof.

Thus, though the Gloucester sank in seas five metres deep, Danckerts shews her quite literally beached rather than capsized, upright and prow forwards, leading one to believe that all souls on board would readily reach the strand and safety. As for the Duke’s lifeboat, depicted thronged with crew and passengers, it was in reality near-empty, courtesy of John Churchill’s sword.

In 1685, this glory of a Duke of York succeeded Charles II, only to be overthrown by the still-more-Glorious, as it were, Revolution of 1688.

A final remark: In 2005, after five years’ relentless search, two expert amateur divers, the brothers Julian and Lincoln Barnwell, seconded by their friend James Little formerly of the Royal Navy, discovered the wreck of the Gloucester. To discourage booty-hunters—the Gloucester was laden with all manner of items of most unusual historical interest – the find was made public only in 2022, nor have the wreck’s precise coordinates ever been disclosed. An exhibition at the Museum of Norwich celebrates the intrepid three, who have richly earned their place in history.

(As an aside, the business does point to which nation’s subjects might display the nerves of steel needed to to ensure “success” to the attack on Nord Stream, on the Crimean Bridge, and so forth…)

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. (Revised and amended from the original French on Réseau International).

Featured: The Wreck of the ‘Gloucester’ off Yarmouth, 6 May 1682, by Johan Danckerts; painted ca. 1682.

The Wolfsschanze and the European Commission: Wolf Packs Move in on Western European Cities, A Mortal Danger for Man

For the first time in the French language, a full-scale study has been published on Major-General Professor Alexander Andreyevich Svechin (1878-1938), father of the Russian Operative Art, Professor at the Fruntze Academy (1920-1937), and alongside Clausewitz, one of a tiny handful of the very greatest military thinkers. This book is intitled Conduire la Guerre, and takes the unusual form of answers to 356 questions e-mailed, during lockdown, to the military historian Benoist Bihan by Zhukov’s biographer Jean Lopez. No matter one’s political views, this book is absolute required reading to get a handle on the questions Colonel Douglas MacGregor never fails to put during his interviews on the war in the ex-Ukraine: “What is our strategy? What are our war aims? Where is this taking us?”

A topic unrelated to the wolf, you say? Well, as a layman, Mendelssohn Moses will shortly review Conduire la Guerre for The Postil. In the interval, reading it has served to clarify what sort of offensive needs to be mounted by the European Commission’s countless victims.

In a nutshell, the present article deals with the European peasantry and mountain-dwellers, driven from their property by wolf-packs that are sponsored and protected by European regulations, transposed into domestic law and enforced throughout Western Europe. To date and in the main, the peasants’ reaction has been variously shocked, hurt, defensive, distressed or disorderly; only recently have men begun to organise over national boundaries to hit back. For as we shall see, no “defence” measures against the wolf will work. Because behind the wolf, stands the European Commission fronting for the financial “élite.”

This is war, and not just against the wolf. And so, “What is our strategy? What are our war aims? Where is this taking us?”

Drive out the Peasants and Starve out the City-Dwellers

Amongst the unceasing, innumerable offences against human life perpetrated by the European Commission’s gnomes and lackeys, there stands out a singularly repulsive 1992 Directive “Habitat-Fauna-Flora.”

For No Apparent Reason (there are zoos for such beasts), in 1992 the wolf thus became a “strictly protected” species and the victim-nations, namely those in the EU, compelled to encourage its increase and expansion.

There is nevertheless, an Unapparent Reason. The European Commission and its train of man-haters are waging war on Man. Like SARS-Cov-2, the climate non-emergency, and other forms of obfuscation, the wolf is a tool.

In terms of the war on the peasantry, the wolf is a weapon, precisely as though it were a missile or a tank.

I repeat, this is a war on Man.

