web analytics

Month: January 2018

Categories
Alexandria Civil war Evropa Soberana (webzine) Josephus Judea v. Rome (masthead of this site)

Apocalypse for whites • XVII

by Evropa Soberana

 
Ethnic disturbances in Egypt
In Alexandria, the Greeks organised a public assembly in the amphitheatre to send an embassy to the emperor. The Jews, who were interested in parleying with Nero, came in large crowds, and as soon as the Greeks saw them, they began to shout, called them enemies, accused them of being spies, ran towards them and attacked them (according to Josephus’ version of the event).
Other Jews were killed while fleeing, and three were captured and burned alive. The rest of the Jews soon arrived to defend their coreligionists, beginning to throw stones at the Greeks and then threatening to set fire to the amphitheatre.

Tiberius Julius Alexander, the governor of the city, tried to convince the Jews not to provoke the Roman army, but this advice was taken as a threat: the tumults continued and, consequently, the governor, without patience, introduced two legions in the city, the Legio III Cyrenaica and the Legio XXII Deiotariana, to punish the Jewish quarter.
The legions were given carte blanche to kill the Jews and also to loot their property, whereupon the soldiers entered the ghetto and, according to Jewish sources, burned houses with Jews inside, also killing women, children and the elderly until the whole neighbourhood was full of blood and 50,000 people were dead.
The survivors, desperate, begged Alexander for mercy, and the governor took pity on them. He ordered the legions to cease the massacre, and they obeyed in the act. Alexander would later participate in the siege of Jerusalem.

Categories
Civil war Evropa Soberana (webzine) Jerusalem Judea v. Rome (masthead of this site) Nero Tacitus

Apocalypse for whites • XVI

by Evropa Soberana

‘The East wants to rebel and Judas
wants to take over world dominion’.

—Tacitus

 
First Judeo-Roman war: The Great Jewish revolt (66-73 CE)
In the year 66, Florus arrived in Jerusalem, where he demanded a tribute of seventeen talents from the temple treasury. Eleazar ben Hanania, the son of the high priest, reacted by stopping the prayers and sacrifices in honour of the emperor of Rome, and ordered to attack the Roman garrison. The garrison responded by killing around 3,600 Jews, looting the market, entering homes, arresting many of the Jewish leaders, whipping them in public and make them crucified. The next day, however, the concentration of rebellious Jews had increased. A civil war was about to explode.
On August 8, 66 CE the Zealots and Sicarii struck a quick blow in Jerusalem: they murdered the Roman detachment and put all the Greeks to the sword. In a synchronized way, the Jews from all provinces and Roman colonies rose up. In Jerusalem a council was formed that sent sixty emissaries throughout the Empire with the goal to trigger the various Jewish quarters. Each one of these emissaries declared himself the Messiah and proclaimed the beginning of a sort of ‘new order’. Herod Agrippa, the ethnarch of Judea, in view of the fact that the popular masses were in full boiling, chose to take his suitcases and leave the province for a good season.
The outcome was the return of Jewish uprisings and, in reaction, more anti-Jewish pogroms in Caesarea, Damascus and Alexandria, not counting the intervention of the Roman legions, which harshly repressed the Jewish quarters of the aforementioned cities and also in Ashkelon, Hippos, Tire and Ptolemaida. The more moderate and sensible Jewish sectors advised to immediately reach an agreement with Rome, but the criterion that was going to prevail among Jewry was that of the Sicarii and Zealots who, fanatically, vowed to fight to the death, entrenching themselves in the impregnable fortresses of Jerusalem, fortifying the walls of the city and mobilizing the entire population.
Under the command of Nero, Cestius Gallus, the Roman legate in Syria, concentrated troops in Acre (a square that would be many centuries later an important strategic centre of the European Crusaders) with the aim of marching to Jerusalem, devastate the Jewish populations found on his way and crush the revolt. Gallus took the city of Jaffa, killing 8,400 Jews. Later the refugees would regroup in the city and devote themselves to banditry and piracy, attracting a second Roman intervention, in which the city would be definitely razed and another 2,400 Jews killed.
After encountering the solid fortifications of Jerusalem, Gallus’ forces withdrew, and were intercepted by the Jewish fanatics in an ambush directed by elements from the Zealots and the Sicarii, who massacred 6,000 Romans in the same place in which the Maccabees had defeated the Macedonians centuries before. The Jews, excited by the symbolic repetition of the event, formed a government led by the most fundamentalist elements, and minted coins with the inscription ‘Zion’s freedom’.
This tragic disaster undoubtedly moved the Roman authorities to take more seriously the rebellion’s operations. Nero put General Vespasian in charge of the repression. With four legions—the Legio V Macedonica, the Legio X Fretensis , the Legio XII Fulminata and the Legio XV Apollinaris, a total of 70,000 soldiers, that is to say, a formidable force, although it faced an enemy far superior in number—Vespasian quelled the Jewish revolt in the north of the province, re-conquering Galilee in the year 67, capturing there Josephus, the famous historian and Samaria and Idumea in 68.
The Jewish leaders John of Giscala (Zealot) and Simon bar Giora (Sicarii) fled to the fortified Jerusalem.

