web analytics
Categories
Sticky post

Tom Goodrich (1947-2024)

Without having read Hellstorm, the darkest hour for the white race will never be understood (book-review here). If you’ve already read it, check out ‘The Wall’.

Categories
Currency crash

Conmen

by Gaedhal

Metaphysically, I disbelieve in classically theistic gods, and revealed gods. I believe that most religions cause more harm than good most of the time. However, that said, I prefer ‘secular Catholic’ as an identifier rather than ‘atheist’. However, we in Europe have come to terms with things like secularism—which is not the same thing, at all, as state atheism—and the social safety net.

America, though, seems to be regressing into a hypercapitalist Christian Nationalist dystopia, though.

For billionaires, like Elon Musk, a third-world country is actually what they want. Third world countries are poor, religious and uneducated. In a third-world country, Churches and business are rich… it is only the majority of the country that is starving. Beside every third-world slum, there is a resplendent cathedral and Bishop’s palace. Paying attention to the first few weeks of Trump’s presidency, he seems to be doing everything in his wit and ken to turn America into a 3rd-world Christian theocracy.

An abstract wood burning art representation of a political rally, deeply infused with Christian symbolism.

Placing Pentecostalist lunatic Paula White as head of a White House “Faith Office” is exactly what we would expect, if Trump and Elon wanted to turn America into a 3rd-world Christian theocracy. And, to reiterate: billionaires, oligarchs and conmen—such as Trump and Elon—love 3rd-World Christian theocracies, because in such a polity, they are completely unaccountable.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s 2 ¢

Neither Trump nor his followers (or the Woke Democrats!) will get away with it. Finally, after much prediction from Austrian economists, the Big Boys—the Central Banks—are starting to buy tons of gold. Translated this panic into our language, they are dumping dollars. The day when the dollar collapses and is no longer the international reserve currency is no longer so far away…

Categories
Kali Yuga Sparta

Football

The fact that Donald Trump was present yesterday in a stadium watching the American football final, or that Emmanuel Macron was present at the final of the last FIFA World Cup—both football finals featuring teams with a huge number of blacks—, is a symptom that we are suffering the darkest hour for the white race (which the title of this site designates with the euphemism ‘the West’).

What a difference from those times when only pure Aryans attended the Olympics! This was before a Christian emperor banned the Olympic games (‘resumed’, centuries later in the Christian Era, admitting people of colour). Those who haven’t read our abridged translation of Eduardo Velasco’s essay on Sparta should read it now.

Categories
Holocaust William Pierce

Wm. Pierce

on the Holocaust

Thanks to the comments section of yesterday’s post, I discovered an article by William Pierce from 1981. I quote a couple of paragraphs:

Actually, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to determine the truth of the matter. There are reckless “revisionists” who assert that no Jews were killed, solely for being Jews, by the German government. That is almost certainly not true.

I have spoken with SS men who told me that they shot Jews, and I believe them. They also told me that the claims of mass killings of Jews put forth after the war have been greatly exaggerated, and I believe them on that score also.

Read it all here.

Categories
Holocaust Miscegenation

Lawyer

and prosecutor

I still can’t find a place to move, so I don’t have time to resume my full-time activities for the sacred words. But today, at the bank, and already at home watching a video on how the old left thought (‘How the Left Destroyed Itself’ with Yanis Varoufakis), my mind doesn’t stop its train of thought.

Recall once again the faces of white Mexicans in my recent post ‘Blue pill’. In one of Mexico City’s best-known malls, where I was today because the banks are open there on Saturdays, I saw a huge billboard in the car park showing a Caucasian male with a black couple. I had seen such billboards in London but apparently, they are now catching on in the third world. The West suffers from an endless hatred: an exterminationist hatred of the white race even in countries where, like Mexico, there are very few true whites.

I didn’t take a picture of the huge billboard I saw in the mall with my mobile phone (although as a priest of the holy words I don’t use a mobile phone in a city without friends, for banking matters I have to carry it). But I think we Westerners have seen such billboards in various countries.

