Whatsoever a people believeth shall make it free, enslave it, or corrode its very marrow in strict accordance with natural order.
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s interpolated note: This reminds me of what Savitri says about true religions (such as Indo-Aryan religion or National Socialism) and false ones (such as those derived from Semitic thought, especially for Aryan consumption).
______ 卐 ______
Consequently if a people place implicit faith in what philosophers teach them, they are liable to be duped. If many nations are so duped, their deception is a menace to the liberty of the world.
Freemen should never regulate their conduct by the suggestions or dicta of others, for when they do so, they are no longer free. No man ought to obey any contract, written or implied, except he himself has given his personal and formal adherence thereto, when in a state of mental maturity and unrestrained liberty. It is only slaves that are born into contracts, signed and sealed by their progenitors. The freeman is born free, lives free, and dies free. He is (even though living in an artificial civilisation) above all laws, all constitutions, all theories of right and wrong. He supports and defends them of course, as long as they suit his own end, but if they don’t, then he annihilates them by the easiest and most direct method.
There is no obligation upon any man to passive obedience, when his life, his liberty and his property are threatened by footpad, assassin or statesman.
One of Columbus’s lieutenants in the West Indies captured a Carib chief by means of a subtle stratagem. The chief was invited to a feast and when there, persuaded with honeyed words to don (on horseback) a set of brightly polished steel manacles; it being cunningly represented to him, that the irons were the regalia of sovereignty. He foolishly believed his astute flatterer, and when the chains were firmly clasped around his limbs, he was led away, to die of vermin, turning a mill in a Spanish dungeon.
What those glittering manacles were to the Indian chieftain, constitutions, laws, moral codes, and Hebrew dominated civilisations, are to the nations of the earth. Indeed, under the name of Progress and Social Evolution, mankind has been lured into foæted dungeons, where it labours unceasingly and for naught, in darkness, despair and shame. Like that Spanish lieutenant the masters of the earth first flatter their dupes, in order to more easily enchain them. Who talks nowadays of the ‘sovereign people’, without a laugh of derision? And yet it was once thought to be a term full of significance. Their ‘sovereignty’ is now acknowledged sham, and their freedom a dream. The sovereign people be—damned.
It is clear, therefore, that the man or nation that would retain liberty, or be really safe, must accept no formula as final—must trust in nothing written or unwritten, living or dead—must believe neither in special Jehovahs, nor weeping Saviours—neither in raging devils, nor in devilish philosophies—neither in ghosts, nor in idols, nor in laws—nor in woman, nor in man.
O threats of hell, and hopes of paradise,
One thing at least is certain—this life flies;
One thing is certain and all the rest is—lies,
The flower that once has bloomed forever dies.
4 replies on “Might is right, 5”
As you know, César, I follow Calvinist-Extremist lunacy.
In Calvinism, God entered into a contract with Adam, the ultimate progenitor, our federal or covenantal head. When he broke this contract, all of his descendants were made liable for this breach of contract. This is how Calvinists explain Original Sin. Jesus is our new federal head, or covenantal head.
Both the Fall and the Redemption are both contracts that were contracted without any individual Calvinist’s consent.
One of the funny things about Calvinists is that they are obsessed about drawing up contracts—or, in Christianese: “covenants” with their non-existent god. Indeed Calvinism contains within its systematics: “Covenantal Theology”.
Dear Cesar,
Please could you tell me what poem the lines of verse you quoted in italics are from? It reminded me faintly of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. I owned a translation by Edward Fitzgerald, which I used to enjoy as a young teenager. Recalling that poem book off the top of my head, the lines are slightly different though. I was wondering if there was a mutual second source, or some popular overlap from a Biblical saying or folk wisdom. It’s been so long since I read that poem, and sadly I don’t own the book anymore. I liked the melodious flow of Fitzgerald’s work, but I’ve heard since that it’s inaccurate in places to the original Persian lines.
Best regards,
Benjamin
It’s not me, but the author’s book.
Ah, thank you for correcting me. Yes, sorry, my eyes are tired as usual. I ended up losing concentration as I was halfway through typing my query as somewhat was talking to me from behind. How silly of me. I typed the ‘wrong thought’ regarding a Biblical analogy. I’ve cursorily looked up one of the lines since by typing it in. It seems, from the results bar, that it is in fact drawn from The Rubaiyat, but in a different translation to my old one, as far as I can ascertain (or at least unnamed). I’m too tired tonight to explore my search in any more detail but I might look for that version in entirety tomorrow. I’m enjoying Might is Right, thanks for posting it. I’ll try and pick up a copy. I’m sure one of these National Vanguard type independent publishers will have a copy of it. It seems the expression is often flung about by white nationalists, but misinterpreted by them somehow, away from Ragnar Redbeard, and more as a justification to themselves to be cruel and insensitive to their peers, or to animals, rather than expressing strength, instinctive power, and independent choice in action, and usually mentioned like a buzz-term in the same breath as another Christian nationalism aside, or petty conservative authoritarianism. It seems dependent on Natural prudence and racial soul intactness.