Categories
Justice / revenge Quotable quotes Real men

SIEGE quote

‘Best of all is the fact that Franklin supposedly has been killing mixed couples… the rotten Whites right along with the Blacks. Bravo!’

—SIEGE, page 275

Categories
Civil war Ethnic cleansing Evropa Soberana (webzine) Josephus Judea v. Rome (masthead of this site) Nero

Apocalypse for whites • XV

by Evropa Soberana

Chapter 2

 
The Jewish-Roman wars
In the previous chapter we discussed an anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish and anti-Christian) repression that the Roman Emperor Nero ordered in the year 62. Now we will see how all the previous events evolved into an escalation of ethnic violence, which will culminate with the unleashing of three immense wars in which, for the first time, we will see the eradication of the Greek ethnic communities of Asia Minor and North Africa at the hands of the Jewish uprisings.
In 64, Nero sends Gessius Florus as procurator to the province of Judea. The historian Josephus blames Florus for all the tumults that happened in the area, but the truth is that, as we have seen, they did not start with him—and, because he was a Jew and a Sadducee, the works of Josephus must always be read with caution (for example, he has a writing called Against the Greeks, in which he makes apology for Judaism).
In Caesarea, a Jewish sympathizer of Hellenism sacrificed several birds in front of the synagogue, which, in the traditional Jewish mentality, ‘contaminated’ the building, as we have seen several times before. With this precedent, but with a long history of previous hostility, the Greek and Jewish communities of Caesarea became entangled in a judicial dispute in which, with Roman mediation, the Greeks won. Under the advice of Gessius Florus, Nero revoked the citizenship of the Jews of the city—which left them at the mercy of the very anti-Jewish population of Greece.

Nero Claudius Caesar
Augustus Germanicus

The Greeks soon began a massive pogrom during which they massacred thousands of Jews. Florus and the Roman military—who logically identified with the Greeks rather than with the Jews, and perhaps even planned to use the Greeks as the vanguard of ethnic cleansing in the area—did not intervene to protect the Jewry or pacify the city, allowing Jews to be murdered and synagogues to be profaned on port and starboard.
According to Josephus, when the rabbis took away the sacred scrolls to save them from being burned by the flames, Florus ordered them to be thrown into dungeons. This was too much for a group as cohesive as the Jews, and they reacted with more violence, which only intensified the pogrom and made it spread to other populations, with the consequent Roman reprisals.
Jerusalem, then, began to fill with Jewish refugees from Caesarea and other areas whose houses had been burned and whose property had been confiscated by the Romans, claiming vengeance and oozing resentment from all pores. The massacre of Jews in Caesarea turned out to be the trigger of a great war that, in any case, had been taking place for some time.

Categories
Julian (novel) Literature

Julian, 24

Julian presiding at a conference of Sectarians
(Edward Armitage, 1875)

