web analytics
Categories
Audios George Washington Racial right

Hitler’s speeches – I –

One way to demonstrate that the American racial right is monumental nonsense is simply to compare what the Founding Father of the United States said with what Hitler said in his public speeches a century ago.

With this post, I begin a new series commenting on his speeches in German, which only until this year were available in English thanks to A.I.’s translators (translations that, by the way, were all censored on YouTube but not in Rumble).

Near the beginning of this speech that we can now hear in English, originally delivered in February 1920, Uncle Adolf says that only Aryans can be German citizens, so Jews cannot be. That was an early pronouncement by Hitler before he took power.

Let’s compare it with a few words from a speech by George Washington, who in 1790 before the Newport Hebrew Congregation said: ‘May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in [the US], continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants, while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid’.

In other words, to save the Aryan on the continent where I live it is imperative to repudiate American patriotardism and replace it with Hitlerism. There is no third alternative.

Categories
Correspondence

Dear César,

I thought you might like to see some new paintings I’ve acquired over the last year. Two were at discount due to scuffs, scratches and dents on the canvas, and one due to a chipped frame (and the fourth frame missing altogether). I’m particularly pleased with the riverside scene, from a lesser known Barbizon School artist I enjoy, although I think the waves and sky on the fishing boat picture are particularly well-wrought, in subtle use of colour.

Yes, [responding to my previous mail — Editor] I really don’t know where the other good commenters have got to on your website. At least Berk and Robiul semi-regularly comment…

The Americans really did (and do) behave appallingly. They always have. They should never had have the arrogant fundamentalist disloyalty to leave England at all in my estimation, and consequently found a traitor nation, corrupted to the very stated core of its egalitarian constitution. I too don’t think one can merely place the decay in the 19th Century. Much as there is nothing to be patriotic about in my own country, I do not extend any strange, knee-jerk admiration overseas either. Thomas Goodrich’s paragraphs never fail to shock and distress me, no matter how many times I read them. The abject sadness of them is worthy only of a terrible focussed anger. I cannot imagine, had the Jews been their legitimate official enemy in this war, that the American armies would have treated their prisoners with such barbarity. And that goes back to the morals instilled in them from at least the founding of their country.

It upsets me to know that our race is so effortlessly suicidal, so lacking in racial loyalty. There are no ‘George Floyds’ among our own citizens, so regularly knifed to death, raped to bloody ruin, and, as of recently, torched in their sleep. Just flowers and condolences, and prayers for forgiveness and ‘peace’, if that even, forgotten by the day after so more signs can be held up for the cameras, ‘refugees welcome’, ‘say no to racism!’ and these febrile idiot golems can feel good about themselves, as they empty their nations out in inverted charity and misplaced love. I struggle to see how bad it will have to get for them to ‘wake up’. Part of me still fears even then that they will capitulate. Filing reverently into oblivion, cautious to be decent and welcoming and polite.

Hence why in my opinion most people do not deserve life – they can’t even protect their children. As I said to Abby not so long ago, “why are you a slave? When they’re lining you up next to me, ready to machine gun us into the flaming pit, will you be as you are now, telling me to keep my voice down in case I offend the authorities and turning to them with a meek apologetic smile, with their weapons drawn and pointed at you? When it is too late to do otherwise?” (again I was told to ‘stop being silly’ – I take it she took me in full imminent literality, missing my point).

Best regards,

Ben
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s 2 ¢

They should never had have the arrogant fundamentalist disloyalty to leave England at all in my estimation, and consequently found a traitor nation, corrupted to the very stated core of its egalitarian constitution.

Indeed, in fact, as you will see in my forthcoming post on uncle Adolf’s 1920 speech, Americans should invite the ghost of King George III to come back and resume the throne.

George’s ghost would dissolve the Union, arrest the pretender in the White House—whether Biden or Trump—, and round up the philo-Semitic ‘representatives’ in Congress.

