web analytics

Category: Eduardo Velasco

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Philosophy of history

Heartland, 8

Editor’s note: I will not translate the entire book on Heartland that Eduardo Velasco published on the now defunct Evropa Soberana site in Spanish (here, here and here). I limit myself to translating only a few paragraphs from the final section:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s The Closed Commercial State (1800) is a tedious book, utopian and pedantic in its rationalism, but it is worth our attention. On the one hand, it had a certain influence on the development of what Spengler would call ‘Prussian socialism’ or ‘Prussianism’, and on the other, it defends the exact opposite thesis to that of globalisation, i.e. that a country should seek autarchy to extricate itself from the network of international trade, becoming, so to speak, an endorheic state of exclusively internal (commercial, economic) flow. Thinkers of all political persuasions have seen interesting things in Fichte’s work, liberals as well as socialists, communists, anarchists, fascists and Nazis[1] so it is not a work to be dismissed lightly.

We return, then, to Prussia, the land that before the Second World War was home, according to Mackinder, to ‘one of the most virile races of mankind’, a race that was to suffer between 1944 and 1946 an ethnic cleansing of extreme brutality. While England was ruled by a cosmopolitan aristocracy of shipping, trade, commerce and banking speculation, Prussia was ruled by a provincial, military, land and productivity aristocracy. Fichte sent a copy of The Closed Commercial State (ECC) to Frederick William III, supposedly to influence his economic policy.

Fichte was inspired by the peasant society of the Germanic world and the economic organisation of the old German cities. It is impossible not to see in his work affinities with Lycurgus, Plato and Thomas More. The German philosopher’s economic ideal was a completely self-sufficient state, with ‘nothing to demand from its neighbours and nothing to cede to them’. Fichte says that in such a state, ‘the government does not aim at acquiring commercial predominance, which is a dangerous tendency, but at making the nation completely independent and autonomous. If a single nation has achieved supremacy in commerce, its victims must use every possible means to attenuate this supremacy and restore the balance’: a clear reference to the power of Great Britain.

The danger of the commercial supremacy of a single nation was that the international trade handled by that nation took over all the goods of a rival state until that state had only one commodity left to sell: itself. In this way, ‘the state sells itself, sells its independence, collects a permanent subsidy thus becoming the province of another state and a means to any of its objectives’.

In this regard, it is worth remembering that, although autarchy is today surrounded by taboos, in classical Greece it was the ideal to which people aspired, even if it was not always completely attainable. Aristotle, in his Politics, considered autarchy to be the ideal situation for a state. Hesiod went further and proposed autarchy for each family household. Tellurian Sparta, the most respected state in classical Greece, was a closed, autarchic economy thanks to its conquest of fertile Messenia. Thalassic Athens, by contrast, was heavily urbanised and had to rely on grain markets such as Egypt and southern Ukraine.

Fichte divided society into three strata: producers, merchants and craftsmen. Then came the military, teachers and statesmen. Of all these castes, the most dangerous for Fichte was the merchants since, through their possession of commodities and especially money, they tended to escape the authority of the state and ended up imposing their own rules.

The philosopher thought that Europe had a great commercial advantage over the other continents, tending to take over their labour power and goods. He considered that this state of affairs could not be perpetuated forever and that one day, a large state would have to leave the ‘European commercial society’ to form its own closed productive circuit.

What Fichte was criticising in these reflections was the explosion of Europe, and he advocated an implosion: Europe could not be eternally dependent on overseas ‘backyards’ in the Third World and must one day be able to stand on its own feet. Moreover, a planned economy cannot be planned, nor can a country be like a self-balancing and autonomous microsystem, if it depends on foreign goods and production, the supply, processing and transport of which it does not control, and is thus at the mercy of the whims of the markets: price fluctuations, trade embargoes, competition with the domestic product, etc. Such economic phenomena will tend to turn the country that is subject to them into a mere province in the network of international trade, tending to specialise in one economic sector rather than hosting all of them.

In the 1930s, autarky seemed to be gaining the upper hand over international trade. Three distinctly autarkic geopolitical blocs emerged: the European Axis (Germany, Italy and allied nations), the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (the vast conquests of the Japanese Empire from Manchuria to Indochina) and the Soviet Union.

With Europe, Asia and the Heartland closed to the US export market (except, in the case of the USSR, the substantial military, economic and oil aid it received from the US and the UK), all that remained on the planet was the British Empire and the impoverished colonial Third World: a de facto and imposed US autarchy. In The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (1959), William Appleman argued that the US ruling oligarchy went to war against Germany and Japan to protect global export markets from the effects of autarky. The dynamics of the autarkic blocs were neutralised with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system (1944), with its three pillars: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the dollar as the reserve currency of international trade. The only bloc that was spared to some extent was the USSR, which formed the economic organisation COMECON, formed in 1949, the same year that NATO was founded.

