In 1914 the world descended into madness, though it did not then know that it had.  The madness was guaranteed by the mutual defense treaties between Europe’s leading alliances.  The treaty system between Europe’s leading Monarchies assured that World War I would be triggered precisely as the Socialist International had anticipated.

The problem for the Socialist International was that, at that time, they were still just a collection of chin scratchers and criminal thugs, no match for Europe’s field armies.  One can’t crawl into Leon Trotsky’s head, but if anyone could, it would have been Sigmund Freud.

Forgive me for neglecting all mention of Freud’s Oedipal Complex since that hypothesis has been well trod by both protractors and detractors alike.  I am obligated to emphasize much of early twentieth century “science” was being conducted in a cloud of opium smoke, a fact modern academia utterly neglects in its appraisal of their failings in the last century.

I will not neglect the role narcotics played in the degeneration of science between 1905 and 1939.  In the early twentieth century, just as in the early 21^st century, popular opinion about the recreational use of mind-altering substances had swung in opposition to traditional opinion which insisted that narcotics were the devil’s tool.

Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung and Alfred Adler did not agree.  Neither did a majority of the intelligentsia of that day.  Opium was still legal, but suspected, as were many of its derivatives and cousins.  I needn’t document the prevalence of drug use among Europe’s intelligentsia, and especially among the leaders of the Socialist International since it is perhaps the best documented fact of that day.

Adolph Hitler was known to have used narcotics in his early adult life and went on to direct the development of synthetic substances used by the National Socialist Worker’s Party throughout the war.  Of those patrons attending Café Central whose habits in the chemistry department are undocumented, it is safe to assume they also imbibed.

Freud consistently experimented in what came to be known as pharmaceutical psychology, but that is putting lipstick on a pig.  And that is putting it mildly.  Freud’s only contributions to modern psychology, it must be noted, are found in self-analysis accomplished under a cloud of opium intoxication.

Without getting into the illicit and disturbing details which emerged from Sigmund Freud’s “self analysis”, I will note that Freud primary failure was not to be found in the efficacy of observations made under the influence of narcotics, but in the fact Freud regarded himself as “everyman”.  By everyman I mean to say that Freud regarded himself, his psyche and all that follows from either, as representative of the human population overall.  Freud, in raw, statistical terms, regarded himself as the “mean”, as the standard against which all others may be properly evaluated.

In Sigmund Freud’s drug addled mind, what was true and correct in his own psyche must, therefore, be true and correct in everyone’s psyche.

I believe my audience will see clearly where this is going: To some very disturbed thinking.

Freud’s detractors will conclude that Freud’s Oedipal Complex, first conceived in self-analysis, then projected on all of Freud’s “patients”, is irrefutable proof of the man’s own deviant nature.  I insist it was more likely the result of narcotics induced psychosis, for what possible coherence can be expected of the mind as it’s Default Mode Network begins to disintegrate.

And though Sigmund Freud could not then know it, that is precisely what was occurring in his neurological tissues when he got high.  21^st Century neurologists can now watch, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, as the human brain begins to breakdown and the Default Mode Network governing the proper function of the brain disintegrates under the use of narcotics.

The seductive power of narcotics is masked by the endorphin rush induced when the Default Mode Network of the human brain begins to unravel.  It is within that endorphin rush that an intense sense of wellbeing, of clarity, of dissociative superiority is experienced.  During recall, individuals who voluntarily subject themselves to DMN disintegration (intoxication) universally report feeling more aware, more intellectually capable during these “highs”, but practical measure of performance in laboratory settings, all participants in subsequent studies were documented to be deluded.

Human performance under the influence of intoxicants is uniformly poor despite universal insistence by the participants their mental acuity was superior.  The participants uniformly insist their perceptions and their thinking were never better.

Narcotics induced psychosis, not an evolved cognitive state is all the Socialist International achieved at Café Central.

No historian can, of course return to London where Marx put pen to paper and codified his homicidal tendencies in scientific mumbo-jumbo, but it is well known that the leading intelligentsia of the age were open consumers of such quantities.

I’d declare garbage in, garbage out, if the damage these men did with their drug addled musings did not continue to wreak havoc on society.

In 1914, though Alfred Adler wand Sigmund Freud were colleagues and good friends, their research led them in opposite directions.  Both men explored the human mind, but where Sigmund Freud experimented as an introvert, Alfred Adler explored as an extrovert.  The individual psyche was Sigmund Freud’s plaything.  The social psyche was Alfred Adler’s plaything.

A psychoanalyst of the 21^st century would find remarkable similarities in the course both man’s research followed, and where their “observations” ultimately led.  In 1914 Sigmund Freud was then just fresh from publishing “Totem & Taboo: Resemblances between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics”, so we needn’t debate what Sigmund Freud thought about darker skinned people in distant regions of the world.

