Author: C .T.

O’Meara interprets Heidegger

Post author By C .T.
Post date August 18, 2012
5 Comments on O’Meara interprets Heidegger

The Anglo-Saxon world of Americanism has resolved to annihilate Europe, that is, the homeland, and that means: [it has resolved to annihilate] the commencement of the Western world.

In annihilating the commencement (the origins or breakout of European being)—and thus in annihilating the people whose blood flowed in American veins—New World Europeans, unknowingly, destroyed the essence of their own being…

An awakened, recommencing Europe promises, thus, to repudiate America’s betrayal of herself—America: this foolish European idea steeped in Enlightenment hubris, which is to be forgotten as a family skeleton, once Europe reasserts herself.

Incapable therefore of beginning again, having denied herself a commencement, the bad idea that America has become is likely, in the coming age of fire and steel, to disintegrate into her disparate parts.

_______________________________

Excerpted from: this piece.

Tags Europe, United States

My pinacoteca

Eleanor Urquhart

Painting of the day:

Henry Raeburn
Miss Eleanor Urquhart ~ 1793
National Gallery of Art

Christendom Universalism

We’re definitively doing it to ourselves

Post author By C .T.
Post date August 17, 2012
12 Comments on We’re definitively doing it to ourselves

A quotation from John Martínez’s:

“Why Christianity and not Judaism
is the Enemy #1 of the White Race”

(in Portuguese)

“Blaming Christianity is a sort of taboo topic in most of the English-speaking White Nationalist blogosphere.”

—Tom Sunic

It is a taboo topic in the whole WN blogosphere, Chechar.

These folks are ready to speak the unspeakable about race differences and the Jewish Problem. But they refuse to take the final step and face the fact that, if it was not for Christianity, perhaps we would not have to be discussing all of these problems now because they might not have happened in the first place.

How can someone advocate for the dignity and self-reliance of the White race while operating within a non-White, Levantine cult?

How can these people expose the Jews and their race supremacist cult while worshipping a Jew (!) and making extensive use of the Jewish mythology and the Jewish Weltanschauung?

It is mind-boggling…

My view about the core problems facing the White race today is that Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Communism are Semitic and therefore alien, extraneous ideologies that should be consigned to the trashcan of History. The differences I see among them nowadays are close to irrelevant as far as our interests are concerned.

Bluegrass comments here:

America was the preeminent racialist country before any European equivalent arose, but it was always held back from completely securing the existence of the European race by the mitigating power of our Christian foundation.

No Christianity means no Puritan proselytizing and universalism within the American psyche, which means no ideological foundation to tolerate the presence of Africans, Indians, or any non-White immigration.

Christianity always made it “uncouth” to be overly racialist. European America was able to implicitly secure the genetic stock through immigration restrictions, segregation, and what have you, but it was always a precarious position.

This semi-implicit racialism, always pervaded by the Christian sense that it was not necessarily the most dignified of ideologies, was easily destroyed by the Jewish culture of critique.

From then on, without the sounder minds to shepherd the flock our universalism (Coolidge etc) took hold and our religion became the realization of the proposition nation.

Of course, to realize that dream the destruction of White genetics has become a necessary sacrifice.

A personal note:

When I was translating to Spanish “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy,” chapter 7 of Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique, I suspended the translation when I hit this 1924 sentence about Israel Zangwill:

Mr. Zangwill spoke chiefly on the immigration question, declaring that if Jews persisted in a strenuous opposition to the restricted immigration there would be no restriction. “If you create enough fuss against this Nordic nonsense,” he said, “you will defeat this legislation. You must make a fight against this bill; tell them they are destroying American ideals. Most fortifications are of cardboard, and if you press against them, they give way.” [emphasis added]

If most fortifications in 1924, when supposedly American ethnocentricity was still very robust, were “of cardboard,” I told to myself, there must be an underlying factor that prevents us from defending our ethny, a primary infection.

Most nationalists act under the assumption that the Jewish Problem is the primary infection. My working hypothesis is that the JP, if compared to the most common HIV-related infections, is not the virus that is killing us but something like a bacterial disease such as tuberculosis, pneumonia or septicaemia: a deadly opportunistic infection that the HIV virus allowed to thrive.

Kill all the bacteria if you want. I have no problem with that. But if we want to save ourselves from extinction we really must go after the primary virus that weakened our defenses in the first place.

