10 January 2012
My first contact with Kerry Bolton occurred on the back of my first article for The Occidental Observer, 'Memoirs of a Dissident Student in Post-Modern Academia', where I recounted my experiences in postgraduate school. At the time, and as we will see in the interview, Dr. Bolton was having a few unpleasant experiences of his own, so it is easy to see now why my piece resonated with him. A fellow at the Academy of Social and Political Research and of the Centre of Independent Studies, an extraordinarily prolific essayist and writer, publisher of the journal Ab Aeterno, and a contributor to publications such as Alternative Right, The Occidental Quarterly, Counter-Currents, and the Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies among others, Dr. Bolton is the author of Thinkers of the Right and, more recently, Revolution from Above, which was published by Arktos last year. He holds two doctoratess: one in Theology and another in Historical Theology, while his writing deals with geopolitics, history, revolutions, conspiracy, religion, the occult, and Freemasonry. In this interview we explore Dr. Bolton's career, learn about his experiences in academia and the media, and get a sense of the man behind the legend. Continued from yesterday.
Tell us about the New Zealand media.
The media here is as one would expect. I have used both the Press Council and the Broadcasting Standards Authority to make my points. My last action via the Press Council was undertaken a few years ago in regard to a large feature by the Christchurch Press on the “extreme Right”. The writer got his facts so fouled up on so many levels, my complaint was for the most part upheld, in regard to the parts of the article that related to me, and the Press Council decision was printed in full, at length in The Press.
An action against Radio New Zealand to the Broadcasting Standards Tribunal was the result of a Trotskyite academic, Dr Scott Hamilton [above], a supposed sociologist whose only achievement of note has been as a two-bit poet, who was interviewed on a feature programme on “holocaust denial’ in New Zealand. Since there isn’t any he had to make something up, Van Leeuwen-style, and launched into a tirade against me, saying that I was New Zealand’s most active “holocaust denier.” He then proceeded to state that I was also the “father of the Celtic New Zealand theory” (a theory most widely propounded by Auckland researcher Martin Doutré, that a proto-Celtic race reached New Zealand in ancient times) and that since I was a “nazi” the theory is ipso facto a Nazi theory. The BSA upheld my complaint. It was appealed by Radio NZ to the High Court where I represented myself. Amusingly, David Zwartz, head of the Wellington Jewish Council and former honorary Consul for Israel to New Zealand, showed up wearing a yamulke. It shows the half-wittedness of these creeps: why did he think I would give a crap about him wearing a yamulke? He showed up with his dowdy wife who dresses like a bag-lady. I don’t give a stuff whether someone Jewish, only whether he is an arsehole, which Zwartz is. He wanted copies of the written submissions to the Court and the Radio NZ lawyer had to ask my permission while Zwartz stood next to him looking like a creep. I told the lawyer what I thought of Zwartz, said that he did not have my permission, and the dwarfish creep slimed away.
The court asked that the decision be reviewed by the BSA to see how it would impact on “free speech”. The BSA obligingly reversed its decision, found that to expect a broadcaster to check facts before airing a programme would be an unreasonable burden, but declined to make any ruling on the accuracy of Hamilton’s statements against me. BSA also advised that I should have complained against programme under the “fairness” clause rather than the “accuracy” clause of the Broadcasting Act (although I had asked BSA for advice on this from the start). A precedent was therefore established, that a radio programme can be slanderous nonsense, and it is an unreasonable burden to expect the broadcaster to check contentious claims before going to air. It is clear enough that the BSA would have liked to have found against RNZ, as I had proved that Hamilton is a liar, but felt constrained by other issues.
Dr Hamilton is a nutcase even among the extreme Left, and once accused another Trotskyite of being a paedophile. He subsequently retracted, saying that he had been “very young, very drunk and very stupid” and had got carried away with Trotskyite factional disputes. Hamilton continued to vent his spleen against Martin Doutré, and the Jewish anti-Zionist magazine editor Jon Eisen, who remains unperturbed and continues to publish revisionist articles in his magazine Uncensored.
