The last words of Will Durant in the previous entry of this series: ‘Let us study The Republic’. But in this post I will not quote any passage from Durant’s book. I will give my opinion on this classic work that bequeathed us historical Greece.
In the first place, it must be recognised that the race of the ancient Greeks was of the Nordic type. In The Fair Race there are two articles on the subject, one written by a Spaniard and another by an American. Since then civilisation has metamorphosed so much, especially in axiology, technology and demography, that what Plato wrote could only be valid after the extermination of all non-whites, as William Pierce put it at the end of The Turner Diaries. Sorry, but the Greeks of the ancient world were physically beautiful, says the article of the mentioned Spaniard. Hence, in our technological times with a demographic explosion that, because of Christianity, reversed the beautiful values of the classical world, only in an ethnically cleansed Earth what the ancient Greek philosophers discussed could become germane again.
The tragedy of the Aryans reminds me of the meaning of the One Ring in the tetralogy of Wagner, a symbol that Tolkien would pick up in his novel. It has been Aryan greed what blinded them to the fact that using non-whites as capital was suicide in the long term. That is the moral that emerges from the stories about the white race of William Pierce and Arthur Kemp. But even from the 19th century some Americans felt the danger, as shown in the paintings of Thomas Cole. A world with the destroyed Ring means, in many aspects, a return to the small cities: the subject matter not only for Plato but for Aristotle. For the latter, a Greek city should not exceed ten thousand inhabitants…
That is precisely the moral of my books in Spanish: after so many hells in ‘the Black Iron Age’ as I said as a teenager, I propose a return to the Shire so to speak. For the same reason, if there is something that hurts me when I see the sites of white nationalists, it is that they are cut off from their European past. I have spoken on this site about music, but not much about painting. The following is the oil canvas by Claude Le Lorrain (1600-1682) that appears at the top of my Facebook page:
On my most recent trip to London I saw some splendid canvases of Le Lorrain’s paintings in the National Gallery. Outside of London and the madding crowd, some English aristocrats of past centuries took Le Lorrain as a paradigm to mould their extensive lands, and even some buildings in the countryside. Some of this can even be seen in the movies of this century. In this very beautiful film of 2005 for example, when Mr Darcy declares his love to Elizabeth, I could not contain my admiration for that place: it seems to be taken from a canvas by my favourite painter (watch the last ten seconds of this YouTube clip)! Who of the contemporary racists has such contact with their visual past?
A true racist should reject any image of pop culture sold to us by American Jewry. But going back to Plato. Let us suppose, just suppose, that the white race will emerge alive from the coming apocalypse and that, in an Earth already without Orcs and (((Sauron))), they would reconstruct white civilization. In an unpopulated land and with only a few small cities, like the one seen in the painting above, the question would arise as to what kind of government is desirable. In this world, the survivor could be asked about Plato’s magnum opus, something like a second chance or a fresh start for the West. So let’s expose our views about the philosopher.
The first thing I could say is that the distortion that is taught in the academy about the classical world is such that we would have to change the title of The Republic for the simple fact that it is an invented title. The original in Greek was Politeia, whose translation would be ‘regime or government of the polis’, that is to say how to govern a small city-state. The title The Republic falsifies the mind of Plato already from the cover of the book we see in bookstores, inducing the popular notion that the author was an utopian. He was nothing of the sort. Politeia was the recipe of Plato to remedy the bad governments he saw in ancient Greece. His starting point had been the examination of the Greek cities of his time, not of a hazy future but the four regimes of Greece: timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and tyranny.
Imagine a world à la Lorrain in which only whites inherit the Earth. The bookstores, this time with imprimaturs that do not admit anything from Semitic pens, would show Plato’s main work with the original title… But that does not mean that we should consider the disciple of Socrates a provider of laws, a new Lycurgus. At this stage of the historical game it is obvious that Plato did not see, nor could he see, the iniquity of the world; of men, of the Jewry that would invent Christianity, and the catastrophic industrial revolution.