Jewry is Enemy #2.
For my collection of articles
dealing with Enemy #1 see here.

Tags Christian problem (CP), Jewish problem (JP)

My pinacoteca

Diane de Poitiers

Painting of the day:

François Clouet
Diane de Poitiers (detail) ~ 1571
National Gallery of Art

Amerindians Ethnic cleansing Real men

Exterminationist pro-whitism!

Post author By C .T.
Post date August 16, 2012
8 Comments on Exterminationist pro-whitism!

“With his fall [Sitting Bull] the nobility of the Redskin is extinguished… The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians.

Why not annihilation?… We cannot honestly regret their extermination, but we at least do justice to the manly characteristics possessed, according to their lights and education, by the early Redskins of America.”

These are the wise words of L. Frank Baum, the famous author of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, that appeared in Saturday Pioneer, December 20, 1890. “Like many of his compatriots, Baum had personally lived through many of the Indian wars and atrocities firsthand,” writes Arthur Kemp in his monumental history of the white race. “His deeply-entrenched and strongly-held opinions were shared by many at the time.”

Tags United States

Art My pinacoteca

Woman Weighing Pearls

Painting of the day:

Jan Vermeer
Woman Weighing Pearls ~ 1662-64
National Gallery of Art

Miscegenation Racial studies Universalism

Another insightful comment by Bluegrass

Post author By C .T.
Post date August 15, 2012
16 Comments on Another insightful comment by Bluegrass

Cesar’s point is that White ingroup-outgroup psychology was already extremely weak relative to other races.

“There is only one race: the human race!” is a PC concept seemingly compatible exclusively with the White mind.

It is difficult to imagine the majority of Tutsis, Hutus, Han, or Mestizo being capable of accepting such egregious ethno-masochistic self-deception. However, this is complicated even further by the genetic character of the White Race.

Hypothetically, even if every African believed in “One Race: the Human Race”, and imported a Han man and Women for every three African men and women, who in turn believed in total amalgamation as well, the genetic effect on the African gene pool would still be insubstantial.

This is due to the dominant nature of African genetics. This is vastly different case to Northern-Europeans: particularly of the Nordic variety, who may be the most recessive-mutated subspecies of humanity (the pygmy people might be more recessive-mutated).

In other words if one African genetically mixed with a Nordic, but whose subsequent descendants mated entirely Nordic for 2 or 3 generations, you would still see remnants of their African ancestor when compared to pure Nordic descended families.

It takes very little foreign genetic input into our group to destroy the very fabric of our identity, and is naturally one of our greatest inherent weaknesses. We simply do not have the luxury that the colonial Africans or Mestizos faced, when they passively absorbed European genetic input into their gene pool with seemingly miniscule consequences.

In larger perspective: for Africans to genetically invade the world they merely must set forth and breed. For Whites to genetically invade the world, we would need to wipe out the rest our genetic group competitors to literal non-existence to ensure our futurity.

Since the genocide option is either morally reprehensible or practically impossible in the opinion of most White Nationalists, our most prescient option is complete separation while upholding ideologies that restrain as effectively as possible our Universalist natures.

♣

Original source: here

See also “Extermination or Expulsion?”

from this series of articles

Autobiography Christendom Individualism Judeo-reductionism Liberalism Miscegenation

My latest comments at CC

Lew,

Perhaps it’s time to make a personal confession.

Since I awakened on the JQ [Jewish Question] in 2010 a question had tormented me: to assign—intuitively of course—percentages of blame on JQ vs. other factors.

After much inner struggling I discovered that it all depended on the sources I was reading. If I happened to be eating too many Jews for breakfast, it looked indeed like the JQ constituted 90% of the etiology of our current mess or more (I myself was a sort of “monocausalist”). Surprisingly, when following next I reread intriguing discussions like this one it became apparent that Christianity and its liberal offshoots were the damned ninety percent.

I simply could not make my mind… Throughout 2010 and 2011 my inner life looked like sine/cosine graphs alternating Monday, Wednesday and Friday believing that Jews were the main factor while changing my mind on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday below the “x” axis of the graph. Again, I realized all had to do with the chosen sources and with the subsequent confirmation bias.

Everything started to change by the end of the last year after digesting the implications of Michael O’Meara’s “White Nationalism is Not Anti-Semitism”.