The COMECON bloc, of which the Warsaw Pact was to be the military arm. Red: Member states. Yellow: observer states. Pink: belonged to the organisation but did not participate. (Editor's Note: Compare it with BRICS).

Fichte—who believed that ‘in the beginning was action’ and that property emanates from labour and productive activity, that is, that the earth belongs to whoever pours his blood and sweat upon it—did not recognise the value of money, but the value of the commodities that such money is capable of buying. For him, ‘The total mass of money represents and is worth as much as the total mass of commodities’. No matter how much money is in circulation or is created out of thin air in the form of credit, its purchasing power will always be limited by the actual goods and services that can be bought.

Wealth does not depend on how much money one has, but on how large a fraction of the total existing money one possesses. It is clear that when there is, as today, much more money in circulation (especially electronic money and interest-debt-money) than real commodities, the excess capital floating in ‘the markets’ is devoted to inflating bubbles, opening new artificial markets (for example, by turning the emotions of the individual and human nature itself into a business), manipulating needs and demand with aggressive advertising and speculating to justify its existence. Not to mention that every time the money supply is increased, the creators of money (or rather, counterfeiters of money) increase the proportion of capital they own out of the total money supply, using this capital as if it were a commodity in itself. But ‘In the simple expression “to realise something in money”, the whole falsity of the system is already contained. Nothing can be realised in money because money itself is nothing real. The commodity is the real reality.’

To bring about the closure of the commercial state, Fichte advocated the ‘abolition of the world currency’ which he identifies with gold and silver (Editors’ Note: after the collapse of the British Empire, nowadays the dollar is still the reserve currency of international trade) and the ‘introduction of a national currency’. It is difficult not to see here the influence of Sparta, which forbade the possession of gold and silver by creating a new currency which was not accepted outside the territory of the Lacedaemonian state: rough iron bars, so that they could not be manipulated or moulded, were dipped in vinegar while still red-hot; the idea was to armour against the fluctuating and shifting influence of foreign trade.

In this situation, there is no longer any exchange with foreign states, except for one-off trade pacts based on direct barter, without monetary intermediaries. This is what Germany was doing before World War II in Eastern Europe and South America: a barter trade that did not need to use international currencies in the hands of its enemies. In contrast, initiatives for a world currency have always come from globalist individuals or entities, for example, the Rothschild family. (In this video, Mr. Evelyn de Rothschild proposes an ‘international currency’ to avoid conflict. What he does not say is who will have the power to issue such a currency—presumably himself, for example.)

Another of Fichte’s contributions to geopolitics is his idea that states should not overstep their ‘natural frontiers’, understood as those within which a state can achieve self-sufficiency. Towards the end of his writing, Fichte leaves us with a very politically incorrect reflection:

It is evident that a nation so closed, whose members live only with themselves and very few with foreigners; a nation which preserves by those measures its particular way of life, its institutions and customs; a nation which deeply loves its Fatherland and everything national, very soon a high degree of national honour and a very peculiar national character will emerge. It will become another nation, a completely new nation. That introduction of the national currency is its true creation…

 

______ 卐 ______

 
The power of High Finance has decided to base itself in the United Kingdom, North America and to a lesser extent the rest of Western Europe because among other things there is an excellent quality manpower there.

The American troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan have a fabulous genetic heritage, perfectly comparable to the Indo-European hordes of antiquity. Even in the faces of many white American convicts, we can discern a potential crusader knight, Viking, sailor, soldier, hard-nosed farmer or hard-headed labourer. These are people gone astray, uprooted by crossing the Atlantic, without the moral and spiritual foundations that only deep Asia, along with inspiring European history—based on heroic examples, war, art, culture, work, beauty and love—can provide.

What is currently being exported from Hollywood and MTV is not American culture, as the saying goes. ‘American culture’ is the love of family and country, the right to defend them with arms, civic sovereignty, religion, liberty and independence: the values of a people whose land was not given to them by a feudal lord, but won by blood and sweat. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor George Washington has anything to do with the toxic rubbish propagated from the meccas of the Yankee subculture, and the sphere of influence of the Pentagon and Wall Street is not an ‘American empire’ any more than the Vatican is the Roman Empire and the City of London is the British Empire.