For example, Plato does not speak of the need to keep Nordic blood pure, at least not with the lucidity the Nazis had. The closed polis of the Spartans complied more with the laws of nature than the open polis of the Athenians (in this Durant was fatally wrong). But not even the Spartans knew Pierce’s formula: to maintain an Aryan culture one must maintain the Aryan ethnicity: and that can only be done by exterminating or expelling all non-Aryans.
Plato’s missteps go further. Above I complained that the typical racist of today has no internal contact with the world of the great masters of painting. Another common ailment in those who have abandoned Christianity is that they keep infectious waste that puts the Aryans at a clear disadvantage compared to the Jewish quarter. One of these residues is the belief in post-mortem life. He who believes this doctrine will not fight as much in this life as the Jews are currently fighting, insofar as they believe they will have a second chance (either in the afterlife or reincarnated).
Jews do not masturbate their minds with unearthly hopes: one of their enormous advantages before us. But to be fair to Christianity I must say that even before Christianity Plato already masturbated his mind, and the minds of his male pupils, with such fantasies: what I have called in this series the root of the baobab. In fact, Plato finishes his great work sermonizing us: if we stick to what he says and believe in the immortal soul, we will be happy:
Thus, Glaucon, the tale has been saved, and will be our salvation, if we believe that the soul is immortal, and hold fast to the heavenly way of Justice and Knowledge. So shall we pass undefiled over the river of Forgetfulness, and be dear to ourselves and to the Gods, and have a crown of reward and happiness both in this world and also in the millennial pilgrimage of the other.
As I observed in a previous entry, during the savage destruction of most of the books of the classical world by the Judeo-Christians, it survived a work that many consider a precursor of the Christian doctrine of the human soul. The Republic, to use the falsified title, is anachronistic in many other ways. In addition to his post-mortem masturbations, what is the point of praising Plato when he did not oppose the incipient miscegenation of Athens with the greatest possible vehemence?
Unlike every rabbi who practices intuitive eugenics, Plato did not even leave offspring. He was not a husband or father. In his case, no good genes passed to the next generation (where his sperm ended, I dare not speculate). Moreover, he believed that in his republic women could perform the same functions of the male, even the highest. Compare the feminism of this philosopher of 2,400 years ago with what the Orthodox Jews of New York teach today: they educate their women to behave like little red riding hoods!
Whoever complies with the laws of Nature survives and who violates them perishes. At present the Jews fulfil them and the Aryans violate them. The white race will not be saved unless it makes a destructive criticism of much of what passes for ‘wisdom of the West’, starting with the Greeks.
61 replies on “The Story of Philosophy, 6”
A slightly different version of the above post in Spanish can be read: here.
The platonic politeia is something that works internally(ideally suited), and then comes the transformation of the outside, Still no insight on the transformation of the ages, every era of 2000 years has the external characteristics , the history is not linear, not even cyclical, so the ‘Republic’ is not of our time line.
The religion is for the masses, it is something that comes naturally from the past, it will decline but not in the way talmud-marxists want and ‘preach’.
Even if you could walk back in classical ages you would see different racial types in a city and all kinds of facial characteristics .
Look how Socrates was !. Stereotypes that comes from marxists about the destruction of books, dont fit the ocassion.
Ancient ‘religion’ was corrupt to a vast degree, degeneracy in ‘temples’ of ancient ‘god’s and ‘goddesses’. Christianity came as ‘punishing Law’ and contained mixed elements from ancient practices, and customs. Just some thoughts on the subject you are posting.
Are you saying that Christianity is ultimately good due to the fact that the late Roman Empire was degenerate?
Are you saying, for example, that the event in which Hypatia was gang raped and skinned alive was a necessary evil?
If so, do you believe that the Bolshevik revolution was a necessary evil, as the rates of education and literacy increased after the Romanov family was executed?
