‘The world corresponds by nature to who is superior’.
—Stobaeus (IV, 6, 19)
Categories
Author: C .T.
Categories
The Lightning
and the Sun, 6
Editor's Note: Bold emphasis is mine.
As I have previously stated, Adolf Hitler was from early adolescence, and probably from childhood, conscious of the shocking disparity that exists between ‘real life’—life under Dark Age conditions—as it drew his attention through thousand and one details, and his own conception of earthly perfection, a living reflexion of which he sought in the world of the old Germanic Sagas (transfigured, for him, in Wagner’s musical dramas) and—Kubizek tells us,—in the stately blonde young maiden to whom he never spoke, but whom he idealised from a distance as the resplendent embodiment of perfect German womanhood.[1] Instances of human misery, nay—and the importance of this can never be sufficiently stressed— instances of the age-old exploitation of animals by man,[2] which another person would have deplored, but judged unavoidable, or looked upon as trifling, or not noticed at all, provided him with an opportunity to feel indignant and to crave for entirely new conditions of life. But it is during the years of grinding poverty and complete moral solitude, which he spent in Vienna as a young man, that the experience of the wretchedness and ugliness of this present Age imposed itself upon him for the first time in all its tragic horror. He has described it in immortal words.[3] And, more than the daily contact with material misery itself (with material misery which he, by the way, not merely beheld, but actually shared), the sight of the degrading effects of that misery upon his people and upon their young children was unbearable to him.
Two facts should, at that stage of Adolf Hitler’s life, retain the attention of whoever wishes to understand him and the Movement he was to start ten years later, obviously as a political Movement for the assertion of Germany’s rights, in reality, also as the moral and metaphysical basis of a new civilisation: first, the aloofness in which he lived, amidst the surrounding misery and degradation; and then, the thoroughness and detachment with which he studied the latter, traced its deep causes under the immediate, superficial ones, and became, through that clear knowledge, more and more aware of his own predestined role in this Age of Gloom. ‘One cannot ‘study’ the social question from above,’ writes he, in Mein Kampf.[4] One has, one’s self, to experience the same perpetual insecurity of life, to be acquainted with the same pangs of hunger, to dwell in the same over-crowded, dirty, noisy surroundings as the disinherited classes, in one word, to live the wretchedness that gnaws into them and degrades them, in order to know what social misery means. The future German Führer has lived it, and suffered from it, personally, day after day, for months, for years, without it ever degrading or even changing him. He preferred to ‘exist’ on hunger rations, rather than sacrifice his independence or sell more than it was absolutely necessary of the precious time he needed to study both books and men and to think. And when he had earned a little money, he preferred to buy himself a seat in the theatre—two or three hours’ holiday in the beautiful world of the old Sagas, to the accompaniment of Wagner’s solemn music, away, far away from the daily dreary wretchedness that seemed to be his lot for ever,—rather than treat himself to a substantial meal.[5] He refused publicity—and money—rather than to allow a story which he had written to he printed by a Jew.[6] Nobody can understand him save a true artist who is, at the same time, a true revolutionary: a person of one dream and one aim, like himself. But how well every such a one—every creator and fighter of his type, when surely not of his magnitude, i.e. every person ‘against Time’—does understand him!
There is more. Not only did he live in uncompromising faithfulness to his ideals, inaccessible to the lure of material comfort and social advantages, but he shared none of the weaknesses of average mankind, not to mention the vices of that underworld into which fate had pushed him or, by the way, those of the so-called ‘better classes’ of this fallen humanity. He rigourously abstained from alcohol and tobacco; and even when, occasionally, he could afford a diet other than his usual bread and milk, he ate pastry and fruits, not meat. His deeper instinct inclined him naturally towards that sort of food which people, in whose life an immemorial Tradition still plays a great part, call ‘pure.’[7] And the dictates of serious reflexion merely confirmed in him those of deeper, healthy instinct. Adolf Hitler was, in course of life, to become a more and more convinced vegetarian; and though disaster robbed him of the opportunity of attempting ‘after the war,’ to give his views, gradually, the force of law, he remains, to my knowledge, the only ruler in the West who, both on hygienic and moral (and aesthetic) grounds, ever earnestly considered the possibility of suppressing meat-eating, and of abolishing thereby the standing horror of the slaughterhouses. This is reported by Dr. Goebbels in his ‘Diaries,’[8] and brilliantly confirmed by numerous statements ascribed to the Führer himself in the ‘Dinner-time talks,’ also printed after 1945 by the bitterest enemies of National Socialism, certainly not with the intention of exalting him.