 
In January 350, Ecebolius and I got permission to move on to Pergamon. We made the three-hundred-mile trip in bitter cold. As we rode through the perpetual haze of steam from our own breath, I recall thinking, this must be what it is like to campaign in Germany or Russia: barren countryside, icy roads, a black sky at noon and soldiers behind me, their arms clattering in the stillness. I daydreamed about the military life, which was strange, for in those days I seldom thought of anything except philosophy and religion. I suspect that I was born a soldier and only “made” a philosopher.
At Pergamon, Ecebolius insisted we stay at the palace of the Greek kings, which had been made available to me. But when the prefect of the city (who had most graciously met us at the gate) hinted that I would have to pay for the maintenance of the palace, Ecebolius agreed that we were better off as guests of Oribasius, who had also met us at the gate, pretending not to know me but willing, as a good courtier, to put up the Emperor’s cousin. In those days Oribasius was far richer than I and often lent me money when I was short of cash. We were like brothers.
Oribasius took delight in showing me his city. He knew my interest in temples (though I was not yet consciously a Hellenist), and we spent several days prowling through the deserted temples on the acropolis and across the Selinos River, which divides the city. Even then, I was struck by the sadness of once holy buildings now empty save for spiders and scorpions. Only the temple of Asklepios was kept up, and that was because the Asklepion is the centre of the intellectual life of the city. It is a large enclave containing theatre, library, gymnasium, porticoes, gardens, and of course the circular temple to the god himself. Most of the buildings date from two centuries ago, when architecture was at its most splendid.
The various courtyards are filled with students at every hour of the day. The teachers sit inside the porticoes and talk. Each teacher has his own following. Unfortunately when we came to the portico where Aedesius was usually to be found, we were told that he was ill.
“After all, he’s over seventy,” said a raffish youth, dressed as a New Cynic. “Why don’t you go to Prusias’ lectures? He’s the coming man. Absolutely first-rate. I’ll take you to him.” But Oribasius firmly extricated us from the young man’s clutches. Cursing genially, the admirer of Prusias let us go. We started back to the agora.
“That’s how a lot of students live in Pergamon. For each new pupil they bring to their teacher, they are paid so much a head.” Just behind the old theatre, Oribasius pointed to a small house in a narrow street. “Aedesius lives there.”
I sent one of my guards to ask if the philosopher would receive me. After a long wait, a fat woman with a fine grey beard and spiky moustache came to the door and said firmly, “He can see no one.”
“But when will he be able to?”
“Perhaps never,” she said, and shut the door.
Oribasius laughed. “His wife. She’s not as nice as she looks.”
“But I must meet him.”
“We’ll arrange it somehow. Anyway, tonight I’ve something special for you.”
That something special was the woman philosopher, Sosipatra. She was then in her forties but looked much younger. She was tall and though somewhat heavy, her face was still youthful and handsome.
When we arrived at her house, Sosipatra came straight to me, knowing exactly who I was without being told. “Most noble Julian, welcome to our house. And you too, Ecebolius. Oribasius, your father sends you greetings.”
Oribasius looked alarmed, as well he might: his father had been dead three months. But Sosipatra was serious. “I spoke to him just now. He is well. He stands within the third arc of Helios, at a hundred- and-eighty-degree angle to the light. He advises you to sell the farm in Galatia. Not the one with the cedar grove. The other. With the stone house. Come in, most noble prince. You went to see Aedesius today but his wife turned you away. Nevertheless, my old friend will see you in a few days. He is sick at the moment but he will recover. He has four more years of life. A holy, good man.”
I was quite overwhelmed, as she led me firmly by the hand into a dining-room whose walls were decorated with pictures of the mysteries of Demeter. There were couches for us and a chair for her. Slaves helped us off with our sandals and washed our feet. We then arranged ourselves about the table. All the while, Sosipatra continued to talk in such a melodious voice that even Ecebolius, who did not much like the idea of her, was impressed.
“Do you know the beautiful story of Aedesius and his father? No? It is so characteristic. The father wanted his son to join him in the family business. But first he sent him to school at Athens. When Aedesius returned from school, he told his father that it was now impossible for him to go into business. He preferred to become a philosopher. Furious, his father drove him out of the house, shouting, ‘What good does philosophy do you now?’ To which Aedesius replied, ‘It has taught me to revere my father, even as he drives me from his house.’ From that moment on, Aedesius and his father were friends.”
We were all edified by this story. Sosipatra was indeed a fountain of wisdom, and we were fortunate to drink of her depths.
Priscus: Did you ever meet this monster? I once spent a week with her and her husband at Pergamon. She never stopped talking. Even Aedesius, who was fond of her (I think he was once her lover), thought her ignorant, though he would never have admitted it. He, by the way, was an excellent man. After all, he was my teacher and am I not, after Libanius, the wisest man of our age?
Libanius: Irony?
Priscus: But though Sosipatra was hardly a philosopher, she was a remarkable magician. Even I came close to believing in her spells and predictions. She also had a sense of drama which was most exciting. Julian was completely taken in by her, and I date his fatal attraction to this sort of thing from that dinner party.
Incidentally, a friend of mine once had an affair with Sosipatra. When the act was over, she insisted that he burn incense to her as she lay among the tangled sheets. “For I am Aphrodite, goddess come among men.” He burned the incense but never went to bed with her again.
Maximus also thought that Sosipatra was divine, or at least “inhabited from time to time by the spirit of Aphrodite”. Which made her sound rather like an inn. I always found her tedious. But she was often accurate in her predictions. Lucky guesses? Who knows? If the gods exist, which I doubt, might they not be every bit as boring as Sosipatra?
Libanius: As always, Priscus goes too far. But I rather agree with him about Sosipatra. She did talk too much. But then, who am I to criticize her when one of my oldest friends has just told me to my face that I bore all Antioch?