In exchange for an apology and a promise to never misbehave again, Americans would get lower taxes, a less intrusive government, secure they borders with cartel-controlled Mexico, and above all end the madness that has flowed from the ‘self-evident’ Christian / neochristian idea that ‘all men are created equal’!

Categories
Christendom

Apologetics

Excerpts from Gaedhal’s latest communication:

Apologetics is for Christians. It is a Christian product, and the target demographic is Christians—and, in particular, those Christians who have an IQ in excess of 90, who are beginning to doubt Christianity.

Apologetics is not for non-believers. To non-believers, Apologetics is a pseudo-discipline that merely serves to infuriate us and to confirm us in our disbelief. To a non-believer, Apologetics is every bit the pseudoscience that Astrology is. In the same way that Celestial bodies do not influence earthly events, dead Jewish carpenters usually stay dead—and certainly don’t float off into the sky. This is really the end of the matter for us non-believers. Apologetics is a product—it is intellectual property—and its consumer base is almost exclusively Christian…

Without the threat of Hell, then Christianity really does fall apart [emphasis added by Editor]…

If we heed William of Ockham and throw out God, Heaven, and inscrutable morally sufficient reasons [that try to solve the problem of evil—Ed.], then we are left with the vulgarity: “shit happens”. In a godless swirl of cause and effect, such as this planet seems to be, then we would expect to see the quantity of horrendous suffering that we do in fact see upon this planet.

Categories
Dwight D. Eisenhower Summer, 1945 (book) Thomas Goodrich

1945 (XVI)

Editor’s Note: I spent Christmas Eve all alone. I don’t celebrate Christmas anymore. It is precisely that philosophical loneliness that makes me realise that the US has been the worst nation in the history of the West. Whoever murdered the defenceless men of the Reich in this way is, by necessity, the worst scum western history has ever produced. Thanks to the solitude of the cave and the tutelage of Bloodraven Goodrich, may he rest in peace, I was able to take a fleeting look at the last century as it happened. The former three-eyed raven wrote:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
“God, I hate the Germans,” wrote Dwight D. Eisenhower to his wife in 1944.

As Mrs. Eisenhower and anyone else close to the general knew, her husband’s loathing of all things German was nothing short of pathological. With the final German capitulation in May, 1945, the Allied commander found himself in control of over five million ragged, weary, but living, enemy soldiers. “It is a pity we could not have killed more,’’ muttered the general, dissatisfied with the body-count from the greatest bloodbath in human history. And so, Eisenhower settled for next best: If he could not kill armed Germans in war, he would kill disarmed Germans in peace. Because the Geneva Convention guaranteed POWs of signer nations the same food, shelter and medical attention as their captors, and because these laws were to be enforced by the International Red Cross, Eisenhower simply circumvented the treaty by creating his own category for prisoners. Under the general’s reclassification, German soldiers were no longer considered POWs, but DEFs—Disarmed Enemy Forces. With this bit of legerdemain, and in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, Eisenhower could now deal in secret with those in his power, free from the prying eyes of the outside world.

Even before war’s end, thousands of German soldiers who somehow escaped being murdered by the Americans when they surrendered and who actually did reach a POW camp, nevertheless soon died in captivity from starvation, neglect and, in many cases, outright murder. At one camp along the Rhine River in April 1945, each group of ten men were expected to survive in the open, on a plot of mud a few yards wide, in cold, wet weather, without shelter or blankets, with virtually no food. When the Americans finally “fed” the prisoners, it was one slice of bread that had to be cut ten ways, a strip for each man. A voice on the camp loud speaker arrogantly announced: “German soldiers, eat slowly. You haven’t had anything to eat in a long time. When you get your rations today from the best fed army in the world, you’ll die if you don’t eat slowly.” This mocking, murderous routine continued for three months. Once healthy prisoners soon became barely-breathing skeletons. Like clockwork, large numbers of dead were hauled away every day.