On the other hand I must confess that, although I don’t have time to read at the moment, I find fascinating what I have barely read of the 1455-page Spanish translation, which I recently acquired, of the classic book The Destruction of the European Jews. In digital form, I own the revisionist counterpart: the Holocaust Handbooks series (pic of one of them on the left). It would take a lifetime—many years that I no longer have on my horizon—to assess both sides. Hopefully, future priests will follow my method: listen to both the prosecutor and the lawyer before rendering an educated opinion.

In any case, as we can see from my featured post ‘The Wall’, the priest is not affected by the official story as he is a man who has already transvalued his values. As a Swede said on page 83 of my anthology On exterminationism:

What is certain is that the Holocaust would not have produced any debilitating psychological effect on non-Christian whites. (By Christianity I mean ‘Christian morality.’ Most atheists in the West are still Christian, even if they don’t believe in God or Jesus.) Being emotionally affected by the Holocaust presupposes that you think: (1) Victims and losers have intrinsically more moral value than conquerors and winners, (2) Killing is the most horrendous thing a human can do, (3) Killing children and women is even more horrendous and (4) Every human life has the same value.

None of these statements ring true to a man who has rejected Christian morality. Even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathise with them. If you told the Vikings that they needed to accept Jews on their lands or give them gold coins because six million of them were exterminated in an obscure war, they would have laughed at you.

Who within the American racial right, which largely subscribes to Christian ethics, thinks like this neo-Nietzschean Hyperborean?

Categories
Axiology Racial right

Morgan’s

responses on The Unz Review

Eagle Eye: “Even back then, scientific authors were required to recite these politically-correct shibboleths to be allowed to publish at all.”

I wouldn’t say so. Phillipe Rushton and Arthur Jensen were able to publish their heretical ideas on the hereditary nature of racial differences in intelligence “back then”, along with other racial characteristics. In fact, plenty of others, too, were questioning the standard line: Hans Eysenck, Chris Brand, William Shockley, James Watson, Richard Lynn, Herrnstein & Murray (in 1994’s The Bell Curve), etc.

The biggest stumbling block was that in our Christianity-derived culture, all “souls” are supposed to have been created equal, and rightly or wrongly, most people appear to think a “soul” has something to do with mental abilities. To proclaim otherwise is looked at as a kind of blasphemy, so people are reluctant to agree, and they self-censor any doubts. I think it likely that Cavalli-Sforza actually believes what he’s saying in the quote above, although I don’t myself believe it.

Spencer J. Quinn: “In the past 15 years, geneticists have been struggling with the idea of early human ‘introgression’ with archaic hominid populations. Through introgression, members of two disparate populations mate and produce hybrid individuals, which then mate with members of either parent population.”

“Disparate populations”? LOL That palaver is a kind of cleaned-up way to put it. What it really means is that two different SPECIES crossed and produced a fertile hybrid, which of course boggles the mind of every good American, who has been told for years that the proof that niggers are the same species as whites is that a nigger/white cross can produce fertile offspring. But it’s been known for a long time that animals as taxonomically separated as sheep and goats (not even in the same genus, let alone same species) can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Oxford biologist John Baker, in his book Race, says:

These and many similar experiments were performed by others, but Buffon himself supervised experiments on the crossing of sheep with he-goats. The fact that this intergeneric cross is sometimes successful, and that the hybrids are not infertile, appears to be established. It was accepted as true by Broca, who mentions that the French have a special name, chabin, for the hybrid. Several examples of the successful outcome of this cross are quoted by Alfred Russel Wallace in his famous work Darwinism. The information he quotes suggests that the hybridity is paragenesic. The cross appears to be what Broca called ‘unilateral’, since there is evidence that the ram does not produce progeny with the she-goat.
– John Baker, Race, p. 94

America’s (and the West’s) culture of equality demands, however, that niggers be ranked as the same species as whites, even at the cost of the falsification of reality and the betrayal of scientific truth. This new information about nigger genetics, which underscores how different they really are from whites, may someday help reality break through the complex network of lies that has been constructed to obscure it, but in all frankness, I wouldn’t expect that to happen for many years, if ever. America and the entire West have bet so heavily on racial equality that both would rather immolate themselves on its pyre than admit that the whole thing has always been a lie — a lie inspired and kept in force by the most grievous Christian ignorance and misconceptions about the nature of the world.