Categories
Women

Alt-Right vs. the sceptics

I have been very critical of the webzine Counter-Currents but these days Greg Johnson has two excellent articles about the recent debacle of the YouTube ‘sceptic community’ stepping into the ring with the Alt Right:

I mostly agree but have to say something about Johnson’s reply to Sargon’s question #8: Should women have a role in public life? Johnson believes that only a few women could be involved in politics.
This makes me very nervous. Women are wired to raise kids and, if childless, start to transfer their innate pity towards the downtrodden, even toward the Jews in Roman times (see e.g., what happened with Nero’s wife in our previous post).

Categories
Ancient Rome Claudius Evropa Soberana (webzine) Judea v. Rome (masthead of this site) Nero St Paul

Apocalypse for whites • XIV

by Evropa Soberana

 
Claudius and Nero
In the year 49, Claudius, who was fed up with the conflict of the Alexandrian Jewish lobby wrote:

Wherefore, once again I conjure you that, on the one hand, the Alexandrians show themselves forbearing and kindly towards the Jews who for many years have dwelt in the same city, and dishonour none of the rites observed by them in the worship of their god, but allow them to observe their customs as in the time of the Deified Augustus, which customs I also, after hearing both sides, have sanctioned.
(Bust of Emperor Claudius.) And on the other hand, I explicitly order the Jews not to agitate for more privileges than they formerly possessed, and not in the future to send out a separate embassy as though they lived in a separate city (a thing unprecedented), and not to force their way into gymnasiarchic or cosmetic games, while enjoying their own privileges and sharing a great abundance of advantages in a city not their own, and not to bring in or admit Jews who come down the river from Egypt or from Syria, a proceeding which will compel me to conceive serious suspicions.
Otherwise I will by all means take vengeance on them as fomenters of which is a general plague infecting the whole world.

Claudius expelled all Jews from Rome in the year 50 (apparently, according to Suetonius, ‘they acted without ceasing at the instigation of Chrestus’) and, as Pontifex Maximus, tried to stop the expansion of Eastern cults, including Christianity and Judaism, into the Empire.
Year 50. Judea is already part of the Roman Empire, but its Romanisation will never materialise; on the contrary, the Judaisation of Rome itself will be achieved.
Of Nero we will talk in the article on Christianity. His wife, an idle harlot named Poppaea Sabina, was openly sympathetic to Jews and Christians, and conspired behind the emperor’s back to favour them. Thus, for example, through Poppaea Sabina, Flavius Josephus himself was freed, who had been sent to Rome in order to negotiate better conditions for his people.
The Roman minister Sextus Afranius Burrus was assassinated in the year 62 by orders of Poppaea Sabina, or perhaps by Jews, after he denied them Roman citizenship in Greece. The emperor, tired of having the conspiracy near him, had his wife executed. The official version is that he kicked her on the belly while she was pregnant. The problem is that those who divulged this version had a strong enmity with the emperor, so it should be taken with caution.
This was followed by a bloodthirsty Roman repression against Jews and Christians, in which Jewish ‘revolutionaries’ like Saint Paul and Saint Peter fell. This execution of key characters in the Jewish strategic movement to infect the Roman foundations, along with some other factors, would be the trigger for a massive Jewish revolt, which we will deal with in the next article.

Categories
Day of Wrath (book)

Steiner’s critical review

Finally Day of Wrath (DOW) is available again for the general public. Today I also discovered that, last September, Charles Steiner had written a highly critical review of it, of which I’ll quote some excerpts:

Due to the evil in his family, the author of this book hates humanity. The evil in his family was child abuse, which happened to the author when he was an adolescent, more than forty years ago. The book does not detail the circumstances…

Steiner fails to mention the info in the Introduction, that DOW is a mere selection of chapters from my two thick volumes in Spanish Hojas Susurrantes and ¿Me Ayudarás? (the latter will be available by March or April).