“The provision of water was a major problem,” revealed another witness, “yet only 200 yards away was the River Rhine running bank full.”

With the war still in progress, when the hard-pressed German leadership heard of these American atrocities they naturally appealed to the International Red Cross.

“If the Germans were reasoning like normal beings, they would realize the whole history of the United States and Great Britain is to be generous towards a defeated enemy,” came Eisenhower’s pompous reply. “We observe all the laws of the Geneva Convention.”

With German surrender and the threat of retaliation against Allied POWs entirely erased, deaths in the American concentration camps soared dramatically. While tens of thousands died of starvation and thirst, hundreds of thousands more perished from overcrowding and disease. As sixteen-year-old, Hugo Stehkamper, graphically described:

I only had a sweater to protect me from the pouring rain and the cold. There just wasn’t any shelter to be had. You stood there, wet through and through, in fields that couldn’t be called fields anymore—they were ruined. You had to make an effort when you walked to even pull your shoes out of the mud… It’s incomprehensible to me how we could stand for many, many days without sitting, without lying down, just standing there, totally soaked. During the day we marched around, huddled together to try to warm each other a bit. At night we stood because we couldn’t walk and tried to keep awake by singing or humming songs. Again and again someone got so tired his knees got weak and he collapsed.

The situation at American death camps near Remagen, Rheinberg and elsewhere, was typical. With no shelter of any sort, the men were forced to dig holes with their bare hands simply to sleep in.

At night, the prisoners would lower into the holes and try to stay warm by clinging to one another. And since it rained virtually every day, those holes that did not collapse always filled with water. Because of rampant diarrhea many of the victims were forced to defecate on the ground. Others were so weakened from sickness and starvation that they could not even lower their pants. Quickly, everyone’s clothes became infected with excrement and very soon, all the men suffered from chronic diarrhea. One camp “was nothing but a giant sewer, where each man just shit where he stood,” recounts a victim. Another enclosure was “literally a sea of urine” where prisoners were compelled to live and sleep. Even though the Rhine River flowed nearby, there was no water in most camps to drink, much less wash clothes in. As the prisoners rapidly weakened, many who fell into the numerous dug holes found it difficult or impossible to get out again without the help of others.

“Amputees slithered like amphibians through the mud, soaking and freezing. Naked to the skies day after day and night after night…,” remembered a witness.

When the camp commandant decided to feed the prisoners, generally every other day, the starved men read on the ration container that the amount was only one-tenth the normal daily diet fed US troops. One prisoner actually complained to a camp commander that the starvation diet was against the Geneva Convention.

“Forget the Convention,” snapped the American officer. “You haven’t any rights.”

As elsewhere, within days of enduring such deadly conditions many of those who had gone healthy into the Remagen camp were being dragged out the front gate by their heals and thrown onto a waiting truck.

“The Americans were really shitty to us,” a survivor at another camp recalled. “All we had to eat was grass.”

At Hans Waltersdorf’s prison, the inmates survived on a daily soup made of birdseed. “Not fit for human consumption,” read the words on the sacks. At another camp, a weeping seventeen-year-old stood day in, day out beside the barbed wire fence. In the distance, the youth could just view his own village. One morning, inmates awoke to find the boy dead, his body strung up by guards and left dangling on the wires. When outraged prisoners cried “Murderers! Murderers!” the camp commander withheld their meager rations for three days.

“For us who were already starving and could hardly move because of weakness… it meant death,” said one of the men.

Not enough that his American jailers were starving them to death; Eisenhower even forbade those on the outside from feeding the prisoners:

Under no circumstances may food supplies be assembled among the local inhabitants in order to deliver them to prisoners of war. Those who violate this command and nevertheless try to circumvent this blockade to allow something to come to the prisoners place themselves in danger of being shot.