As an example of this idiot “academic’s” scholarly abilities and research expertise, on his blog he claimed that I had written a pamphlet describing Stalin as a “secret Jew”. What the idiot obviously did is see the title of an article called “Was Stalin Jewish?” and drew a retarded conclusion. In fact, I repudiated the claim that Stalin was Jewish and that his name means “son of a Jew”. Hamilton also refers to my supposed chapter on “Third Reich philosopher” Martin Heidegger in Thinkers of the Right, although Heidegger isn’t even mentioned there, let along the subject of a chapter. Yet this compulsive, half-cocked liar was presented by Radio New Zealand as an “academic expert”.
The news media is incapable of getting things straight, whether by contrivance or stupidity, and I have resolved not to undertake any interviews other than in writing.
Though we have mentioned two books, when it comes to essays you are like a volcano of academic prose. The words flow out of you in a torrent whose speed and breath is truly extraordinary. I have seen you produce erudite 15,000 essays, vacuum-packed with references and citing rare and little-known sources, in two days. I almost think this is some form of graphomania, and imagine Kerry Bolton writing non-stop from dawn till dusk, only to be woken in the middle of the night from restless sleep with the compulsion to write some more. How do you manage to be so prolific? Where do you find the energy?
Your impression is quite wrong. I am retired and have time. I have been reading and thinking on things for over 35 years and find it an easy matter to get out an article or paper almost automatically. It is then a matter of filling in the references. I can often work out the basis of an article or even a book or pamphlet in my head while walking along the beach, or when people think I am listening to them (such as my wife, ha ha).
The publishing world is changing. As a confessed luddite, how do you view the advent of the ebook? What, in your view, are the positive and negative effects?
I am a “luddite ” by necessity because technology, like mathematics, is a big mystery to me, and I find it tedious. I have never read an ebook and would far prefer sitting back in an easy chair, reading a proper book. I do not like reading material much on the computer screen either, and even interesting material becomes tiresome on the computer screen. I would also rather have a proper book about than a stack of computer printouts. It is partly a matter of aesthetics.
The internet in general, has obviously allowed material to be spread far and wide to present the possibilities of real challenges to the mass media. My articles are now read by thousands instead of a few dozen. However, I think there has also been a tendency of quantity over quality, and the proliferation of poorly researched material, as well as giving hitherto non-existent opportunities for cowards to slander in safety, and for individuals to think they are accomplishing great feats of activism by creating yet another blogsite or expending much time on forums that tend to be of a most inane level.
Along with Michael O’Meara, you are the world’s leading specialist on Francis Parker Yockey. What first got you interested in this mysterious and tragic character? What are some of the Yockey rarities you have been able to obtain? How do you think his career would have unfolded had he been able to evade capture and live? Why should we be interested in Yockey today?
Being called “the world’s leading specialist on Francis Parker Yockey” is being overly charitable. I seem to apply his methodology more than most writers, at least in the Anglophone world. Expertise on Yockey would require knowledge on many of his influences about whom I am quite unfamiliar.
As mentioned above, I obtained “Imperium” from a Chinese Spenglerian Social Crediter in New Zealand when I was about 18. (I subsequently obtained his stock of the book). I found Yockey’s “cultural pathology” gives an added perspective in analyses, a revelation as to new ways of looking at history and events I then obtained a copy of “Proclamation of London”, I think from James Warner’s Patriotic Books in the USA. Then “The Enemy of Europe”, published by Liberty Bell Publications in the USA, from, I think, John Tyndall in Britain. During the 1990s I was in communication with the late H Keith Thompson, Yockey’s primary American colleague, and remain in contact with one of Thompson’s friends, and obtained hitherto unpublished Yockey MSS.
The MSS I obtained include: “America’s two ways of waging war”, “Life as an art”, “America’s two political factions”, “Culture”, “Philosophy of constitutional law”, “Letters to Dean Acheson”, “Thoughts distilled”, “Thoughts personal and superpersonal”, “Thoughts upon waking”, “XXth Century metaphysics”. I had previously obtained a publication called “Yockey: Four Essays”, which comprised “Tragedy of youth”, “Prague treason trial”, “Destiny of America”, “World in flames”.
