The Ex Files

3,472 words

It is an old party game to ask that someone or something be described as though they or it were an animal. If X was an animal, what type of animal would X be? For a long time, if the Epstein files had been an animal, they would have been Schrödinger’s cat. Did the files exist or didn’t they? Erwin Schrödinger was one of the founders of quantum mechanics. But he abandoned many of his theories for a simple reason; philosophy. He found the discipline to be quite dark, from his theoretical point of view, and if philosophy can confound a master of quantum mechanics, perhaps we should listen to her more often.

Schrödinger’s cat—along with Pavlov’s dogs—could lay claim to being the most famous creature in science. Theoretical science, anyway. The queen of the practical sphere is poor, dead Laika, the first dog in space and the first dead dog to orbit the earth, where presumably her bones still spin. But Erwin Schrödinger’s famous cat was unique in that it both existed and did not exist. If you want the full story, you will have to be a theoretical physicist and/or a particle theorist. I am neither, but philosophers can gain admittance to other areas on occasion. When there is talk of existence and non-existence, and the possibility of their coinciding, then modern philosophers—if they are neither hidebound nor woke—will prick up their ears, much as a cat does at the slightest sound.

We are asked to imagine a cat in a sealed box, alone apart from a radioactive device which has a 50% chance of emitting radiation sufficient to kill the cat over a given time period (there are differing, more humane versions). The time period elapses. What are the chances of the cat being alive? Evens. 50-50. Certainly, says Schrödinger. But just before we open the box to see whether it has survived, the cat is in a curious state of being. It is neither dead nor alive, and is in fact an amalgam of the two. Now you know what quantum physicists do on their day off.

But this “superposition,” which in the realm of physics and quantum mechanics becomes the ability of a particle to exist in two states at the same time, is an anomaly. Thus, such a particle not only exists but also doesn’t exist, and it’s got the cheek to do so in two different places. There is, of course, a hot field of debate within the discipline about Schrödinger’s indecisive moggy. Its existence or non-existence requires an observer, for a start, like Einstein’s theories of relativity, and has no truck with an objective world as such. But, nuclear physics aside, this strange state of existential limbo was where the Epstein files had been floating for some time until they became suddenly manifest as a text, like the Koran. Democrats, Republicans, sports stars, Jews, pop stars, politicians, business leaders; they all likened the mythical files to a night-time story with which Daddy intended to frighten you before sleep. The Epstein files existed for those potentially implicated—as well as for the media—as the Grail existed for the Knights Templar. They knew in their hearts that it existed, though none had seen it.

But the Epstein files suddenly became so real that Pam Bondi used a telling figure of speech when she said that the files were “on my desk.” And now that a new mother-load of over three million pages has been dropped into the public domain (albeit redacted in part), the initial reaction from the media is that the fabled files are something of what the US media call a “nothingburger” or at best a vegan cutlet. But that is in America. In the UK, the Epstein files are rapidly becoming the Ex files, leaving a trail of ex-ambassadors, ex-MPs, ex-princes of the realm, and ultimately an ex-Prime Minister. I’ve written here before about the prospect of Donald Trump being the best President the UK ever had, and the stalled decision to unleash the Epstein files has certainly claimed its first scalps in the old country.

If you want to incapacitate a country, what do you go after? Its largest, founding institutions. And the Epstein files have caused chaos in two of the largest British estates: Westminster and Buckingham Palace, Parliament and the monarchy. I am not sure that the enormity of the past fortnight has registered with the British public, oblivious to British history as the vast majority of them are, but comparisons have been made. Let’s start with the first, as it is indicative as to just how much British society has changed in two thirds of a century.

