Further to what I said in my previous post about Yahweh. In his exchange with a Jew, Spencer gets the gist of what we have been saying about Christianity. For example, on 1:11 he speaks about the destruction of Greco-Roman art by Judeo-Christians and on 1: 18 we hear from him that ‘the origins of Christianity are entirely Jewish’ and a minute later: ‘The difference between Judaism and Christianity is like this Menshevik vs. Bolshevik stuff’.
1: 35. Spencer said: ‘We function better’ in paganism after mentioning the Dark Ages. Although I doubt he has read us, Spencer is conscious about the subject of the masthead of this site, the essay about Rome against Judea and Judea against Rome:
You have to understand that the triumph of Christianity was a class revolt; it was a revolt against a people who had achieved a higher, a superior level of civilisation. And it always has been that way. It always has had that germ in it—even if it was adopted by aristocracy. Christianity… if you read the words, if you take that text seriously it is full, it is dripping with class resentment of the rabble, fighting against a people who are rightly superior, who are more beautiful, more physically imposing and domineering, who have achieved higher levels of military prowess and scientific acumen and civilisational glory.
Then after 2: 19 he said that the early Christians ‘fundamentally shifted the collective psychology of the white race, to a point that I think it’s very difficult for us to think outside of Christianity’, something that includes ‘cultural Christians’, i.e., secular westerners.
What Spencer says next hits the nail about why racialism has been a failure. It has to do with the resistance among whites, even white nationalists, to transvalue values back to Aryan normalcy: ‘What we’re doing now is going to be small, but in many ways it is going to resemble the early Christians who adopted this creed’. Indeed, since Christian ethics has invaded every atom of the Aryan soul, now we need the same process in reverse. In the Q&A after a listener asked Spencer: ‘What is the destiny of whites and how to achieve it?’ he answered:
Huge things: I would say this, I think disobeying Yahweh has to begin there… The Aryan spirit is best articulated through domination and Empire… basically kicking asses across the world… That is who we are, fundamentally. And Judaism, the Old Testament… is revered for the wrong reasons. I think that it is good to use it as a kind of moral compass in reverse: that the things that displease Yahweh… are exactly the things that we should do… We [whites] are the villains on some level. We are that person who other peoples fear [the blond beast]. We have to embrace that aspect of ourselves if we are going to free ourselves.
Then Spencer mocks ‘the poor victim of the little Christian lamb. That’s not going to work. Lambs get to be slaughtered. We should be the ones slaughtering lambs’ (this he said after 2:32). Ten minutes later he sees today’s nationalists as folk preaching to the choir, and uses the metaphor that they are trapped in a hamster’s wheel, telling to themselves the same old story over and over.
If white nationalists started to speak like that I would be a little more optimistic and would stop trolling them on this site!
Yesterday I was struck by the wise words that, in his table talk of July 21, 1941, Hitler pronounced:
Und dann unsere eigene Geschichte auf italischem Boden: Wer kein Organ für Geschichte hat, ist wie ein Mensch, der kein Gehör oder kein Gesicht hat: Leben kann er auch so, aber was ist das?! (There’s also our own past on Italian soil. A man who is indifferent to History is a man without hearing, without sight. Such a man can live, of course—but what a life?)
In the West, the religion of our day seems to be to exterminate the white race through historical slander and lies. That is why the most important subject of all we can imagine is what Hitler says: the history of the white race, the reading of which sets the record straight.
Lately there have been some videos that have become fashionable on YouTube about reconstructions, with computer special effects, of ancient Greece and Rome and how they would look with their citizens. I was shocked to discover that, along with the beauty of classical architecture, the scoundrels who make these videos have been putting the inhabitants of Greek and Roman cities as dark-skinned! They were actually very white, and Hitler implied that when he said ‘There’s also our own past on Italian soil’, referring to the migrations of Nordids (such as the Dorians or the original Latins) when they conquered the southern mudbloods.
The great failure of white nationalism is not starting with the Classical World as understood by the Greeks and Romans: a culture based not only on architecture but on sculpture that showed the beauty of the Aryan body and face uncontaminated by mud blood. (American white nationalists do not begin their narrative with the pre-Christian art because, as Sebas Ronin said, most of them are patriotards.)