O’Meara’s claim that, if financially sponsored like KMD [Kevin MacDonald], he could demonstrate that the West’s darkest hour had to do more with capitalism, Protestantism and Catholicism (among other factors) than to Jewry started to make sense in my soliloquies only after I posted a couple of entries about how the Spaniards’ lust for gold (and sex), together with the crazy approval of the Pope to marry Indian girls, caused the horrible mestization that I see every time I step outside my home.

Thinking about what happened in New Spain (not to be confused with “Mexico”) provoked a change in my worldview, and gradually the sine/cosine alternations ceased, to my relief.

Spanish-English translation of the painting’s footnote: “A male Spaniard and an Indian woman produce a Mestizo”

This does not mean that my present point of view is necessarily right. I am still learning. However, for the moment I believe that my “catalyst” metaphor accurately depicts the Jewish Problem.

Jewish subversive activities are a strong chemical, granted; but like O’Meara I believe that it is not the main ingredient of the witches’ formula. Some of KMD’s papers on how whites have some unique hardware characteristics such as individualism, abstract idealism and universal moralism, together with the software that I call the Christian / Secular Christian problem (liberalism run amok after the Revolution), constitute, to my mind, the main ingredients of the brew that’s killing us. (I think that Wallace is doing a good job illustrating it in the case of the US, what he calls the “Yankee Question”.)

But as I said, I’m still open to new ideas, just as I was open when O’Meara’s short piece made an impact on my previous thought.

P.S. of August 15th:

@ Lew,

The importance of clear definition as a tool for clarity…

For more that two years Hunter Wallace (and sometimes Guessedworker) have been using the term “single Jewish cause” in their blogs. As to racial preservation, you can define it as those who believe that there is essentially a single cause for the West’s darkest hour, but it has been something so obvious at MR and OD that a formal, dictionary-like definition has been deemed unnecessary there.

…won’t be able to sustain the position that monocausalism is a dominant view in WNism.

I think it’s pretty dominant. Besides Revilo Oliver and me who among white nationalists blame more Christianity than Judaism? Who besides O’Meara and a few others blame more a capitalism run amok or even, before the rise of capitalism, “economics over race” policies (again, cf. Arthur Kemp’s book)?

Above I talked about the “witches brew”. While in my blog I’ve added quite a few entries about how Christianity is a megalodon compared to Judaism (in the sense of a far larger predator of whites), the meaning of my metaphor is that even the history Christianity, which is a huge subject, is not enough to understand the brew’ formula. O’Meara for one has published here some intriguing articles purporting to demonstrate the havoc that corporate capitalism has caused for the white race. And again, if you study why whites disappeared in the Middle East, India, Egypt and later mongrelized themselves in Greece, Rome and throughout the American continent at the south of Río Grande after conquering all of these lands—sans Jews—, you start getting the big picture.

The criticisms of Christianity recorded in my blog are not original. It’s a collection of articles from other authors. If we add to these factors the Jewish Problem and my truly original contribution to the field (my interpretation of Psychohistory as to why some whites hate their race), my “brew” metaphor starts making sense: The etiology of Western malaise is extremely complex indeed, with several exotic ingredients—not just one—that must be deciphered, one by one. Any theorist who picked one of the above-mentioned ingredients and claimed that it’s the single element of the brew would be a “monocausalist” (e.g., if I claimed that my book on Psychohistory explained it all I would be a monocausalist).

Don’t quibble over definitions, Lew. The term “monocausalism” is well known even in the academia. Edward Gibbon has been criticized by later historians precisely for being a “monocausalist”: claiming that the rise of Christianity was the main factor of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

Get in touch with [X, Y and Z nationalists]… I said I’m not a monocausalist… Tanstaafl explicitly says he’s not a monocausalist.

Are you kidding me?

Let’s suppose for a second that you are not one.

Are you ready to acknowledge that the whites’ hardware according to some of KMD’s papers (abstract idealism + individualism + universalism + altruistic punishments) in addition to whites’ cultural software (Christianity + its liberal offshoots + economics over race policies) all together constitute the major ingredients of the formula that’s killing us, and that Jewry merely catalyzes such process?

(Btw, you didn’t read my above link of what Franklin Ryckaert said about my exchange with Tanstaafl, did you?)

♣

Original source: here