web analytics
Categories
Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 100

It is already too late to regret the past. We should have thought about it before the Second World War—and not unleashed it!—before the over-industrialisation of the West, then of the world; before the intensified massacre of forests and wild animals, and all the horrors committed or permitted, on the beast (always innocent, incapable of being ‘for’ or ‘against’ any ideology whatsoever) in the name of man’s interest, or of his well-being or simply amusement. We should have thought of this before the irresistible progression, the geometric progression, of the pullulation of the two-legged mammal at the expense of its quality, the ultimate source of all evils and all degradations.

It is already too late, not to mention the time when the degeneration of man, under the generalised rule of Chandala, will be an accomplished fact. There is little for the elite to do. There is only to maintain, against all odds, their faith in eternal, non-human values; to curse those men whom the powers of the abyss have chosen as instruments of their inevitable victory and, with all their strength, with all their thirst for beauty and justice, to call upon Kalki, the last hero ‘against Time’, the Avenger of all his glorious precursors: He who must succeed where they have all failed, and bring about the end of this Dark Age.

Whenever one passes through an overcrowded countryside, where quickly built houses and fields for the feeding of the human multitude stretch out indefinitely in place of the felled forests, one need only try to get in touch with the impassive and hidden principle of action and reaction, and pray intensely: ‘Return, O patient Lord, the earth to the jungle, and its ancient kings! Treat man, individually and collectively, as he has treated them and still treats them!’

Categories
Kali Yuga Miscegenation Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book) Winston Churchill

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 99

What I am saying here about the decline of the Aryan is not confined to India. It is a fact observable in any country with a multiracial population, in which the State opposes the promotion of the superior ethnic elements, instead of encouraging it at all costs and by all means. This is particularly evident in any country with a multiracial population in which the state clings to democratic rule, where power rests with the majority. It is a fact which, in an ironic twist of fate, is increasingly threatening to take hold in Britain itself, as a growing multitude of non-Aryans of the most diverse races, and people of no race at all, peacefully invade and swarm.

I have been forbidden to visit England since my participation in the Hitler camp at Costwolds in August 1962, and I cannot, unfortunately, give here the result of recent personal observations. I can, however, state that the situation created nine and more years ago by the presence on British soil of almost two million Africans, Jamaicans and Pakistanis, not to mention, of course, the Jews who had arrived as early as 1933, was already alarming, if not tragic. And, according to the echoes that I have been able to hear, it has only worsened since then, as no measures have been taken to expel all these non-native elements.

There has been an attempt, it seems, or a pretence of an attempt, to exercise somewhat tighter control over the entry of these Commonwealth subjects into England. But this is not the solution to the problem. Non-Aryans, and especially Africans and Jamaicans (the latter, originally African Negroes too), are multiplying at a rate nine times faster than the average European Aryan. It is clear, therefore, that an absolute ban on even one new immigration would surely not be enough to stem the danger to Britain’s very fabric.

Assuming that not a single non-Aryan, Negro or Jew, or Indian Sudanese who have been converted to Islam for some time (for that is what a ‘Pakistani’ is), lands in England from now on, even for a temporary stay, it would make virtually no difference to the situation in the long run, that is to say, to what is already the tragedy of the race problem, in the country which has madly given itself the mission of fighting Hitler’s racism with arms. It wouldn’t change anything because, I repeat, the non-Aryan immigrants who are already settled in England—who work there, who live there with their families, who have acquired, for the most part, citizenship—multiply much faster than the English; and because the benefits, and in particular the medical benefits, which are lavished on them, only encourage their demographic growth. All further immigration being, let us assume, forbidden, the numerical proportion of the Aryan to the non-Aryan population of Great Britain during the next few decades, and a fortiori; during the centuries to come, would nevertheless shift in favour of the non-Aryans, and among these, the Negroes: the people who multiply fastest.

We must also take into account the inevitable mixing of races, all the more frequent (and more revolting) because to the growing perversity of the men and women of the advanced Dark Ages, we must add the influence of a whole literature designed to arouse and maintain a morbid sexual curiosity. Today, yesterday, ten years ago and more, it is (and was) not uncommon to see in the streets of London some beautiful blonde Englishwoman pushing in front of her a child’s carriage in which rest (or rested) one or sometimes two little Euro-African half-breeds.

You can see them even in small towns (I have seen them in Croydon, Chettleham, and elsewhere). It would only be possible to put an end to these shameful and unnatural unions and this production of half-breeds, by changing the mentality of a youth that has so far been increasingly indoctrinated with anti-racism, while taking radical measures for the definitive removal, if not the physical elimination, of current or potential undesirables.