In his TV series Civilisation Kenneth Clark says that in the transition from the Ancient World to Christendom the human figure disappears, although Clark failed to add that it was the figure of the pure Aryan that disappeared (pre-Renaissance Christs represent the Semitic man, not the Aryan). Lord Clark was a Christian. Yes, he had an immense sensitivity towards art, but he was a Yahweh worshiper after all. Clark’s widow said that her husband always had a profound Christian sensitivity, and that whenever he went into a church in search of works of art he would first kneel and pray.
Like Lord Clark, the history books read by whites who are under the illusion they are racially conscious were written by Christians, Jews, and neochristians. The latter are the secular whites who never abandoned the Semitic ethics that the New Testament bequeathed to us.
Only William Pierce wrote a story of the white race from the point of view that we could call the POV of the priest of the fourteen words. But Pierce’s story is not read in the circles of white nationalism because even anti-Semites continue to allow themselves to be sodomized by Yahweh. They reason in this way: ‘Indeed, the Old Testament orders the Hebrews to exterminate the non-Hebrew peoples that they are conquering. But we are good. How do we know that we are the good guys? Because unlike the Old Testament written for them, in the New Testament Yahweh commands us to love all our neighbours and we obey Him. Thus, we abhor the exterminationist fantasies of our enemies’.
It goes without saying that the only way to prevent Yahweh from continuing to sodomize us is to stop subscribing to the moral code imposed on us by his gospel. And that means even going beyond Arthur Kemp, the other historian who wrote a story of the white race from the POV of the 14 words. Unlike Pierce, Kemp is not an exterminationist. Some could even say that he is a secular neochristian. Many years ago a commenter said in this forum that Kemp had come to write about the rights of a group of blacks in an African country. I didn’t visit the Kemp article that this commenter linked to, so I can’t substantiate his claim. But we can say that the so-called human rights that became fashionable after the French Revolution are a by-product of Yahweh’s command to love one’s neighbour.
Here we see my hand holding a hard-cover copy of Uncle Adolf’s after-dinner talks in the original language. A priest of the 14 words takes Uncle Adolf’s talks as his Aryan gospel. This cannot be more contrasting with the Semitic gospel of the ‘anti-Semites’ of American white nationalism.
This is a postscript to what I wrote yesterday in ‘Holmes quote’.
In his article yesterday on The Occidental Observer, Robert S. Griffin, author of a book about William Pierce, not only fails to mention the JQ, which Pierce talked about so much on his podcasts. Griffin also fails to mention the CQ about which Pierce said wise things in the book that I mention at the end of my previous post.
A subject who only reads Kevin MacDonald’s webzine and doesn’t delve into the most important non-fiction work that came out of Pierce’s pen, will be left with a sanitised view of Pierce: more akin to American race realism than Pierce’s exterminationist racism.
This recent discussion thread reminds me of something. The white nationalist’s methodology is contrary to that of Sherlock Holmes, who told Dr. Watson: ‘It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts’.
I try to be like Holmes: first comes the data and only after the theories. The data is the facts that cannot be questioned, the historical facts in the only two books written from the POV of the 14 words, authored by Pierce and Kemp. Those are the elemental facts from which we must formulate our theories to explain the darkest hour for the fair race. Now that I have finished my books On Beth’s Cute Tits and The Human Side of Chess, I have time to continue rounding out the facts that Pierce and Kemp showed us with Deschner’s series on the criminal history of Christianity.
Unlike us, white nationalists theorise before they have data. Kevin MacDonald is not a historian, so it seems easy for him to start with the JQ and end with the JQ. In the case of Jared Taylor, the grandfather of race realism, he simply confesses that for him the cause of the dark hour is a total mystery.
Among the new generation of American racialists, who are Jew-wise but sympathetic to Christianity, ignorance of historical data causes them to twist the facts to suit their theories. That’s why they regard the JQ as the sole factor in Aryan decline. White nationalists don’t want to see gigantic events that have destroyed the European race without Jews, as what happened precisely in the American continent when the Spanish and the Portuguese conquered it. (Every time I go out into the street and see a sea of brown people in the largest city in Latin America, I cannot but curse Catholicism, as it was the Church of Rome that allowed that miscegenation was practised in the newly discovered continent.)