We know—because we are not deluded or cultural Judeo-Christians, nor do we believe in globalisation or the religion of political correctness—what happens in countries that forget the fundamental laws of reproduction and race improvement: they become vulgarised, corrupt, unserious, undisciplined, disorganised, weakened and Third Worldised. The darkening of the race goes hand in hand with the darkening of the mind and spirit. Parasitic weeds take over the garden and eventually choke out the noblest and most productive trees and plants…

Deliberate and systematic ignorance of human reproduction, of the importance of race and genetics in geopolitics will only have the effect that the ‘myth of blood’ will resurface with greater force and violence. Globalisation pretends to make us believe that we are all equal while at the same time homogenising us racially, a clear proof that it does not consider us all equal. Genetic and anthropological-physical studies, i.e. recognising the difference between people, are therefore an anti-globalisation vector.
 
____________

[1] Dr. Carl Schmidt, associated with the power groups of Deutsche Bank, IG Farben and Siemens, defended the idea of a Closed Commercial State in Europe led by Germany.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco

Heartland, 7

by Eduardo Velasco

 

Middle Ages: Pax Mongolica

If initially Hindu and Bactrian traders had dominated the Silk Road trade, between the 5th and 8th centuries the Sogdians and, after the Muslim conquests, the Arabs and Persians would do so. At the western end of the route, Byzantium was the first European power to realise that the Heartland was a geopolitical reality to be taken into account. Alternating diplomacy and war with the peoples of the steppe (Avars, Pechenegs, Kipchaks and others), Constantinople could prolong its existence for a millennium after the fall of Rome.

Closely intertwined with the history of Byzantium is that of the Varangians (as the Slavs called the Vikings of Sweden), who moved up the great Russian rivers from the Baltic to the Black Sea basin and allied with the Slavs in an attempt to defeat the Khazars—a steppe confederation in southern Russia that had adopted Judaism as its official religion and is probably the ancestor of much of Ashkenazi Jewry. The Varangians took Kiev, the southernmost of the cities on the Dnieper, which allowed them to maintain constant contact with Byzantium, and eventually conquered the Khazar capital, Sarkel, not far from present-day Volgograd. In doing so, they came to dominate the trade corridor where the Don and Volga rivers come closest, jumping from the Black Sea basin to the Caspian basin—thus to the Heartland—and establishing themselves as a sort of second Byzantine Empire to connect Europe with Asia. The history of the Russias begins, clustered around cities like Kiev, Novgorod, Vladimir, Suzdal, Pskov or Muscovy, in generally heavily forested territories, where the Orthodox faith will eventually prevail.

Red: areas subject to Viking colonisation. Green: areas subject to Viking influence. Russia was born as an intermediary between the Scandinavian and Byzantine worlds, just as Germania was born as an intermediary between the Scandinavian and Roman worlds. The Vikings, as the founders of the first Russian states, laid the foundations of the only power capable of dominating the Heartland in the long run and connecting it with Eastern Europe. Although the core of historic Russia was born in Kiev, it slowly moved northwards, passing through cities such as Smolensk, Novgorod, Vladimir, Suzdal, Moscow and St Petersburg.

Genghis Khan, a tall, white, red-haired, blue-eyed man, was in many ways the Asian and medieval counterpart of Alexander the Great. His extraordinary personality succeeded in uniting the tribes and clans of Mongolia and in seizing control of the Silk Road, so that by his death in 1227 he was ruler of an empire stretching from the Sea of Japan to the Caspian, ruled from the Mongol capital of Karakorum (not to be confused with the mountain range of the same name). The strongly continental character of these domains was brilliantly portrayed when the Mongol invasion of Japan failed: the steppe horsemen, who had never seen the sea before, suffered severe seasickness and vomiting in their naval adventure, and what the Japanese called kamikaze or ‘divine wind’ caused such heavy losses to the Mongol fleet that the invasion failed. Other environments where Mongolia was never able to make its dominance felt emphatically were the mountains and forests—the Mongols were a people of plains and steppes, and both Siberia and the Russian principalities had huge forest masses. Indeed, at the time of the ‘Mongol yoke’, during which the Russias were tributary to the Tartars, the khanate of the Golden Horde ended where the steppe gave way to the forests of the North. From these closed and impenetrable spaces, Alexander Nevsky, Dmitry Donskoi, Peresvet and other national heroes of Russian history forged the greatness of the future Principality of Muscovy.

The Mongols’ military adventures reached Syria, Poland, Hungary and the gates of Vienna, but they were unable to cross the Sea of Japan or other maritime spaces. You don’t have to be a lynx to appreciate that the Mongol Empire drew its power from the dominance of the Heartland. In the West, the Mongols were able to advance thanks to the excellent information provided at all times by the Venetian merchant intelligence network. One of these agents was Marco Polo’s father.