If so, do you believe that the invasion of Europe by the Muslim Semites is justified because they are less degenerate than the average European?
”If so, do you believe that the invasion of Europe by the Muslim Semites is justified because they are less degenerate than the average European?”
If the Europeans accept their racial identity and study in deep the roots that are forgotten and the roots are in Eastern Mediterranean Yes in the future the invasion will do good for them.
It is a marxist and pacifist misconception that Christianity deteriorates the war charisma of Aryan – White Races.
I do not use the ‘expression’ necessary evil but the word evolution, sometimes historic disasters could not be seen from a narrow perspective span of one or two generations.
My main point is that i do not want to use examples and facts that the marxist left uses in his rhetoric against establishments.
Pessimism is a weapon that the Talmud-marxists use everywhere in order to gain from youth misconceptions of history .
Show me examples of Christianity actually encouraging Aryans to kill their Race’s enemies. The Crusades actually did next to nothing to get rid of the Moors. The purpose of the Crusades was to go to the Middle East and take back the Holy Land for the Jews.
What you also ignore is that the Templars were no aloud to touch a woman, whether Mother or Sister, and had to remain celibate for the rest of their lives. That is pure dysgenics. How is that reminiscent of Aryan spirit?
The other Crusades were Aryans killing Aryans because they did not believe the same thing about a dead Jew on a stick. Once again – How is that good?
In your eyes, it was “evolution” when Semites destroyed Aryan culture, murder thousands of women and children, the tragedy of Hypatia being just one out of a thousand of these types of stories.
So, you are just an intellectual coward?
Christianity spawned Marxism in the first place. Where do you think the ideology of equality and the brotherhood of man came from?
If it were your family then I doubt you would be saying such mindless statements. I noticed that is how you people work in your minds. You expect everyone to conform to this particular worldview but god forbid you should ever behave in that same way.
Where do you leave ?, Europe? States ? You don’t have enough knowledge about History battles and that is something that can not be answered in a post.
”Show me examples of Christianity actually encouraging Aryans to kill their Race’s enemies.”
Go back for studies and come back after 10 to 15 years
You have a hole gap of 1000+ years of History battles sorry my friend it is not a history class
You are not giving me examples simply because you are too stupid to know how stupid you are.
I an afraid it is you who knows nothing of the Crusades. their intended purpose being to murder Aryans who did not believe a particular thing about a Jew on a stick.
Instead of acting like an irrational Televangelist, actually show me why I am wrong, don’t just insult me like a sanctimonious prick.
You say that this is not a history class and yet ignore the fact that Cesar has made available entire books about Christianity and certain events in history for all eyes to see. So don’t puss out and act like you are too smart a guy, and I am beneath you. if you had the answers you would show me them.
The Byzantine Empire, also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire, was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the East during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, when its capital city was Constantinople
Founded: May 11, 330 AD
Date dissolved: 1453
Yes: The Byzantine Empire was a Racial melting pot.
Good for you , you are alive now and you can write in English nuff said.
You just used the Byzantine Empire as a Racially conscious Christian Civilisation, and I was refuting it. Think before you speak to me like a little punk.
”You just used the Byzantine Empire as a Racially conscious Christian Civilisation, and I was refuting it. Think before you speak to me like a little punk.”
TYPICAL Anglo-Scythian reaction. Many paid mercenaries in Imperial – Byzantine Army the Varangian Guard were from Anglo-Saxons later where Scandinavians and first were North Russians mercenaries because of the proximity of the newly born Russia. They both fought Eurasian tribes – Tatars, Pechenegs, Proto-Bulgars, Avaroi, Later came the Seljuk Turks ”called Gok Turks” Blue celestial Turks from Altai mountains at the borders of Mongolia-Russia-Kazakhstan. At that ancient land of Asia Minor all the tribes were descendants of White East Mediterranean omofilia(greek word it can not be translated) mixed with Iranian. In all the battles with Mongols Turks till the 20th century Turks always had vast casualties of their military 7 to 1 , Our casualties were most of them civil population unarmed . They were using the youth from all the occupied territories of Balkans to train military the wellknown Janissaries. Even in the battles we lost in Manjikert 1071 A.D. and Myriokephalon 1176 A.D. , Turks were losing army in vast numbers .