This is War—War on Man

Under the French Environmental Code’s Section L. 411-2, a peasant or breeder whose livelihood is threatened must demonstrate that three requirements have been met:

  • substantial harm to livestock;
  • lack of other satisfactory (sic) solutions;
  • the wolf packs must be allowed to go on living under “favourable” (sic) conditions in their natural domain” (editor’s note: in Western Europe, wolves have had no “natural” domain for over 200 years.)

Shooting a wolf without official permission is punishable with up to two years’ jail and 150,000 € in fines.

Until serious harm have been incurred, such permission is virtually impossible to obtain while most European countries forbid peasants, and more generally, the citizenry, from holding the firearms they would otherwise need under the circumstances. In the light of what we shall now see, even those amongst us who have never devoted a moment’s thought to the matter of an armed citizenry, are having very much of another think coming.

In plain speech: the peasant, whose lands may well have been in the family for several hundred years, is expected to be duly terrified, swoop up his children and chattels, and flee.

Needless to say, the European “authorities” never refer to the fact that the peasants and breeders now being literally cast to the wolves, inhabit the hills and mountains to produce what city-dwellers eat.

Make no mistake about it: such is the European Commission’s purpose.

Meanwhile, the great brown bear, another “strictly protected” species, has just struck and killed a youth in one of the world’s most densely-populated nations, Italy.

That too is the purpose.

The Death of Andrea Papi, Celebrated by a Love-Poem to Jj4

Exactly two months ago, in the early morning of April5, 2023 at Caldes (Val di Sole) in the Trentino, Andrea Papi, a secondary-school teacher aged 26, was out jogging when he was attacked and killed by a bear bearing code name Jj4.

When the provincial authorities ordered the bear shot, the Usual Suspects, operating behind their Animal Rights and Nature mask (Oipa, Enpa, Lav, Leal and Centopercentoanimalisti) announced that they would take the legal battle for the man-eater’s life to the highest Courts in the land.

In scenes recalling the run-up to Wilhelm Tell’s adventures with a crossbow, furious peasants and mountaineers from the surrounding hills gathered at Andrea Papi’s funeral. Unmoved, a virago named Elena Baruzzi seized the occasion to write a prose-poem to celebrate Jj4’s deed—one cannot make this up.

Earlier, and by some irony of fate, on August 30, 2022, up North near Hannover, on Frau Ursula von der Leyen’s splendid estate (erasing Pfizer’s cellphone messages, a lucrative activity?) her 30-year old pony Dolly was killed by a wolf identified by code name GW950M and known to have killed much sheep and cattle.

Doubtless disgusted at finding that Me, Myself and I might, for once, be on the receiving end of the misery wreaked on thousands of peasants … well, suffice it to say that Strings were Pulled for the wolf to be shot. But No! Hoist by one’s own Petard! The Usual Suspects popped up, and have so far apparently succeeded in keeping this man-eater too alive.

We shall shortly turn to Professor Valerius Geist’s Scale of Aggression, the clearest-yet approach to evaluating the degree of actual, imminent peril to Man, but first, recent statistics from Western Europe.

Carnage in Western Europe

According to a pro-wolf broadcast on Radio France: “In June 2022, the Office français de la biodiversité reported that there were 1,000 wolves in France, with 125 wolf-packs. The Italian wolves have recently begun to hybrid with those streaming in from Eastern Poland via Germany. The wolves have taken over the entire Alpine arc, currently their centre of operations, and are now moving into the Pyrenees, the Massif Central and even into the Jura where cattlemen demand they be shot further to incessant attacks on their herds. In France, every year, 11,000 to 12,000 sheep are killed…”

While Radio France gives no figures for goats, donkeys, geese, ducks, hens, rabbits, or pet dogs and cats, three to four thousand are said to be killed every year now, which works out at something like 15,000 pets and farm animals dead in France alone, each year.

Even the giant and very costly (5,000 euro a dog) Abruzzese guard dogs, brought in throughout Europe as a last-ditch stand by the unarmed peasants, are being attacked and killed by the wolf-packs; only the Turkish Kangal dog, larger and heavier than a man, seems able to fight back.