For better or worse, the Mongol conquests provided the Pax Mongolica (or Pax Tatarica) and a relatively stable territorial continuity from the Near East and Eastern Europe to China. Thanks to it, from 1245, on the occasion of the First Council of Lyon, we can find European emissaries sent to the Mongol dominions by order of the Pope and the King of France: Giovanni da Pian del Carpine, Ascelin of Lombardy and André de Longjumeau. The aim was, on the part of the Papacy, to gain influence in Asia, especially by winning over the ancient communities of Nestorian Christians and, on the part of France, to forge links between Louis IX of France and Güyük Khan and to solidify a Franco-Mongol alliance, supposedly to make common cause in the Levant (the time of the Crusades).

In 1253, the Flemish Franciscan monk William of Rubruk was able to cross all of Central Asia and reach Karakorum, where he found French, Russian and Hungarian captured in Hungary. The friar also reported the presence of German prisoners working in iron mines in Central Asia—it seems that Stalin was not the first to capture Germans in Eastern Europe and deport them as slaves to the Heartland. In Mongolia, Islam, Buddhism, Manichaeism and Nestorian Christianity were already flourishing under the religious tolerance of the Khans. Rubruk returned to Europe with a detailed report for King Louis IX of France, entitled Itinerarium fratris Willielmi de Rubruquis de ordine fratrum Minorum, Galli, Anno gratia 1253 ad partes Orientales.

Travels of Friar William of Rubruk. At the time, Sarai played the same role that the Khazarian Sarkel had played before and the Soviet Stalingrad would play later: to serve as a bridge between the Don and Volga rivers, between the Black Sea and Caspian basins—and thus between Europe and the Heartland.

Later in the same century, the brothers Niccolo and Maffeo Polo, Venetian merchants, were able to establish prosperous trading emporiums in Constantinople and in Sudak or Soldaia (see map of the Mongol conquests above), where the presence of the powerful Venetian thalassocracy was strong. Encouraged by the wealth of the Golden Horde khanate, the Polo brothers eventually settled in its capital, Sarai, already within the confines of the Eurasian Heartland. Sarai was located in southern Russia, close to ancient Khazarian Sarkel and modern-day Volgograd, shared with these cities its role as a hinge between the Black Sea and Volga basins (the latter being part of the Heartland) and, with 600,000 inhabitants, was one of the largest and wealthiest cities of the 13th century. There, the Polo brothers became acquainted with the customs of the Tartars, the world of the steppe and the information brought back by foreign traders about distant routes further east. Following these indications, the Venetians proceeded to Bukhara, present-day Uzbekistan, where they lived for three years. They travelled up the Silk Road to Dadu (Beijing), where the throne of Kublai Khan, Genghis’s grandson, was located. The Asian monarch provided them with a Mongol ambassador to the Pope in Rome, safe conduct to travel throughout the Mongol dominions, and a letter to the Pope asking for a sample of oil from the lamp of the Holy Sepulchre, as well as a hundred ‘wise men’ to teach Christianity and Western customs in China. Sino-Roman relations, which had never been able to take shape in antiquity, were beginning to take shape in the middle Ages thanks to Venice, the Papacy and the Mongol conquests.

Pope Gregory X received the missive from the Mongol Khan in 1271, sending only two Dominican friars with the Polo brothers, this time accompanied also by Niccolo’s seventeen-year-old son Marco. The friars did not complete the journey out of fear, while the Venetian merchants completed the Silk Road from one end to the other, arriving in the capital of the Khanate in 1274, three years after their departure. Welcomed by the Khan, they lived under his hospitality for se¬¬venteen years before returning to Europe. The Polo voyages would never have been possible without the existence of a single state from the Middle East to the Pacific; thanks to this, Europe was able to read Marco Polo’s accounts, accessing first-hand testimony about what lay at the heart of Eurasia.

Thanks to the stability of the Pax Mongolica, Marco Polo was not the last European to set foot in Eurasia. In 1318, four years after the dissolution of the Order of the Temple, the Franciscan friar Odorico da Pordenone embarked on an impressive journey that took him from Venice to Armenia, Persia, India, China, Indonesia, and other places in the Far East. He even described Tibet as ‘where the Pope of the idolaters dwells’.

Several events ultimately brought the Pax Mongolica to an end:

• The virulent spread of the Black Death in the 1340s. Originating in Central Asia, the plague spread along both land and sea trade routes, affecting Europe as well as China, India and Arabia and introducing terror, distrust and the quarantining of entire cities along the trade routes.

• The Mongol horsemen were becoming fat, comfortable and decadent, and the Chinese, seasoned in palace intrigue, seized power, driving out the Mongol Yuan dynasty and other foreign (including European and Christian) influences and founding the Ming dynasty in 1368. The coup d’état in China was heavily influenced by a secret society: the White Lotus.