If they are to be kept alive and their labour used, all half-breeds should be sterilised without exception, as well as Aryan women guilty of crimes against the race: for once they have been impregnated, even once, by foreign seed, they are no longer safe (there have been cases in which the child of a very acceptable husband bore a dangerous resemblance to the unacceptable lover whom his mother had left long before his conception). And all Negroes, Jews, and other non-Aryan elements should be forced to leave the national territory, or at least to live there only in exceptional cases, and then subject to laws and regulations that keep them in their place—such as the famous Nuremberg Laws of September 15, 1935 that protected the racial integrity of Germans under the Third Reich.

But for this to be possible, Britain would have to have a dictatorial government of the same type as that of Germany in 1935, and inspired like it by the ancient faith in the excellence of blood purity. Can it ever hope to have one?

Such a Government was able, across the Rhine, in 1933, to come to power ‘by the legal way’, that is to say ‘democratically’, by relying on a majority of voters (and what a majority!) in universal suffrage. It was able to do so because the German people, without having the racial homogeneity the Führer dreamed of, at least had sufficient biological unity to feel their interest linked to that of the Aryan blood. If nothing is done, and done soon, to remove the non-Aryans in Britain from participation in public affairs, it is clear that, given their soaring numbers, they will play an increasingly decisive role in the country’s internal and external politics and its cultural life. (The theatre, cinema and television already seem to have long since become the ‘reserved hunting ground’ of the Jews, without whose approval nothing is played.)

The Aryans will eventually have to abdicate the position of leadership which the virtues, inherent in their race, had given to their fathers, at a time when democracy was conceived only among equals, and there were neither Negroes nor Jews in England[1]. They can, of course, remain pure of blood. And for that to happen, they will have to take great care that their children’s minds are not contaminated by the increasingly insistent influence of the multiracial school, radio, television, cinema, the press, books (especially textbooks); in a word, all the means of dissemination that the majority, hostile to all ‘racial pride’, will have taken more and more firmly in hand.

What is certain is that their numbers will diminish more and more, and especially diminish in proportion to those of men of other races who will then call themselves, without having any right to do so, ‘the English people’ (like so many Indians today, Dravidians, or even mixed-race aborigines who, without having any more right to do so, boast of being part of the Aryajati, the Aryan race, the biological elite of their country).

Eventually, in a few centuries, they will be a hundred thousand, fifty thousand, twenty thousand, scattered over the whole surface of the British Isles, then overpopulated with half-breeds of different shades. They will be drowned in some hundred or two hundred million robots, generally dark-skinned, with the most varied features, a termite mound directed by the diabolical intelligence of a few Jewish technocrats. They will be the only creatures in this termite mound worthy of the name ‘man’ in the sense we would use it. But the world of that time will have no use for such creatures.

Perhaps they will cultivate in themselves a belatedly awakened Aryan consciousness. Perhaps they will manage, despite the distances, to meet from time to time, in small groups, and talk nostalgically about ‘old England’, now deader than the Athens of Pericles. Perhaps, at some pitiful meeting, on some historic anniversary, some man of knowledge and insight will arise and tell his brethren of the race the remote and deep causes of their downfall.

‘Behold,’ he will tell them, ‘we are paying the price of the folly of our fathers of the 19th and 20th centuries; those who, in what was once our Empire, encouraged the propaganda of the Christian missionaries, compulsory vaccination, and the adherence of the “literates” to democratic principles; of those, above all, who, moreover, stubbornly refused the hand sincerely extended to them by the greatest of all Europeans: Adolf Hitler; of those who, in response to his repeated offer of alliance and his promise to leave us the domination of the seas, unleashed the Second World War against him, drowned his country in a deluge of phosphorus and fire, and burned alive nearly five million of his compatriots, women and children, under the burning rubble or in the shelters where the liquefied asphalt of the streets penetrated in fiery streams. We are paying the price for the crimes of Mr Churchill and others and of all those who believed in them and fought against National Socialist Germany, our sister, the defender of our common race. These men, you may say, were bona fide, but short-sighted. That may be so. But that doesn’t excuse them before history. Stupidity is itself a crime when the interest of the nation, and especially of the race, is at stake. We cannot do what our fathers did—to their shame and ours—and escape punishment!’

The punishment will be to have some woolly-haired, simian-faced Christian as Prime Minister of Great Britain: a descendant of equatorial African immigrants annihilated for ‘services rendered’, and perhaps named Winston, after the gravedigger of the former British Empire. The punishment will be to live amid a brownish, camel-headed England—also, at least in large part, woolly-haired—whose former inhabitants, the legitimate inhabitants, the Aryans, whether Normans, Saxons or Celts, will number as few as the Native Americans on the reservations do today in the U.S.