As the press generally refrains from reporting such “non-events,” the plan can proceed apace.

Thus, in Slovenia, a recent article from Euronews reports, “In Slovenian Carinthia, wolf attacks have become so numerous that sheep-breeders have begun to throw in the towel.”

On the Austro-Slovenian border, in 2022, four times as many sheep and cattle were killed by wolves relative to 2021.

In Germany, 161 wolf-packs (about 1,600 wolves therefore) roam the woods and hills, plus 43 wolf pairs and 21 solitary prowling wolves. One identified wolf still at large is known to have killed at least 76 sheep.

Tens of millions of Euros in tax-payer funds currently go towards counting the specimens, affording them (unbelievably) veterinary care, genetic identification and so forth, all for the benefit of this vermin, rooted out of Europe for good reason in the 18th Century, after a killing-spree that lasted over a thousand years, from the fall of the Roman Empire to modern times.

This included a siege of Paris by wolf packs in the 15th Century. After fourteen women had been killed within the city gates, the wolves reached Notre Dame Cathedral in 1439, where a pitched and eventually decisive battle took place between men and the wolf packs.

Since in Europe, wolves have no predators, thanks to the European Commission they increase and multiply by 30 to 40 % a year.

From all over Europe, especially from Italy where matters are virtually out of control, we hear terrible news; propriety prevents us from republishing the images, but the reader should know that it is among the wolf’s habits to eat its prey alive.

The Wolf—Probably the only Living Creature able to Extinguish the Human Race

The reader must try to understand this: the wolf is probably the only living creature able, in theory, to extinguish the human race.

For the wolf is the only animal known to kill, not to eat, but for the sake of killing: once a wolf is got loose amongst a herd of sheep, a flock of geese or a crowd of children for that matter, it cannot stop. It will go berserk, what the Germans call a Blutrausch or Amoklauf.

Wolves will generally kill pet dogs; those they “keep,” give rise to a hybrid wolf-dog species, still more mentally unstable, hate-crazed, indeed psychopathic to use a term from human psychology. As for the farm animals which survive the attacks, some are seen to shake and tremble uncontrollably for hours, others die of shock while yet others are so traumatised, they will avoid the site where the attack occurred for years.

And what of the children who live in rural areas now infested with this vermin? Like their parents, who may commit suicide or suffer a nervous breakdown, the children’s fate seems to interest no-one, the authorities being doubtless more exercised by a Trans-Gender event. What would your child say if he awoke to find that his pet dog or cat had had its eyes pecked out and been killed by a raven or seagull? Well, these children of the peasantry get up to find that their pet lamb, goat or donkey has been killed by wolves in the night—while their parents’ flock has been torn to bits.

Some children go into shock and are hospitalised; they will never fully recover, as a child cannot rationalise the irrational hatred of Man these European regulations reflect.

In the infested areas, peasants will allow the children outside only with a guard-dog or adults bearing clubs and sticks present:

“Sigle now fears leaving his three-year-old boy in the pasture, and has stopped bringing his six-month-old in the pram to pasture as he works. ‘It’s not safe to do that now’ he told Bild Zeitung. Another peasant told the paper: “My children are aged two and four. Formerly I’d have them sit in the grass as I worked, about 150 m away. Never used to worry. Now I’m on edge the whole time.”

On May 1st 2023 in an Alpine village called Oberdauf (Bavaria) where wolves have set to destroying the livestock, a hundred or so peasants met up with Bavarian President Markus Söder and his Economics Minister, come up from Munich. After listening to the peasants, Söder stated “the wolf does not belong here.” The uproar in the Christian Democracy (CSU) has reached a point, that the Party is drafting a Bill to get the wolf out of Germany, full stop.