As a young man, and nay, a very attractive one, Adolf Hitler withstood the manifold temptations of the corrupt metropolis—ignored the solicitations of women, rejected with disgust those of men, and kept the sacred ‘flame of Life’ (to use the word Kubizek quotes) pure and strong and constantly under control within himself. He did so without the slightest intention of ‘mortifying the flesh’; without the slightest desire of ‘acquiring merit’ for the salvation of his soul; simply because he respected that energy given to man for a higher purpose, and looked upon every wanton waste of it as a sin against the Race at the same time as a profanation of the divinity of Life. The ‘flame of life,’ felt he, was to be dedicated to the selfless service of the Race, visible Vehicle of Life eternal. It was to be used, like man’s whole physical and moral energy, ‘in the spirit of the Creator,’ i.e., in view of the attainment of perfection on earth. The entire National Socialist teaching concerning sex and sexual relations, with its well-known stress upon absolute health and racial purity, as laid down in Mein Kampf,’[9] has its origin and its basis in that truly religious (although anything but ‘other-worldly’) attitude; in that standpoint of the ‘Man against Time’ seeking, in defiance of the corruption of the Dark Age, to re-establish, here and now, the biological—i.e. fundamental—conditions of the earthly paradise; preparing the privileged, natural élite of mankind for the part it has to play in the formation of the god-like Race of the new earth, that will thrive in peace after this Dark Age has come to an end.
And all Adolf Hitler’s positive measures in view of the physical and moral protection of his predestined people, natural leaders of Aryan man, after he came to power: his admirable laws for the welfare of mother and child; for the creation of ideal living conditions for workmen’s families; for the education of a healthy, self-confident and self-reliant, proud and beautiful youth; and his famous ‘Nüremberg Laws,’ forwarding the growth in Germany of a pure-blooded Germanic race (forbidding sexual relations with Jews and, in fact, with non-Aryans of any description), have no other origin and no other meaning. Their aim—nay, the practical aim of National Socialism as such—was and remains not merely to improve the material lot of the German labourers (however important a part this immediate aim doubtless played in the success of the Hitler Movement in Germany, after the first World War); not merely to make the new State, comprising all people of Germanic blood—that ‘holy Reich of all Germans’[10] of which Adolf Hitler already spoke in his adolescent’s conversations with August Kubizek—a strong and prosperous State, but to regenerate the German people—the most conscious among the Aryans of the West—radically, and to organise them, in all walks of life, so as to create out of them the only dam capable of withstanding and thrusting back the threatening tide of inferior humanity, whose rise is, in this as in every Time-cycle, the increasingly tragic sign of an advanced stage of the Dark Age; capable of thrusting it back and of carrying, beyond its defeat, (and its destruction, at the very end of the Age of Gloom) the treasure of god-like life into the glory of the new Beginning.
As I said before, it is difficult to state how far Adolf Hitler could have explicitly given expression to this point of view. It was, nevertheless, in reality, his point of view. In particular, he was and remained all his life vividly aware of the compelling necessity of preserving, nay, of forwarding, at any cost the racial aristocracy of mankind—the best elements of the Aryan race,—if this planet is not, after an appalling period of chaos, (after the end of the present Time-cycle) ‘to go its way, void of human beings, through aetherial space, as it did millions of years ago.’1 Standing alone, personally untouched by Dark Age conditions at their worse, although deeply and painfully acquainted with them, he observed their effects upon the people in whom his unfailing intuition forced him to recognise, in spite of all, the predestined biological substance of an infinitely better mankind: the ones who are not yet, but who (to quote Nietzsche’s words) are ‘becoming,’ or at least are capable of becoming supermen: his own German people. And, with serenity and with realism, he sought the causes of physical and moral wretchedness; the many causes: selfishness of the owning classes; indifference or cowardice of men in power; the grip of international high finance upon national economy; the influence of Jewry upon the national body and soul, etc.; etc., but under those many causes, the one cause: the rule of false values; the exaltation of untruth, which is synonymous of sickness; in all domains, rebellion against the spirit of the divine Order of Nature. That is what he had come to fight, so that the ‘reign of Righteousnes’ be re-established.
__________
[1] Kubizek, Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfreund, p. 76 and following.
[2] Ibid., p. 61.
[3] Mein Kampf, pp. 23; p. 32 and following.
[4] Ibid., p. 26.
[5] Kubizek, p. 37.
[6] Ibid., pp. 298-299.
[7] In Sanskrit: sattwik.
[8] See The Goebbels Diaries, entry of the 26th April, 1942.
[9] Mein Kampf, p. 444-446.
[10] Kubizek, p. 109; Mein Kampf, p. 439.