Nor can it be argued that Freud’s theories on sexuality had not already emerged from a cloud of opium smoke.  By 1914 he had already said all he had to say about his proclivities toward his mother and father.

Of note to any expert in the field of narcotic toxicology is that both a tendency toward hypersexuality, paranoia and delusion are replete in Freud’s published materials in the period 1905-1914.  There should now be little confusion on the true origins of Freudian Psychology: A chronically disintegrating Default Mode Network.

And it was there, in Freud’s observations as his Default Mode Network disintegrated that we find the residue of all of Freud’s intellectual influences.  Malthus, Darwin and Marx all conspired in Freud’s stupor to produce an explicitly racist series of papers which define Freud as the norm, and savages and neurotics as deviants.

Melanin was the mechanism of action proposed in Freud’s day.

Judging by the prominent place Freud gives the term “savages”, we needn’t explore what he thought of those with a proliferation of melanin in the skin.

Why skin would matter to a neurologist confuses everyone unfamiliar with neurophysiology.  To average men and women, individuals not vetted and indoctrinated by the Ivory Tower, racial prejudice is only skin deep.  Not true in neurology.  Not true at all.

Reasonable individuals would expect that racist attitudes in medicine are improving with every new discovery, but when it comes to role of melanin in human biology, the opposite is true.  Racism is just skin deep.  Racism is intrinsic to the human brain and, therefore, intrinsic to human psychology.  Or, at least melanin is intrinsic to neurologists like Sigmund Freud and all who follow in his discipline.

Hypotheses regarding the function of melanin in human psychology have, of course, been morphing in direct proportion with Ibn Shal’s microscope, so few of Freud’s observations remain operative.  Freud’s conclusions, which I evoke hereafter in the disciplinary sense, all do remain operative.

That requires some unravelling, so allow me to begin at the heart of the matter, the Substantia Nigra.

In 1786 by Félix Vicq d’Azyr was the first scientist to use Ibn Sahl’s microscope to identify a dark substance in the stem of the human brain.  That region came to be called the Substantia Nigra, a Latin term for “the black stuff”.

There is no fault in Felix d’Azyr’s observation or conclusion, just in its later, racist application.  No, all fault belongs to lesser men who, still ignorant to the Substantia Nigra’s true role in neurology, consistently drew racists conclusions.

The pseudoscientific fallacies which lead to the hypothesis of the “dumb nigger” and “angry nigger” of the early 20^th century all originate in the ignorance surrounding the Substantia Nigra.

In 1893, another scientist named Edouard Brissaud to hypothesize that the Substantia Nigra was the major pathological site in Parkinson’s disease. Brissaud’s hypothesis was validated in 1919, which meant the “race” was officially on to identify the role the black stuff played in human cognition.

I am here not trying to resolve the function of the Substantia Nigra, just establish the fact this critical region of the brain was center stage the year Sigmund Freud put pen to paper and published his observations on the similarities between “Savages” and “Neurotics”.

1882 Darwin died, leaving Francis Galton, Darwin’s cousin, unchecked in his application of Darwin’s theory.  Eugenics was the name Galton gave his personal twist on Darwinian evolution.  Galton could not have then known his idea would breathe scientific authority into the greatest outrage perpetrated against the family of Mankind in history.

1893, led Edouard Brissaud to formulate, in 1895, the hypothesis that the substantia nigra is the major pathological site in Parkinson’s disease. Brissaud’s hypothesis was validated in 1919, which meant the race was officially on to identify the role the black stuff played in human cognition.

Freud’s earlier treatises on the origins of human sexuality may not have been young Adolph’s cup of tea, but I assure you, Freud’s “Totem & Taboo: Resemblances between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics” was just what Hitler’s doctor ordered.

And yes, I argue, among the options available to an eager, young, Bavarian mind like Hitler’s Sigmund Freud was his preferred choice in the psychology department.  In Totem and Taboo, Freud applies his approach of psychoanalysis to the archeology and anthropology departments, a contribution which could not have failed to influence the Socialist International.

In fact, if I am reading the history of European Socialism correctly, and I am convinced I am, then Freud’s contribution to the opium cloud is what caused the rift between the three dominant wings of the Socialist International.

In 1910 the debate raging among the Proletariat was over the mechanism of action in human evolution, and the criterion by which evolution in humans could be and should be measured.  On Trotsky’s side of the table, human evolution was primarily a cognitive process, owing to no great innovations in physiology between humans and other primates.

I admit, if evolution, as Darwin and his followers imagine it is the mechanism by which life forms diversify in creation, Trotsky has a point.  Chimpanzees, for instance, are known to have first appeared in the fossil record about 50 million years ago.  50 million years ago a species suddenly appears then…nothing.