As one would expect, given the German Green Party’s “escalate” modus operandi in the ex-Ukraine, Steffi Lemke, Green Minister of the Environment, seized the opportunity to escalate. Calling for “better protection for the wolf,” in true sophist vein she asked: “how might one call for protecting animal species in Africa, whilst declining to protect the wolf here?”

Professor Valerius Geist and the Scale of Geist

As I read an excellent article by an Italian mountain-dweller, Michele Corti, dated December 3, 2022 the puzzle-pieces clicked into place.

Dr. Corti refers to the decades of work put in by a Russo-German zoologist, Professor Doctor Valerius Geist (1938-2021), who spent most of his adult life in Western Canada and radically altered his initial view of the wolf-peril.

Although the Scale of Geist cannot be found in the mainstream media, dozens, perhaps hundreds of articles on both scientific and peasants’ journals and Websites, have presented Geist’s ideas: in Range Fire, Outdoor Hub, Statement by Valerius Geist pertaining to the death of Kenton Carnegie (2007), and When do wolves become dangerous to humans?

In Professor Geist’s own, carefully chosen words, this is how it works.

These are the 7 Stages Leading to an Attack on People by Wolves

  1. Within the packs territory prey is becoming scarce not only due to increased predation on native prey animals, but also by the prey evacuating home ranges en mass, leading to a virtual absence of prey. OR Wolves increasingly visit garbage dumps at night. We observed the former in summer and fall 1999. Deer left the meadow systems occupied by wolves and entered boldly into suburbs and farm, causing—for the first time—much damage to gardens, sleeping at night close to barns and houses, which they had not done in the previous four years. The wintering grounds of trumpeter swans, Canada geese and flocks of several species of ducks were vacated. The virtual absence of wildlife in the landscape was striking.
  2. Wolves in search of food began to approach human habitations—at night! Their presence was announced by frequent and loud barking of farm dogs. A pack of sheep-guarding dogs raced out each evening to confront the wolf pack, resulting in extended barking duels at night. The wolves were heard howling even during the day.
  3. The wolves appear in daylight and at some distance observe people doing their daily chores. Wolves excel at learning by close, steady observation. They approach buildings during daylight.
  4. Small bodied livestock and pets are attacked close to buildings, even during the day. The wolves act distinctly bolder in their actions. They preferentially pick on dogs and follow these right up to the verandas. People out with dogs find themselves defending their dogs against a wolf or several wolves. Such attacks are still hesitant and people save some dogs. At this stage wolves do not focus on humans, but attack pets and some livestock with determination. However, they may threaten humans with teeth exposed and growling when these are defending dogs, or show up close to a female dog in heat, or close to a kill or carrion defended by wolves. The wolves are still establishing territory.
  5. The wolves explore large livestock, leading to docked tails, slit ears and hocks. Livestock may bolt through fences running for the safety of barns. The first seriously wounded cattle are found; they tend to have severe injuries to the udders, groin and sexual organs and need to be put down. The actions of wolves become more brazen and cattle or horses may be killed close to houses and barns where the cattle or horses were trying to find refuge. Wolves may follow riders and surround them. They may mount verandas and look into windows.
  6. Wolves turn their attention to people and approach such closely, initially merely examining them closely for several minutes on end. This is a switch from establishing territory to targeting people as prey. The wolves may make hesitant, almost playful attacks biting and tearing clothing, nipping at limbs and torso. They withdraw when confronted. They defend kills by moving towards people and growling and barking at them from 10-20 paces away.
  7. Wolves attack people. These initial attacks are clumsy, as the wolves have not yet learned how to take down efficiently the new prey. Persons attacked can often escape because of the clumsiness of the attacks. A mature, courageous man may beat off or strangulate an attacking wolf. However, against a wolf pack there is no defence and even two able and armed men may be killed. Wolves as pack hunters are so capable a predator, that they may take down black bears, even grizzly bears. Wolves may defend kills.

