Robert Brasillach (1909-1945) was a French journalist, “intellectual”, rabid antisemite, passionate admirer of German National Socialism (“socialism with German characteristics”), and a collaborator with the German occupiers of France. In 1945 he was put on trial and shot for treason.
Now, amidst all the mainstream media blather about the situation in Tibet and growing “protests” all over the world, hardly a word is being said about the condition that Nepal has become, in essence, a satellite state of the People’s Republic of China. And regarding China’s Olympic Torch – about whose role in this “public relations” catastrophe our blog has now written several posts in the past few days…
…hardly a word has been said about what ought to be a blindingly obvious incongruity, a piece that does not fit in any ordinary jigsaw puzzle of the map of Asia: the summit of Mount Everest is not in just in China. It’s also in Nepal. Now, what does that tell you about the intended significance of China’s plan to bring the Olympic Torch FROM China TO Nepal, AFTER the bloody torch has already made its passage through its final destination of China?
As we have written before, the current outbreaks of Tibetan outrage are the products of the following chain of proximate causation:
China announces the decision (aided and abetted by either idiotic or outright malicious Western “Public Relations” consultants) to bring the Torch through Tibet AND to bring it to the top of Everest AFTER its passage through its country of final destination, China.
Nepal – a satellite state subordinate to China’s whims – announces pending closure the area around Everest for “security reasons”, thus completing the nearly total circle of isolation of Tibet from the outside world.
Tibetans perceive this time as their possible last chance to expose their plight to the outside world, before the Iron Curtain totally surrounds them (it has virtually done so already) and before the expected bloodbaths, purges and “cultural genocide” accelerate.
Now comes news from Nepal, that it has indeed increased “security” along the China-Nepal border. But why? Not because they fear invasion from China – and even if they did fear it, they would be unable or unwilling to resist. No, the increased “security” along the Nepal-Chinese border is to keep the Tibetans locked inside, and to keep all foreigners locked outside of Tibet. Nepal is locking down Tibet’s iron curtain, as a collaborating satellite-client state of China, for China’s perceived national interests. How else does one explain THIS craven, tremulous, slavish statement:
The Nepal Government has repeatedly clarified that it supports the ‘one China’ policy and that no anti-China activities will be allowed on Nepali soil, nepalnews.com reported.
Pray tell, what in God’s name does the Nepalese government mean by “anti-China activities”, if not simply whatever China’s Central Propaganda Department defines them to be? In the PRC, “anti-China activities” can mean something as innocuous as saying Chairman Mao was only “69 percent correct.”
Call Nepal, if you will, the “Vichy” regime of the Himalayas, opening its loins to receive that phallic Torch, while American “China Hands” collaborating with the opium-dreamers in Beijing lubricate their own palms in more ways than one.
And as usual, I am more interested in, and more disgusted by, the Westerners’ roles in all this than in the mistakes of the Chinese. The Westerners who aid and abet such follies simply have less to lose than the Chinese if all hell breaks loose, and coming from free, open societies, they ought to know better than the Chinese. And so those particular kinds of Western expats-in-China – especially those motivated expressly by a belief in some looming “China miracle” which will of course land THEM (the Westerners “in the know”) on top of several heaps, both social and material – well, THOSE expats-in-China remind me in many ways of Robert Brasillach.
In 1944, when it became almost clear that Germany was going to lose the war, Robert Brassilach proffered a sexual metaphor for the behaviour of the French collaborators, in order to console them while they contemplated their pending defeat. He wrote, in an article in “Revolucion Nationale”:
…I was not a Germanophile before the war, nor even at the beginning of the politics of collaboration: I was only seeking the interests of reason. …It seems to me that I’ve contracted a liason with German genius, one that I will never forget. …Frenchmen given to reflection (will understand that we, the French) have more or less slept with Germany…and the memory of it will remain sweet… (Emphases supplied)
Yes, Brasillach was a man well worth shooting, even if only for those words alone.
Here’s a good introduction to the life of Brasillach, “The Collaborator: The Life and Trial of Robert Brassilach”, by Alice Yeager Kaplan.