Categories
Curtius
We should all do this: Turn outward what we carry deep inside and pour it out on our brothers. All withholding is bad.
These words, from Ernst Robert Curtius’ introduction to Miguel de Unamuno’s The Tragic Sense of Life, motivated me this morning to get out of bed on a cold, cloudy and depressing day. Curtius continues:
Men are crustaceans. Each lives in his shell, in his solitude. The task of the writer must be to break through the shell of his fellows, to disturb their slumber, to awaken them.
Categories
Hitler, 47
In late February 1924, Hitler was brought to stand trial before the Volksgericht in Munich in the old Infantry School on the Blutenburgstrasse. He was allowed to appear in a suit rather than prison clothes and sporting his Iron Cross. Security was strict, and the press interest, including from abroad, was intense. Hitler would no doubt have been pleased to know that ‘one heard particularly many English voices’. The Reich government had wanted the trial to be held in Leipzig, but the authorities in Munich were determined to keep it local, almost certainly because they feared what might otherwise emerge about their complicity in the various plots. Berlin gave way in the context of a broader rapprochement with Bavaria. In mid February 1924, about a week before the trial began, the Bavarian Reichswehr submitted once again to command from Berlin, thus reversing Kahr and Lossow’s position in November 1923; Kahr resigned.
Hitler famously used the courtroom as a platform from which to expound his world view… The trial lasted just over a month, from 26 February to 27 March 1924… He did not deny the substance of the charges, but argued that he had acted at all times in the greater interest of Germany… Sometimes Kahr appeared so overwhelmed that his voice dropped to a whisper as the courtroom audience strained to hear him. The rampant Hitler, by contrast, was repeatedly told to lower his voice by the trial judge.
Hitler’s final speech was a triumphant reiteration of his beliefs and sense of mission. If he was a traitor, then so were Bismarck, Atatürk and Mussolini, whose treason had been ratified by success. Hitler decried that there was ‘self determination for every Negro tribe’, but that ‘Germany did not belong to the Negro tribes but stood under them’. The root of the German predicament, he continued, lay in Germany’s exposed geopolitical position in Europe. ‘The German people’, Hitler argued, ‘has perhaps the worst location of all nations in military-political terms. It is geographically extraordinarily badly located, surrounded by many rivals’. It was menaced by France’s determination to ‘Balkanize’ Germany and to reduce her population. In this context he referred to ‘Clemenceau’s [alleged] aim to exterminate 20 million Germans in Europe, to break up Germany into individual states and to prevent the emergence of another united large Reich’. It was also threatened by Britain’s supposed much broader policy of Balkanizing Europe as a whole in order to maintain the balance of power. There was no economic solution to this predicament, Hitler stressed, but only a powerful foreign policy based on the highest level of internal mobilization. Germany would need to get rid of ‘international Jewry’, which was coordinating the global forces against her. She would also need to pursue the related struggle against international capitalism. ‘The battle against international stock exchange enslavement’ and against the ‘trustification’ of the ‘entire economy’, Hitler demanded, must be taken up.
These were all familiar themes from Hitler’s previous statements, but this time he had the eyes of the German and even some of the international press upon him. His dosing speech concluded with a resounding statement that though the court might secure a conviction, posterity would surely acquit him. In an obviously choreographed sequence, the other accused said they had nothing to add, with the result that Hitler’s resonant last words were left ringing throughout the courtroom and shaped the story of the trial. He turned the defeat and humiliation of 9 November 1923 into a victorious narrative…
Hitler was now a hero not merely to the Bavarian right, but to many nationalists throughout Germany. What had begun in the public mind as the ‘Ludendorff Trial’ ended as the ‘Hitler Trial’. ‘I am occupying myself with Hitler and the National Socialist movement,’ the Rhenish student Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary in early March 1923…
On his return to Landsberg to serve the rest of his sentence, Hitler was confronted with some serious strategic questions… Ernst Röhm began to revive the SA, under the cover of a front organization, and went to confer with Hitler at the very end of May 1924. Perhaps anxious not to provoke the authorities, and mindful of his inability to seize power by force, the Fuhrer insisted that the SA keep a lower profile…
Gregor Strasser and General Ludendorff strongly supported amalgamation with the DVFP to create a new National Socialist Freedom Party (NSFP). Hitler reluctantly agreed in broad terms but insisted that the main base and focus of the party remain in Munich….