Then, perhaps, groups of true Englishmen, more obstinate than the others in their resentment of the defeated and betrayed, more combative if not less desperate, will burn, every 8th of May, some effigy of Churchill, purposely grotesque; his big puffy, plump face, furnished with the legendary cigar, and smeared like that of a clown; his big belly stuffed with gunpowder. May 8 will, indeed, at last be recognised as the anniversary of the shame of England as much as of the misfortune of the ‘sister nation’, once hated, now adored with all the passion that accompanies a remorse that we know is useless. Perhaps these same Englishmen, and others, will publicly worship Adolf Hitler, the Saviour whom their ancestors of yesterday rejected and whom their ancestors of today—our contemporaries—still insult. Perhaps there will be, among the dwindling number of Aryans throughout the world, a militant minority, serene, almost happy in its unshakeable loyalty, who will worship him while waiting to become (they or their descendants) the bodyguard of the Avenger he hinted at, but was not: Kalki.

But all late repentance and retrospective devotions will remain ineffective, both in Europe and among the Aryan minorities in other countries, especially in an increasingly Jewless and negrified America. Nothing can save the youngest of humanity’s noble races from the fate that must befall it as a consequence of the crimes committed or tolerated by too many of its representatives, under the influence of an anthropocentrism of the wrong sort. These crimes will be followed by ‘return shocks’, slowly no doubt, but all the more irresistibly as those who committed or tolerated them were more responsible (or should have been) while being less detached, more focused on themselves and their narrow-minded notions, than on the Universe: the Cosmos and the essence of the Cosmos.

There are all kinds of crimes, the wages of which have been accumulating for millennia—crimes against all animal aristocracies, from mighty bison to graceful deer, from great cats to common cats, tigers in miniature; crimes against the massacred forest, against the impassive sea, sullied by all the filth of invading industry; crimes against all human aristocracies, especially against the Aryan race itself, against the Germans in Europe, against the purest Aryas in the Indies, in Asia, in the name of Christ or Christian ‘values’; in the name of Democracy or Marxism, always in the name of some faith or philosophy invented and spread by Jews.

____________

[1] There were no Jews in England from 1290, when King Edward I expelled them, until the middle of the 17th century when Cromwell, who owed their bankers enormous sums, recalled them.

Categories
Monologe im Führerhauptquartier

Monologe im Führerhauptquartier, 10

Führerhauptquartier

27. 7. 1941, abends

Es ist sonderbar, wie sehr es für die Stellung eines Volkes in der Welt auf das Alter der Macht ankommt, die in ihm repräsentiert ist: Eine werdende Nation ist auf ständige Erfolge angewiesen, während eine alte sich ständige Mißerfolge leisten kann: Deutschland und England.

Wir werden eisern darauf bedacht sein müssen, daß sich diesseits des Ural keine militärische Macht je mehr auftut: Unsere westlichen Nachbarn würden immer die Bundesgenossen unserer östlichen sein; so haben [es] die Franzosen mit den Türken gehalten, und so halten es jetzt die Engländer mit den Sowjets. Unter diesseits des Ural verstehe ich eine Linie von 200-300 km östlich von ihm.

Es muß uns möglich sein, diesen Ostraum mit 250 000 Mann und dazu einigen guten Männern der Verwaltung zu beherrschen. Schauen wir uns nur die Engländer an, die mit 250 000 Menschen insgesamt – Wehrmacht davon etwa 50 000 Mann – 400 Millionen Inder regieren. Immer soll dieser Raum auf deutsche Herrscher angewiesen sein. Nichts wäre verkehrter, als die Masse etwa erziehen zu wollen. Ein Interesse haben wir lediglich daran, daß die Leute, sagen wir die Verkehrszeichen unterscheiden lernen; sie sind jetzt Analphabeten und sie sollen es bleiben. Wohl aber müssen sie gut leben können; das ist unser eigenes Interesse.

Den Süden der Ukraine, die Krim besonders, wollen wir ganz ausschließlich deutsch besiedeln. Es macht mir keine Mühe, die dortige Bevölkerung anderswohin zu schieben. Der deutsche Siedler wird der Wehrbauer sein, und dazu nehme ich die Kapitulanten, mögen sie bisher verwandt sein wie immer. Wir erhalten auf diesem Wege zugleich ein braves Unteroffizier-Korps, wie wir es brauchen.