These are to be published, along with introductory notes, by Greg Johnson’s Counter-Currents, as a book entitled World in Flames: collected writings of Francis Parker Yockey.
I also obtained FBI reports on Yockey and newspaper clippings relating to his capture and death, and some issues of the newsletter “Frontfighter”.
In reply to the question, “had Yockey lived”, I think he might have ended up in the Soviet bloc, or South America, perhaps with Johannes von Leers in Argentina, or maybe in Franquist Spain where there were Degrelle and Skorzeny. I think he would have had to self-exile from the USA and US run Europe. He saw the American Right as lacking, and it is not until now that it has shown signs that he would have found encouraging. Maybe he would have gone to the Middle East again, perhaps to Syria or Iraq or Iran.
Yockey’s relevance remains because he provided an enduring methodology, “cultural pathology”, that is universally valid and will remain so.
Last year Arktos published a new book by you, Revolution from Above. Tell us about this book—its genesis and aims.
When I was a youth reading about politics there were some excellent writers on the hidden hand of international finance; in particular A K Chesterton and Ivor Benson. Britons Ltd. was still going and published works by Nesta Webster. Despite the proliferation of “conspiracy theories” over the internet, much of it lacks cogency and reliability of sources, or is imbued with some quirky theory about the British Royal Family, or the Jesuits being the controllers of the Illuminati, etc. Also, while the early association between international capital and the Left had been documented, new research seems to have been lacking in regard to the bogus nature of what is today regarded as “rebellion”, such as the New Left, and subsequent liberalisation movements including feminism, and various other “human rights” causes. I wanted to show that Left-wing rebellion, including what is regarded as youthful anti-Establishmentarianism, has been manipulated. I was providing last minute material, including analysis of the “Arab Spring”. There is also some eye-opening material on the US role in the Russian Civil War, which I think might be groundbreaking. I wanted to provide an up to date, cogent, and well referenced book on how the globalists manipulate their supposed opposition and how they create crisis scenarios as a means of control.
I also wanted to do this without being sidetracked by issues such as Jews and Zionism. Much material focuses on this, but it leaves no room for other factors. There are plenty of scholarly books on the Zionist and Jewish machinations, such as Kevin MacDonald’s volumes, and those of Israel Shahak. I have also written a lot about these matters in pamphlets and articles, so I cannot be accused of avoiding these issues, or “compromising “ or “selling out”. But how many people now know of the plutocratic forces that promoted Kinseyan sexology, or the Frankfurt School in the USA, or modernism in the arts, and feminism, and how these coalesced into the New Left, which was backed as a dialectical move to push America over to a leftward direction? How may have wondered, as I did, as to why America intervened in the Russian Civil War if the plutocrats were really pro-Bolshevik? I show with reliable documentation that the USA went into Russia and backstabbed Kolchak and was never there to “fight bolshevism’.
The MS for the book sat about for over a year, as I was unable to find a publisher, however I see that it has remained a best-seller for Arktos [the book is also available from Wermod and Wermod].
Dealings with Arktos have been excellent and professional on all levels. Matthew Peters did a meticulous job of checking references. You can expect a quality book with reliable sources, thanks in no small part to Arktos editing and the pursuit of excellence.
How do you see New Zealand changing over the course of the century?
It will be regarded as “part of Asia” and fully integrated into the Asian economy, to provide resources. It will divest itself of the few remaining state owned assets to pay off debt. There will be a continuing gap economically among classes and a permanent pool of the unemployable in a service economy. The Welfare State will become unsustainable, and there will be a push to secure further migrants from Asia to replace the aging population. It will be populated primarily by Asian and Polynesian peoples. It will find itself in an impossible position in regard to alliances when Asian states start to war upon each other over water resources and other crises.
What, in your estimation, is most surprising to visitors in New Zealand? What do you enjoy the most about living in that part of the world?
If you are a backpacker from Scandinavia or Germany, expecting a safe and quaint country, you will be surprised by being raped and murdered, and dumped in some bush at the side of a country road. If you go to Christchurch, you can expect virtually non-stop earthquakes for the next several decades.
I talk to many overseas tourists and they seem reluctant to say anything negative: they generally consider New Zealanders to be particularly friendly, which is probably true of the older generations.
