Napoleon:Is the depiction so frequently seen in the traditional textbooks of his history a folk devil of an intention to further the grandiose ambitions of a post World War Two society?Part of his legend is based on his being ridiculed as a young military cadet but later coming to extreme power.The issue should you find yourself in a similar position of ridicule is whether such circumstances are oracular or whether there is no hope to be drawn from such group dynamics.This is a philosophical dilemma about the nature of truth.Of course Napoleon had experienced enough hardship in his childhood to have a claim that the obstacles to his ambition were of injustice.He was widely read and had a heart of gold and conversely was guilty of immoderate behaviour.With such mixed credentials what right did he have to claim superiority over his peers except that this ambition was indeed mitigated by some beautiful qualities and in life there is power to achieve splendid levels of material comfort should one possess an ambition based on an obsession with the possibly erroneous nobility of royalty and soldiering
Ho Chi Min:A lesson in hatred.There is a reason for the fearful propaganda of capitalist societies regarding communists and that is that they were indeed fearful.In Ho Chi Minh we witness the dragon that is Asian spirituality.The wispy beard and longish hair of this man were of humorous appearance to the Vietnamese as they were the traditional fashion of the stereotypical wise man in South East Asian culture.When there is an obvious threat to your community don't add to their burden by claiming ownership of a struggle by claiming that as a leader their destiny is in your hands.Humour is a fabulous antidote to conceit
Che Guevara:Here we see the age-old scandal of moderately good looking people..His exploits were not especially terrific and his middle class background gives much validity to the claim that he was suffering from the Tarzan syndrome whereby suburban males miraculously become the archetypal warrior and lover.However his image has become world famous and remains so despite his passing away over thirty years ago.So how do you secure your place as a claimant to such a macho legend?The obvious answer is to in today's more competitive world directly take up a military lifestyle and then you will have an increased chance of getting some street credibility.However unlike Che Guevara there is no chance that you will stumble upon it.
.JF.K:How do you respond to a mongrel such as this.On the one hand he was the prodigy of a faultless clan of ambitious go getters and on the other a hypocrite who believed that his wife was sacrosanct whilst at the same time his infidelity was rampant.From personal experience it is most insightful to herein recognise the Dark Side but I purposefully remind the reader of the political dimensions of recurrent nostalgia about Celtic and other dead religions.Obviously J.F.K was despised by many Americans owing to his Irish ancestry but this very same blood created a man of the people.His story is a lesson in historiography at a time when 'Big Brother'is losing patience with childish conspiracy theories.Therefore his story is both a psychological/biological portrait and a fairytale in so far as it has become a story whose existence in the mindset of Western citizens is problematical to the following sector of society,the aliens.So should you have difficulty in recognising an alien this is the essential formula;they will exhibit no signs of mutation which is the preserve of humans who have due to their inferior intelligence and superior courage suffered greater physical deteriation.But remember although your memory is evidence of your having once been a human this may no longer be applicable due to your having forgotten whether your soul and birthname are that which your consciousness now belongs and other aliens will without any cessation criticise your ambition as obviously sentiment, honour and logic being the qualities of ambition which are despised by aliens.However there is salvation for those who are worried by either the falsity or truth of this claim.Firstly there is significant historical evidence to suggest that primitive societies were visited by alien or advanced beings.Should you immediately be sceptical as infact I remain do not forget that this is a belief of a large number of voting citizens and has become a part of spirituality of which belief is sometimes amongst the ignorant a foundation for contemporary sprituality.If the use of the term alien immediately inspires bodily new age rejection symptoms I will redefine those categories as two coexisting groups,firstly the humans who claim that 'It is Good to be good because it's good'and those who believe it's 'necessary to be necessary because it's necessary' the latter being those in opposition to J.F.K conspiracy theories and the least likely to have an alcohol problem.If you happen to feel at some time threatened by those who espouse alternative radical theories there is no point in trying to protest about the lack of evidence to support such views as we live in societies founded on greater erroneous claims such as the existence of deities and these same traders in circular arguments about what is good or just might sacrifice you on the basis of being evil.Equally dangerous should you happen to promote an alternative radical theory are those who believe it's 'necessary to be necessary because it's necessary' as they will conscientiously destroy your right to free expression on the basis that you can't prove your claims.Part of the solution when we encounter the 'story' of J.F.K and other stories told in bars and universities is to recognise that neither school will ever achieve absolute truth as language can't follow truth.Then you should retreat on the basis that you can't abide such vulgar prattle,the insight being retreat may be the best policy in a world where guns are produced and mens' brains blown out.
