web analytics
Catholic Church Friedrich Nietzsche New Testament Twilight of the idols (book)

Nietzsche on the Aryan race

Excerpted from
Twilight of the Idols,
chap. The “Improvers” of Mankind:


My demand of the philosopher is well known: that he take his stand beyond good and evil and treat the illusion of moral judgment as beneath him.


A first, tentative example: at all times morality has aimed to “improve” men—this aim is above all what was called morality.

To call the taming of an animal its “improvement” sounds almost like a joke to our ears. Whoever knows what goes on in kennels doubts that dogs are “improved” there. They are weakened, they are made less harmful, and through the depressive effect of fear, through pain, through wounds, and through hunger, they become sickly beasts. It is no different with the tamed man whom the priest has “improved.” In the early Middle Ages, when the church was indeed, above all, a kennel, the most perfect specimens of the “blond beast” were hunted down everywhere; and the noble Teutons, for example, were “improved.” But how did such an “improved” Teuton look after he had been drawn into a monastery? Like a caricature of man, a miscarriage: he had become a “sinner,” he was stuck in a cage, tormented with all sorts of painful concepts. And there he lay, sick, miserable, hateful to himself, full of evil feelings against the impulses of his own life, full of suspicion against all that was still strong and happy. In short, a “Christian”…


Let us consider the other method for “improving” mankind, the method of breeding a particular race or type of man. The most magnificent example of this is furnished by Indian [Aryan] morality, sanctioned as religion in the form of “the law of Manu.” Here the objective is to breed no less than four races within the same society: one priestly, one warlike, one for trade and agriculture, and finally a race of servants, the Sudras. Obviously, we are no longer dealing with animal tamers: a man that is a hundred times milder and more reasonable is the only one who could even conceive such a plan of breeding. One breathes a sigh of relief at leaving the Christian atmosphere of disease and dungeons for this healthier, higher, and wider world. How wretched is the New Testament compared to Manu, how foul it smells!

Yet this method also found it necessary to be terrible—not in the struggle against beasts, but against their equivalent—the ill-bred man, the mongrel man, the chandala. And again the breeder had no other means to fight against this large group of mongrel men than by making them sick and weak. Perhaps there is nothing that goes against our feelings more than these protective measures of Indian [Aryan] morality.

Manu himself says: “The chandalas are the fruit of adultery, incest, and rape (crimes that follow from the fundamental concept of breeding).”


These regulations are instructive enough: we encounter Aryan humanity at its purest and most primordial; we learn that the concept of “pure blood” is very far from being a harmless concept. On the other hand, it becomes obvious in which people the chandala hatred against this Aryan “humaneness” has become a religion, eternalized itself, and become genius—primarily in the Gospels, even more so in the Book of Enoch. Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity—the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against “race”: the undying chandala hatred is disguised as a religion of love.

16 replies on “Nietzsche on the Aryan race”

Nietzsche had everything figured out hundred years ago. He fully understood the jewish question even if he said that he was not a anti-semite.

Do you really think the economic collapse is coming? ‘Peak Oil’ is just a myth you know.

When I spaek of the crash of the dollar I don’t have in mind peak oilers, but common sense (if you print trillions of dollars out of thin air, that’ll produce hyperinflation). Click on the “crash” category here and in the Addenda and see what do I mean.

Its funny but I was only the other day doing a search for Aryan & Nietzsche to see if he ever used the term. I get growled at in other forums for using Aryan instead of the uglier Indo-European etc. Nietzsche understood the strength of the Jews and the weaknesses of the Germans and could thus claim he was not an anti-Semite. Indeed we could learn a thing or two from them.

Nietzsche (correctly IMHO) blamed Christianity instead of focusing on Judaism (as WN do) as the source of our problems. Look at my collection “The Christian problem encompasses the Jewish problem” and see another stunning quotation of Nietzsche.

The hasidic jews in NYC have outbreed the “secular” jews and their numbers have grown. This show the jewish traditional strength, even in a urban, cosmopolitan enviroment the jews remain a tight group.

White Nationalists ‘do not’ take this view; only those who have tried to make WN’sm their own, have done this.

White Nationalism was concieved, if you will, in the Nietzschean sense of a independent ‘will to power’, strong enough to see who our real enemies are: ourselves. The early WN’st saw this. Those who have come on board recently, many of whom I think you have problems with, are not WN’sts in the true sense, but are only stumbling through the process.

Why are you promoting this?

You are right that if we consider Christianity and Neochristianity the main enemy our views will be “heretic” in most WN circles, where Judaism is considered Enemy Number One. However, Tom Sunic, who constantly speaks in WN circles, says about the same (and like me he also blames the One Ring of Greed and Power—economics over race).

Yes: I am busy again. Wait 24 hours and see my abridgement of one of Sunic’s articles addressing this very issue, the Christian problem. Perhaps you may want to continue this discussion there?


I have my reservations about the ‘whole crowd of intellectuals’ who see the negative side of ‘american white nationalism’, and as an aberration, and always seem to be at ‘odds’ with the philosophy of white nationalism as an inclusive racial construct, bridging the gap between Europe and America, and finding the minutae of philosophical debate as more noteworthy than our common struggle.

I, for one, appreciate your hard work on these various issues, taking to task the prime issues, rather than holding up one world-view over the other.

I look forward to your presentation.

Comments are closed.