Horrified by what they could see at a distance, heart-broken women from towns and villages surrounding the camps did indeed bring their own meager food stocks to share with the starving men. Good to his word, Eisenhower’s guards always chased the women and children away, scooped up the food, poured gasoline over it, then set the piles on fire. As warned, when some anguished women persisted, they were shot. After this murderous decree, anyone who insisted that the goal of the American general was anything less than the massacre of those under his control was simply one of those privy to the plan.

There was no lack of food or shelter among the victorious Allies.

Indeed, American supply depots were bursting at the seams. “More stocks than we can ever use,” one general announced. “They stretch as far as the eye can see.” Instead of allowing even a trickle of this bounty to reach the compounds, the starvation diet was further reduced. “Outside the camp the Americans were burning food which they could not eat themselves,” revealed a starving Werner Laska from his prison.

“When they caught me throwing C-Rations over the fence, they threatened me with imprisonment,” confided an angry American guard, Private Martin Brech. “One Captain told me that he would shoot me if he saw me again tossing food to the Germans… Some of the men were really only boys 13 years of age… or old men drafted by Hitler in his last ditch stand… I understand that average weight of the prisoners… was 90 pounds.”

As Brech noted, many of the prisoners were mere children. Some little boys were still clad in the same grimy pajamas the Americans had arrested them in. Fear that the children might form guerrilla groups was the official reason given.

Horrified by the silent, secret slaughter, the International Red Cross—which had over 100,000 tons of food stored in Switzerland—tried to intercede. When two trains loaded with supplies reached the camps, however, they were turned back by American officers. “These Nazis are getting a dose of their own medicine,” a prison commandant reported proudly to one of Eisenhower’s “political advisers.”

“German soldiers were not common law convicts,” protested a Red Cross official, “they were drafted to fight in a national army on patriotic grounds and could not refuse military service any more than the Americans could.”

Like this individual, many others found no justification whatsoever in the massacre of helpless prisoners, especially since the German government had lived up to the Geneva Convention, as one American official put it, “to a tee.”

“I have come up against few instances where Germans have not treated prisoners according to the rules, and respected the Red Cross,” wrote war correspondent Allan Wood of the London Express.

“The Germans even in their greatest moments of despair obeyed the Convention in most respects,” a US officer added. “True it is that there were front line atrocities—passions run high up there—but they were incidents, not practices; and maladministration of their American prison camps was very uncommon.”

Nevertheless, despite the Red Cross report that ninety-nine percent of American prisoners of war in Germany had survived and were on their way home, Eisenhower’s murderous program continued apace.

One officer who refused to have a hand in the crime and who began releasing large numbers of prisoners soon after they were disarmed was George Patton. Reasoned the general:

I emphasized [to the troops] the necessity for the proper treatment of prisoners of war, both as to their lives and property. My usual statement was… “Kill all the Germans you can but do not put them up against a wall and kill them. Do your killing while they are still fighting. After a man has surrendered, he should be treated exactly in accordance with the Rules of Land Warfare, and just as you would hope to be treated if you were foolish enough to surrender. Americans do not kick people in the teeth after they are down.”

Although other upright generals such as Omar Bradley issued orders to release POWs, Eisenhower quickly overruled them.

Mercifully, for the two million Germans under British control, Bernard Montgomery refused to participate in the massacre. Indeed, soon after war’s end, the field marshal released and sent most of his prisoners home.

After being shuttled from one enclosure to the next, Corporal Helmut Liebich had seen for himself all the horrors the American death camps had to give. At one compound, amused guards formed lines and beat starving prisoners with sticks and clubs as they ran the gauntlet for their paltry rations. At another camp of 5,200 men, Liebich watched as ten to thirty bodies were hauled away daily. At yet another prison, there was “35 days of starvation and 15 days of no food at all,” and what little the wretched inmates did receive was rotten. Finally, in June, 1945, Liebich’s camp at Rheinberg passed to British control. Immediately, survivors were given food and shelter and for those like Liebich—who now weighed 97 pounds and was dying of dysentery—swift medical attention was provided.