Gottfried Feder remarked after visiting him that Hitler was ‘depressed [and] wants to withdraw completely from the movement’ in order to ‘work’, that is, ‘write’ to earn money. Over the next two months, Hitler repeated his message publicly on a number of occasions. He was acting partly because he was disenchanted with the way in which the various mergers and collaborations were turning the party into a purely bourgeois organization, and partly because he had no real power to turn things around from prison…
One reason why Hitler wanted to lie low was fear of having his release delayed, or of being deported to Austria. The Bavarian authorities had long hoped to do the latter, and in early May 1924, the Polizeidirektion in Munich told the Bavarian Ministry of the Interior that ‘Hitler constitutes a permanent threat to the internal and external security of the state’. In late April 1924, the Austrians agreed to accept him in principle. Hitler managed to avoid deportation, but after being refused probation he failed to get out by 1 October as he originally hoped. On 16 October he made a statement that he should be allowed to stay, ‘because I never felt myself to be an Austrian citizen but only a German’. ‘My affection for my Austrian homeland is great,’ Hitler continued, ‘but so is hostility of the Austrian state’, in which—like the ‘earlier Habsburg state’—he could only see ‘an obstacle for the unification of the German people’.
Categories
The lobby
Seven years ago, John Mearsheimer predicted what would happen in the Israel-Palestine conflict.
When I first got into white nationalism, this kind of stuff was only said on our forums. Now, this video uploaded today on YouTube is no longer being cancelled! (as countless accounts have been cancelled in the past).
Categories
Heartland, 6
by Eduardo Velasco
Antiquity
The first great empire of the Heartland, the Persians, arose after the irruption onto the Iranian plateau of various Aryan tribes from present-day Russia and Ukraine: the Medes, Persians and Parthians. Since then, Persia has been a country that has merely recycled itself as an empire over and over again throughout history, tending to project power across the five seas of Penthalasia (Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caspian, Persian Gulf and Red Sea) and to be a bridge between Europe-Esthasia, Stasia-Africa, Central Asia-Indian and the Eurasian and Arabian Heartland.
The 4th century saw an event that would have a decisive influence on the consolidation of the Silk Road as the backbone of international trade: the eastward thrust of Alexander the Great. Starting from their Balkan base in northern Greece, the Macedonians conquered Anatolia, the Levant, Pentalasia, Egypt and the Achaemenid Empire, reaching as far as India. The Greeks founded several Alexandrias in the Heartland: Alexandria of Aria (today’s Afghan city of Herat, through which passes a strategic gas pipeline and road, and near which there is a Spanish-Italian military base), Alexandria Eschate (today’s Jodzend, Tajikistan), Alexandria of Oxo (today’s Ai Khanum, Afghanistan), Alexandria Caucasus (probably present-day Bagram, Afghanistan, where there is a major NATO air base) and Alexandria Aracosia (present-day Kandahar, Afghanistan, where there is another US military base). According to Isidore of Carax, the Parthians called this region ‘White India’. North of these militarised and fortified Greek colonies, the Scythians and Masagetes—whom Alexander the Great never dared to attack—flowed freely across the steppe. The Macedonians had reached the gates of Gog and Magog.
Citadel of Herat (Afghanistan), the ancient capital of a Persian province described by Herodotus as ‘the granary of Central Asia’. Given the success of Macedonian conquests in the Greater East, it is understandable that Pompey, Trajan, the medieval Crusaders, Napoleon, today’s NATO armies and any Western power seeking to penetrate deep into Asia would look to Alexander the Great.
Greek expeditions from the Tajik valley of Fergana reached the city of Kashgar (present-day Uiguristan), home to an Indo-European tribe, the Tocaryans. The Dayuan (‘great Ionians’) of the Han Chinese chronicles are believed to be descendants of these Greek settlers of the Heartland. Alexander the Great was the first who, by stabilising a vast space between the Great West and the Great East, opened both domains to mutual trade. Thus, the most important and lasting effect of the Macedonian campaigns was the definitive opening of the Silk Road.
When Alexander the Great died in 323 b.c.e., the Diadoks (generals of the Macedonian army) divided up his empire, fighting for twenty years for regional hegemony. After his death, the epigones, his successors, reigned over the territorial units resulting from the fragmentation of the Alexandrian empire. The one that interests us most in this article is the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom, centred in Bactria (present-day Balkh, northern Afghanistan). The 3rd century b.c.e. saw the entry into this Greek domain of Buddhism from the Maurya Empire of India, with which the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom maintained numerous political and commercial relations. It is the beginning of an extraordinary Hellenistic-Buddhist civilisation, led by Greek monks and a Greek military aristocracy, descendants of the ancient Macedonian armies, in the heart of Central Asia, an episode rarely remembered in modern historiography.[1]
Approximate extent of the Greco-Bactrian kingdom in 180 b.c.e. By this time, Buddhism with pagan-Hellenic influences was already the dominant religion, to the extent that reliefs of the Hindu Buddha protected by the Greek Herakles were sculpted. Despite the problematic mountain barriers, the kingdom was mainly oriented towards India. It dominated an important segment of the Silk Road, controlling the exits from China to the West.