• The fleeting rise of Tamerlane, the last great steppe conqueror, who annihilated the Nestorian Christians of Persia and attacked the khanate of the Golden Horde (southern Russia), causing Muscovy, then ruled by Vasily I, to stop paying tribute to the Tatars. Yet in 1382, Moscow was still sacked by the Tatars.

• Buddhism, a new cultural and ideological trend very different from the ancestral paganism that the Mongols had hitherto professed, had penetrated Mongolia itself. It would take a couple of centuries for Buddhism to gain a foothold in the country. Still, it was only a matter of time before the new monks would win over the local shamans, winning over the Mongol aristocracy and erecting monasteries at crossroads and in the great pasture lands where large numbers of herdsmen gathered to perform sacrifices and other rituals. It has always been rumoured that it was the Chinese who favoured the introduction of Buddhism into Mongolia, hoping that the new creed would defuse the ancient warrior mentality of the Mongols and in turn ease the pressure on the Great Wall fringe; in fact, the White Lotus was a Buddhist society. The process would culminate centuries later, in 1568, when Altan Khan granted the head of the Tibetan lineage, Gelug, the title of ‘Dalai Lama’.

But if the Black Death, Tamerlane’s raids and the collapse of the Khanate had cut off communications between East and West, a new and at first-sight unfortunate event was to restore them: the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453 closed the ‘Varangian route’. It blocked the natural maritime outlet to the steppes, while many Greek immigrants migrated in stages from Constantinople across the Black Sea to Ukraine and eventually Moscow. Europe became an island, surrounded to the west by the Atlantic, to the south by the Mediterranean, to the southeast by the Ottoman Empire and the east by the Golden Horde and other khanates. In this situation, the only states capable of breaking Europe’s insularity and reuniting it with the Greater East by land were the Russian principalities. So the catastrophe of 1453 forced the peoples of Russia to turn eastwards to conquer the Tatar dominions, just as it forced the peoples of the West to turn to the Atlantic to conquer the new world. Both European movements, East and West, initially had a similar goal: to reconnect with Stasia. However, while Europe’s western thrust would accentuate its insularity and maritime character, the eastern thrust would emphasise its terrestrial character.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Philosophy of history

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.
 

___________

[1] More information here.

[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
Eduardo Velasco Racial studies

Heartland, 5

Previous Heartland entries: 1, 2, 3 and 4.

 

A Brief History of the Heartland

Prehistory

During the last ice age (the Würm glaciation), geographic pockets surrounded by glaciers formed in the Heartland, and it is in the extreme conditions of one of these icy pockets that an extraordinary human type, ruthlessly selected by the environment, was able to develop. In the article on racial classification, we saw that the Nordic Central Asian race, progenitor of the R1a and R1b genetic lineages and thus paternal ancestor of most of the world’s modern ethnic Europeans, was born in the Palaeolithic in the heart of Eurasia, the Zungaria and Altai regions being proposed as possible Urheimaten of this evolutionary type. Mackinder himself, who lived at a time when eugenics and the study of human biodiversity were not politically incorrect taboos, related the Heartland to brachycephalic skulls and considered the Central European ‘Alpine’ racial type to be an appendage of the anthropological world of ancient Central Asia,[1]separating the dolichocephalic populations of southern Europe (‘Mediterranean’) from the dolichocephalic populations of northern Europe (‘Nordic’) like a wedge.

After the deglaciation, the hunter-gatherer way of life was still dominant throughout the world, but two new ways of life had emerged: in the Near East, the farmer (evolution of gathering), and in the Heartland, the herdsman (evolution of hunting). From the Neolithic onwards, the Heartland did not cease to spew horde upon horde of pastoralist and mountain peoples over the margins of Eurasia, these peoples eventually forming the aristocracies of many ancient Middle Eastern civilisations.

Through the Persian plateau and the mountainous areas of the Middle East, the R1b lineage will reach Europe, up the Danube and accumulate in breeding nuclei in the Alpine region (Unetice and related cultures), as well as in the French-Cantabrian strip. The R1a took the simpler steppe path to end up in Eastern Europe and the German-Polish Plain. It is here that the properly ‘Indo-European’ world was born, linked to the mobility of large conquering troops, the use of the chariot and the horse, patriarchy and the sense of vast spaces and horizons that would give rise to empires, to such an extent that millennia later, ‘knight’ continues to designate a man considered worthy of respect. It is therefore in the pastoralist-herding cultures of Yamna (or Yamnaya), Poltovka and the Volga battle-axe that we must look for the origins of the chivalric and imperial traditions of history.