…the author asserts on page 373 of this 377-paged harangue [Steiner refers to the out-of-print, pocketbook edition of DOW], adding elsewhere that ‘I know exactly no one with honor or true nobility of soul’

Steiner omits my previous phrase ‘Of Creole men, for example…’ implying that I know no Latin American male of noble soul, as everyone seems to be blue-pilled here.

The pessimism expressed in this book is similar to that which can be found in Arthur Schopenhauer’s World as Will and Representation…

There’s a problem here. Steiner is talking about of the selection known as DOW as if it’s my last word. The end of ¿Me Ayudarás? could be interpreted as optimistic.

…or in David Benator’s Better to Never Have Been: The Harm of Never Coming Into Existence, Benatar’s most current work, The Human Predicament, or E.M. Cioran’s The Trouble With Being Born, with one large exception: the latter works are definitely better written, more literary and readable and are more concise and rely less on Wikipedia and online research.

This is incorrect, as the bibliography of the books and printed articles I read to write the two volumes in Spanish are listed even in DOW. Also, as I struggle a lot to write in a second language, and as Steiner has not read the original tomes in Spanish, he doesn’t know if my philosophy appears in poor style in the original language.

Literally, on every page of this fat, squat book there are grammatical errors, typographical errors, stylistic errors, and incomprehensible declarations that can only mystify because the author is not a native English writer and has trouble understanding basic English syntax.

See my previous post today, ‘Preaching in the white nationalist desert’. If I had more than one sponsor I’d have paid the expenses of a native English speaker to check the entire manuscript.
But this hard reviewer has picked my interest: Since I’ve now published about half of DOW here, does it really contain so many syntax errors (I cannot tell since it’s not my mother language)?

Why the author did not choose to use Grammarly software or a grammar checker, why he did not find a copy editor, even one who is a college student, I do not know.

I didn’t even know that grammar checkers existed! Also, in Mexico City where I live no native college student would have a much better English syntax than mine.

The book stands largely on the shoulders of two of the author’s mentors: Julian Jaynes, author of The Bicameral Mind and Lloyd DeMause, author of History of Childhood, among several others.

I rely far more on deMause than on Jaynes. But in DOW I also debunk deMause and, in the forthcoming ¿Me Ayudarás? I even added a David star after the Lloyd deMause✡ name. (His anti-Nazi POV is so extreme that some nationalists suspect he’s a crypto-Jew.)

Nonetheless, as has already been hinted at, however, the author has little patience or tolerance with evolution’s slow procession through time, the changes through history or promulgation of education toward a more civilized human being. He wants all forms of violence against children and animals eliminated, which means the extermination of millions of adult human beings.

Supposing you have Star-Child powers (cf. Kubrick’s 2001) what’s so wrong with the immediate extermination of the Neanderthals considering that thousands of animals are being tortured by humans this very second?

On page 12 is a black and white reproduction of Hitler contemplating the bust of Nietzsche. The author hints (incorrectly, I believe) that since Hitler tried to wipe out a subversive tribe so he wants to wipe out all those ‘subversives’ who do not serve his values for an idyllic society of empathic child and animal lovers.

I never hinted such a thing, only suggested that Hitlerism is not entirely incompatible with Nietzsche’s transvaluation of values.

In the middle of the book, there’s a huge chunk of data he dumps on the reader about ancient Mexico’s infanticidal traditions as well as a diatribe on later historians who either overlook these atrocities or pretend they don’t exist. He wants people to know the facts of the cruelties against children throughout the history of mankind, and he will tell you about them ad infinitum and repeatedly so as to force your consciousness to recognize the dark and savage history of men and women and the deceitful and psychopathic cooperation of historians who are willing to do the intellectual work to hide that history at the expense of their academic integrity and honesty.

Again, what’s wrong with that?

C.T. runs a website entitled ‘The West’s Darkest Hour’… No children or animals are in evidence there either. Clearly, like his book, a high-strung, self-involved, and volatile temperament rules the blog as well as the book under review here.

I’ll leave visitors to say that I’m high on drugs or something. But the reason I rarely post here on child abuse is precisely that we need, first, an all-white world so that in the future a perfected breed of Aryans will eliminate all unnecessary suffering of animals and children (my philosophy of ‘the four words’): something that the coloureds have no high incentives to do.

