In Siege, James Mason wrote:
In revolution as in any war, actual accomplishment of it primarily involves KILLING and the consequences of that. The sooner the Movement accepts all this as merely par-for-the-course, the sooner things will begin going more in our direction.
True, but since Mason wrote that in the 1980s, he hasn’t killed an enemy, nor will the group of wolf-clothed lambs who worship his book kill any. They are de facto like today’s white nationalists, who advocate a reactionary ideology, never a revolutionary one. The latter aren’t even capable of advocating a revolution in the distant future to stay out of trouble, nor will they. What the racialists, wolf-clothed or not, fail to understand is that before any cure it’s necessary to know the aetiology of a problem.
Mason wrote The Theocrat, where he compares biblical passages with Mein Kampf. As I said on pages 171-75 of Daybreak (see sidebar for links), Mason’s neochristianity, or Satanism in the symbols of Attomwaffen Division, the pseudo-NS group that reads Siege, keeps and will keep them in a pond from which they have to emerge.
An old commenter on this site just said: ‘That the Bund movement—25K membership—popped like a balloon pricked with a pin the day after the Pearl Habor event shows just how weak its foundations were unlike Christianity that’s stood the test of time; and unlike Jewry, too, standing the tests of time. The NS’ers—myself included—aren’t even out of the womb yet’.
Indeed! Any ideology of racial preservation that doesn’t confront the basic aetiology of the problem, Christian ethics, was and will be epidermic or ‘not out of the womb yet’. If they were to confront it, then the fantasy of all the racialists in the world would be to destroy all the churches, including the ones inside the Vatican.
As long as the diagnosis is not properly made about what’s killing the white race, it is impossible to begin the cure. That’s why as soon as Germany was defeated in 1945 the survivors didn’t pick up the torch that fell to the ground. As I said on Friday, publicly Hitler didn’t speak to the masses without a parable, but he explained everything to his apostles. It is time to read not Mein Kampf or Siege, but Uncle Adolf’s after-dinner talks where, among his apostles, he spoke very badly of Christianity.
Postscript:
The fifth part of the translation of Bardamu’s essay on Christianity is now available in the German section of this site.
3 replies on “On wolf-clothed lambs”
Re: PS above. It’s in this instalment where Bardamu criticises Kevin MacDonald’s stance on Christianity.
I note that, around the same time Mason wrote his book, Robert Mathews and his “Bruders Schwigen” did start “killing the enemy” and look where that led. Jews made a lot of media hay about evil, bank robbing, neo-Nazzies killing a poor, innocent, Jew talk show host. So much for that revolution.
I also note Hitler begin his political efforts with the failed revolutionary “beer hall putsch” that resulted in his incarceration. It was not until Germany’s political and economic situation had soured to the break point that it became possible for Hitler to pursue the more acceptable election process to achieve his goals.
The point made by these historical events is that no solution to a social problem is possible until the time is ripe for action. Actions taken before that point are not only wasted, but often turn against those attempting to make the change.
The trick is to know when that time has arrived. One only needs look at the obsequious masking and vaccination compliance to realize that, most assuredly, it is not yet time for the white race to pursue violent revolt.
The question is, will such a point arrive in time to save the white race?
I am not advocating immediate violence, only a revolutionary ideology. My difference with Mason and his epigones is that they cannot break completely from Xtianity (or Xtian symbols, like Satanism, etc.).