I specifically enjoy the Kapiti Coast [above] because it still retains something of a rural and seaside character. However, population expansion has been rapid and whereas my house was surrounded by fields and vacant sections 15 years ago, it is now in the centre of a large suburb, and we get fuckwits with stereos or yobs breaking letter boxes, who require “direct action” from time to time because the police are lame. I enjoy walking the beach best of all, and the many people I see there, mostly in connection with dog walking.
Give us a sense of a typical day for you.
Until November 28 we had a Labrador Retriever, and much of the day was focused on her, and taking her out to the beach and river, but she passed away at 15 years old. However I have resumed lengthy walks along the beach, often prolonged by chatting with various people, and will be looking to having another dog sometime this year, when the right one shows up.
Several hours are spent in the morning catching up with e-mails or writing. Long beach walk. Play scrabble with my wife in the afternoon. In the evening watch Television as an excuse to do nothing, and generally fall to sleep in the chair. Catch up with e-mails or writing around 12:00-2:00 am. Quite obviously, life is lived on the edge for a dark lord of neo-nazism.
What projects are you working on right now?
Answering this interview.
I will hopefully be assisting Dr Michalopoulos with an English edition of a 1940s Italian Fascist publication on economics, which looks as though it will be produced by a European publisher, and will probably be writing a prologue.
I am a contributing writer for Foreign Policy Journal, and write analytical articles when certain issues of interest crop up in the news. I am also a regular contributor for scholarly journals. Articles will be appearing in Fins Mundi journal from Portugal and the next edition of Intertraditionale from the Ukraine. Troy Southgate’s “Thoughts and Perspective ” series provides a steady demand for a stream of writing and research, and there is another volume due out on an English poet. (Troy really does seem to be someone with graphomania, and I find his energy genuinely amazing, as both a writer and the publisher of quality volumes).
At the moment I am waiting on projects to come to fruition. I am looking forward to your edition of Imperium with my lengthy introduction. My collection of essays on foreign policy and international relations, Age of Chaos: International relations in the New World Disorder, is due out any day now from Finis Mundi in Portugal. Artists of the Right is due out via Counter-Currents in February, and World in Flames, the collection of Yockey essays with my notes, in April.
I am looking forward to seeing the new journal Radix, from Richard Spencer and yourself in March, for which I have contributed an article on how America scuttled Europe’s Africa empires, which I assume has been accepted.
I have just signed a contract with Arktos for another book. This is about occult and sinister influences in revolution and politics, with a focus on Freemasonry, from the viewpoint of Tradition and Counter-Tradition. I have written this, like Revolution from Above, with a view to providing cogency and reliability of references, and bringing out material which has not generally been used in books. Material on the pro-Bolshevik attitude of Nicholas Roerich’s so-called Hidden Maters; the role of Masonry in Mexico and its persecution of the Cristeros fighters; in Russian, Portuguese and Spanish revolutions, in France and in the USA.
What are your plans for the next five years?
Find another dog, no. 1 priority.
I would maybe like to travel a bit, in the unlikely event of ever having some money. I would like to find a publisher for my unfinished biography of A N Field; and for the full version as a book, of my expose of the Parihaka myth (New Zealand’s version of Wounded Knee and the Sharpeville Massacre) which has been published in a redacted form in an anthropology journal. Both of these topics are rather New Zealand specific and there are no publishers in NZ who would be interested. I would like them issued as something more than simply self-published photocopied booklets. The conservative groups in NZ remain hopeless in providing alternatives with ideological and historical depth. My focus is overseas, and my hope is that Russia will revive, get real about China and provide the neo-barbarianism that is necessary to purge a decayed Civilisation and build a new Civilisation; which even the originally Slavophobic Yockey saw as a possible Euro-Russian synthesis, hopefully in place of a balkanised dis-United States that no longer functions as a world power, and an equally imploded China.
How would you like to be remembered in a hundred years?
Unless I discover a cure for cancer or walk on Mars, I will be forgotten within one or two generations, like most people. One is only remembered usually at most by one’s grandchildren after death, then that’s it. I don’t see myself as being an exception.