I feel that his website like his book is a fraud in that both are ruled by an emotional trope of pessimism based on his experience of child abuse and for which reasonings and facts, whether historical or moral, are later found to justify that stance instead of the other way around, and I’m embarrassed for having spent good money to purchase a book that really is not worth the money I gave, a book that he or an editor easily might convert into a powerful article at the author’s blog to be read for free if he or an editor took out all the repetitious, Wikipedia dump of material and merely summarized the contents.

Again we see Steiner’s slander that I based my research on Wikipedia. If I used a wiki debate in the chapter about Ark (a single chapter which I still have to add in my monthly series of DOW), it was because Ark’s flaming exchange in a Wikipedia talk page was the only debate about psychohistory I ever found on the Internet and the printed press.
I have in my personal library the books that allowed me to do the research on child sacrifice: the bulk of DOW. If the Wikipedia articles on the subject resemble DOW data it’s because I was heavily involved in writing them as can be easily ascertained by checking up the diffs of, say, the Wikipedia article ‘Infanticide’ that I edited ten years ago, adding about a hundred of academic references—and not the other way around: that I based my research on the wiki! (I also contributed a lot to edit some Wikipedia articles on Mesoamerica.)

As a writer, C.T. has something I’m calling ‘narrative voice authority’ when he writes, and while I don’t know quite how he pulls it off, it is this voice that convinced me to keep reading despite the many serious flaws within this book. It is a skill that hypnotizes the reader temporarily to believe that what he has to say is more than his mere opinion, and that what he has to say is, in fact, knowledge, when there is no knowledge presented at all…

No knowledge presented? What about what constitutes most of DOW: the exposé of the sadism and serial killing in Pre-Columbian America, the exact opposite of what is being taught in the academia today?

The warning is: if parents don’t honor their children and teach them well, at least one of them will grow up to be an unhealed adult who will force unsuspecting adult readers to read an angry, vitriolic harangue with an almanac full of facts and attitude all aimed against the offending parental predator and others like him or her, a harangue authored by the abused child who hadn’t been lucky enough to have good parents. The work of Alice Miller needs improvement while also forging ahead so as to avoid the views and attitudes expressed in this volume by someone who was terribly, foully hurt.

The fact that I am hurt like hell does not invalidate my point—just as the hatred of an hypothetical survivor who witnessed the ritual sacrifice of his dearest sister in Tenochtitlan does not invalidate his craving for the Aztec world to be destroyed by the Europeans. See the Quetzalcoatl pic I chose for my book keeping in mind the latest instalment of DOW in this site.
Whatever its syntactic flaws, which must be quite a few, DOW is only an invitation to read my extended work in Spanish. One thing that Steiner got right is that I’ll need either money or a native English proof-reader to check the inaccuracies of my Spanish-English translations. For the moment I can only hope that the series ‘Apocalypse for whites’, that I am translating, do not look so bad for the native speaker…

Preaching in the WN desert


 

‘You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep’.

—Navajo Proverb

Commenting about the Christians on the Counter-Currents webzine, I was about to post the following as a mere comment in my last post but in the last minute decided to post it as an entry. I don’t care it iterates what I’ve already said before:
What is irritating is that The West’s Darkest Hour has only one generous sponsor and Greggy makes thousands of dollars. The reason is obvious: those who donate to him have not broken away from the current paradigm (Christianity, sexual liberalism, de facto conservatism, degenerate films, etcetera) as the few fans of the WDH have.
Infuriating above all is that all over the white nationalist forums no one has even tried to answer my main arguments against Christianity: that massive mestization started right after Constantinople was founded—all of the Maghreb was much whiter in Roman times—or that sans Jews the Iberian Christians ruined their gene pool in the Americas (the Portuguese, in the Iberian peninsula itself).
Zero reasonable feedback when, over the boards, I tried to shove these facts under their noses. It’s obvious that American white nationalists want to preserve their race without what we might call an internal Jihad, i.e., examining the viruses of the white mind that brought us in the current mess.
Tomorrow I’ll add the mantra question once more but I’m curious: when by March I finish the translation of ‘Apocalypse for whites’ and start adding, once more, entries on the ‘Kriminalgeschichte’ series more frequently, when will this effort make a single bleep in the white nationalist radar?
My guess is that never, just as Jack Frost’s comments at Kevin MacDonald’s webzine a few years ago did not make any dent in the fixed, conservative worldview of the commenters on The Occidental Observer.
Perhaps my only hope is that, in the future, the very young who are starting to visit the WDH will be willing to take my redpill instead of the mere purple-pill provided in nationalist forums? After all, paradigms are not abandoned: the older generation who sticks to the old paradigm must die in order to make room for the new generation of more enlightened racists.

