Lev Navrozov
Friday, March 7, 2003

Compare geostrategically two countries, China and Iraq.

China (its population approaching one-quarter of mankind) had its first successful nuclear test in 1964, and its 45 subsequent nuclear tests show that with its missiles able to reach the United States and Western Europe, China can annihilate both – just as they can annihilate China.

What China achieved is known as Mutual Assured Destruction. Neither side can annihilate its opponent without the latter’s nuclear retaliation.

What next? In 1986 China started “Project 863,” a super-academy of sciences and technologies developing post-nuclear superweapons capable of destroying the Western means of nuclear retaliation, that is, of overcoming Mutual Assured Destruction and of gaining world domination for the owners of China.

Iraq is one of those small (especially in terms of population) countries, so technologically backward that it does not have even the nuclear weapons of half a century ago. During its war with Iran, the United States supplied Iraq with “a poor country’s nuclear bombs” – chemical and biological weapons – which allegedly have not been destroyed and may allegedly be given to Osama bin Laden.

Incidentally, the excessively publicized Osama is not the fearless leader of global suicidal terrorism, but a pusillanimous braggart, good at threatening, fleeing and hiding . But he inherited $300 million from his father, and if he is the fearless leader of global suicidal terrorism, he could have bought long ago, say, plague culture at $100 a vial from China or on the international black market.

To compare China and Iraq geostrategically is like comparing the predatory power of a tiger and a gnat. Yet the U.S. government, most members of the U.S. Congress and the “majority of the American people” have so far been for the friendship, including economic and even military cooperation, with the geostrategic tiger and for a “pre-emptive” all-out war on the geostrategic gnat.

This is possibly the best example so far of that societal mental regression (outside verifiable sciences and technology) that John Stuart Mill predicted for the “democratic West” and already partly observed in England in 1859.

Indeed, the societal mental regression of the Western political establishment has reached the degree of geostrategic lobotomization, which the U.S. political establishment exemplifies so tragicomically and which means the death of the West from, for example, the post-nuclear superweapons, developed in China since 1986.

Hence the subtitle of my present book: “A Life in the Geostrategically Lobotomized West in the Age of Terrorism and Post-Nuclear Superweapons.”

Before outlining the contents of the book, let me explain why I want to publish it online, and not in print.

In my book, I describe print book publishing as one of the examples of societal mental regression. If a print publisher had published my book, he or she would have disproved it thereby.

Who is right? I assert that print book publishing is in a state of societal mental regression, while print book publishers may say that I am insane (surely no one else speaks of societal mental regression), and hence my book is not worth publishing.

But here is what Saul Bellow, an intensely published Nobel Prize–winning novelist, and actually also a scholar and a thinker, wrote to me about my book when it was in the offing:

I doubt whether you (or anyone) can restore the diminishing sight of what you call “the sightless and hence doomed” West. What one can attempt is to describe the condition in its fundamentals. This indispensable description if it is to be uncontestable will take more strength than any normal man has, for what we have is a probably fatal case of political poisoning, and the distortions and hallucinations it causes may be impossible to dispel. You must have more strength than any normal man or you would not have set yourself such a task.

A New York magazine editor recommended my book to David Richardson, a Prima Publications editor, and on Oct. 18, 2002, I sent him some materials pertaining to my book, including Saul Bellow’s statement above. I also sent him the NewsMax.com profile of myself, which ended as follows:

Winner of the Albert Einstein Prize for outstanding intellectual achievements. Author of “The Education of Lev Navrozov” (Harper & Row, 1975), compared by the reviewers to Mark Twain, Proust, Orwell, Voltaire, and Dostoyevsky. More than twenty of his articles are in the United States Congressional Record. Go to http://www.newsmax.com for more.

No answer from Prima Publications. A couple of months later I called, but the Christmas holidays were drawing nigh, and who would think of publishing any book during that time?

Mr. Richardson told me to call in mid-January. I did. Mr. Richardson seemed eons away from my book. Finally I asked Mr. Richardson whether he had read at least Saul Bellow’s statement. He could not recall whether he had or had not.

Then I said, “I will fax it to you.” “Oh, no!” he said, “I am going home!” He would not wait for me to fax one page to him, so that he could read it on his way home. No! He might be one minute late for dinner! Or for a five o’clock tea?

Says one of Dostoyevsky’s characters: “What is more important – the end of the world or my tea? Surely I should not be left without my tea just because of the end of the world.”

On the other hand, Internet publishing is very much as samizdat (“self-publishing”) was in Soviet Russia. Having published a weekly column on NewsMax.com, I have dealt not with a bureaucratic hierarchy of officials who assume that their tea (to say nothing of dinner!) is more important than the end of the world (or the end of the West as described by Saul Bellow above), but with readers who have responded with thousands of e-mails, some of which prove that while the American political establishment and the “majority of the American people” are geostrategically lobotomized, here there are Americans who are, as individuals, highly intelligent – nay, brilliant, though the major print publishers do not rush to publish them and the mainstream media to invite them as their guests.

This is why the Web site publication of my book will also be an online discussion club. May these readers grow into an influential cultural elite able to alter the course of history, to overcome the geostrategic lobotomization of the Western political establishment, and to avert the end of the West.