The Peter Mandelson affair has been compared with a similarly seismic scandal in 1963; the Profumo affair. The scale of the scandal in media terms—and potentially in political terms—is certainly comparable, but to compare the Mandelson affair with that of Profumo tells us a lot more about the decline and fall of Britain, of what went wrong between The Beatles and Billie Eilish. John Profumo was a young, dashing Junior Minister in Harold MacMillan’s Tory government, so his parliamentary ranking was well below that of Mandelson. He became fascinated with a prostitute, Christine Keeler, and the scandal erupted when it was discovered that she was also sleeping with a Russian intelligence agent. The resultant uproar brought down Prime Minister MacMillan, and ultimately the government. MacMillian resigned after the Profumo story broke, citing ill health, and the Conservatives went on to be heavily beaten in the following year’s General Election. As with the Mandelson affair, the wider world tends to suffer from the sexual proclivities of powerful men. All the way back to Helen of Troy, significant episodes in history have been erection-led.

Whether the Epstein files will bring down the Starmer government remains to be seen. Starmer himself has just made it to his second weekend of the news cycles, like a football team being beaten and desperate for the half-time whistle to blow. But this is not the Britain of 1963. Of course Profumo represented a security risk. His dalliance was discovered a few months after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the fact that Profumo’s pillow-talk might well have been translated into Russian and wired in code back to the Kremlin was a red-zone risk. In the case of Mandelson, Epstein was being fed financial information which may have empowered him to make advantageous portfolio decisions. But Mandelson—and possibly even Prince Andrew—had access to state secrets which would have made Epstein darkly powerful as an individual. This can’t be put down simply to sexual indiscretions, particularly when the paper trail reveals a string of payments made by Epstein to Mandelson. But the comparison between Profumo and Mandelson illuminates a wider societal transformation in 60 years, and not for the best.

The nature of the British politician has changed unrecognizably between 1963 and today, even between 1997 and now. The Blair switch project, whereby regular, patriotic statesman are swapped out for self-serving, quasi-autistic, non-empathic and, above all else, malleably stupid politicians, has taken Britain from a country which is governed to a people that is ruled. Human nature, or at least that of its ruling class, has been altered using the British political class in laboratorio. Bad traits such as conscience and empathy have been bred out, like a dog-breeder would breed out a weak ear or hooded eyes. What we have now instead of statesmen is a borg army of replicants, quasi-autistic (autism is a feature, not a glitch), hyper-technocratic Manchurian candidates. They were primed and now they are operational. If the next government cannot reverse this mechanized managerialism and replace it with something, as it were, organically grown, then we will all be in a file of some sort before too long. Which brings us to the concept of security vetting.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s Against Imperialism here.

The British intelligence services have long been recognized as among the best in the world. How is it, then, that they failed to notice Mandelson’s connection with a pedophile playboy? Those of us who remember Mandelson from the Blair years were well aware that the former US Ambassador was a wrong ‘un. In 1997, when the Blair-led Labour Party demolished the Tories and gave the country its first Labour government for 18 years, Peter Mandelson was the architect of the triumph. The “Prince of Darkness” was Blair’s Machiavellian éminence grise, the power behind the throne, the kingmaker. Mandelson was a part of “New Labour,” The party being in the process of shifting its base from the white working class to the multiculturally inclined metropolitan elites. Blair even managed to keep the unions onside, most of the time. But Mandelson was fired by Blair not once but twice, in 1998 for a fraudulent home loan application, and after his readmission to Blair’s inner sanctum, in 2001, Mandelson was fired again. This time, he had acted inappropriately to expedite British passports for the Hinduja brothers, Indian steel magnates under investigation by the Indian government (what level of fraud gets you that?) and wanted to escape the heat in England. So to claim that Mandelson was not on some list somewhere marked “security risk” is laughable. If a punk like me has an MI6 file—and I have—then one would think that Mandelson was worth a bit of investigation. And why did British intelligence not have a man on Epstein’s island?

The Profumo affair was so tame compared with the whispered horrors of Epstein Island and the louche decadence of the Lolita Express. Profumo was all stockings and spies, Ian Fleming meets John Le Carré. Epstein’s island, according to some speculation, is more like Bret Easton Ellis meets The Marquis de Sade. The online Dissident Right are a motley crew, and much given to the hothouse spread of absurd rumor, but it has surpassed itself this time. Profumo would meet Keeler at an apartment by The Regent’s Park. John would bring her little gifts and they had lovers’ names for one another. Epstein’s clientele, according to some of the wilder theories, met up for Satanic rituals, and there is talk of murder rooms deep beneath the island, places where infants are consumed by politicians. . . This stuff makes The Protocols of the Elders of Zion read like pulp fiction.