Wir werden künftig eine ständige Heeres-Stärke haben von doch 1,5-2 Millionen. Mit dem Abgang der Zwölfjährigen stehen jährlich 30000-40000 Kapitulanten zur Verfügung. Ihnen stellt, wenn sie Bauernsöhne sind, das Reich einen vollständig ausgerüsteten Hof zur Verfügung. Der Boden kostet uns nichts, wir müssen nur das Haus bauen. Diesen Betrieb »kauft« sich der Bauernsohn, mit dem ich das Land besiedeln will, durch seinen zwölfjährigen Dienst; die letzten zwei Jahre schon in Vorbereitung auf die Landwirtschaft. Es knüpft sich daran nur eine einzige Bedingung, daß der Kapitulant keine Städterin, sondern ein Landmädchen zur Frau nimmt, das möglichst gar nicht erst in der Stadt mit ihm gelebt hat.

Diese Wehrbauern bekommen Waffen mit, so daß sie bei irgendwelcher Gefahr sofort als örtliche Waffenträger zur Verfügung sind. So hat das alte Österreich mit dem Grenzer seine Ostvölker im Zaum gehalten. Zugleich ist der Wehrbauer der beste Lehrer dort. Jedenfalls ist der Unteroffizier ein besserer Lehrer für die Bauernkinder als der heutige Lehrer ein guter Offizier ist.

Auf diesem Wege stellt sich zugleich der Kindersegen auf dem Lande wieder ein: Wahrend jetzt das Erbhofgesetz die Nachgeborenen leer ausgehen läßt, ist künftig jedem Bauernsohn seine Scholle sicher. Und 30 000-40 000 Bauern jährlich, das ist sehr viel. In die baltischen Länder können wir auch Holländer, Norweger und vereinzelt sogar Schweden hereinnehmen.

Categories
PDF backup

WDH – pdf 424

Click: here

The software converter was unable to add the YouTube embedded image in the article “Reflections of an Aryan woman, 93” but it’s embedded below:

https://youtu.be/x7_5BX5rzhw

Categories
Vladimir Putin War!

NATO wants a ground-war in Ukraine

by Mike Whitney

USA and NATO: We are united in our determination to defeat Russia whether we blow up the planet or not. Got it?

 
Why is NATO sending more lethal weaponry to Ukraine? Didn’t Putin say that poring arms into Ukraine would increase the likelihood of war? Yes, he did, but the US and NATO continue send more shipments anyway. Why? And why does Ukraine need more weapons?

Could it be that Ukraine’s 600,000-strong military is collapsing like a trailer park in a hurricane? Is that it? Is that why NATO had an emergency confab in Brussels on Thursday to restate their support for a NATO-trained army that has not successfully launched even one major counteroffensive against the Russian military?

The media insists that the Russian offensive ‘has stalled’. Is that what you call it when your opponent captures an area the size of the UK in less than 3 weeks or when all your air and naval assets have been obliterated or when your Command-and-Control centers have gone up in smoke or when most of your combat troops are either encircled by Russian forces or fleeing to locations west of the Dnieper River? Is that what ‘stalled’ looks like?

Do you get the impression that the media is not being entirely straightforward in their coverage of the war in Ukraine? Do you think that maybe their WEF-linked owners might have a dog in this fight? Here’s how Archbishop Vigano summed it up recently in an article linking ‘Covid tyranny’ to the war in Ukraine: ‘The ideological continuity between the pandemic farce and the Russian-Ukrainian crisis continues to emerge, beyond the evidence of the events and statements of the subjects involved, in the fact that the ultimate perpetrators of both are the same, all attributable to the globalist cabal of the World Economic Forum’.

Truer words were never spoken. It’s all manipulation by globalist stakeholders pursuing their own narrow interests…

It looks to me like Chomsky thinks arming Ukraine was a deliberate provocation. Which it was. NATO stuffed the country full of weapons, trained its combat troops and paramilitaries, conducted military operations with NATO, ordered their army to the east so they could terrorize the ethnic Russian population, and then–to top it off–threatened to develop nuclear weapons. In short, they put a gun to Putin’s head and threatened to blow his brains out. If that’s not a provocation, then what is?…

But do the brave Ukrainians that are fighting in this fiasco, know what they’re fighting for?

No, they don’t. They think they’re risking their lives for their country, but, actually, they’re fighting to preserve US global hegemony by annihilating Russia, encircling China and establishing America’s dominance over the world’s most populous and prosperous region of the next century. That’s what they’re fighting for, Washington’s pivot to Asia. As the author of the WSWS article admits: ‘It is clear that what is involved is not only a war in Ukraine, but a campaign by the US and NATO imperialist powers for war against Russia and a redivision of the world’.

Yes, that’s right, and Biden doesn’t even try to hide it. Here’s what he said just two days ago: ‘Now is a time when things are shifting… here’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it’.

New World Order? You mean, this isn’t about Ukraine’s borders, after all? Nope. That’s all patriotic claptrap dolled-up for the serfs. Here’s how Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov summed it up on Tuesday:

This is not about Ukraine, this is about a world order in which the United States wants to be the sole sovereign and dominate… This all is about removing the obstacle in the form of Russia on the way to building a unipolar world.