The Chances of Wolves attacking Humans is very High or nearly Certain Where:

  • Wolves are very abundant.
  • Wolves are protected de facto or de jure and do not experience humans as hunters.
  • Where natural prey populations are declining in abundance and diversity
  • Where there are opportunities to feed regularly on a rich food source such as a garbage dump filled with kitchen wastes, or easily hunted alternatives to natural prey, such as pets and livestock.
  • Where populations of domestic livestock are sparse, and cannot maintain wolves for any length of time
  • Where “experts” inform people that wolves are harmless and pose no danger, and are lulled into a false state of security.
  • Where wolves are emboldened to visit human habitations, approach humans closely in order to observe humans at leisure and get away with maiming and killing pets or livestock.
  • Where wolves are not deterred after attacking and being only temporarily dissuaded, while the victim is criticized and blamed and the misbehaviour of wolves is explained away in some “scientific” fashion.
  • Where persons meeting wolves run away, look away, turn their back, show signs of fear, physical unsteadiness or illness.

For Dr. Michele Corti, “we have reached the final rung on the Scale of Geist. Very recently, we have learnt of wolf attacks near homes, and right into stables and stalls. A great many wolf attacks have involved pet dogs, right in front of their master. A woman was attacked by a wolf and her clothing torn whilst she was out walking near Alessandria… This is precisely the escalation Prof. Geist describes. There will shortly be wolf attacks on Man.”

Marcel Züger: “The Wolf, A Danger to Children”

Prof. Dr. Geist is not the only scientist to have drastically changed his view of the problem.

In July 2022, Swiss biologist Marcel Züger told the French on-line hunters’ magazine Chassons that he had made a grave error 25 years ago, when he rejoiced at the birth of wolf-cubs.

“The world now belongs to the wolf; they no longer fear Man and have become ever-bolder. For the wolf, the world of men is just a supermarket, but with no cash register and nothing to pay. As they realise they can up the ante still further, they will become a real threat to the population, and especially to children… The more they become used to seeing men, the closer they will move in.”

Züger told the magazine that the wolf propagates so rapidly—+30 to 40 % of the beasts a year—that the population is now doubling every two to three years. Every single wolf has the genetic potential to become a major problem. He adds:

“European wolf-protection policy essentially means propagating the species. Wolves are only very rarely shot. Millions of Euros of European funding goes to purportedly “defensive” measures (for the peasants—editor’s note). It is however a complete illusion to imagine that such measures, no matter how sophisticated, will keep the wolf from its prey. Perforce, the day will come when the EU will have to change its policy.”

Fontainebleau! Foresta immensa e solitaria!

Contrary to what one hears in Verdi’s Don Carlo, the Forest of Fontainebleau close by Paris, may still be somewhat “immensa” but most certainly not “solitaria.” There, wolves have been spotted, in a pleasure-spot frequented by parents and children on weekend excursions.

On January 11, 2023, after a hiker reported seeing a wolf or wolves in that forest at night (he took photographs), a wolf was killed on the motorway near a Fontainebleau roundabout in January.

Wolves have been seen very near Compiègne. They have killed farm animals in Brittany. They roam the forests of Picardy. Hunters have told me that less than 30 km from Paris, they have sighted wolves, and are henceforth very careful to keep their dogs close.

Italy: Attacks on Women, Children and Pet Dogs in City Centres. You Have been Warned

The very day after the original, French version of this article was published, leading to over 200 reader comments (!)—some demanding that the Website reveal Mendelssohn Moses’ “true” (?) identity or ban his articles—on Sunday May 21, 2023 at Palombaro (province of Chieti), a woman was attacked by a wolf in front of the town’s hotel. The beast seized the woman’s dog and made off with him. Although the dog was later found dead, while the woman was injured as she tried to save him and had to be hospitalised, Aidaa (Association in Defence of Animals and Environment) sprang to the wolf’s defence. Praising the authorities’ decision to merely put an electronic collar on the wolf, Aidaa stated: “there mustn’t be a reckoning with the wolf. No, one must simply observe its behaviour, and eventually, correct it (sic), but it musn’t be shot for just doing what wolves do—that’s no cause for killing it.”