The earliest artistic depictions of the Buddha, which strongly influenced Buddhist imagery throughout Asia, occurred in this kingdom. It has even been reasonably speculated that Apollo influenced the early sculptures of the Hindu saint so that the legacy of the more typically Western god would have reached the Pacific—something the shepherd warriors of the Balkans could surely never have imagined. The entire Gandhara artistic current is of Greek and therefore European genesis. In the middle of the Silk Road, the colossal Buddha statues in Bamiyan (Afghanistan, demolished by the Taliban in March 2001), were clearly of Greco-Buddhist heritage. This cultural stream is a superb example of the extraordinary fruits that a healthy and positive interaction between the West and the East could bring.
Museum, Lahore, Pakistan. This 2nd-century Gandhara statue is the Greek Athena, sculpted in the Greek style and with facial features typical of the aristocracy of classical Greece. It is part of the legacy of the first European state in the Heartland.
Around 130 b.c.e., the Greco-Bactrian kingdom was overrun by the Toccharians, who eventually founded the Kushan Empire. For a time, however, the Indo-Greek kingdom survived, detached from the Greco-Bactrian when the latter conquered the Indus basin and part of the Ganges basin in an expansion reminiscent of the Indo-Aryan conquests fourteen centuries earlier.
Indo-Greek kingdoms in 100 b.c.e., in what are now Afghanistan and Pakistan. 14: Pushkalavati. 15: Taxila. 16: Sakala. They occupy a position straddling the Heartland and the fertile, overpopulated, rich plains of the Indus and Ganges. They include what are now the AFPAK frontier and the troubled tribal areas of Pakistan. These kingdoms, following in the footsteps of the ancient Indo-Aryans, will eventually conquer much of the Indus and Ganges basins. It will be noted that the regions of Nuristan (Afghanistan) and the Chitral and Hunza valleys (Pakistan), where European physical features have been best preserved to this day, fall within this area of Hellenistic influence.
The Macedonian push into the heart of Asia was merely the logical climax of the process initiated centuries earlier by the Greek colonies in Asia Minor, now western Turkey. By now it will have been appreciated that in Hindu civilisation, centred in North Hindustan, the influence of the Heartland predominates, even though India was later conquered by a typically maritime empire such as the British.[2] It seems that since then, the mountainous territories separating Hindustan from Central Asia have been a clear battlefront between thalassocracy and telurocracy. Inevitably, this reminds us of the role of Afghanistan and Pakistan on the international scene today.
Both Rome and China were mutually aware of the existence of the other empire and maintained to some extent essentially indirect relations. The Han Empire regarded Rome as a kind of Western counterpart, and Rome probably had the same image as China. However, between the two powers stood two states in the former Alexandrian conquests: the Parthian Empire and the Kushan Empire. Rome tended to push eastwards, eventually conquering the Caucasus and what is now Iraq, but problems in the Levant meant that Roman conquests in the rest of Pentalasia were rather short-lived. The Mediterranean was the only sea that Rome could call Mare Nostrum; neither the North Sea, the Atlantic, nor the Black Sea, nor the Red Sea—let alone the Caspian or the Persian Gulf—could be called fully Roman.
The Roman Senate even proclaimed several edicts prohibiting, in vain, the use of silk, since its trade bled the Empire of its gold reserves, which indicates that two millennia ago, what happened at one end of the Silk Road influenced the opposite end—an example of proto-globalisation. Pliny the Elder said in Natural History that ‘by the lowest estimate, India, Seres and Arabia cause our Empire to lose 100 million sesterces every year: this is what our luxuries and our women cost us’. There seems to have been phenomena in Rome comparable to the flow of silver to China before the opium wars, as well as the loosening of patriarchy in the West today.