So what of the biological/psychological portrait of J.F.K? His infidelity, his Irish ancestry, his Catholicism and his stand over missiles in Cuba?In regards to his exciting sexual conquests one must answer which came first, his success and then the sex or his sexuality and then the success or in other words 'which came first the chicken or the egg?Immediately there is the temptation to interpret the two possibilities as describing two growth phases of the same individual animal but might not there be an evolutionary or creationist aspect to the question specifically 'how did the animal come into being, as a chicken or an egg?Now let me ask you this if the egg came first then how did it get there first?In fairness if we surmise that the chicken got there first we must summise that its existence occurred through a process other than that of an embryo in a shell.Therefore I conclude J.F.K's promiscuity was a component in his giving birth to his abundantly fortuitous career and although I may be criticised of fallacious syllogism it is worthwhile noting that capitalist purists must according to their own principles find the work of Sophists to be meritorious whilst it is no coincidence that an individual would be sexual in order to further their rise to power just as the Ancient philosophers were astute in order to fill their coffers.Also the issue of his hypocrisy might be best examined in the dread way pagans regarded an eclipse of the Sun.Their sacrifice of human victims sent rivers of blood splashing over the feet of the pagan clerics but their deeds were accompanied by a certain majesty which later humanists admired as useful.Will there ever be a successful renewal of European Pagan culture?Too much was destroyed by the onset of Christianity and the fall of the Western arm of the Roman Empire to facilitate a realistic revival.But what of the possibility of J.F.K's retaining some personal traits since before his forebears were Baptised probably no later than one thousand years earlier?Certainly a poetic quality of the personality is recognised in literary tradition as resembling the powerful and turbulent heroism of the pagan people.His Catholicism adds to the mix the early Christian mysticism such as Arthurian romance providing those famous observations of an American Camelot embodied in the Presidency and marriage of Kennedy.For those wishing to emulate the success of J.F.K one should recognise the strength of a belief in love defined by categories which currently are seen with the arrival of homosexual relationships,philosophical and free love and in Kennedys'example love flavoured by higher culture.Such beliefs if they are defended and taken seriously by the individual provide the personal character required to face huge dilemmas and triumph as demonstrated by Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis in which more was required than logical thought alone.
Machiavelli:If you become concious that in life you are enjoying whatever struggle or torment you are facing this represents the will-o-the-wisp fire power which is intelligence.For any Christian the most intelligent strategies in achieving greatness are charity,humility and fantasy.An intelligent human will encounter fantasy first and then humility and if they have survived humility they will be charitable and if they have courage diligence and strength they will recreate themselves starting with fantasy.This is why we have religion as it assists us in this process.
Emperor Maximillian:The peril of genius given to those who are already wealthy and powerful owing to hereditary rights.I recommend getting an IQ test.There is always a place for Science in every society.The happiest Genius's are the least famous because such superiority will not achieve gratification in a material world as all holy prophets have described since the beginning of recorded history.However if you be a genius there is nothing wrong with hiding behind pomp and ceremony except that the biological brilliance of your mind will be eroded due to depression but should you abdicate the power will be given to humans who cannot recreate this intelligence.Also the moral majority will despise you for not sheltering intelligent qualities in your lineage however dormant they may seem.
Papillon:At least for those of you who have experienced misery and lived to tell your tale there can be humour to be found whist co-existing with those who you feel have been blessed with happier pasts.However their company will not satisfy your desire for justice and possibly love but you might find greater happiness, relatively happiness is simply the phases in life where you don't cry.Being captured is not a disgrace but rather a loss of the opportunity to pursue life goals.
Stalin:The most successful bandit of the twentieth century and a failure of a person.Not being a communist whose only similarity with Adolf Hitler was Evil and whose adoration by so many Europeans especially Eastern Europeans was a belief in mediocrity.This is not to say that Europeans do not seek good but many do love mediocrity being choices which do not involve any consideration of historical precedent or intellectualism.Now to understand the success of Stalin do not look upon his evil but his mediocrity for this is a source of bravery whose destruction I can not reveal to the uninitiated because I am a believer in excellence.When describing Stalin I shall in an unbiased way talk specifically about evil.Evil is obviously something to be avoided as this is the nature of evil.Who has ordained that humans should avoid evil?The answer is our minds because the heart is a fickle beast willing to partake of both good and evil in any situation.This is the dilemma for every religion as love in all creeds is honoured but disturbs the moral order of the moral majority in any society.I am not against love but should you choose to be guided by its precepts you must find the appropriate clause that exists in every society to live your love with indemnity or else be condemmed.Behaviours such as incest and bestiality are noble in the classical tradition.Stalin hated his Mother but on those Georgian steppes he should have made love to her like the barbarian that he was.
Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola: Did or does Orpheus exist? Is there a human being who can conceivably love every other human being? The answer is no because there is no such thing as unrequited love.What is the problem with fundamentalism and is it unfair? Fundamentalism is unfair because when we sin it is always unholy and when we do a good deed it is always holy.
Jim Morrison:What is friendship? Actually these are the tears that you shed when an injustice is done to you on the basis that it offends your kindred spirits.
Jacki Onassis:Is there validity to feminism?No there is not because women as a component of this species should not be constricted in their ambition to achieve predominance over men or other individuals of their own sex.
Ned Kelly:The Messiah of kindness.Should you claim that your activity is ostensibly for the benefit of mankind you will know that you are succeeding when other people are trying to kill you and you will have achieved success when they do.
Elvis Presley:Will the flamboyance of 1950's Rock n Roll ever again erupt on a world stage or are we too timid to accept it and if so why?Of course it will never again be ours to enjoy.Rock n Roll was written for the poor and these days nothing is done for the poor.Even the poor don't like the poor.If you were to create a society in isolation with strict observance of Christian morality as seen in the deep South of America in the nineteen fifties and forbade them to play anything other than acoustic instruments for the first thirty years of their existence then you would witness the development of a new genuine musical style.