Indeed, that is the objective, and the US is not going to be timid in pursuing its interests. China and Russia are under the illusion that the emergence of various power centres will inevitably bring about change in the global order. But the world doesn’t work that way. The world leader will not willingly concede defeat or graciously abdicate the throne. He must be knocked from his pedestal much like the schoolyard bully must be subdued through force.

In any event, we should try to go beyond the media’s propaganda and see if we can identify the real causes of the current conflict. Why, for example, is the US targeting Russia? In what way is Russia an obstacle that is blocking Washington’s strategic ambitions? The former Undersecretary of Defence, Paul Wolfowitz, answers that question in one short paragraph written more than two decades ago. It is as relevant today as it was then:

Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.

In short, Washington sees Russia as a hostile power because it sits atop an ocean of oil and gas reserves and because it ‘defiantly’ conducts its own independent foreign policy. For these reasons, Russia is Uncle Sam’s mortal enemy.

__________

Read it all on The Unz Review! I omitted the passages where the author says (with other words) that NATO and the US Deep State are like the characters in Dr Strangelove: a film I saw on the big screen when I was about twelve years old.

Categories
Hinduism Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 98

Advertisements, like the ones I have just mentioned, cover whole pages. There is also, of course, the occasional request from some ‘broad-minded’—i.e., heavily influenced by foreign propaganda) father (or brother—that ‘caste doesn’t matter’. Forty years ago there were already such advertisements—one in a hundred—in the big city newspapers. Most of them came from Brahmosamajis. The mentality they reflect is unknown in the villages of India, where ninety-five per cent of the population live.

As for the immense mass of Harijans the government may open the doors of the temples wide to them, but they don’t care to enter. They know that this is contrary to custom and that custom is sacred, whereas the government isn’t. They continue to stay away as before.

Despite all this, the poison of anti-Tradition, the virus of a new, anti-racist, and above all anti-Aryan mentality—contrary to that which has governed Hindu life for sixty centuries—has been injected into the souls of an increasing number of young people of both sexes and all castes. It has been injected already in the time of the English, and, as I have so often repeated, by the English themselves; their teachers as well as their missionaries, or the Jews of high Masonic degrees who acted behind them and through them, mostly without their knowledge.

It may be that Hindu civilisation will resist to the very end of this last age of our Cycle. It may be that, in time, it will cease to resist and succumb. All will depend on how long our Cycle is to last, and above all on how quickly the non-Aryan Hindu castes pull up. The revolt of the latter,[1] which is now being felt everywhere among their educated members can only remain in a multiracial ‘democracy’, directly proportional to the success of the measures of preventive hygiene and medicine. The present Indian government, with its profoundly anthropocentric views inherited from the humanitarian—if not Christian—West, will continue to apply such measures, the pure and simple suppression of which would seem ‘monstrous’ to them.

The Indian Aryan will certainly remain in India. But he will have (like the Aryan, moreover, wherever populations of an inferior race, enjoying ‘rights’ equal to his own, multiply alongside him), less and less power. The democratic system, if it isn’t broken in time by violence, will prevent him from acting or even from asserting himself through words and books.

It would be necessary, therefore, that, in an immense and irresistible impulse against the current of the Dark Age, India should repudiate both democracy and anthropocentrism, and return to living in the atmosphere of the ancient racism of the hierarchical castes: the Aryan, Brahman and Kshatriya at the top, having sole temporal power and spiritual authority; the latter deriving its legitimacy from the former.

But if, as everything suggests, the ‘twenty-fifth hour’ has really come, there is no one before Kalki himself who can initiate and guide such an impulse. What our beloved Führer, the precursor of Kalki, didn’t succeed in doing amid a Nordic majority, with the collaboration of more than a million SS fighters—the warrior and mystic elite of the world, totally devoted to the Aryan cause—, no one will succeed in doing anywhere the equivalent of that—no one, except Kalki, the last ‘man against Time’ who must close this cycle.

_____________

[1] A revolt that took shape, in particular, in the South of India, with the struggle of the Dravida Munetra Khazgham against the Brahmins, the Sanskrit culture, the cult of Rama (the deified Aryan hero) and, in general, against everything in life and institutions which recalls the Aryan presence.

Dissenting voices

This interview dates back to when Trump was president, but it feels like it was done yesterday: two dissenting voices on the war in Ukraine.

For context see another YouTube short clip. In it, one of the above scholars, a specialist on Russian history, explains how Russian political leaders have seen NATO expansion as an ongoing threat. The one on the left died in 2020, but I had already dedicated an entry to the other fellow, who recently spoke out about the war in Ukraine.