In 56 b.c.e., Rome fights the Parthian Empire at the battle of Carras (modern-day Kurdistan). The feared Parthian cavalry manages to defeat the legion and Crassus, the Roman general, is executed. Ten thousand Roman soldiers were taken prisoner and deported to the far east of the enemy empire, to the Eurasian Heartland; specifically to Bactriana (Afghanistan). Plutarch and Pliny the Elder tell us that many of the Roman survivors were enslaved or sent to forced labour, but that some managed to make their way into the world of labour as mercenaries. These Roman troops were supposedly used by the Parthians to fight the Huns in the province of Margiana, which is now Turkmenistan. The Roman Empire and the Parthians signed a peace treaty in 20 b.c.e. and attempts were made to bring back the prisoners, but by then all traces of the ill-fated legion had been lost. Han chronicles from 36 b.c.e., describing a Chinese military campaign in western China, tell of a disciplined enemy army guarding the square of Zhizhi, present-day Uzbekistan. These chronicles mention a quadrangular wooden fortress and enemy soldiers entering the battle perfectly aligned and building a fish-scale-like formation with their shields: the ‘tortoise’ of the Roman legions had arrived in the Heartland. After finally being defeated, these soldiers were taken, again as mercenaries, to the southern frontier of the Gobi Desert, to protect China from barbarian raids. They were eventually settled at Li-Jien (present-day Liqian), a node on the Silk Road whose very name is a corruption of ‘legion’. The presence of the ‘lost legion of Crassus’ was brought up in 2001 and genetic analysis has confirmed the trace of European blood in this area, a presence that can be seen with the naked eye in the high frequency of more aquiline noses, wavy brown hair and light eyes.
The journey of the ‘lost legion’.
The incursion of the Roman legions into the Levant catalysed a historical process of enormous importance. In the 1st and 2nd centuries, several ethnic cleansings of Greeks took place in the Eastern Mediterranean. Cyprus, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Crete, Crete, Sicily, Rhodes and elsewhere saw Jewish communities, taking advantage of the absence of Roman legions engaged in a military campaign against the Parthian Empire, rise in complete synchronicity against the hated Greek communities of the region. Although these Jewish revolts would be harshly put down by Rome, the Europeanisation of the Levant would never come to fruition, Jewish collaboration with the Parthian Empire would continue and, in the long run, the entire Roman Empire would be semi-ethnicised and would see the eradication of the Greco-Latin legacy, this time under a Christian sign, in a much more resounding way. These ethnic cleansings of European populations were a reaction to the will of the deserted, dry and infertile East, the effect of which was to break the continuity of Greek culture from the Roman Empire to India. The Greek pockets in India and Central Asia, deprived of the source of their culture and human capital, would gradually lose influence until they were swallowed up by the Heartland. It would be fourteen centuries before another power, this time Russia, would reintroduce the flame of Greek culture into the heart of the continent.
The Huns, who emerged from the Heartland in the latter days of the Roman Empire, are of nebulous ethnogenesis. We know that they were a society of pastoral warriors whose main foodstuffs were meat and milk, and whose military tactics were based on large formations of light cavalry masterfully employing the bow and javelin throw. The Huns were, rather than a specific ethnic group, a confederation of steppe horsemen, whose ranks included Ural-Uralic, Turkic, Mongol, Iranian, Germanic, Slavic and other peoples, probably dominated by a Turkic-Mongol aristocracy, although in the Hunnic territories of Eastern Europe, the lingua franca was Gothic. At Attila’s death, his confederation dissolved as quickly as it had appeared, but the effects of its brief existence—notably setting in motion the great migration of the Germanic peoples who were to constitute the medieval nobilities of Western Europe—were to endure for a long time.
The case of the Huns is comparable to that of the silk trade in terms of the repercussions at one end of the Silk Road of what happened at the other end, for if the Huns spilt over into Europe, it was because they could not spill over into China. Europe, unlike Stasia, lacked a state with a clear strategic doctrine that took into account the importance of the Heartland. On the contrary, the Chinese, who had already built dams to control the disastrous floods of the Yellow River (whose sources are in the Heartland), had decided to dam the human floods coming from the heart of the continent by building the Great Wall of China—again, to preserve their ‘political order’. The Great Wall is an impressive testimony to the importance of the Eurasian hinterland; in many sections, it coincides exactly with the boundaries of the Heartland. It seems that the Chinese emperors saw the Heartland as an impenetrable domain, a source of barbarians and a hornet’s nest best left alone. But the Great Wall was not merely a military barrier, it was also a transport corridor and a system of locks to extract taxes, fees and tolls from Silk Road trade, levy tariffs and control migratory flows.
The fact that the Great Wall is more like an infrastructure of countless different walls, built over eighteen centuries, shows that defending against the Heartland tribes was a constant obsession for successive Chinese dynasties. The Mongols had a diet based on animal products and were, as a people, more warlike than the Chinese, although China had the most effective martial traditions in the world.
In 431, Nestorian Christianity was condemned by the First Council of Ephesus, leading to a great exile of Nestorian Christians to Sassanid Persia. Henceforth, Baghdad and Seleukia-Ctesiphon were centres of Nestorianism, which sent large numbers of missionaries (or perhaps better said ‘agents’, mainly Syrians and Persians) to the far reaches of the continent, founding Christian communities throughout most of Asia. Cities such as Herat, Farah, Almalik (known to 14th-century Christians as Armalec), Samarkand, Kashgar and even Tang-era Beijing itself, were home to thriving Nestorian communities from the early Middle Ages onwards.