Nothing at all. 

Focus here, especially if you believe in evolution as proposed by Darwin and adhered to up until this very minute.

50 million years ago a distinct species of primate appears on the fossil record then stops evolving.

Seriously.  Forget religion for a minute.  I am not one of those Christians who believes God created the universe in six, twenty-four-hour periods.  If your basis for scientific comparison is the six-day-work-week, you cannot fail to be closer to the truth no matter how flawed is your theory.

I ask you to consider the ramifications of single species, but in strict adherence to evolutionary theory.  If the chimpanzee we all know and love today suddenly appeared, as it did 50 million years ago, why has it not exhibited a single, substantial morphological change since?

In Darwinian evolution, is not biological evolution an ongoing process that occurs over millions of years?  Of course, that is precisely what every evolutionary biologist has insisted since Darwin first boarded the Beagle.

Am I wrong?

If we are agreed that I am not, we may proceed.

What do we consider a species which suddenly appears and does not evolve physically in any measurable way? 

I pray we will still call it a species, but we can’t say it is evolving.  Ture, it may have evolved, but that has yet to be observed to have occurred anywhere.

I am not saying chimpanzees did not evolve.  But neither can any scientist demonstrate with any documentable criterion that chimpanzees are evolving.  Evolved is past tense.  Evolving is an ongoing tense which connects the past to the future.  Chimpanzees may have evolved, but they certainly did not continue evolving.  No.  Quite the opposite of “evolution” occurs in the chimpanzee species of primate.  Chimpanzees appear then remain identical across 50 million years of existence.

This is not an observation isolated to chimpanzees, folks.  This is an observation which can be made about every member of the primate family.

Affix this conundrum firmly in your mind, for we are destined to return to the subject matter in the 1930s.  The young Adolph, as we all know, grew up to become a methamphetamine addict with raging paranoia, and increasingly acute homicidal tendencies.

The man fostered then commissioned trams of craniologists to venture forth into the wider world to measure then catalogue the proportions of human skulls.  The reasons?  Because he was attempting to document the morphological path the Aryan race took from Atlantis to Germany.

Every delusion can be traced to a logical origin.  The delusion of the Master Race can be traced to a cloud of opium lingering in the air at Café Central in Vienna in 1910.  There, among the Literati feasting on papers written by Alfred Adler, Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud, were any number of “pamphlets”, factional newspapers socialists at the children’s table published containing the vomit which natural results from such a feast.

Trotsky & Company insisted human evolution was no longer tethered to physiology, and therefore the proletariat could evolve in any place on earth, provided they read the “Spark” he edited.  Socialists destined to become the National Socialists rejected that claim and insisted that evolution had to be body, mind and psyche, a wholistic approach to use a modern term.

To any casual onlooker this may have appeared nothing more than an intellectual joust, but not to the combatants.  You see, the proletariat were defined by Karl Marx himself, the first of that evolved species of hominid, as a species which attained class consciousness together, and the uniformity, the solidarity of that consciousness defined the species.

What began to occur at Café Central was obviously not uniform of thought and, therefore, contradictory to the thesis.

And one does not contradict the thesis and retain one’s status among the Proletariat.

No.  Not at all.

It was there, I argue, at Café Central where the Paradox of the Proletariat was first in evidence, for where Marx’s thesis required unanimity of consciousness, and that required unanimity of thought, any deviation of thought from consensus formed an existential crisis.

Regrettably, the young men and women at the kid’s table did not turn on each other in that moment.  How could they, when all hell broke loose. 

I would love to have been a fly on the wall at Café Central the day news of Archduke Ferdinand’s assassination reached the kid’s table.  It was, after all, one of their number, an Anarchist who staged that outrage.

The look on Trotsky’s face would have been telling indeed.  Up until the moment of that assassination, Trotsky & Company were precisely what they appeared to be, chin scratching blowhards with a bad caffein and opium habit.

Following the assassinations of 1914, Trotsky & Company realized Alfred Adler’s theories on the Social Psyche worked, with deadly effect!  All of Europe was outraged.  If the psychology department was correct, and the Substantia Nigra was the fuse in the neurological fuse box, the spectacle of an innocent man and his wife gunned down in cold blood was all it took overcome the Substantia Nigra’s role in the human brain.

Trotsky & Company departed Café Central with a mission. 

The young Adolph Hitler, having just witnessed the “savages” of Eastern Europe throw his dignified world into chaos, left that café with ambitions of his own.  

The two words most frequently overheard between Trotsky and Adler, the words “superior” and “inferior”, resonated in Adolph’s memory for decades to come, likely until the very moment he put a pistol to his own head, the day Adolph finally stopped “evolving”.