Categories
Christendom Racial right

A Christianoid view of the world

I recently came across this quote by Robert Morgan: ‘This is why ass clowns like Gregory Hood and Jared Taylor utterly fail’. I replied to him in The Unz Review and he replied:

C.T.: ‘Hood and Taylor subscribe to Christian ethics’.

I think it’s more than ethics. The entire culture of the West has a Christianoid view of the world, and it infects all discourse. Though neither Hood nor Taylor are ostentatious about their Christianity (if they’re professed Christian at all), they absorb it from the culture at large. It’s present in everything they write.

Take Hood’s endorsement of the ‘solution’ of repatriation of negroes back to Africa, for example. The most remarkable thing about this ‘solution’ is that when it was tried it didn’t work! And one wonders, how could so many distinguished and seemingly intelligent men in the nineteenth century have thought it would work? And why do Taylor and Hood both even today continue to try to push this absurd narrative that it was a great idea, especially in light of its pathetic record of failure? These are real mysteries only partly explained by ‘Christian ethics’.

To expect that all these monkeys suddenly will voluntarily decide to depart for Africa is ridiculous, and should have always been denounced by any sane men as obviously crazy. It’s on the same order of craziness as a beautiful blond woman deciding to take a nude stroll through a negro ghetto at midnight and not expecting to be raped. In the latter case, we’d accurately say she’s just a whore who secretly wants to be raped. Applying this logic to the former, what does it say about the white race? That is, for some unfathomable reason, wants the negroes to stay?

C.T.: ‘And Kevin MacDonald has done it again: another apologetic article claiming that Christianity is compatible with racism has been published today in The Occidental Observer!’

In a vein similar to the above, what does the maniacal insistence on retaining Christianity say about whites, given its abysmal record in preserving the white race so far? To me, it seems obviously crazy; quite as crazy as the nymphomaniac blond. Either the white race is too stupid to perceive the problem, or it is, as I have speculated, following an unrecognized ‘group evolutionary strategy’.

The [TOO] article itself was gibberish, but some of the comments were interesting. In some ways it’s good to see so many coming out against Christianity in that webzine. It’s usually overrun with Christianity’s defenders, so maybe the tide is beginning to turn. Unfortunately though, history has shown that to oppose Christian lunacy for the wrong reasons can often be as bad or worse than not opposing it at all.

‘I think it’s more than ethics’, said the American Morgan. I would say that it is the massive blindspot that most American racialists suffer from. Morgan has been criticising Hood’s Christianoid view of the world in the comments section of The Unz Review. But anyone who hasn’t read last month’s critique of Taylor should do so now.

Categories
Hinduism Miscegenation Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 97

It is fortunate that in India the masses are deeply conservative, and gifted with an uncommon strength of inertia. It isn’t impossible that, out of sheer indifference, and without even a vague awareness of what they are doing, they will successfully resist all the pressures exerted upon them to pull them away from Tradition, or from what they have been able to retain of it. They may even resist literacy—by which I mean the harmful effects that literacy has so often had on trusting and credulous populations of traditional civilisation.

They won’t necessarily lose faith in their Gods and in everything that, in their way of life, seems to them to be closely or remotely related to the divine order. I have alluded in these pages to the Viswakarma cult as I saw it practised in 1958 by the factory workers of Joda, Orissa. It isn’t impossible that for a long time to come, even to the end of this Dark Age—and not only in Joda but in the great and increasingly industrialised agglomerations—the ‘working masses’ of India will continue to ritually decorate with scarlet flowers, once a year, in honour of the Cosmic Worker, the steel monsters with their intricate workings, which help them to ‘produce’ more and more. No government, apparently, would object.

Besides, governmental objections don’t disturb the Indian masses, even the working class—let alone the rural ones. One of the first acts of the first government of ‘Independent India’ was to ‘abolish the caste system’ and open the temples to the untouchables, whom it is fashionable to call, in the phrase coined by Gandhi, ‘Harijans’ or ‘People of God’—as if all the living didn’t participate, more or less, in the divinity of Reality itself, in the Hindu world view.

However, since my return to India in June 1971, I haven’t noticed that caste is, on the whole, less meaningful to Hindus and less important in their lives than it was forty years ago. You only have to open any large or small daily newspaper and read the matrimonial advertisements to be convinced of this. You will find sentences like this one on every page: ‘Wanted: young man Agarwala’ (this is a sub-caste of the Vaishyas, widespread in the United Provinces) ‘for a beautiful girl of seventeen years of age, from the same sub-caste; good housewife and well endowed’. Or: ‘Wanted: young girl of Brahmin Saraswati’ (this is a sub-caste of the Brahmins of Maharashtra) ‘for a young man of the same sub-caste, returned from Europe, with a brilliant future. Would like dowry in relation’. Or again: ‘Request Brahmin’s daughter from Chitpavan sub-caste’, another Maharashtra community, ‘young, pretty, of robust health and fair complexion, versed in domestic arts, for young Brahmin from the same community, of good looks and fair complexion, with future employment. The dowry may be small, if the girl is beautiful, of fair complexion; and if she comes from an orthodox family’ (i.e., faithful to tradition).

