The previous two posts, in which I quote what Robert Morgan recently said in The Unz Review, are not about Trump or his VP marrying an Indian. The topic, as the red-lettered categories at the top of those posts say, is about the working hypothesis of white nationalism: that Jewry is the cause of Aryan decline. In a nutshell, Morgan’s comment illustrates that this isn’t true. It was we—and this I say—who doomed ourselves since, as Emperor Julian said in the 4th century c.e., we abandoned the true Gods in favour of the Jews.
That sin reigns throughout American white nationalism, so the typical American racialist reverses cause and effect, as was made clear not only in Morgan’s brief comment but in the red-letter links in the words ‘succeeded’ and ‘has seen’ that I put in the first of the two posts.
The paradigm shift is such that this site almost gets no comments. In spite of this tomorrow I will resume my quotes from Simms’ book on Hitler. I like that intellectual biography of Uncle Adolf’s thinking because the author shows that, while Hitler started with exactly that Judeo-reductionist POV he eventually realised geopolitics, the need for Lebensraum (cf. my last post on Eduardo Velasco’s essay on the Heartland) and things very similar to what John Mearsheimer has been saying about why his country destroyed Germany (and thus is ‘the enemy of Europe’, Francis Parker Yockey would add).
All this escapes and will escape the American monocausalists because, in their tunnel vision, they are not only unable to see what Hitler saw, but also such things as what William Pierce saw in his book.
There he mentions subversive Jewry but Pierce’s broad historical context makes us see history under a very different light from the history coming from the pen of Christians and neochristians. To give just a couple of examples: Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar appear not as heroes but as villains from the point of view of that book, which is also my POV (thanks Pierce: you were the most intelligent American of all US history!).
3 replies on “Reigning sin”
I’ve read William Pierce’s Who We Are series and it was the first written work that introduced me to Nordicism.
I have come to learn that the biggest difference with the historic Nordic racial movement and White Nationalism is that WN focuses on the physical aspects of race whereas the Nordic movement focused on both the physical and spiritual aspects of race. For them It wasn’t enough to just be Nordic-looking; having a noble spirit was just as important.
White nationalism’s focus on physical race is essentially the reverse of the Judaic spirit which separates the physical and spiritual with the spiritual usually being more important than the physical. Its no wonder then why they haven’t been successful.
They’ll never be. Their whole movement is rather phony.
Yes, because this movement is rooted in the Christian/Judaic spirit of mind-body duality. This spirit devalues the body in favor of the mind or devalues the mind in favor of the body, in WN’s case.
This spirit is why degeneracy, which disregards the health of the body in favor of gratification, transgenderism, cultural and social relativism and even the abuse of children and the destruction of the family is so widespread.
When the fair race was healthy throughout history their spirit/values were based on mind-body unity, not mind-body duality. The latter was brought or forced upon them by Christianity or by them living among Nonwhite/mixed races. So to achieve transvaluation and save the fair race from its darkest hour this spirit of mind-body unity needs to be revived and crush the spirit of mind-body duality which will eliminate Christianity and modernity in one fell swoop.