What Holmes warned happens to Americans and not so much to Europeans because the former insist on respecting the religion of their parents. Tom Sunic doesn’t respect it that much, which is why he was able to say more than a decade ago: ‘No Jews, no Arabs, no communists have done so much damage to the White gene pool as Whites themselves’. But the supporters of Christianity who read Sunic’s words in The Occidental Observer continue to twist the facts to fit their monocausal theories about white decline, rather than letting the facts speak for themselves.
It is precisely for this reason that Pierce and Kemp’s books, like Deschner’s on the history of Christianity that I will soon continue to translate, are still ignored by American racialists.
___________
Update: And remember that an illustrated version of William Pierce’s Who We Are is now available online: here (and hard copy: here).
My entire adult life has been devoted to the writing of unwritten history. As we all know, unless you learn from your history, you are doomed to repeat your history.
Thus, I have made it my life’s mission to give voice to history’s losers so that we might actually learn from our history, learn from both sides of our history, in the hope that we might thereby avoid repeating much of that history in the future.
From the American Civil War and Abraham Lincoln to World War Two I have chosen the loser’s perspective in my books simply to find out what is mostly unknown and hence, find out what is almost entirely unwritten.
Winners do indeed write history and the libraries are full of the winner’s accounts. I write that one book, that one book which will hopefully help us to not only understand and learn from the ‘other side’, but will hopefully help us to understand and learn what real history is.
Only by understanding both sides of history can we hope to avoid repeating that very history we would prefer to avoid.
The year in which I wrote the first draft of this book marked a century since the birth of Carlos Torre. Our age is, in many ways, worse than 1904: especially in overpopulation and in degradation of culture. But there is more freedom to question the family institution in which some parents assault their kids’ minds. A hundred years ago it was impossible to film Shine or even write about a similar case in real life. Claroscuro was titled this Oscar-winning film in Mexico, where millions of viewers saw how an abusive father literally drives his son mad.
There are two ways of seeing Caissa: as the great whore of the marginalised and even of those who have suffered crises like the one Torre suffered, or as a generous mother who welcomes the marginalised into her lap. In the original version of this booklet of 2004, an abominable bias towards the first interpretation appeared, although when speaking of my nostalgic park we glimpse that this mother welcomed many social outcasts and abused young people at home.
The fact is that not all of us were able to dedicate ourselves to cinema like GM Marcel Sisniega. At sixteen he had managed to become the national chess champion of Mexico. He came from such a wealthy family that he even had beautiful palm trees in his Cuernavaca garden. When Sisniega retired from competitive chess in his thirties, he presented his last book at La Cabaña of Las Arboledas park. I attended the event and at his speech he said that if the will to win had died out, as it had died out in him, it was pointless to continue playing chess tournaments. After that sporting farewell presentation before a select group of fans who went to La Cabaña, Sisniega devoted himself to the seventh art and in 1996 he made his debut in the film industry with the making of a short film. But even though Sisniega was a year younger than me, he died in 2013.
(Left, Marcel Sisniega Campbell.) Not all of us were able to have a career like Sisniega’s because not all of us received support from the family. That is why, although I dealt little with Fernando Pérez Melo in the park (who in a tournament in the 1980s came to play with Sisniega), I dedicate this booklet to that poor fellow who died after Sisniega died. The point is that the marginalised individual has to do something to escape his fate, and along with drugs, Caissa is one of the best ways to do it, although without killing neurons.
As a teenager I read a comic from Editorial Novaro where the origin of the game of chess was explained. With friendly illustrations I saw the story of a king of ancient Greece stuck on an island. His soldiers were hungry. Then the king devised a game to entertain them, from which chess would emerge.
Being trapped on a small island is a great story to understand the psychology of the player, and why many of these powerless individuals, but hungry for fight and life like those soldiers, have had no choice but to become immersed in a simulation of war, as is the magical kingdom of the sixty-four squares. At the time I review this book, seventeen years after the first version, I cannot even fight for the creation of an ethnostate because I am alone. The so-called white nationalists, bourgeois to the core, enact a reactionary, not a revolutionary, ideology. Fortunately, these Americans are heading for the biggest economic crisis in their history, and since the world’s fiat currencies are tied to the dollar, when the latter hyperinflates we will all suffer stagnations comparable to that of the hungry on the Greek island.
I would like to end this booklet with the words of the cartoonist Luis de la Torre from his cartoon series that he entitled ‘The Most Beautiful Way to Waste Time’ that I saw in the newspaper many years ago:
It seems incredible that a macropolis like this one where we survive barely has three or four [chess] clubs. Why in this Valley of Tears is it not promoted as education and therapy in schools, delegations, parks, companies, houses of culture, etc.? It sure can become a vice. But it is the healthiest of all vices.