You asked for battles i ‘delivered’ 2 major
No, dude. I never “asked for a battle”, when did I say that?
>If the Europeans accept their racial identity and study in deep the roots that are forgotten and the roots are in Eastern Mediterranean
You’re not an Israelite.
>Yes in the future the invasion will do good for them.
I didn’t know being a Shithole was a good thing to be.
The Course of Empire paintings can stay at the ‘Shire’ stage if Aryans follow strict Nazi rules but make sure that they kill the non-Aryans, at least the ones that pose a threat. Like I was saying to Adunaithethird, there is not point creating a beautiful Nation like the one that you are proposing in this post, all for Mongoloids to turn it into dust, and fuck your bloodline, literally and figuratively.
What is the point in passing on your genes if eventually your descendants have such a doomed fate?
But to move on to the topic of paintings and music, and other such things: I was raised in a split environment in this case. My Mother basically introduced me to classical and Opera, and great paintings. my Dad was a different type of person. He listened to rock, and Nigger shit. He had no artistic sensibilities whatsoever, and his taste in films was just awful. He was the one to actually introduce to me to Pulp Fiction in the first place.
However I have surpassed even my mother in these things. She never passes up the chance to listen to David Bowie, whereas I simply cannot stand that type of music.
Anyway, the painting you show above is a nice ‘snapshot’ of how I imagine our future. Even if it is an idealised future.
It’s idealised indeed. But if you click on the post’s words ‘watch the last ten seconds of this YouTube clip’ you’ll see a cozy place in the bucolic England of today. Tell me if a civil war to expel the Orcs and destroy Sauron is not worth for reclaiming this Austen world! (Also, see how similar the ‘idealised’ building of the painting is with the edification that appears in the film: a real place in your country.)
This is one of the reasons why I think that a “positive christian” SS-run Catholic Church should be retained. I remember that I weaned myself off all popular music thinking it mortal sin. I only listened to Classical music and Sacred music by Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. I am backslidden now. However, I remember at the time that even the best of popular music sounded painful to my ears. Once one gets that poison totally out of one’s system, the body begins to reject it if he should try to reintroduce it.
“Jews do not masturbate their minds with unearthly hopes…”
This is the reason why they are untermenschen.
No it isn’t. It is because they are corrupt, and leech off each other as well as other people. They are a Race of swindlers and liars. Sexual deviancy also comes natural to them – Things like paedophilia.
How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that it is because they don’t believe in Heaven? I don’t believe in Heaven, does that make me Untermann as well?
What you describe is a consequence of their belief system, not the reason for it.
An untermensch, in my view, is someone who is an atheist-materialist and who denies the existence of the spiritual. This results in the beviours described above.
Their inability to perceive the higher reality(the Kingdom of Heaven) means that they live in false reality.
So you have just called me an Untermann. Saying that they are at fault for not being able to perceive Heaven is like saying I am at fault for not being able to perceive a Schizophrenic’s hallucinations.
There is no actual tangible evidence for Heaven, or an actual God. Where do Embryos go when they die? Where do babies go? What about insects or goldfish? Is there a separate heaven for them?
Explain that then.
And how do you know that it not you that lives in the false reality. You believe in a thing which cannot be seen or heard by any means.
You choose to call yourself an untermann; I don’t. If you believe that definition applies to you, well, I won’t argue against it.
You know what Pascal’s wager is? It’s the basis for the blue pill/ red pill choice. Untermenschen choose the blue pill whereas ubermenschen choose the red one. It is, however, a symbolic choice.
Yes, my understanding of reality could be a false one; I accept that, but, you know what; I don’t really care.