“It was wonderful to be under a roof in a real bed,” the corporal reminisced. “We were treated like human beings again. The Tommies treated us like comrades.”

Before the British could take complete control of the camp, however, Liebich noted that American bulldozers leveled one section of the compound where skeletal—but breathing—men still lay in their holes.

 
______________

Note of the Editor: Here you can request an item of the ‘Hellstorm Holocaust’ package (the biggest secret in modern history: the Allied genocide of Germans after 1945), and here you can order other books by Tom Goodrich (1947-2024).

Categories
Philosophy Racial right

Maesters

of the Citadel

Yesterday I alluded to American Renaissance and The Occidental Observer when I said that it was part of German decency in earlier centuries to know something about race realism and to be aware of the JQ. But there is another racialist webzine that has been publishing, rather, cultural articles since 2010. This month for example Counter-Currents finished, in a fifteen-part series, publishing a philosophical article on the problem of evil analysing the philosophies of Schelling and Heidegger.

As a teenager I was going to study philosophy. My plans were spoiled by a family tragedy that left me without an official degree, although I became a wandering philosopher. Perhaps I should say that Schelling and other German metaphysicians of his time helped me to realise that there was a new conception of God, pantheism; and in more recent times I was pleased that Heidegger had been a member of the National Socialist Party. Well: what about the recent article in Counter-Currents? The author wrote:

I have tried to argue that Schelling’s theory of evil was a major influence on Heidegger. Heidegger effectively adopts Schelling’s account of evil, but places its existence on philosophically surer footing. Whereas Schelling’s claims are metaphysical and often seem ad hoc, Heidegger’s account is phenomenological. In other words, Heidegger shows us that, if we are honest with ourselves – if we are, in other words true to the phenomena – we clearly do experience life as if we are in the grip of forces over which we have absolutely no control, regardless of whatever modern myths we may pay lip service to about how man is the author of his destiny. And, more specifically, it really does seem as if there is a force of evil loose in the world.

Following George R.R. Martin’s fiction, a wandering philosopher is someone who, unlike the Maesters—an order of scholars in the Seven Kingdoms who educate new students in the Citadel (see image above)—educates himself. Thus, unlike the academic author of Counter-Currents, I have approached the problem of evil from my peculiar point of view: exterminationism. See for example what Gaedhal and I say very briefly on the subject in ‘On solving the problem of evil’ (pp. 143-144 of On Exterminationism).[1]

But that is not what I wanted to talk about in this article. What caught my attention in the Counter-Currents article were these passages more or less sympathetic to Christianity:

One of the interesting aspects of today’s cultural scene is the plethora of conservative “influencers” who are flocking to Christianity. More and more, it seems, convert – or return – with each passing day. A frequent topic of discussion in our circles is whether such and such influencer seems to be tending towards Christianity and about to announce his conversion. “It’s going to happen any day now,” friends will say to me (Joe Rogan is the current topic of speculation). It is fascinating that what seems to have drawn them to religion is their confrontation with the political Left. The extraordinary indecency of the Left today does indeed often seem to be demonic. It is enough to drive one into the arms of the angels.

Of course, most so-called “conservatives,” especially those holding political office, are serving the same system and see nothing problematic at all about the commodification of beings and about an ideal of “freedom” that amounts to freedom to exploit and consume. Nevertheless, it is a fact that those locating themselves on the political Left present us with the most extreme examples of modern perversity – and the most extreme examples of malice. In the face of this overwhelming perversity, for many people – those aforementioned influencers, and others – Christianity has essentially morphed into “the decency party.”

For most of them, the details of Christian teaching, and the differences between denominations, seem to be largely unimportant. They see Christianity as something clean, decent, and untouched (so they imagine) by modern perversity; a refuge, in other words, from evil. It is a reaction with which we can sympathize – even if we cannot ultimately follow them. What is indisputably true, however, is that the religious and mythological traditions that personify evil may offer us invaluable insights into its nature. And it is to those that I plan to turn, if and when I decide to write about evil again.