Doesn’t it seem that the author of this last announcement is ‘one of us’? And yet he wrote simply as a Hindu deeply attached to his ancient tradition. But tradition is the same. This Brahmin of 1971 has, without knowing it, a nostalgia for the immemorial Hyperborea. And there are millions like him in India.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note:

Just the attitude I have in the Latin American country where I live. The great irony is that, even though my bloodline is compromised, I think like these Brahmins; and two ethnic Germans I met in Mexico married… brown women. (The mongrel daughter of one of these marriages now lives in Germany; her German father is now dead!) Isn’t it a disgrace that someone like me religiously follows these ancient Aryan codes while today’s Germans violate them in the most egregious way?

Categories
Christendom

Apologetics

Editor’s Note: The following is Lucius Vanini’s response to the latest Christian apologetic article appearing in Kevin MacDonald’s The Occidental Observer (TOO):
 

______ 卐 ______

 
The article makes much of an absence of race-related doctrine in Christianity, and the author seems to think that such absence leaves Christians free to be White Nationalists if they choose. Well, they are thus free to choose–to be at odds with moral doctrines that are stated and explicit. If Christian morality enjoined taking rather than giving, pride rather than humility, fierce retaliation instead of non-resistance and even the invitation of further aggression, and bias toward the strong and highly-placed instead of for the lowly and poor (like blacks usually are), then becoming White Nationalists would be consonant with Christianity.

But Christian morality does not so enjoin. No, it says the opposite. Hence, while it doesn’t explicitly tell us to be racially self-abnegating, its all-embracing altruism, its enmity toward ‘selfishness’, are very consonant with racial self-abnegation–if indeed they don’t imply the rectitude thereof. So, again, when Merkel said that her migrant-friendly politics are alone consistent with Christian teachings, she was spot on. In contrast, Whites who combine self-identification as Christians with Viking in-group preference, together with a readiness to strike back against threats to their group, are hypocrites–they behave against the grain of the creed they profess to honour. Europeans did this for ages and thus (with the help of the Pagan revolt known as the Renaissance) were able to revive European greatness after a long nadir. But there were drawbacks: (1) they were monsters of falsity; (2) their lip service to Christianity preserved the religion for such Europeans as were able to practice its morality of un-selfing.

That Christianity doesn’t talk much about race is, at the very least, no positive help to the development of White in-group preference. So why must we even consider it, since there are creeds which do explicitly deal with race and explicitly enjoin White Racialism? There’s the Cosmotheism of William Luther Pierce and the Creativity of Ben Klassen. These Racialist creeds not only call for doing whatever will enable Whites to preserve themselves, to prevail and prosper, but enable Whites to be self-consistent, whole, honest, without hypocrisy.

The article seems to place importance on the Bible’s recognition that there are different kinds of humans. Why? Has that any more importance than remarking that a pine is different from an oak tree? Such a prosaic observation doesn’t say that different kinds can’t be integrated or even amalgamated. And as long as nothing is said about preferring the kind which one belongs to, it’s of no help to us; and again there still are the other parts which contravene self-preference, pride, resistance–things all of a piece with racial White self-assertion.

That Christians today don’t ask blacks or non-White Hispanics to ‘jettison’ their racial identity, while Whites are urged to jettison theirs, is a wholly natural outcome of Christian ‘otherself-interest’ and condemnation of egoism and pride. These Christians–and the bigger group, the post-Christians who’ve inherited Christian altruism while having dispensed with the metaphysics–think they are being righteous or moral because they are selfless–since they, being White, are willing to let those who are not White get a leg up on them. Pure decadence, of course.

The failure of Saul of Tarsus (whom the articles refer to as Paul) to condemn boundaries between peoples begs another consideration to accompany it–assuming that he did believe in a Second Coming which would sweep away the world order and replace it with something quite different. His not decrying something as a problem could very well have betokened an unconcern about it–a contempt for something whose days are numbered.