Gregory Hood: “American Empire must serve white interests, because the core American identity is white identity. … White identity remains forbidden in public life while non-white identity is celebrated. ”

Huh?

White identity is the “core” American identity, but it’s somehow “forbidden” in public life? LOL What kind of “core” identity is that?! And how can American Empire serve it, if it’s forbidden?

The truth is, the average white American doesn’t identify as white at all, and that’s why white nationalism never gets anywhere. If forced to, a white American might reluctantly check that box on a form, but he’s not proud of it. His culture has taught him that thinking of his race as being important would be racist! Unpatriotic! Hitlerian! Anti-Christian! Almost blasphemy!

Until that changes, the downward spiral will only continue.

Rich: “The Whites I know are proud of their heritage and are angered by the anti-White, anti-Christian actions and rhetoric of leftist Americans. They vote White, they seek out White neighbors and associates. They are the largest segment of American society by numbers. It’s why republicans win elections.”

If the average white man were proud of his race, then “racist” wouldn’t be the toxic label it is. By their reaction, you can tell that whites think that that is about the worst thing you can call them. LOL Even Jeffrey Dahmer took pains to let folks know he wasn’t a racist. A serial killer, a cannibal, and a homosexual, sure, but NOT a racist!

Christianity, with its emphasis on the idea that it’s the “soul” and not the body that’s the thing that’s really important about a man, is responsible for a lot of this. Race is a property of the body, not the “soul”. A typical white Christian would rather his daughter marry a nigger who’s a Christian than a white man who’s not. It’s hard to see how that’s a sign of racial pride.

As for voting Republican, Trump explicitly condemns racism, and especially white racism, as he carefully said after the Charlottesville fiasco. He’s not a racist who values the white race above all others. He favors a race-blind meritocracy. Anyone who voted for Trump expecting him to make America white again is going to be sorely disappointed.

John Johnson: “I don’t think that is an accurate term as liberal religious beliefs are not derived from Christianity nor do they require belief in Christ or God.”

Not derived from Christianity? That’s just historically inaccurate. John Locke, often called the father of liberalism, was a Christian theologian who based his arguments about human rights on his reading of the Bible. The case for these so-called human rights is a cultural legacy of Christianity, and only Christianity. Liberals didn’t invent human rights ex nihilo.

John Johnson: “The most closely held liberal religious belief is related to evolution and not Abrahamic religion.”

This is just another way of saying that human equality is one thing there are fanatics about, and I agree. But a faith in human equality, human rights, and a supposed “brotherhood of man” reeks of Christianity, and is obviously derived from it. The genius of Christianity as a belief system is that this ethical perspective can persist without any “belief in Christ or God”, as you put it. Thus, there are even atheistic versions of Christianity, such as Marxism.

Above in #230, I made a racist revision of John Lennon’s song “Imagine”. But as historian Tom Holland observed in his book Dominion, the original version is Christian through and through.

Categories
Correspondence Philosophy of history

Dear Herr Cesar,

I hope you are doing okay on your process of realocation.

Today, I am writing to you regarding the following subject. Yesterday, I found a book on a bookstore of rare books titled Early Civilisations of the Nordic peoples by Pearson Roger.

Have you heard this book before?

Within the passages, I found some sections that caught my attention.

It states that the nordic warlike spirit has been the race downfall since ancient times, as they will keep fighting with one another with passion while sparing/pitying darker races whom they seem not worthy of challenge.

It also mentions how ironic and tragic it was that, after the nordic people have dissappeared, the darker races will also keep the culture, language and teachings brought by the fair invadors.

Very interesting book, although short and out of print now, and I found it on the “racist/white supremacist” section. It also has some references to German/French books in order to learn more about the subject of Nordic migrations. The book was first printed by the beginning of 1965.

Can you believe we still had such books just 60 years ago? Even after Germany lost the war and when commander Rockwell was still alive.

Now, the shelves on libraries are full of degeneracy, negro literature and prolefeed content. Unreal how much things have decayed in such a short period of time.