While the subtitle of my book refers to geopolitical lobotomization, its title – “Out of Moscow and into New York” – suggests that the book is not a doctoral dissertation, boring everyone stiff, but a docu-memoir showing how my life in Russia and, since 1972, in the West has led me to what I write.

Indeed, the first two online installments of the book will tell how I came from Russia to New York in 1972 and was received by the editor of the New York Times Magazine on the recommendation of New York Times Moscow correspondent Ray Anderson.

I proposed an article about a gigantic Soviet program in quest of post-nuclear superweapons able to destroy the Western means of nuclear retaliation. The editor took me for a madman. Twenty years later, President Yeltsin opened the giant biological part of the project to international inspection.

The West, on the whole, was blind and deaf to my message for 20 years, but even today the Western political establishment does not understand the geostrategy of the former owners of Soviet Russia.

The next three installments of the book are devoted to the same geostrategy of the owners of China. And again I have been a voice in the wilderness.

The installments of the book to follow deal with the Western societal mental regression today, about 150 years after the publication of John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty.”

Having read these installments, few readers will be surprised that the history of the West in the past millennium is represented by me, contrary to all textbooks of history, as the history of three superweapons.

Superweapon No. 1, firearms and then machine firearms, allowed Christendom to stop the expansion of the Islamic world, to increase the territory of the British Empire about 100 times compared with that of England itself, and to expand the territory of the Russian Empire to one-sixth of the world’s land surface.

Superweapon No. 2, nuclear weapons, obtained by the United States ahead of Germany, prevented Hitler’s global domination.

Superweapon No. 3, able to destroy the Western means of nuclear retaliation, will ensure the world domination of the owners of China unless dictatorship returns to Russia, which will resume its development of Superweapon No. 3 of 1972 to 1992.

Chapter 3 is devoted to the mainstream mass communication media. According to John Stuart Mill, the mass communication media in England as of 1859 (the newspapers) already caused societal mental regression. Today, U.S. mainstream television drives “the majority of the American people” functionally insane with obsessions like the war in 1999 on Yugoslavia (which endangered the world, according to President Clinton!) or the war on Iraq (another global danger!).

Chapter 4 is devoted to U.S. universities, from one of which (Yale) my son graduated, and bought, on his graduation, the 150-year-old “Yale Literary Magazine,” of which Yale robbed him because he published my articles about the Western societal mental regression and cultural degradation in the 20th century.

The chapter demonstrates that in the English-speaking countries, the university humanities (their destiny in France has been different) are the major engines of societal mental regression as they make “doctors of philosophy” out of mediocrities by bureaucratic fiat or let their professors and salaried “poets in residence” churn out poetry that no one wants to read except those who churn it out under the wing of university salaries.

Chapter 5 demonstrates that the Western intelligence/espionage services vis-à-vis countries like Soviet Russia or China today do not exist, and they use their secrecy to conceal their nonexistence except as thousands of officials receiving their salaries and having a good time in their comfortable offices.

How did I begin to discover this? In the 1970s, the CIA testified in Congress that Soviet Russia was a peaceful country bent on creating a better life for its citizens. It was assumed that these were intelligence data. I saw that this was Soviet propaganda, which the “CIA spies” bought in Washington, D.C., and copied.

That is, it was a swindle, a fabrication, a forgery to suit the politically correct conformity of the time.

My article about the nonexistence of the CIA as an intelligence/espionage agency was published in Commentary (September 1978) and reprinted in more than 500 periodicals all over the world, down to Australia. Ronald Reagan read my article (in the proofs!), we met, and he said he would create a new CIA if he was elected. He was. But the CIA of 2003 is the same as it was in 1978 or 1948, and the British Intelligence Service is an even more absurd phony than the CIA is.

The book ends with the survey of the mental level of heads of state and government in the democratic West in the past century. Here is just one example from the evaluation of Winston Churchill.

In all textbooks of history East or West I have seen, Hitler came to power because, while Winston Churchill was a heroic wise foe of Germany and in the 1920s was (of course!) against the abolition or any restriction of the Treaty of Versailles, the numerous appeasers and peaceniks in the democratic West were, in the 1920s, even for the abolition or restriction of the Treaty of Versailles.

The plain fact is that if the Treaty of Versailles had been abolished at any time in the 1920s, Hitler would NOT have come to power. Under the Versailles treaty Germany was virtually defenseless against Stalin’s growing military might.

The question as to why Stalin did not conquer the virtually defenseless Germany is still too subtle for the Germans (or for American historians) to answer. The readily available documentary evidence indicates that more Germans voted for Hitler’s party in 1932 than for any other party because Hitler was the only candidate who could and would abolish the Treaty of Versailles – and he did it. That is, the heroic sage Winston Churchill was one of those who brought Hitler to power.

So much for what my book is about. Of course, within the above scope, I could make only a few desultory remarks, but if you are interested, e-mail to me (navlev@cloud9.net) your wish to know the link to the Web site that is to serialize my book in weekly installments, and the link will be e-mailed to you as soon as the Web site is ready.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
China/Taiwan
Russia

Editor's note:
Find out Russia’s secret strategy Click Here Now