So as not to write an article here in the comments section, I’ll limit myself to the above. Yet I must say I’m struck by the author’s partiality to Jews. Funny, in his posts in TOO’s comments section, which I’ve read and controverted, I saw sweeping statements about the incurable wickedness of Jews. His disapprobation thereof is such that I recall him asking, during a discussion of Jews’ racial nature, why we should even want Jews to be White–as if our desire could determine their ethnic/genetic character; and that sounded to me like pretty deep hatred. Well, such hatred would be understandable enough–if it weren’t for the fact that he also derives his beloved creed, his pantheon of soothsayers, and his very God from that same ethnic group! Saul, and every one of the twelve disciples and the apostles was an ethnic Jew, as was the carpenter of Nazareth, born the son of the God of Israel and a scion of the House of King David of Israel. Hmm. Do the bad guys include the very best guys?

And I’d be very curious to know whether the author contends, like some Christians do, that Christianity and Judaism are wholly separate phenomena. He seems to think that passages of the Old Testament, the pre-Christian Judaic scriptures, are one with his creed. Well, if so, isn’t the messianic religion adapted for the goyim in some degree an extension of the original messianism just for Jews, such that tenets of the latter also apply to adherents of the former?

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s note: Lucius Vanini added the next day:
 

______ 卐 ______

 

I can’t resist asking the article’s author the following questions:

1) Does he recommend White Nationalism to the congregation of his church? I notice that, among non-Christian White Nationalists, Christians constantly stump for Jesus and Saul; but I don’t get a sense that they try to favorably dispose non-WN Christian congregations toward White ‘racialism’ (or, the term I prefer, ‘racism’–because that’s what discrimination based on race is, notwithstanding that it may consist merely in preferring Whites to all others).

If the author isn’t trying to publish a White-Advocacy article on an ecclesiastical website, or making comments sympathizing with WN perspectives under Christian articles, it’ll confirm my belief that he thinks Christians have a better idea of what’s important than White Advocates do. Equally it underscores another reason why Christians who say they’re WNs are a problem for the Cause–namely that their creed is more important to them than are peculiarly White interests.

2) How can he assure his co-religionists–or even himself–that rejecting intimate association with sincere black Christians is righteous? Are not such blacks his brothers in Christ? How can he prefer infidel Whites to his brothers in Christ? Since race is what most counts with me, White Christians like him are allowed into the Ethnostate I dream of, whereas blacks who share my religious views are excluded. Can he share my biases and thus be a thoroughgoing White Partisan?

Remember, his creed doesn’t say that preferring Whites is important, but places supreme importance on accepting Christ as Redeemer. If Whites don’t accept Jesus as their savior–and perhaps a majority of WN Whites never will–how can a true Christian prefer them to blacks who do?

3) Talking of a coming holy kingdom wherein where all conflicts have been ended, is he aware that the Christian expectation thereof is a reason why Whites don’t espouse White Advocacy? I get around, not only in cyberspace but geographically; and wherever I go, I talk to Conservative Whites about White partisanship; and time after time I hear them say, ‘All these troubles are signs of the last days, and it’s good they’re happening, because it means Jesus is coming soon and only he can make things right’. Though RockaBoatus [the author of the TOO piece] might differ with them about the timetable, a whole lot of them think that if anything the Second Coming is past due; and I don’t see how he knows better than they. Christians have believed that the end of ‘this world’ is nigh ever since they heard ‘There are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming into his Kingdom’ (so says the literary character Jesus in the books of Matthew, Luke and Mark)–and that’s going on two millennia ago…

Of course, the whole narrative is aware of snake-oil salesmen, mere mythology. But the upshot in any case is that when people think troubles herald an end to all trouble, they’ll accept them; and when they expect a supernatural personage to make everything right, they’ll rest content with ‘having faith’.

4) If because of exploding population Africa suffers famines, will he support White efforts to relieve those famines? With the highest birth-rates in the world, black-African numbers burgeon and often lead to food shortages; but they also overflow toward and into Europe. Would RockaBoatus be for letting black children starve to death instead of enabling them to live and help continue the proliferation? I know exactly where I’d stand. As a racist, to whom nothing is more valuable than White well-being, I’d let all sub-Sahara starve if that could benefit Europe. But as a Christian, can RockaBoatus reject the option of ‘charity’? Can he be for letting children starve?

5) Will he favour the abolition of abortion, which in the USA has kept black numbers down because blacks use it as birth control, aborting five times as often as Whites do? At 40+ million, American blacks commit hundreds of thousands of violent crimes against Whites per year–at least 1480 per day–and an alleged 86% of them vote Leftist, helping elect Marxists and black mayors who ruin cities and DAs who abet crime. And for abortion the black pop could easily be 80+ million.

So will our Christian writer favour devoting so much time, money and work to doubling this trouble by reversing Roe v. Wade, when the cheapest and least risky option possible–doing nothing–will enable Whites’ natural enemies to continue culling their own numbers?