Anyhow, that will be everything for now. I may search for more “racist” lost literature here and see if I can save something for posterity. The internet and digital media are not to be trusted, specially with the raise of AI generated content.

Best regards,

Jamie

PS: My girlfriend found a picture of her great-grand-father, wrapped with a National Socialist flag and a SS Waffen officer cap. I can’t tell if he was an active soldier since he was not wearing the full uniform, but also very interesting, indeed.

Categories
Israel / Palestine Racial right

Bibi’s dream

fulfilled by silly Xtians

As to why I said yesterday that the Christian Question is more relevant than the JQ—something the American racial right doesn’t want to see—see a minute of Judge Napolitano’s interview with Matt Hoh today, starting here.

Categories
3-eyed crow

A sage

without a kingdom

The following words of a YouTuber reminded me of some things… (my translation from Spanish to English):

Being intelligent is a problem. Not because intelligence itself is negative, but because the world is not designed for those who see beyond it. From an early age you were told that intelligence would open doors, that it would make you stand out, that it would set you free. This is a lie. Intelligence doesn’t set you free, it isolates you. It doesn’t make you fit in, it separates you. It doesn’t give you an advantage, it makes you a target. If you’re here, you’ve already lived it. Overthinking is a self-imposed punishment.

This reminded me that, although I’m a 14-word priest, white nationalists—sympathisers of Christianity in general—ignore me because I realised that the CQ is more relevant than the JQ. The vlogger continues:

As your mind expands, you find superficial conversations unbearable, other people’s stupidity becomes background noise, and pervasive mediocrity feels like a weight you have to carry every day. And the worst thing is that you can’t say anything. If you do, you are arrogant. If you try to explain what you see, you are trolling. If your existence exposes the incompetence of others, you are the problem. Nietzsche understood this better than anyone. Society is not a community of individuals seeking truth; it is a control mechanism based on slave morality, a code designed to glorify obedience and punish independence.

Are you smarter than the rest? Congratulations, now you will be called arrogant. Do you think differently? Now you are conceited. Do you see what others ignore? Now you are a threat. If you talk too much, they isolate you. If you keep quiet, you end up drowning in your own mind. It’s a dead end.

That’s why so many end up faking it. They reduce their speech, disguise their thoughts, and hide their ideas behind common phrases so as not to make anyone uncomfortable. They learn to be mediocre to survive among mediocre people. And if they don’t, they are devoured.

Intelligence not only isolates you, it makes you the enemy. Because the one who sees beyond is a problem for those who have built their lives with their eyes closed. People don’t want the truth. They want confirmation of their beliefs, they want validation of their illusions, they want security in their cage. You are the crack in their walls, the reminder that they could have been something more.

Plato described this thousands of years ago in his Myth of the Cave. Imagine a group of people chained in a cave, seeing shadows on the wall, believing that this is the only reality. One day, one of them breaks free and sees the outside world. He discovers the truth. And when he returns to tell the others, what do they do? They reject him, they attack him, and they want to kill him. Because the problem is not that people don’t understand. It’s that they don’t want to understand [e.g., understand the Christian question—Editor]. It is easier to live in the dark than to accept that you have wasted your whole life looking at shadows.

The intelligent is a problem because his existence exposes the self-deception of others. If you have tried to share what you know, you have seen it with your own eyes. People don’t want depth, they want entertainment. They don’t want critical thinking, they want distraction. They are not interested in knowing reality; they want you to play along, to go with the flow, to not force them to think too hard. If you confront them with the truth, they crucify you.

That is why intelligence is an exile. No matter how hard you try, you will always be too much for the world and not enough to change it. You don’t fit into society because society is not made for those who think for themselves. It is made for stability, for conformity, for the balance of mediocrity. Those who see beyond that are ignored or destroyed. Most of history’s geniuses ended in ruin, in madness, in isolation. Not because they were incapable, but because their minds operated at a level where the rest could not follow. Socrates was condemned to death for asking uncomfortable questions. Galileo was persecuted for challenging the establishment. Nietzsche died alone and despised.

