I stand forth to challenge the wisdom of the world; to interrogate the ‘laws’ of man and of ‘God.’ I request reasons for your Golden Rule and ask the why and wherefore of your Ten Commands. Before none of your printed idols do I bend in acquiescence and he who saith ‘thou shalt’ to me is my mortal foe.
I demand proof over all things, and accept (with reservations) even that which is true. I dip my forefinger in the watery blood of your impotent mad-redeemer (your Divine Democrat—your Hebrew Madman) and write over his thorn-torn brow, ‘The true prince of Evil—the king of the Slaves!’
No hoary falsehood shall be a truth to me—no cult or dogma shall encramp my pen. I break away from all conventions. Alone, untrammeled. I raise up in stern invasion the standard of Strong.
I gaze into the glassy eye of your fearsome Jehovah, and pluck him by the beard—I uplift a broad-axe and split open his worm-eaten skull. I blast out the ghastly contents of philosophic whited sepulchres and laugh with sardonic wrath. Then reaching up the festering and varnished facades of your haughtiest moral dogmas, I write thereon in letters of blazing scorn: —‘Lo and behold, all this is fraud!’
I deny all things! I question all things! And yet! And yet!—Gather around me O! ye death-defiant, and the earth itself shall be thine, to have and to hold.
What is your ‘civilisation and progress’ if its only outcome is hysteria and downgoing? What is ‘government and law’ if their ripened harvests are men without sap? What are ‘religions and literatures’ if their grandest productions are hordes of faithful slaves? What is ‘evolution and culture’ if their noxious blossoms are sterilized women? What is ‘education and enlightenment’ if their dead-sea-fruit is a caitiff race, with rottenness in its bones?
4 replies on “Might is right, 2”
I put a painting of Goethe because I mentioned him in my previous post about Heydrich. But the abject slavery of the greatest writers to Christianity is more evident in Dante, for obvious reasons; and Cervantes, who considered his masterpiece not Don Quixote but Los trabajos de Persiles y Sigismunda, where Nordic princes travel around various places in the world to end up arriving in Rome, the seat of the Vatican, and get married.
CT,
I don’t know if you are aware of the debate going on between those that are arguing that “Wokeness”, ie late stage progressiveness, is the outgrowth of Protestantism (Steve Sailer) and those that are arguing that it is the product of the Jews (Fuentes, Keith Woods). If you haven’t seen it, here is an essay by Keith Woods:
https://keithwoods.pub/p/protestantism-jews-and-wokeness
A sample:
“Any attempt to trace the roots of wokeism that ignores this sea change, and the motive and character of this new intellectual elite transplanted into American society, is doomed to be but a partial explanation. This leaves anti-woke crusaders trading reductive and sometimes mystical theories of intellectual origin back and forth, trying to identify some kind of “woke” solvent in Christianity, classical liberalism or German idealism, which was destined to expunge every intellectual current but itself.”
I understand where he’s coming from but I still disagree. Its Christianity’s universalism that is the problem. But the Fuentes’ and Woods’ of the racialist movement are hell bent on defending Christianity.
I wrote about the Christian Woods four years ago, here.
These folk simply ignore what pundits like Revilo Oliver or William Pierce have written about Christianity and how it has affected the white race, not to mention what Hitler used to say on the subject.
Christians are not honest people. If they were honest they would try to respond to Hitler, Oliver, Pierce and to what I say on this very site.
I had not read that blog post on Woods. Thanks for that.