The earliest metal-age culture typical of the steppe Heartland is probably that of Sintashta-Petrovka. The Arkaim site in the southern Ural Mountains in the middle of the steppe, dated 1600-1900 b.c.e. is the best-known material evidence of this mother culture. Called the ‘swastika city’, ‘mandala city’, ‘Russian Stonehenge’ (located at approximately the same latitude as the English Stonehenge) and even the ‘capital of the ancient Aryan civilisation’, Arkaim is a fortress-village of concentric circles, oriented according to the cardinal points and the stars, and its inhabitants were probably the ancestors of the Aryans described in the Rigveda (India) and the Avesta (Persia).

Birth and expansion of the use of the two-wheeled radial war chariot, the forerunner of modern armoured military formations. Its emergence is within the Heartland, in the southern Urals, now Kazakhstan, which according to Mackinder was ‘the very pivot of the Pivot Area’. Here the Sintashta-Petrovka culture flourished, where animal husbandry, copper mining and bronze metallurgy played a central role, along with the war chariot and well-fortified human settlements, such as the Arkaim site. Later came the Andronovo (orange) culture with its burial complexes where the warrior was buried in burial mounds along with his weapons, horses and chariot. In Anatolia and Syria, the chariot came from the Hittites, in Egypt from the Hyksos, in Mesopotamia from the Kassites and in Europe from the Celts.

In the Bronze Age, the entire steppe is in ferment. On their chariots and horses, the Mitanni fall on Penthalasia, the Mycenaean Achaeans invade Greece and the Hyksos conquer Lower Egypt. The Rigvedarecounts how three and a half millennia ago the blond Arya, led by the god Indra, swept through the cities of the Indus civilisation, scattering the ‘black skin’ and establishing themselves as the new aristocracy of the region. In India and Persia, conquered by pseudo-Scythian Indo-European peoples from the Heartland, the most important gods are depicted as chariot drivers. In Greece, the Homeric ‘Iliad’ is a hymn to the lifestyle of the Indo-European warriors of the Bronze Age. Even in far-off, inhospitable Scandinavia, the red-haired Thor was conceived as driving a chariot pulled by billy goats. Even after the civilisation of vast areas of Europe and the Middle East, the steppes of the continental interior will continue to be inhabited by peoples of Iranian (‘Aryan’) stock who, like the Scythians, Sarmatians and Alans, will maintain a barbaric modus vivendi until they are swept away or pushed back by new migrations from the interior.

Metal Age cultures where horse husbandry was established. The use of the horse was closely related to a landscape of open spaces and flat horizons such as the Eurasian steppe, as well as to forms of warfare based on speed. This culture would end up having tremendous social and military success across the globe.

These Indo-European steppe societies had a clear predominance of R1a paternal lineages – associated with the Slavs, Persians and North Indian high castes – and bequeathed to archaeology (first Soviet and then international) the phenomenon of kurgans: earthen burial mounds in which important men were buried, found from Western Europe to Central Asia. Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great, was buried in a burial mound. This imaginary ritual is the origin of the legends of the lost king: missing and often red-haired rulers (such as King Arthur, Frederick Barbarossa or Genghis Khan) who sleep inside a mountain waiting for ‘the moment of greatest need’ for their people.

Kurgan in Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine. The origin of myths about kings sleeping inside mountains is to be found in the kurgans (burial mounds) of the Metal Age, where important warriors were buried together with their weapons, horses and other belongings. This is where the genesis of the Indo-European world is to be found.

In the article on Indo-European genetic heritage in Central Asia we saw, in addition to some maps illustrating the subject under discussion, to what extent many anthropological-physical traits considered Europoid survive in some ethnic pockets of Central Asia, including Mongolia and Uyghuristan. Precisely from China come references to Western peoples called Dinlins and Boma, who surprised the indigenous population with their ruddy appearance, blue eyes and reddish hair. Some Russian archaeologists link these peoples with descendants of the Afanasiev culture.

_______________

[1] The Geographical Pivot of History, p. 428.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Philosophy of history

Heartland, 4

by Eduardo Velasco

Previous Heartland entries: 1, 2 and 3.

‘The Heartland is the greatest natural fortress on Earth’. —Mackinder.

Heartland comes from heart and land, ‘cardinal region’. The Heartland is the sum of a series of contiguous river basins whose waters flow into bodies of water inaccessible to oceanic navigation. It is the endorheic basins of Central Eurasia plus the part of the Arctic Ocean basin frozen in the Northern Route with an ice cover of between 1.2 and 2 metres, and therefore impassable for much of the year—except for atomic-powered icebreakers (which only the Russian Federation possesses) and similar vessels. Although the word was first used in its specific meaning by James Fairgrieve (a Mackinderian disciple) in Geography and World Power (1915), the concept of Heartland was first defined by the English geographer Halford John Mackinder (1861-1947), one of the founding fathers of modern geopolitics, in his work The Geographical Pivot of History (1904), where he drew the first graphic representation of what he initially called the ‘Pivot Area’:

