Category Archives: Rants

In Defense Of…

James Churchward (1851-1936)


During my research into the life in theories of my great grandfather James Churchward, I have had the opportunity to interact with many different people with wide ranging views. For some, his theories are blasphemy to their beliefs, deserving of vitriolic screeds and condemnation. For others, his words require the solemnity of scripture when referenced and then there are all the folks in between the two extremes.

Originally, my predilection was to believe his theories were bunk; however, since I had yet to read or research what he wrote, I was just parroting what someone else said. I looked into his sources and found the proof I needed; but it didn’t answer the question, “Why after 90 years or so were his theories still being discussed and his books sold?” This part of the quest took longer and maybe a definite answer will arise eventually, but I have some thoughts.

Some of the naysayers would respond the reason is racism. The author’s late 19th century mindset and approach is the evidence. I addressed this some years ago. If the reader weighed 90 years old works against today’s enlightened mindset, of course you can find something to complain about. James isn’t alive today to modify his theories according to the latest evidence or defend himself. His writings are water under the bridge. The few passages where the critics attack his works actually point out the weakness of their argument (and James.) The critics attack his supposition that the white “Maya” colonized the planet and brought civilization to the rest of the world’s people. James really wrote that all people were from the lost continent of Mu. They all enjoyed a high level of civilization and were educated, fed and clothed in a peaceful society. Where did the people not on the continent of Mu come from? If everyone came from Mu, who did the white “Maya” conquer and “civilize”? Likewise, when James asserts the Mongols wiped out the white “Maya” in Central America – “Where did the Mongols come from?” I really don’t believe it is racism maintaining the continued promulgation of James Churchward works. I’ve met James followers of all colors and creeds and none of them discussed an opinion where his works were abhorrent or overtly racist

On the other hand, looking at it in context, James was in his early 70s when he started speaking on WNYC in 1924. Along with his other speaking engagements and written articles, James began to gain a following. In 1926, his first book was published as fiction, according to his biographer. The next printing of his books coincided with the Great Depression and flew off the shelves. Income from book sales would have been helpful for the aged retiree. The underlying message in James books is humanity had a common origin. Together, they built a great civilization with no strife. People lived in peace and harmony. AND together as humans, we can accomplish it again. For many people, even today, that is an exciting possibility and provides hope for a brighter future. I can’t find fault with someone looking for a brighter future.

So, the bottom line is there is a myriad of opinions of my great grandfathers works. As far as I’m concerned, neither extreme should be counted as anathema and people should not be judged according to their reading list. The over-the-top rhetoric attempting to silence alternate viewpoints drives people apart and is in direct opposition to James’ ideal. Such harsh pronouncements deter open and honest discussions where minds can be changed, and common ground established.

This is not a defense of James writings; it is a defense of everyone’s right to think for themselves according to their conscience. James Churchward was right on one point; human beings are all one big family. I’m all for a greater understanding of this concept.

Suspect Research website

As mentioned before, I occasionally receive emails with proof of my great-grandfather’s theories.
The link contained in a recent email appeared odd.
As shown below, the title of “Bullfinch Mythology” just doesn’t mix with the subtitle, “Stories of a Great Flood in Polynesia and Micronesia.”

Bullfinch’s Mythology is a 19th century classic, but I didn’t remember reading a chapter about flood myths. Given the benefit of the doubt, I’ll accept that it is probably an error.

The next lower title on the webpage is the title of chapter 13 of volume number 1 of “Folk-Lore In The Old Testament: Studies In Comparative Religion Legend And Law.” The three volumes by Scottish folklorist James George Frazer published in 1918 and not as well known as “The Golden Bough” which was first published in 1890.
One wonders why part of the title is missing?
Where are the notes contained in the original?

Further investigation was hampered when I attempted to navigate to another page for more data. My browser found a redirect command there and stopped the visit.
As far as I am concerned, that was strike three. I know where the original text is located and there is zero risk involved in accessing that text.
I do not know what games they are playing and I do not have to join.
Therefore, I will not provide a direct link to the website, proceed at your own risk.

I’ll put an examination of Frazer’s flood myths on my to-do list…

SPLC Equates Belief in Ancient Civilizations and Aliens With Being a Nazi

This past week the Southern Poverty Law Center posted an article in their Hatewatch section entitled Close encounters of the racist kind

The modern far right is crisscrossed with pseudo-scientific research into lost Aryan super-civilizations, biblical giants, ancient astronauts and the occasional inter-dimensional alien.

I should stop here and allow the reader to read the SPLC article and make up their own mind to avoid the inevitable name-calling and other nonsense my comments might draw; however that would be out of character.

First, I covered racism in one of my podcasts in 2009 (please listen to the end if you have yet to watch it.)

I completely agree with SPLC characterization of some theories being racist. I don’t have any hesitation to call it what it really is or to point it out when I see it. I also believe some people today support their racist ideology with the discredited theories of the past.

ON THE OTHER HAND – I do see problems with their broad generalizations.
First, not every person reading or researching the discredited theories of the past realizes or identifies with the underlying racism. While my great-grandfather’s theory proclaims an ancient advanced civilization ruled by white people, if you missed the one sentence where it is written in the beginning of his books, you may not recognize the racist content. Sure, there are other passages deemed racist; however unless you are a northern Australian bushman, James didn’t say nasty things about you or your ancestors. (see James Churchward, Mu, and Australia)
Grouping everyone who believes in ancient civilizations as a Nazi is like claiming everyone who voted for Donald Trump to be a Nazi or everyone who voted for Hillary Clinton to be a Communist. All three broad generalizations are equally distasteful (and I personally do not care to read any ad hominem attacks or hear your opinion concerning either candidate or their supporters.)

Second, holding historic figures up to today’s politically correct values and standards is a large load of male cow manure.
It also appears to be a vehicle to denounce and rewrite history. These people were products of their generation and held beliefs according to their upbringing and current societal norms; to discard them from history because of a self-righteous attitude stinks of elitist social theories. While we may object to aspects of people’s beliefs, I do not believe we should erase them from memory; there are other contributions to society and civilization they made while living within the system they were born into. If one day, some of the elitist theories are no longer in vogue and subject to the whims of self-righteous individuals, will it be OK to delete those people from history?

In summary – ANY person making decisions or statements based on someone’s skin color is racist. PERIOD

PS Does the SPLC have articles on organizations and people denigrating Caucasians or is that not considered hate?