Surprising in such prolific chess literature as that of the United States is the absence of biographies that explain the mental disorders of their chess champions: Morphy and Fischer. I have complained about friends in the park who lacked the heart to inquire about the personal tragedies of Roger, Iván, Gilberto and Ricardo. For example, I don’t remember hearing anything pertinent about the scar that Gilberto wore on his face due to the blow of the dish thrown by his mother. But this is not limited to my acquaintances: it is endemic outside the chess field. In writing this essay, I tried to search the internet for biographical material on Morphy, Steinitz and Torre. I was surprised that the attitude of the authors of books and web pages was identical to that of friend Antonio, whose supposed friendship was ‘to talk exclusively about chess’.
A section from the fourth volume of Kasparov’s five-volume collection of his predecessors is an exception, in that it portrays Fischer through astonishing anecdotes. Although Fischer’s feat from 1970 to 1972 is admirable from a strictly sporting viewpoint, it’s impossible to read those pages without thinking that Fischer was, in his personal life, a poor devil. Do you know, my dear readers, someone who could have had fame, money and glory and throughout the years threw that opportunity away as Fischer did? It is worth reading Kasparov’s My Great Predecessors, Volume 4 and finding out what happened to poor Bobby after he triumphed over Boris. I am referring to the final pages that are already free of game analysis and focus, pace the friend Antonio, on the human side of chess; in this case, Fischer’s psychological profile. However, and like Reinfeld, Kasparov knew nothing about the morbidity of family dynamics that can flourish in the adult in the form of psychosis.
Not even psychiatrists know these things.
If mental health professionals, or American chess writers, were down to earth they would try to write psycho-biographical studies on Morphy and Fischer. But when it comes to psychological trauma, it is impossible to find an in-depth analysis of those who have suffered this type of crisis. In this aspect my work is innovative. It seems that I am the first person in history who has devoted more than a thousand pages to pondering the tragedy of his own family (see the titles of my books on page 3).
To the names of deranged chess masters I have mentioned I might add Pillsbury. And let’s not forget the alcoholism of Chigorin, Alekhine and Tal. Former world champion Tal and his buddy Korchnoi, who was on the verge of taking the title from Karpov in 1978, were badly beaten up in Cuba for being drunk. Once Alekhine showed up to a simultaneous exhibition so drunk that he wet himself on the floor and the show had to be suspended. The numerous chess magazines circulating in endless languages are as misleading as Velasco’s book on Torre. They focus on the sporty aspect omitting the real life of the pathetic players.
The total lack of knowledge of the human mind in both psychiatrists and chess players is evident in the sovereign folly of blaming Staunton, a retired player in his day, for Morphy’s madness. I find it regrettable that even Reinfeld repeats this like a parrot. Ironically, it was thanks to Reinfeld’s book that I learned that it was Morphy’s mother who forbade her son from playing in public places again, and the best player in the world obeyed like a child. Also the professional chess writers Horowitz and Rothenberg repeat the Staunton myth in The Personality of Chess, where they quote the incredibly stupid words of Ernest Jones, Freud’s disciple, that Morphy was burned out by success. Based on the Freudian axiom of exonerating the abusive father or mother, Jones blames Staunton, who Morphy never played with! His crazy theories appear in the essay ‘The Problem of Paul Morphy’ published in 1931: a classic in psychoanalytic literature on the chess player. In Mexico, a country where the refutation that has been made to the Vienna quack, Freud, is unknown, I have found the fans repeating Jones’ nonsense.
Thus I arrive at the central question: What to do in case of mental disorder of a loved one? What to do, for example, if he gets naked on the streets or surround himself with women’s shoes?
With psychiatry ruled out as an iatrogenic profession, the good news is that we have the humanitarian alternative of Soteria Houses in Europe.