Let there be no doubt: wandering philosophers like Gaedhal and I see things infinitely differently than the Maesters of the Citadel for the simple fact that we have suffered evil in the most direct and overwhelming way imaginable. Philosophising in an ivory tower (see an artistic representation of the Citadel tower here) isn’t the same to suffer evil in the most brutal way and in the naked world. For example, the Counter-Currents author’s paragraphs on Christianity sugar-coat the subject. Just compare those paragraphs with the series on the criminal history of Christianity that we have been translating into English, which will soon reach instalment #200!
 
_________

[1] In that 2022 article, I mentioned that I intended to call the whole of my series of autobiographical books From Jesus to Hitler. I have changed my mind, and the trilogy has three different titles (see here).

Categories
Hans F. K. Günther Racial right

Günther’s father

Hans F. K. Günther’s essay ‘The dissolution of Germanic racial care by medieval Christianity’ is now available here.

As I have said countless times, German National Socialism was in every way superior to the American white nationalism we suffer from today. It is striking how this essay by a Nordicist who flourished in the Third Reich is still far more relevant than what, on this Monday before Christmas Eve, we can see in any racialist webzine today, for the Aryans of the time had not degenerated.

I have been watching and listening to some of my favourite pieces by Modest Mussorgsky and Richard Wagner on YouTube. I was impressed to find several non-white musicians in a performance of the Berlin Philharmonic playing Wagner. A Polish orchestra, on the other hand, was composed only of young white musicians. At least in both orchestras, people continue to dress as orchestral musicians of the last century did: as Günther dressed above, whose father was a musician, by the way.

What the contemporary racial right ignores is that we must transvalue all values, including musical values and dress, to how we were in the past. Racial realism awareness, and JQ awareness, are just a couple of decent facets among many other decent facets of cultural preservation. Alas, as long as, because of their ersatz Christianity, whites continue to behave like that crazy ascetic I saw in Ripley’s Believe It or Not the day I fled San Francisco—mea culpa! mea culpa! mea culpa! mea culpa!—they will be unable to save their race from the extinction still underway.

Categories
Goths Hans F. K. Günther Miscegenation

The dissolution

of Germanic racial care by medieval Christianity (5)

by Hans F. K. Günther

Jan Luyken’s 1698 engraving of the quintessential subversive Jew, Paul, dictating his famous Letter to the Romans to his scribe.

Baher also saw the price of poverty, which must have seemed to the hard-working German peasant the price of inability to work at a time when there was still enough free land to clear and cultivate. For him, poverty was the appropriate fate of the incapable, not the state in which a person was closer to the Kingdom of God. Baher is the price of the weak and sick, the suspicion found in appearance as a sign of spiritual contamination (see p. 377). In the Epistle to the Romans (12:16) Paul warns: Do not aim at high things, but lower yourselves to the lowly – this was the negation of Indo-Germanic values such as pride, the drive for power, the joy of owning land, of competing with all the forces of the region. The medieval pious person was led away from these Indo-Germanic values to values of courage, i.e. according to the root of the word (serve): of being a servile person, of being homeless, celibate and without possessions.

This transformation of values through the ecclesiastical teachings of the Middle Ages was characterized by one of the best experts on pagan Germanic culture, Andreas Heusler:

It is deeply unscriptural that one openly and joyfully admits to pride and the drive for power. Anyone who has what it takes should want to be the first in their region. The sentence that he who humbles himself finds no place in these hearts. The will to power has the affection of the narrator and the listener. With compassion one follows the self-confident man who is bowed down by fate. Something new in the Christian stories is the look of satisfaction that touches the fall of the powerful. To the extent that bias and malicious joy prevail in the sagas, it is directed less against the tyrant and oppressor than against the coward and the quiet, even against the upstart.