“Suffer little children to come unto me!” Luke 18:16 ?

On May 7th, shortly before a bicycle race began, a spectator strolled down the Vasto Marina (Abruzzo) beach promenade called Cordella with his two small children. Suddenly, an animal “strangely” like a wolf appeared out of nowhere, threw itself on the girl and tore her clothing. As the father began to shout and lash out, the wolf turned about and attacked passers-by, only to disappear as the latter counter-attacked. The infant girl was hospitalised.

According to Vasto’s Mayor Francesco Menna, such incidents have become commonplace; he spends his day ringing the local Government and the Ministry of Environment at Rome. According to Chieti Today, the local paper, “at Vasto, wild animals which are either wolves or dog-wolf hybrids, are constantly being sighted.”

Four days later, another attack. As she stood in line at Pizzeria Rusticana in Vasto, a young woman was suddenly set upon by a wolf, which was apparently fought off by passers-by. She was hospitalised.

Concerned to the point that he has had his personal cellphone number and e-mail address published in the press (338-6907436/ [email protected]) in order to collect alerts, Mayor Menna has told the press he would journey to Rome to meet the Minister, as the lives of his fellow-citizens and of the local peasantry are in jeopardy. On May 22nd, the Vasto municipal council voted up a resolution, calling upon the authorities to trap wild boar and wolves now devastating the area.

There is more, much more.

For months now, wolves have been venturing into large and medium-sized towns in Italy. They have been sighted in Tuscany—at Florence, in the centre of Arezzo, at Lucca, on the Rimini coast. In the Piemont, they have taken to the outskirts of towns, a mere 8 km from the former capital Turin.

But fear not! The mainstream press has its “expert” on hand, forest ranger Luca Giunti, who told the Turin daily La Stampa in late April: “As the Western Alps are now over-run with wolves, they’re wending their way downhill—Superga, Marentino, Montaldo and the Asti area.”

And Giunti continues casually

“They’ll be attacking farm animals and people’s pets, not just prey in the woods. Not to frighten you, but you’ll want to get this straight. In the hills about Turin, the wolf will force us to change our habits, not just us “professionals” (peasants, winegrowers etc., editor’s note) but all of us. We’ve got to get it through our heads that we shall have to put up with this business, because the wolf’s a protected species.”

That Luca Giunti prudently refrains from referring to the Scale of Valerius Geist should be no surprise. What, Me Worry? As a forest-ranger, he more than likely holds a gun-licence and makes good use of it to stay safe and whole. A few days later In Italia published a Wolf Warning in the form of a How-To, with useful advice such as “should you be faced with a wolf, make sure to clamber up a tree or onto some other high-up object.” Holding a dog or child in one’s arms, that will doubtless prove a Walk in the Park.

Or, as per the by-line to James Howard Kunstler’s Swiftian piece, “The Next Big Thing” a few days ago: “‘Psychopaths and narcissists aren’t ‘mentally ill,’ they’re just horrible people, and they get worse with age, not better.’—Aimee Terese on Twitter.”

In the meantime, wisdom suggests that in Western Europe, one be extremely watchful in the mountains, woods and hills, that one never leave a child or pet unattended, and that, especially in Italy, one never take to the mountains without a gun-licence and the attendant firearms.

Note: Since I first began to look at the figures about six years ago, wolf attacks have become ever-more frequent and serious, keeping in mind that the majority are never reported due to the mainstream-press blackout. The attacks tend to be reported only in countries where the wolf is not a “protected species,” i.e., without Western Europe and parts of the USA.

Mendelssohn Moses writes from France. (Revised and amended from the original French on Réseau International).

Featured: La Chasse aux Loups. Copyright: Musée Antoine Lecuyer.