No, your definition of Untermann applies to me. I don’t consider myself one.
The red pill/blue pill stuff has really been raped. It is just used by people who can’t comprehend that their worldview might be a bit faulty. Bear in mind that people like Gavin McInnis consider themselves as red pilled. It is the same as Occam’s Razor: “You don’t agree with me? Occam’s Razor bitch”. It has been done to death, and is never used for its original intended purpose.
I wouldn’t consider you as an Ubermann. Not at all. You really have to excel in order to fit that description. Even I do not fit it. You are a Christian right? If that is the case then you are light-years behind being labelled correctly as the Overman.
Then stop talking in black and white absolutes.
This “Dan-0-lee” guy could be the same Ciaran of my post last month, the Irish guy who made me mad because he would be glad that hell (literally, the Xtian hell of fire) exists. He’s also the same “Socko-san” you already responded to in another thread. If memory serves he has commented in other threads—and maybe he’s also our recent commenter “Gaedhal” but I am not sure; the IP is slightly different.
An Irish man who is so traumatised that he has been literally committed: precisely my field of specialty, but not from the POV of the pseudoscientific medical model of mental disorders, but from the trauma model.
It’s too bad that he as well as other nationalists who have been committed won’t bother to study my Day of Wrath because I provide the basis there, and especially in the expanded original version in my native language, of how to heal the psychic wounds inflicted by our parents.
Dan-0-lee is not recognising that the very idea of the Providence is a projection resulting from poor parenting, as you can glimpse in my post “God”. He could start the healing process right now, by reading the chapters already published of Day of Wrath in this site and obtaining a copy of John Modrow’s autobiographical How to Become a Schizophrenic: The Case Against Biological Psychiatry. But that would mean facing his past: something that rarely victims of parental & Catholic abuse do.
My extremely Catholic father became so destructive with us precisely because, as my brother once said with anguish, “He does not recognise his [childhood] pain!”
I have noticed that Hell is a substitution for parental abuse, or rather, a stand-in for sever punishments administered to a child.
If you don’t love and obey God, you go to Hell. If you don’t feel the same about Mummy or daddy, you will have your milk-tooth knocked out or a cigarette will be burned in places where strangers cannot see it.
I really do think that the older generations are more pious because they experience a home life which is seen in the same way that one may read the Bible. My Father was both physically abused and neglected by his parents, and I am damn lucky not to have had this passed on to my childhood.
However, my Father is still living with the after affects. Even though he is not particularly pious, he is very submissive to Governmental authority. he has this fetish for Law and Order, and severe punishments delivered to many criminals. He also believes that if you suffer from mental disorders or from things like Depression, it is because you are weak and nothing else.
But the rest of that family are very pious. My Auntie and my Great Auntie for example. They were brought up in the same environment. You would never challenge a parent if you are frightened at what on Earth may happen if you do, the same as you would never challenge the existence of the God of the Jews if you have the idea of eternal punishment nagging you for life.
On a side note, that is the cause of the kind of Matriarchalism that Covington seems to have. If you are beaten by your Mother, and basically forced into revering her, if you make it clear to her that you do not see her as number one and she hurts you because of that, then you will come to see every woman in your life in relation to her. You end up mindlessly revere every female as if you are unconsciously transferring and projecting your Mother’s image onto her. You revere these random women because you are unconsciously afraid that if you do not, something bad will happen to you. That is the same thinking that causes Dan-0-Lee’s problems.
I do not know Covington’s relationship with his Mummy, but as he is of my Father’s generation, I would not be surprised if he had a similar connection.
No, I’m not Ciaran or Gaedhal. Although, I Have my own opinion as to what you fellows really are. Anyway, if you fellows are right in your belief that God is a man-made invention/delusion; then you have nothing to worry about, otherwise you could be in for a hot-time.
I’d also that you have not discerned the true nature and purpose of the Roman Catholic Church.
Correct. we should all be frightened that Daddy might come back from the grave to give us a spanking.