The teachings of the medieval church thus dissolved the Germanic focus on a human image of spiritual perfection and a noble lifestyle, and instead taught the characteristics of those who had been described by the Germanic people as litilmenn, as people with small souls. The new doctrine thus eliminated the original model of the volatile, noble and beautiful person. This had to have an effect over the centuries and, together with other historical forces, resulted in us Germans being racially and genetically different from the Germanic peoples.

The racial history of the Germanic people as such ends with the conversion of the Germanic people to Christianity. It begins with the period between the 9th and 11th centuries when the barrier between the free and the unfree, here earlier, there later, at the latest in Lower Saxony and in Scandinavia, there only completely in the 14th century, the mass history of the individual Germanic-speaking tribes, in Germany the racial history of the German people, fell. The German people of the later Middle Ages and the modern era already presents itself as a selection result of those centuries in which the racial breeding of the Germanic people, which had returned to Indo-Germanic roots of the Neolithic period, had been dissolved.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s 2 ¢

As far as the last paragraph is concerned, since I have Spanish ancestry it came to my attention in William Pierce’s Who We Are and Arthur Kemp’s March of the Titans that the Visigoths of ancient Hispania only began to interbreed after the introduction of Christianity. A century before the Moors invaded the peninsula, these pure Aryans had terrible punishments for the mixed couple who dared to procreate a mongrel baby. Why are these historical facts that Hans Günther and others talked about not mentioned in the forums of the American racial right?

I think we already know the answer…

Categories
Quotable quotes

Adolf quote

‘It is always more difficult to fight
against faith than against knowledge’.

—Hitler

Categories
Hans F. K. Günther Metaphysics of race / sex Women

The dissolution

of Germanic racial care by medieval Christianity (4)

by Hans F. K. Günther

 
For the racial cultivation of the Germanic peoples, the medieval church teachings not only abolished the barrier of oppression between free and unfree, but above all degraded marriage, which had represented something particularly venerable within the divine order of Indo-European culture. According to Paul (1 Corinthians 7:2), marriage was there to help avoid the souring of people; but more sacred than married life was celibacy and mortification of the senses (1 Corinthians 7:1). This degradation of marriage can be traced from the early medieval church fathers through the entire Middle Ages. The rites of monks and nuns were considered the highest morality, and a doctrine of the ‘immaculate conception’ – even if this doctrine was not as easy to interpret as the layman thought it would be – could mean nothing other than that, conversely, every conception by a woman of his people was to be regarded as tainted. An exception in the evaluation of marriage is Clement of Alexandria (died around 220), who, for the first time after the spread of Christianity, again established marriage as a duty towards the people and state, as it was among the peoples of the Indo-European language, and who even saw the purpose of marriage as the procreation of well-behaved children, the euteknia. But here, and partly in Tertullian’s views on marriage, Indo-European thought still comes to the fore in an indirect and weakened form, the Hellenic and Hellenistic spirit of the Stoa and the writings of the Hellenic Plutarch, who was still essentially Indo-European in his views.

The degradation of marriage was logically linked to the degradation of women. It has often been claimed in the past that Christianity was the first to teach the Germanic peoples respect for women. In 1913, the church historian Boehmer attributed things to the Germanic peoples such as various kinds of fornication, respect and enslavement of the female sex and other shameful acts – all of which were traits of human behavior that were demonstrably only introduced into Germania from the south and east. An expert on the Germanic world such as Neckel was right to reject such opinions as untenable in his work Love and Marriage among the Pre-Christian Germanic Peoples (1934). In fact, medieval Christianity caused a wave of denigration of the female sex, while the woman as mistress of the house (déspoina, domina, matrona) had occupied a low position among all Indo-Europeans, as long as the Nordic racial soul was dominant in their peoples, in the reality of everyday life a much more respected position than the various legal records of the peoples of the Indo-European language would suggest. Among the Germanic peoples there was also the view that women had ‘something sacred and prescient’ (Tacitus: aliquid sanctum et providum). ‘They do not disdain their nature and pay attention to their answers,’ is how Tacilus (Germania, 8) describes the respect that Germanic men had for women.