So the question is not whether intelligence is a burden. The question is what you’re going to do with it. You have two ways: pretend you’re not smarter than everyone else, reduce yourself, hide what you know, and numb your mind with banalities so you don’t feel alone. Or accept it. But accepting intelligence is not comfortable. It is to understand that you will be isolated, that you will be an outsider, and that you will never fit in. Intelligence is a condemnation if you let it be.

But it can be a tool if you learn to use it. You don’t need approval. You don’t need validation. You don’t need to fit in. You just need to know that most people will never understand you. And that it doesn’t matter. Because the world is not made for lone wolves. It’s made for herds. Intelligence doesn’t just make the weak uncomfortable. It makes those who rule uncomfortable. Because power is not maintained by force, it is maintained by ignorance. The world is not made for lone wolves, but a pack of wolves rule the flock. The difference is that the wolf of power is not a lone genius; he is a predator who learned to play by the rules of the pack. The one who is intelligent but does not understand how power works is just a sage without a kingdom.

You cannot dominate an awakened society. You cannot control thinking people. That is why, from birth, we are programmed to accept the balance of mediocrity. Ignorance is glorified, difference is punished, and genius is ridiculed. We are taught to repress our ideas, not to make too much noise, not to stand out too much. It is a systematic domestication. Foucault put it bluntly: power does not need to enslave you physically if it gets you to accept your enslavement yourself. No dictatorship is needed if the herd believes that the rules are for its own good. There is no need for explicit punishment if they make the punishment social exclusion. If you think too much, you will be an outcast. If you challenge the establishment, you’re in trouble. If you decide not to play along, you will be silenced. History bears this out. The world’s greatest thinkers were not rewarded for their genius; they were persecuted for it. The wolves who control the flock have no interest in having more wolves who might question them. If a wolf does not follow the rules of power, he is eliminated or ridiculed into a harmless buffoon.

Look around you. Look at what is glorified. Disposable culture, empty entertainment, quick and simplified thinking. It is not coincidental. It is intentional. Mediocrity is the best weapon of power. Because a sleeping mind does not rebel. Because someone distracted is easier to control. Because it is easier to entertain than to educate. The problem is that most intelligent people do not understand that they are at war. They still believe that truth alone is enough. That if they explain logically what is wrong, they will be listened to. They will not. It is not about logic. It is about power. Camus described it accurately: the man who thinks too much is confronted with the absurd. But society does not want to face the truth. It prefers the comfort of the known. That’s why the intelligent end up isolated, exhausted, and without the strength to keep fighting.

The rest I do not translate because the author doesn’t seem to understand the examples he himself gave: Socrates, Galileo and Nietzsche. In their time they had no chance to become ‘strategists’ or ‘foxes’ as the author says, as they lived against their time (remember Nietzsche’s tragic life).

Categories
Theology

“god”

and the problem of Evil

by Gaedhal

That nasty article that I linked to yesterday—which, unfortunately, is behind a paywall—confirms something that Sam Harris used to say:

‘Religion allows people to believe, in the billions, that which, if believed alone, would render one a lunatic.’

Forsooth, yea, and verily! Let us institute an International festival in honour of a mythical peasant preacher’s Jewishness. An insane idea. However, because it is in accord with the Zeitgeist of the world’s biggest religion, it is an idea that is taken seriously.

Let us call foreskin amputation—and especially the pain caused thereby—a “beautiful” thing. This is what the sicko, Margaret Hebblethwaite wrote yesterday.

There is a video of Christopher Hitchens and he was smoking a cigarette, and saying that Catholic lunatics such as John Paul 2, mother theresa—and I have no doubt that he would include Frankenpope and Hebblethwaite in this list were he still alive—are the ‘real enemy’.

And it brings us back to what John Loftus writes in Horrendous Suffering. Ironically, Christianity—it ideally should be called: ‘Judeochristianity’ as Christianity is merely a denomination of Judaism—has added, greatly to horrendous suffering.

Here we have Hebblethwaite, the Catholic, adding to the horrendous suffering of this world by advocating for this vampiric rite of child-abuse.

Ironically, the history of religion, and the horrendous harm caused by religion, is in and of itself an argument against the existence of god.