Mackinder says in his more comprehensive Democratic Ideals and Reality (1919):

The northern margin of Asia is an inaccessible coast, clogged with ice except for a narrow waterway which opens here and there along the beach during the summer, owing to the melting of the local ice formed during the winter between the floes and the land. It so happens that three of the world’s largest rivers, the Lena, the Yenisei and the Obi, flow northwards through Siberia to this coast, and are therefore divorced for practical purposes from the general system of ocean and river navigation. South of Siberia are other regions at least as extensive, drained into salt lakes with no oceanic outlet; such are the basins of the Volga and Ural rivers flowing into the Caspian, and of the Oxo[1] and Jaxartes[2] into the Aral Sea. Geographers usually describe these internal basins as ‘continental’. Taken together, the Arctic and continental flow regions occupy almost half of Asia and a quarter of Europe and form a large continuous patch in the north and centre of the continent. This entire patch, stretching from the icy, flat shores of Siberia to the torrid, rugged coasts of Baluchistan and Persia, has been inaccessible to oceanic navigation. Its opening by railways—for it had no roads beforehand—and by air routes shortly, constitutes a revolution in the relations of men with the greatest geographical realities of the world. Let us call this great region the Heartland of the Continent.

Sticking strictly to the Mackinderian definition of the Heartland, its exact extent would be as follows:

Mackinder describes the interior of this Heartland in these terms:

The north, centre, and west of the Heartland are a plain, rising only a few hundred feet at most above sea level. In that greatest lowland on the Globe are included Western Siberia, Turkestan, and the Volga basin of Europe, for the Ural Mountains, though a long range, are not of important height, and terminate some three hundred miles north of the Caspian, leaving a broad gateway from Siberia into Europe. Let us speak of this vast plain as the Great Lowland.

Southward the Great Lowland ends along the foot of a tableland, whose average elevation is about half a mile, with mountain ridges rising to a mile and a half. This tableland bears upon its broad back the three countries of Persia, Afghanistan, and Baluchistan; for convenience we may describe the whole of it as the Iranian Upland. The Heartland, in the sense of the region of Arctic and Continental drainage, includes most of the Great Lowland and most of the Iranian Upland; it extends therefore to the long, high, curving brink of the Persian Mountains, beyond which is the depression occupied by the Euphrates Valley and the Persian Gulf.

The Eurasian steppe is the most traversable and open part of what Mackinder called the Great Lowland. It can be considered the backbone of Eurasia and the cradle of pastoralism, the spirit of chivalry and land power. Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Mongolia are the key countries for its domination, indeed control of the steppe is a strategic imperative for the Russian Federation—in the same way, Atlanticism ensures that the steppe is never under the control of a single superpower. The Dzungaria Gate, marked on the map, is a mountain pass that separates Uyghuristan from the rest of Central Asia. Mastering such a mountainous strait is as important to a tellurocracy as control of a sea strait is to a thalassocracy. Between the Great Western Steppe (from Hungary to Kazakhstan) and the Great Eastern Steppe (mainly Mongolia and Manchuria), there is only one major barrier: the Altai massif. Budapest, Bucharest, Odesa, Kiev, Volgograd (Stalingrad), Astana, Omsk and Ulan Bator are key cities in the structuring of the Eurasian steppe.

The basis of geopolitics is the contradiction between sea power (‘thalassocracy’ in Greek) and land power (telurocracy). Sea power tends to engender commercial and liberal states, and land power productive and autocratic states. Typical historical thalassocracies have been Phoenicia, Athens, Carthage, Venice, the Hanseatic League, the Republic of Ragusa, the Republic of Salé, the Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Holland, the British Empire and the United States after 1898. Clear telurocracies have been the Scythians, Sparta, the Holy Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Russian Empire, Germany, Austria-Hungary, the USA before 1898 and the USSR.

Both types of power have their natural citadels and their spheres of influence in the terrestrial geography. The citadel of thalassocracy is the northern half of the Atlantic (Midland Ocean or Mediterranean Sea) and its sphere of influence is Oceania described in 1984 by George Orwell, who knew geopolitics. The citadel of the telurocracy is the Heartland and its sphere of influence is Orwellian Eurasia. The Eurasia of 1984 would, in reality, be, along with other regions of the globe, contested between the two archetypal powers, or have a mixture of both: Southeast Asia, Korea, South India and the Chinese coast would have strong oceanic influence, while Tibet, Uiguristan, Inner and Outer Mongolia, Manchuria and Northern India would have continental influence. According to Orwell, in a world where geopolitics has taken over, the contested areas of the globe—perpetually at war, changing hands and being conquered and reconquered again and again by the three superpowers—form a quadrangle with corners at Tangier-Hong Kong-Darwin-Brazaville, as well as the borders between Stasia and Eurasia. These disputed territories loosely correspond to the Muslim world.