Well, we are all ears…
Your Pascal’s wager is an absolute abomination: a mental disease. Muslims also believe in a Hell with everlasting punishments. They could also challenge us with Ali’s wager: ‘You better believe in Ala or else!’
Your mind tricks may function with silly Catholics; not with Jedi knights.
Where on this wasteland called “earth” do you people keep coming from?
Why do yous keep doxing me. I also think that Pascal’s wager was a fallacy. To waste a life that one knows that one has absolutely,
so as to obtain “the harp business in the world to come. ” (Ingersoll). Pascal considered the atheistic world view as being in a dark dungeon, and every now and then somebody would come down and strangle a prisoner. He also considered the atheistic world view to be like washing up on a desert island, and finding out that all the natives are cannibals.
I am not an atheist, however I consider it fallacious to think that just because something is unpleasant THEREFORE it is untrue.
I don’t think that Pascal was married. Some think he was a homosexual. He was so devout and orthodox that he was excommunicated for Jansenism. I think that Leo XIII in excommunicated him, as it is good PR to have a genius mathematician in the fold.
You very clearly do not know what doxing means. If Cesar had doxed you, he would have revealed your social security number or your address, perhaps even your phone number.
If it makes you feel any less self conscious, my real name is Robert Kelly. The fact that you know my real name matters not, because you can’t do anything with it.
Listen, the reason why you keep talking about this “positive Christianity” rubbish is only and exclusively because you were raised a Catholic and live in a Catholic area. You do not have the capability to actually observe anything good in this religion. You haver been a Catholic your whole life, living amongst Catholics, but like most Christians, you do not have the mental strength to break away from it. So you are making a desperate attempt to rationalise the irrational.
In a sense I am glad. Yeah, I have been committed, twice. It is that which makes me so careful. I am in terrâ inimicôrum.
The SS had a plan to slowly wean the Catholic Church off the Bible and substitute for the Jewish Jesus the Celtic solar deity Esus. I fail to see what is wrong with that plan.
You very clearly have not bothered to read Hitler’s Table Talks.
I am getting sick of the fact that people come to this blogsite and do not bother to read all the sources that Tort has made readily available.
To answer your question: What is right with it?
It was the oriental/Semitic mud people of the Near East and African Negros that were slavers. Jews even make light of this fact in their movie A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum,where the Jew Zero Mostel plays a Roman era slaver. As far back as ancient Rome, Jews were the slave suppliers, following the legions to buy captives to be resold as slaves.
These are the primitive lowlifes that introduced the idea of using slaves to the white man or “Aryans.” Show me where any of the Nordic tribes tribes north of Germany and the British Isles maintained slaves. Show me where the Aryans of India maintained slaves. It is the Semitic tribes that have long maintained slavery. When did the British use slaves? Was it not the British that stood against slavery?
To this day Jews, Negroes and Arabs still indulge their insatiable thirst for slavery. Look at the white women and children Jews entice into coming to Israel where they are enslaved.These are the same Jews that use Palestinians as “domestic servants” even as they murder them. It was the conniving, greedy Jew that introduced the Negro slave to America.
Jews were the the primary factor in supplying and convincing the white man slaves would be a beneficial addition to their work force. But this was a typical Jewish lie. Knowing this, many white men opposed the idea of slavery. Yet the greedy Jew prevailed, convincing the labor intensive plantations of the South it would be to their economic advantage to use slaves for agricultural production.
There was a dispatch from a Yankee reporter doing an article on agricultural production in the South during the late 1850s. He went to the docks to see how cotton was shipped out. There he found a plantation owner having Negro slaves throw bales of cotton into the hold of a cargo ship. The Yankee reporter looked into the hold to find Irish men catching and stacking the bales in the hold. This was a dangerous task, as the bales were heavy and the drop into the hold was sufficient to cause considerable injury if a catch was miscalculated and a bale struck a man.