___________
[2] Conquerors of India from the Heartland include the Indo-Aryans, the Macedonians and the Mongols (Moghul dynasty, still active in the 18th century). Nor can the Persian influence be underestimated: Persian was in many parts of India the cultured language of the social elite until the arrival of the English.
Categories
Metaphysics
of Sex
by Julius Evola [1]
In this field, as in every other, our contemporaries have shown no interest in the search for ultimate meanings… The same is mainly true of the writers, past and present, who have dealt with love rather than specifically with sex. For the most part, they have kept to the field of psychology and, within that, to a general analysis of feelings. Even the writings of such authors as Stendhal, Bourget, Balzac, Solovieff, and D.H. Lawrence have little to do with the deepest meaning of sex. [page 1]
Scientists who try to investigate sexuality by studying others rather than themselves are in error, for they cannot approach the depth of the metaphysics of sex… Without this knowledge, man can only take eros to the exalted boarders of the human, of his passion and feeling. Only poetry, lyrics, and idealized romanticism are created, while everything else is eradicated. [page 2]
…men and women belonging to a phase of civilization oriented toward materialism… In this, as in all other spheres, statistics are worthless. Such criterion can be left to the trivial methods of Kinsey. [page 3]
The problem is subjective… Furthermore, papers on sexological research with scientific pretentions are in general ludicrously incompetent; for here firsthand understanding of the experience is the sine qua non. [pages 4-5]
Sex in the world today
Women is presented in a thousand forms to attract man and stupefy him sexually. [page 6]
Tolstoy once had occasion to say to Gorki: “For the French a woman comes before anything else. They are a weak, degraded people. Doctors say that all consumptives are sensual.” If we leave the French aside, it remains true that a universal and feverish interest in sex and woman is the mark of every twilight period and that this phenomenon today is among the many signs that this epoch is the terminal phase of a regressive process. Classical antiquity formulated an analogy with the human organism: In man, the head, the breast, and the lower parts of the body correspond respectively to the seats of intellectual life, of spiritual and heroic courage, and finally of nourshiment and sex. Corresponding to this are three human types and, we may add, three types of civilization. It is clear that today by regression we are living in a civilization whose predominant interest is neither intellectual, spiritual, nor heroic, nor even directed to the higher forms of emotion. Rather the subpersonal—sex and the belly—are idolized; and therefore the unfortunate saying of a poet may become a reality: Hunger and love will shape history. Hunger is the chief cause of social disaster and economic strife. The emphasis given to woman, love, and sex is counterpart.
Further evidence is provided by the ancient Hindu tradition of the four ages of the world in Tantric formulation. A fundamental characteristic of the last or so-called Dark Age (Kali Yuga) is the awakening and ultimate dominance of Kali, who stamps the epoch with her sign…
This study will highlight the opposition of the metaphysics of sex to established, conventional viewpoints, and this contrast will make even more apparent the inner fall of modern man. [pages 7-8]
_____________
[1] Excerpts from the Introduction of The Metaphysics of Sex (NY: Inner Traditions International, 1983).
Categories
True Himmler, 6
ON JUNE 26, 1919 Himmler’s father had become headmaster of the Gymnasium in Ingolstadt. For a few weeks Heini worked on a farm at Oberhaunstadt nearby. A work diary started on August 1 shows him toiling in stables, fields, and the dairy. On August 15 he entered, ‘Stables as usual. Church in the morning, with Mr Franz after lunch.’
On September 2 he fell ill with salmonella poisoning, and he remained bedridden for the rest of the month. On the twenty-fourth a doctor in Munich diagnosed an enlarged heart, and advised him to quit farm work for a year and concentrate on studies. Himmler transferred from rural Bavaria to Munich. He applied to study at the Polytechnic and paid the requisite fees. At the same time his brother Gebhard engaged to read mechanical engineering. The four storeyed building sat with its square, copper-sheathed clocktower between Gabelsberger Strasse and Theresien Strasse. The Polytechnic’s file records them as living just two blocks away from the college at No. 5, Schelling Strasse, a street much trodden later in history.