So much for the Houses of Parliament. What have the Epstein files done to the House of Windsor? Since the death of Diana Spencer, the British Royal Family has been Europe’s most turbulent. Most of the other crowned heads of Europe have remained low-key by comparison, although it should be noted that Mette Merit, a member of the Norwegian Royal Family, is mentioned in the Epstein files. Prince Andrew has put a nail in the coffin of the monarchy, if not its last. Since Queen Elizabeth II passed away, the British Royal family have gone steadily downhill. They have experienced what it means to introduce a black into the family in the figure of the appalling Meghan Markle. They have experienced a level of hostility from the new Left to which they are not used. And now Andrew has been outed as a sexual pervert and one of Epstein’s best punters, the monarchy looks as shaky in Britain as it has at any time since 1649, when Oliver Cromwell had Charles I’s head cut off in Whitehall, just down the road from Downing Street. The headless king’s Carolingian successor, King Charles III, will not require such drastic measures as he is dying anyway.

So, the Epstein files remain, very real and doubtless containing all the elements needed to doom many powerful men. The files have been redacted, but the required justification for this redaction has not been forthcoming. Of course, it is not easy to justify redaction without identifying the names redacted, but nevertheless, there will be a coterie of worried businessmen hoping that they are in good odor with the deep state. The Epstein files are making waves in the US, and doubtless there will be high-profile casualties when their deep state had decided who is saved and who is damned. In the UK, however, the files have already swamped the ship, and there is every likelihood that Starmer will go the way of MacMillan, and probably with an equally flimsy excuse for his stepping down. The only thing that can be said with certainly about such an eventuality is that it will be everybody’s fault except the wretched Starmer. And, should he realize that he must fall on his sword, expect a raft of legislation before he is ousted, and none of it to the advantage of the white British people, the real fall guys in all of this. It is interesting to note those same YouTubers, and even more mainstream outlets such as GB News and Talk TV, are starting to talk openly about the anti-white bias of contemporary British politics. Whites have been unable to fight back largely because they have had it dinned into them that there is no such conflict taking place. There is, and it is about to reach a decisive series of battles.

Four key questions are now relevant in Britain since the release of the files:

1. How long will Starmer last, and who will replace him?
2. Are Reform a credible alternative in terms of White Nationalism? They are already negotiating with Islam, although that seems inevitable. Britain will become Islamized; the question is to what extent. I predict white balkanization, whereby capable whites who can afford it will gradually form small ethno-states from the Home Counties, while the cities will be abandoned to blacks and Muslims, with results which are entirely predictable.
3. At what point will the economy collapse? The figures have long been out of control, and the myth that government can somehow control and tame the economy is just that, a myth.
4. At what point will there be a significant Islamist attack? The country is at a critical mass, and one more Southport, or 7/7, or Manchester Arena, could see the whole thing blow. Civil War, in whatever form it takes, will depend on two crucial factors. Sir Oswald Mosley said that a revolution is impossible in any country with a well-organized, loyal militia. It is unclear whether or not the current British army, with its DEI initiatives, women, and bizarre push to persuade homosexuals to join the forces, will be in any shape to take on an Islamic army who are already in barracks across the nation and may well be waiting for the call to arms. The white British, Islam, and the British authorities will be the three points of any civil conflict, and a crippled government will be hoping that the army will fight on their side against their own people.

The second point is how Trump would respond to civil strife in the UK. Starmer has done everything in his power to sour the “special relationship” between the UK and the US, and would have to rely on Trump’s familial attachment to Europe (at least, Scotland and Germany) should help be required.

One more point about Epstein island, and how it is being fitted to an undercurrent on the Right which has lurked for some time, and is now coming out into the open; Satanism. I’ve written before on the changing nature of the modern perception of reality. I noted the congruency between two very (post-) modern problems:

1. Is this image real or AI?
2. Is this political/cultural event real or a psyop (psychological operation), or part of a psy-op?