In church doctrine, this is opposed by the mulier tacent in eeclessin (1 Corinthians 14:34/35) and the duty of women to cover their heads during church services, because otherwise they could arouse lust (1 Corinthians 11:5 and 6). For both church fathers, woman, to whom Paul (1 Timothy 2:14) had ascribed the origin of sin, appears as a templum aedificatum super oloacum, as the ‘mother of sin’ and ‘source of sin’, and the Council of Macon, which was held in the 7th century under the Merovingian Frankish kings, discussed whether woman should be regarded as a human being at all. How much abomination the counterhammer, judging according to medieval church doctrine, ascribes to the female sex can be read in this legal document.

The innate veneration of women by the descendants of the Germanic tribes of the early Middle Ages was able to have an impact in the High Middle Ages in the veneration of the Virgin Mary, and from such expressions of the veneration of women it found its way into lovemaking and into that dolce stil nuovo, of which Dante’s poem Vita Nuova may be the finest example. Here the blonde Dante sang of the blonde Beatrice out of a characteristically Nordic feeling of love. The veneration of women that broke through again could now hardly be expressed as simply and grandly as it had been among the Germanic tribes, but rather took on a more or less affected character or experienced a certain romantic exaggeration; but above all: this veneration of women was on the edge of an abyss, the aroused feeling of sin, the fear of the air of the flesh, which for church teachings constituted the essential aspect of the relationship between the sexes. Hence, among the minnesingers, who in their youth had sung of the joy of ‘this world’ and of love between the sexes, so often in all of them the fearful change to the rejection of ‘Lady World’. In church art, ‘Lady World’ was represented as a woman, alluring from the front, tempting to sin, and full of noble animals behind. When the world (for the Germanic people Midgard, the cultivated homeland, the field of all the nurturing industriousness of man and of all the national struggle with the god against Utgard, the epitome of everything anti-divine) as the world understood by the Germanic people as Midgard, was represented by the church as this ‘Lady World’, when Luther also saw in nature only a devilish power that seduces and mocks man, a ‘woman of honor who may bark against her god’, the source of that feeling of life from which the Germanic racial cultivation had sprung.

The Jewish-Christian world of faith thus attempted to separate the Germanic people from the context of the world order and relegated them to an afterlife in comparison to which ancestral ‘earthly values’ lost their meaning. Little by little, the whole attitude to life of the medieval West was thus reduced precisely in those who were capable of absorbing spiritual values and were willing to live according to these values. The coarser-minded people lived without deeper struggles of conscience in the various compromises between church doctrine and inherited nature that were possible and tolerated by the church. However, a decline in the overall attitude to life in the Middle Ages is undetectable and continues until, in the humanism of the Renaissance, the best of the Western peoples sensed the ancient Indo-European attitude to life again through the testimonies of Hellenic and Roman intellectual life, and until later, in the era of Winckelmann, Goethe, Schiller and Wilhelm von Humboldt, the Indo-European spirit was once again ignited by the great testimonies of the past, and until finally, with the Romantic era, native Germanic culture was rediscovered. But at the time of the revival, the Indo-Germanic and Germanic sense of what is humanly noble was no longer valid in the West, as a result of church teachings, no longer the focus on the noble, the will to improve life, to cultivate all growth values, but rather a tendency towards a stunted life prevailed in all spiritual expressions, precisely because a stunted life was a better preparation for the afterlife in this world of afflictions. According to such teachings, people should not feel at all secure in this world.

Categories
Deranged altruism Film Literature Videos

Turning the other cheek

In the excellent Russian film I saw based on this Dostoevsky novel, what stuck with me most was the slap given to the idiot prince (watch it here).