The Polytechnic issued a matriculation certificate on October 18, 1919. Heini would study here until 1922. He had chosen to read agriculture, and he might well have prospered as a farmer; farmers seldom go hungry. The two brothers would share digs, and take their weekly bath at the Luisenbad (at home they had only an old-fashioned bath contraption). ‘Our room looks very comfortable right now,’ he wrote to his parents a few days later. ‘I just wish you could see it. Everything excellently in its rightful place. In the mornings we drink tea, which is very good. We get up at six-thirty. Then we tot up our outgoings of the day before and reconcile them’ – this no doubt for their father’s benefit. ‘For the morning break we always buy cheese.’
His mother did the laundry for them both. The parents still required him to practise the piano, and he struggled with the keys until they conceded defeat. He went back to Ingolstadt frequently, and took Thilde their old nanny from Sendling, the Munich suburb where she lived, to the Waldfriedhof to see one grandmother’s grave and then a day later with Gebhard to the southern cemetery to visit their other’s.
Like freshers everywhere, Heini signed up for everything – the Polytechnic union, an old boys’ society, a breeding association, a gun club, the local Alpine society, and the officers’ association of the 11th Infantry Regiment. The return to Munich, his big native city, also brought Heini together with Mariele, the sister of Ludwig Zahler, a former comrade during his military training at Regensburg; Ludwig was Heini’s second cousin, and became his best friend at the Poly.
___________
David Irving’s book can be purchased on his website.
interview!
It’s a shame that it has pop-up ads, but the content is essential to understanding The West’s Darkest Hour’s sticky post.
Categories
My gauntlet
According to my Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, arrogance is ‘a genuine or assumed feeling of superiority that shows itself in an overbearing manner or attitude or in excessive claims of position, dignity or power or that unduly exalts one´s own worth or importance’ (page 121 of the Encyclopaedia Britannica edition).
I confess that, when it comes to American white nationalism (WN), I have been very arrogant in recent years, even in what I have said recently on the comments section. But if you look closely at the definition above, it says ‘genuine or assumed’.
Virtually one hundred per cent of the usage of the word arrogance refers to an assumed stance, not a genuine one. That is, a superiority complex is not to be confused with a certainty of superiority. For example, white nationalists are right to be arrogant when they criticise liberals and conservatives because, compared to them, normies are stubbornly unwilling to see racial realism. One such example appeared in an article just yesterday: an author of Counter-Currents called Tim Pool ‘an idiot’, which, indeed, he is compared to American racialists.
Now, if I am even wiser than my colleagues on the racial right, in that unlike them I have crossed ‘The Wall’ (cf. the featured post), then my arrogance wouldn’t be a negative one (the superiority complex kind), but a positive arrogance. However, for the sake of argument, let’s assume for a moment that mine is negative. That is, let’s assume that Christian ethics is not the primary cause of white decline and, therefore, my sense of superiority is delusional: as delusional as the grandiosity of the narcissists studied by Richard Grannon (whom I mentioned in my midnight post). From this angle, poor narcissistic César, who thinks he is more enlightened than the nationalists when he is not, hasn’t been done a favour by the latter—trying to refute him!
Connoisseurs of chess know that, in general, there are king’s pawn players and queen’s pawn players. I am one of the former. And if we compare the moves with the ‘chess game’ I want to play with the nationalists, after my 1. e4 nobody wants to reply (whether playing an open game, a Sicilian Defence, a Caro-Kann, an Alekhine Defence or any other first move of Black). If poor César is a delusional narcissist suffering from a superiority complex, why not give him a lesson in humility, a real beating in a game of the chess of ideas?
Translated into the world of ideas, my 1. e4 is: If the JQ is the primary cause of white decline, how do you explain the mestizaje in Latin America that was consummated when the Inquisition of New Spain was keeping the Jews at bay? For me, it is very simple. I think the real perp was Christian ethics, which saw Amerindians as souls equal to the souls of Castilians. That’s what motivated the very Catholic Queen Isabella of Spain and the Pope himself to legalise, and even promote, intermarriage. (The Jewish subversion of later centuries is a secondary infection of that ethnosuicidal zeitgeist.)
That is my first move in the chess of ideas. No Judeo-reductionist WNst has picked up the gauntlet and played a game. My move 1.e4 is left hanging over the board and no Christian or neochristian WNst wants to play with me!
A Redenção de Cam by Brazilian Modesto Brocos y Gómez (1895): Black grand-mother, mulatto mother, Iberian ‘white’ husband and infant with mudblood
genes despite her early phenotype.
The alternative is that my arrogance is not the kind of malignant narcissism, but an arrogance like that of Andreas Vesalius: who mocked the scholars of his time who dogmatically followed Galen’s books, instead of opening a corpse to see if his anatomy was accurate. IMHO that’s why they don’t play with me: I’d beat them with that opening. Or will any of the WN pundits dare, in the future, pick up my gauntlet in a solid article on one of their webzines?