The logical problem of evil says that an Omni god would never have to resort to any sort of evil so as to accomplish his will. If God needs to resort to the allowance of evil, then he is either not all good, or not all powerful. Evil exists. QED. Quod erat demonstrandum: God does not exist. The logical problem of evil is a deductive argument for the non-existence of god. If the premises are true: an omni God would not need evil to accomplish his goals; evil exists; then the conclusion necessarily follows: God does not exist.

Despite Apologists showboating and saying that the logical problem of evil is dead, I think that it is sound. Even if an omni god did need to allow evil to accomplish his creative purposes, then he could always choose not to create. This, according to Doug is the true problem of evil. If God is a perfect and complete world unto himself, then why create a world at all, that He would know, with certainty, would bring about evil. In my view, such a god, faced with either creating a world with evil in it, or choosing not to create a world at all, would simply choose not to create.

However, the evidential problem of evil is an inductive argument. We collect data relating to horrendous suffering, of which there is a superabundance on this Hell-planet, and then we ask ourselves the question, which hypothesis best explains the data: the God hypothesis or the non-god hypothesis. And, in my view, to sincerely and honestly grapple with the problem of horrendous suffering as laid out in Horrendous Suffering by John Loftus is to arrive at the non-God hypothesis as the best explanation for the presence of so much horrendous suffering in our world.

‘James Sterba resurrected the logical problem of evil. It’s impossible that a theistic god exists. Look him up.’ —John Loftus

Yeah, apologists like to pretend that the logical problem of evil is no longer taken seriously in academic philosophy. This is just simply another lie of the apologetics’ profession.

In William Lane Craig’s debate with Christopher Hitchens, he reverses the burden of proof on the logical problem of evil: it was up to Christopher to prove that a god, whom he does not believe in, does not have morally sufficient reasons to permit evil. This is why I take the view of Venaloid, Carrier and Prophet of Zod in saying that William Lane Craig is a conman. A PhD philosopher should be able to wrap his brain around the logical problem of evil. In my view, the hypothesis that Craig is a conman is much more likely than the hypothesis that Craig is incompetent.

But even if a classically theistic god had morally sufficient reasons to allow evil, that same god, by virtue of his omnipotence, could achieve those same ends without allowing evil. The classically theistic god’s omnibenevolence would here kick in: I have two approaches available to me to achieve some end or goal. One approach allows for evil—which I supposedly hate—and another approach does not allow for evil. Well, my omnibenevolence kicks in and necessitates that I choose the approach that does not allow for the existence of evil to achieve my ends. However, evil exists. Thus, a classically theistic god does not exit. If gods there be, then that god is lacking in some omni property. That god is probably less than omniscient, or omnipotent, or omnibenevolent. QED. A deductive proof of the non-existence of a classically theistic god.

However, lest we drift into some sort of atheistic Thomism, or scholasticism, where we simply sit on our philosophical armchairs and a-priori reason all day, we also have the inductive argument against the existence of god from our gathering data as regards instances of horrendous suffering, in our world.

I am sure that William Lane Craig understands all of this very well… Indeed, better than I do. I only have a high-school/secondary-school education. Craig has two PhDs. However, Craig is a dishonest conman.

And thunderf00t—before Elon broke his brain—points this out: Craig isn’t really an academic philosopher, at all. He got two PhDs so as to employ them as props. In academic philosophy, he is a nobody.

Craig, in his own way, is as crazy and as dishonest as Ken Ham. Ken Ham similarly hires PhDs so as to deny evident reality.

Similarly with Wes Huff. Davis points out in that reality rules video, I linked in a previous email, that even though Huff is essentially a thesis and a viva voce away from a PhD, nevertheless, he spends all of his extracurricular time on apologetics, and not, you know, publishing in academic journals. Huff is the new apologetics superstar. However, it is the same modus operandi as Craig’s and Ham’s. Get a PhD. Use it as a prop so as to lie for Jaysus.

Categories
Quotable quotes

Adolf quote

‘All great movements are popular movements. They are the volcanic eruptions of human passions and emotions, stirred into activity by the ruthless Goddess of Distress or by the torch of the spoken word cast into the midst of the people’.

—Hitler