The reporter was amazed at this and asked the slave owner why he didn’t have his slaves in the hold catching the bales. The slave owner replied, (I paraphrase from memory) “Do you know what it cost to buy and maintain a nigger? I have a considerable investment in these slaves. Why would I be fool enough to risk having them injured when I can have these micks working in the hold for pennies a day? What’s more, if one of them gets hurt, it doesn’t cost me a cent.”
In short, no Jews and Negroes – no slaves for the white man.
You also comment on Occidental Dissent, right? It was Hunter Wallace the one who posted an entry that completely changed my views on Latin America, showing that even more blacks were imported into the southern part of the continent than into the US.
This alone refutes your claim, ‘In short, no Jews and Negroes – no slaves for the white man’.
How many times will I have to repeat that in this part of the continent the Iberian Inquisition targeted not only Jews but cryptos (and even so the Iberian whites picked up the One Ring and committed ethnosuicide)?
Tacitus speaks of the Suebi wearing their distinctive knot so they could be identified as free-men, and Aryan India was quite literally predicated upon the enslaving of the Dasyus.
Would you please elaborate further on your statement about the Aryans predicating their culture on enslaving the Dasyus.
“Yet the greedy Jew prevailed, convincing the labor intensive plantations of the South it would be to their economic advantage to use slaves for agricultural production. ”
It was to their economic advantage, due the fact that malaria was endemic in the South, and a black workforce was relatively immune. As wiki puts it:
I did not say “culture”- I was speaking of the functions of the civilization. Without the Dravidians tilling the soil one can imagine the route the rest of society would have gone.
@Jack “You end up mindlessly revere every female as if you are unconsciously transferring and projecting your Mother’s image onto her. You revere these random women because you are unconsciously afraid that if you do not, something bad will happen to you.”
This does not explain why in the past mothers were more cruel, yet feminism did not exist. My opinion is that precisely the improvement in child rearing brings up such schizophrenia, but that’s just a guess.
“Even though he is not particularly pious, he is very submissive to Governmental authority. he has this fetish for Law and Order, and severe punishments delivered to many criminals.”
I have a hunger for such things, too – but because I never experienced them. Law and order are routinely despised in our time, see the novel Der Untertan by Heinrich Mann.
Now I have a question. Even though the idea of hating one’s parents (for the correct things) is closer to my heart, shouldn’t the ideal still be mutual love and understanding?
By Law and Order, I am referring to this idea in modern society that the Laws a Government make are Divine teaching, and god forbid that you disobey words on a piece of paper. They are pacifist Right Wingers, who believe in Democracy. They have such a black and white view of everything, especially when it comes to criminals. But to them, it is perfectly fine to kill people in a war, and Hellstorm was justified.
I am referring to White criminals who, in a healthy society, would function as decent citizens. For example, White drug dealers, thieves, bank robbers, school shooters, and similar sorts of people.
I yearn for what you do in this case, but only when we have a functioning, Pro-White Nation, or tribe, or whatever it will be.
As for the Matriarchalism, you make a good point, and I am going to concede on that. I still don’t understand why my Father was expressing such craziness, despite the fact that his Mother was physically abusive and negligent.
But to answer your question: The parents should be the ones whom are taught to understand and love their children. I speak from experience when I say that when parents fall short of this, the child will feel alienated and most likely feel disdain for his/her parents. I think that the child will then find their own way to love their parents back.
I grew to hate my father when I realised that we had absolutely nothing in common, except facial features and short temper. Aside from that, it was like talking to a stranger. I began to hate him after I felt that he never really understood me, or even tried to. He had this perfect little image of me in his head that was not at all accurate. He old me that if I ever forced myself on a woman or killed a person, he never wanted to see me again. So, I made a plan on doing both these acts just to spite him.
It got to the point so that every time I was in a room with him, I wanted to actually murder him. I then began to make little theories in my head that he was not my father, and that my real father was an alien being, or some god.