A perfect example was the opening ceremony at the Winter Olympics. A few British YouTubers pointed out what they saw as “Satanic” imagery in some of the set designs. One of them believed modern football stadiums are built to resemble reptilian eyes, and he believes everything that David Icke says. I make no comment either way, but if I worked for global governance, and I wanted to impress my bosses, this is what I would do. I would point out to them that there is a conspiracy theory rife on the dissident internet that claims Satanic influence among a global elite. Fine. Feed the beast. There is no such sinister, Eyes Wide Shut-type cabal, but we will give them semiotics suggesting there is. Hence the pentagrams at the Winter Olympics, and the fact that I am reading the names of Baal and Moloch more today than when I studied the occult in my youth.

So, whither British politics, and where must the people follow? Against the backdrop of all this political carnage and what the British have always wonderfully termed “sleaze,” a gentleman by the name of Rupert Lowe has made his move. Lowe had been unceremoniously thrown out of Farage’s Reform UK party, a move which alerted many on the Right to be cynical concerning Farage’s agenda. Now Lowe has converted his political alliance, Restore Britain, into a political party proper, and there is already talk of a merger between Restore and Ben Habib’s party, Advance UK. Habib was similarly ousted from Reform by Farage. I wrote here at Counter-Currents about the dangers of having too many parties of the Right. Thus, fragmentation and dilution are the only outcomes of having three or four Right-wing choices at the ballot-box.

A General Election now, and a Reform win, would be a disaster for the party. That there is a financial collapse coming is scarcely in doubt, and the British people are not sufficiently literate to understand that the party in power is not always responsible for the economic state of the nation. Financial collapses are a long time in the making, and political leaders often found themselves paying for the sins of previous administrations. This is exactly what happened to Joe Biden, whose tenure was blamed for the spike in American inflation. But it was Obama who started printing money, and who doubled the US national debt in eight years.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s The Trial of Socrates here.

Reform has faced criticism for its apparent alliance with Muslim politicians. Zia Yusuf is one of its leaders, and Reform’s answer to the appalling Muslim Mayor of London, the Islamist fifth-columnist Sadiq Khan, is to put another Muslim—actually a Muslima in Laila Cunningham—up against him at the next mayoral elections. The British Right simply doesn’t understand that Farage either negotiates with British Islam, or he makes a sworn enemy of both them and their voting bloc. Muslims—particularly the women—are too low-IQ to make head or tail of something as mature as a political choice. They require their imams or husbands to tell them which box to place their X in (which probably doubles as their signatures, so it shouldn’t be too taxing).

So, one man with a private island given over to sybaritic horrors may bring down the British government, ultimately wreaking more damage on the UK than it is likely to cause in the US. It is easy to see the Epstein files taking their place in the pantheon of American history, along with the Liberty Bell and the Boston Tea Party. And how perfectly symptomatic the whole affair is of these times, made rank and unpalatable by men—and some women—who find that their lives are not exotic enough.  Why are the richest people in the world sexual perverts, nihilists, and quite possibly Satanists? Would you like to play a game?

It’s a theory I have toyed with for years, and I don’t suppose it was particularly original when it first occurred to me. The world is ultimately run by godless men, mostly Jews, who have agreed with Nietzsche that God is dead. These men have no consideration of afterlife, no Jesuitical tests to pass, no necessity to live a life in conformity with some vague notion of morality. Once you have all the money in the world, there is only so much fun you can have. So, what do you give the man who has everything? You let him play with it. The world becomes a giant version of the board-game Risk, popular in the 1970s. Let’s see if I can flood my European country with violent Muslim migrants before you! If Soros and his colleagues know they are going to be just dirt in the ground—Soros sooner than most—why not go out with a bang? The world’s fate hinges on these chance happenings the same way it does on the integrity of President Putin’s health. If Putin is diagnosed with terminal cancer tomorrow, we’re all done. Alea jacta est, as Julius Caesar was reputed to have said; “The die is cast.” But it also means that “everything is chance.” In the end, everything comes down to chance. And you can file that.