Unlike the therapy applied to Torre, which impaired his faculties and left him resentful for life with Ferriz, entering the Soteria Houses is perfectly voluntary. In the United States, those precincts flourished thanks to public funds before Big Pharma lobbied for the subsidies to be withdrawn. (The multibillion-dollar companies that manufacture drugs don’t tolerate competition from their medical model for treating disorders of the spirit.) In the Soteria-type houses that exist in Europe, the dignity of those who suffer a crisis is not violated. Neither you will find treatments such as electroshock, surgical lobotomy or intellectual impairment practised by chemicals euphemistically called ‘antipsychotics’. No matter how serious their delusions are, the person is respected and a friendly environment is provided until, after some time of good treatment, they can regain their senses.
Generally, people who get disturbed are not dangerous. Steinitz believing in his telekinetic powers, Torre imitating St. Francis or Morphy declaiming on the roof ‘and the little king will walk away in shame’ were harmless. Had they lived for a few months in a Soteria House, similar to the quarters for the alienated of the 19th-century Quakers, they would have recovered. There are no Soteria houses in Mexico, although the last Robert Whitaker’s video that I’ve watched now that I review this book, ‘The Rising Non-Pharmaceutical Paradigm for Psychosis’, shows us that alternative in first world countries:
When I advanced the idea of renting in Mexico City an apartment to take care of a friend of Russian descent along with an assistant (a young man who was disturbed), his older brother’s response was to commit him to a repressive institution, where he died. It is sad to say: but psychiatric repression is originated from family repression (Morphy’s family, too, wanted to commit him). That flat would have been cheaper for our friend than the psychiatric fees he paid. But the deference in the West to the medical profession is too ingrained. I hope that the way the medical establishment behaved now that I review this book, with all that media cancellation of the effectiveness of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 (to profit from Big Pharma vaccines), begins to wake up part of the population.
There are very few thinkers who have an exact idea of how the interests of pharmaceutical companies corrupt medical science. And this especially includes psychiatry. It was for this reason that I spent five years of my life, full time, researching the profession.
Sind diese Bauerntochter und jene Landarbeiterin in ihrer einfachen, schlichten und herben Art nicht bestens geeignet, dem SS-Mann Frau Mutter zahlreicher Kinder zu sein?
Click: here
The software converter could not add the image of the video within the article ‘Best Russian film’, but I’ve embedded it below:
https://youtu.be/OsEnNDr6YfA
Currently I only spend a couple of minutes and sometimes only seconds a day while visiting the racialist sites of the Americans. Curious as to what they said on July 4th, I listened to a fraction of a Greg Johnson guest on his podcast and the titles of Brad Griffin’s articles (I think from now on I’ll call him on his real name instead of his penname Hunter Wallace).
I was surprised that Greg’s guest talked about the American flag. Perhaps I am wrong, but in the mere fraction I listened to, his ideology was indistinguishable from what you can hear on Fox News, which reaches an audience incomparably larger than these sites of American racialism. Funny, I thought to myself, since Michael O’Meara, the first featured author in 2009 and 2010 when Greg began his career at TOQ Online, was aware, like Yockey, that things were wrong with the founding principles of his country:
Believing herself God’s favorite, this New Zion aspired—as a Promised Land of liberty, equality, fraternity—to jettison Europe’s aesthetic and aristocratic standards for the sake of its religiously-inspired materialism. Hence, the bustling, wealth-accumulating, tradition-opposing character of the American project, which offends every former conception of the Cosmos.
For the source of O’Meara’s quote see: here. Nothing could be further from what we hear today on forums from American racialists than what Yockey and O’Meara saw. I think Ronin is correct in calling names on today’s white nationalists, such as patriotards, not true racists.
If they were the latter, they would want to learn Scandinavian languages or German, repudiate the golden calf, revalue their values and the centre of gravity would revolve around Europe, as we see on this Twitter account that only posts photos of Aryan architecture and beauty. Instead of repudiating their country they make the Jews the primal threat, the easy way out intellectually so as not to see the beam in their own eye.
Jared Taylor seems to exemplify patriotardism. He wrote on July 4 about what his country’s founders had in mind (again, I only read the title, not his article). It is curious that an ad for the book in which O’Meara summarised his views appeared within the essays of The Occidental Observer in 2010. The ad was a pic of another copy of the book that shows O’Meara’s handwriting above, addressing me by my first name.
It is true what Jack F. says of Ronin’s unreadable prose. But a close reading of O’Meara’s essays, which can still be read online, are much more eloquent than what Ronin or I can say here because, unlike O’Meara, Ronin and I aren’t Americans.
It is a pity that Michael O’Meara, who is still alive, is no longer intellectually active.