The point I am making with this is that both Father and Mother should be accepting of their children’s minor faults and defects, and understanding of their differences. They should never try to make them a certain way. In a healthy society like a 4th Reich, it will be safe to say “they have to make their own path in life”.
I do think that it is okay to spank a child if they are naughty and need discipline.
The laws of modern states make lynchings seem like the pinnacle of jurisprudence. And the very concept of honor cannot survive with the hyper-Christian morality.
“In a healthy society like a 4th Reich, it will be safe to say “they have to make their own path in life”.”
Isn’t it the default?.. Basic human ideas do confuse me.
However, even though I’m all for a strict militaristic society, spanking children is disgusting.
In our society, children are more likely than they ever were to fall into a degenerate lifestyle. If you rear a child in a similar vein to Varg Vikernes, then your children are more safe, but not smothered.
You basically have to keep them away from all decadence, and teach them why those paths in life are detrimental.
Are you really saying that in your post-nonwhite future, all literature which was created by Jews would be banned regardless of merit?
Name me a book written by a Jew that our Race cannot survive without. We are all ears…
I like Stefan Zweig. He was a good writer. But as a Jew, he could not help himself and became sympathizer of the (((Russian))) revolution. Does this mean that I have to throw into the basket can the many books by him I have in my library? Of course not. But I’d be careful that the young don’t get infected with such (((Soviet))) sympathies of the last century.
But when the time comes, these books just have to go to the fire.
That is what I meant by my question to Peter. I wanted him to name a book written by a Jew that has merit worth not being destroyed.
From what I see, there is not one single book authored by a Jew that is worth the Fair Race actually using for anything.
In my own field of specialty, I had to read Alice Miller, whose abusive mother was Jewish. Although she repudiated all things Jewish in adulthood, even changing her name, some kike characteristics remained.
Also, I suspect Lloyd deMause, the creator of psychohistory, has Jewish background as well.
The point is, as no Aryans developed the understanding of child abuse as these two guys, I had to steal their findings and my first book in Spanish presents their findings already translated for the Aryan mind.
Had Hitler won the war that would not have been necessary: the discoverers would have been Aryans. But control in the bookstores and libraries is imperative to prevent that the young go astray with texts written by our enemies.
In my ideal ethnostate, only researchers could have access to, say, the work of Miller and deMause. If a metaperspective on child abuse is needed, my writings (and, say, John Modrow’s writings) would be available for the general public. Censorship is especially important while non-whites still exist on the planet, as Aryans have been programmed for deranged altruism due to Xtian ethics.
“as Aryans have been programmed for deranged altruism due to Xtian ethics.”
To be more precise, Aryans have an evolutionary basis for altruistic behaviour. That is why Xtian ethics is so appealing to our Race.
Yes, but innate disposition for in-group altruism. Out-group altruism only came with Xtianity.
Cesar, there is a theory I have had for quite some time.
Lloyd Demause mentions that human sacrifice has a correlation to Nomadism. While this is evident, I think that it is more specifically because of Armenisation. According to the NRC, the Armenid Race was a Nomadic type which had a propensity for Human Sacrifice and the slave trade.
My theory is that human sacrifice is not necessarily caused by Nomadism itself, but good constitutions of Armenid admixture. Most Aryans are Armenised to a greater or lesser extent, like Constantine.
If we are using epigenetics, then we can see that the Armenised Aryan psyche is basically laying dormant in our unconscious (the Shadow), and pops up when the time comes.
What do you think?
I think that when the 2018 edition of Day of Wrath is ready (I’m correcting the syntax with the program Grammarly) I could send you a copy: everything on child sacrifice is approached through a meta-perspective there.
That would be brilliant. You are fine sending it overseas as far as England?
Amazon Books delivers.
Oh… yes, of course.
“Worlds in Collision”, “Ages in Chaos”, and other works by Immanuel Velikovsky could be worth keeping.
Velikovsky was an absolute crackpot.