Categories
Alexandria Ancient Rome Caligula Claudius Evropa Soberana (webzine) Judea v. Rome (masthead of this site)

Apocalypse for whites • XIII

by Evropa Soberana

Caligula
In 38, Caligula, the successor of Tiberius, sends his friend Herod Agrippa to the troubled city of Alexandria, to watch over Aulus Avilius Flaccus, the prefect of Egypt, who did not enjoy precisely the confidence of the emperor and who—according to the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (Contra Flaccus)—was an authentic villain.
The arrival of Agrippa to Alexandria was greeted with great protests by the Greek community, as they thought he was coming to proclaim himself king of the Jews. Agrippa was insulted by a crowd, and Flaccus did nothing to punish the offenders, despite the fact that the victim was an envoy of the emperor. This encouraged the Greeks to demand that statues of Caligula be placed in the synagogues, as a provocation to Jewry.

Caligula, Roman Emperor reviled
by Judaeo-Christians.

This simple act seemed to be the sign of an uprising: the Greeks and Egyptians attacked the synagogues and set them on fire. The Jews were expelled from their homes, which were looted, and thereafter segregated in a ghetto from which they could not leave: since they were stoned, beaten or burned alive, while others ended up in the sand to serve as food to the beasts in those macabre circus shows so common in the Roman world. According to Philo, Flaccus did nothing to prevent these riots and murders, and even supported them, as did the Egyptian Apion, whom we have seen criticising the Jewish quarter in the section devoted to Hellenistic anti-Semitism.
To celebrate the emperor’s birthday (August 31, a Shabbat), members of the Jewish council were arrested and flogged in the theatre; others were crucified. When the Jewish community reacted, the Roman soldiers retaliated by looting and burning down thousands of Jewish houses, desecrating the synagogues and killing 50,000 Jews.
When they were ordered to cease the killing, the local Greek population, inflamed by Apion (not surprisingly, Flavius Josephus has a work called Contra Apion) continued the riots. Desperate, the Jews sent Philo of Alexandria to reason with the Roman authorities. The Jewish philosopher wrote a text entitled Contra Flaccus and, along with the surely negative report that Agrippa had given to Caligula, the governor was executed.
After these events, things calmed down and the Jews did not suffer violence as long as they stayed within the confines of their ghetto. However, although Flaccus’ successor allowed the Alexandrian Jewry to give their version of the events, in the year 40 there were again riots among the Jews (who were outraged by the construction of an altar) and among the Greeks, who accused the Jews of refusing to worship the emperor.
The religious Jews ordered to destroy the altar and, in retaliation, Caligula made a decision that really showed how little he knew the Jewish quarter: he ordered to place a statue of himself in the Temple of Jerusalem. According to Philo, Caligula ‘considered the majority of Jews suspects, as if they were the only people who wished to oppose him’ (On the Embassy to Gaius and Flaccus). Publius Petronius, governor of Syria, who knew the Jews well and feared the possibility of a civil war, tried to delay as long as possible the placement of the statue, until Agrippa convinced Caligula that it was a bad decision.
In 41, Caligula, who already promised to be an anti-Jewish emperor, was assassinated in Rome, which unleashed the violence of his German bodyguards, who had not been able to prevent his death and who, because of their peculiar sense of fidelity, tried to avenge him by killing many conspirators, senators and even innocent bystanders who had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Claudius, the uncle of Caligula, would become the master of the situation and, after being appointed emperor by the Praetorian Guard, ordered the execution of the assassins of his nephew, many of whom were political magistrates who wanted to reinstate the Republic.
Here is the probable cause of the unprecedented historical defamation of this emperor: The texts of Roman history would eventually fall into the hands of the Christians, who were mostly of Jewish origin and viscerally detested the emperors. Since, according to Orwell, ‘he who controls the past controls the present’, Christians adulterated Roman historiography, turning the emperors who had opposed them and their Jewish ancestors into disturbed monsters.
In this way, we do not have a single Roman emperor who has participated in harsh Jewish reprisals who has not been defamed by accusations of homosexuality, cruelty or perversion. The historian José Manuel Roldán Hervás has dismantled many of the false accusations against the historical figure of Caligula.