Above, the natural citadels of the thalassocracy and the telurocracy. It will be noted that the shortest way between the two is Scandinavia and the Arctic Ocean, near the Russian-Norwegian border. Europe in general has the misfortune of being the natural battleground between thalassocracy and telurocracy. At present, a new thalassocratic space is forming in the Asia-Pacific, which, together with the Atlantic from the West, besieges the Heartland from the East.

Above, in George Orwell’s novel 1984, there is a fictional essay entitled The Theory and Practice of Oligarchic Collectivism, which explains how the USSR has conquered Western Europe to become Eurasia (red), the United States and the British Empire have united to form Oceania (blue), and Stasia (yellow) has emerged after a decade of confused struggles. None of the three superstates can be conquered even by the other two combined, as their military might be at the same level and their natural defences are too formidable. Within the Tangier-Hong Kong-Darwin-Brazaville quadrangle lie the contested zones of the planet. The borders between Eurasia and Stasia are not entirely clear, except for a reference to the unstable border in Mongolia.

Globalisation has its throne in ‘markets’ (mainly banks and multinationals) and in international trade, 90% of which is conducted by sea, even though rail and pipelines are cheaper, faster and more efficient—or would be if it were not for timely instabilities in the most strategic links of land routes. A landlocked state thus has a large vector of influence projection at its disposal and shares a de facto border with all countries with a coastline on the body of water in question.

Unlike the emerged lands, the planet’s seas constitute a single body (Panthalasa or World Ocean theory), so that whoever goes out into the World Ocean and dominates it will tend to envelop all the world’s emerged lands and infiltrate its power into them, especially through the valleys and plains of the great river basins. But despite this great advantage, the sea, changeable, capricious and shifting, serves only to transport things that come from the land and to lay siege to the land itself. If dominating the sea is merely a means to dominate the land, dominating the land is an end in itself so that a maritime superpower needs to besiege the land only confirms the importance of the land itself.

Halford J. Mackinder

This article will therefore take the point of view of the sea’s natural antagonist. The land represents the firm, stable, fertile, nourishing, productive, organised and disciplined, if the sea is very similar to the ‘becoming’ with its ups and downs, the land is close to the ‘being’ with its obstinate permanence. If the sea rises only in stormy moments, the land rises forever in the mountains, which could be defined as ‘concentrated land’. In the economic sphere, the telluric strategy is not to move goods from one place to another but to produce them and make them stay as close as possible to the soil from which they sprang.

Productivity and fertility thus replace trade and speculation to form a political, economic and social system very different from the one that prevails on the planet today. Likewise, the opening up of spaces of free navigation, which is the obsession of Atlanticism, is replaced by the tendency of the great land masses to strangle maritime traffic in delicate bottlenecks, to break up Panthalasa, turning the various seas into mere inland lakes under tight control. For, as we shall see in another article, the Baltic, the Black Sea, the Adriatic, the Aegean, the entire Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Andaman Sea, the South China Sea, the Sea of Japan, and even the Caribbean, the Gulf of Mexico and Hudson Bay, can be excised from the bosom of the World Ocean and turned into lakes as inaccessible as the Caspian, just by activating natural locks: sea straits like Gibraltar or Hormuz, or island barriers like Japan or the Andaman Arc.

_____________

[1] Oxo or Oxus was the Greek name for the Amur Darya (Pamir) river.

[2] The Greek name for the Syr Darya.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Patriarchy

Matriarchy

vs. Patriarchy, 4

by Eduardo Velasco

 
Author’s conclusion

European culture as a whole is eminently patriarchal, but even within the West, I believe I can observe the clash between patriarchal and matriarchal mentalities, expressed in the nations possessed by these concepts. Thus, France and Italy, as modern nations, traditionally represent a soft and decadent mentality tending towards matriarchy, while Russia, Germany, England, and the United States represent the more patriarchal and aggressive tendency.

Within our civilisation, it is obvious and undisputable that the two principles are in debate and that patriarchy has been slowly being overturned in favour of a pseudo-matriarchy for some time now.

It also seems obvious to me that patriarchal societies are superior and more advanced than matriarchal societies and, especially, have much greater potential. There is simply no point of comparison in terms of achievements and superiority between the ridiculous pacifist matriarchy and the glorious, all-conquering patriarchy. For me, it is enough to glance over mythology, or to read The Iliad, to feel deep sympathy for authentically patriarchal societies, besides the fact that patriarchy is inevitably associated with Aryan or ‘Indo-European’.

Editor’s Note: Real men (‘Yang’), not the white trash we see today throughout the West—except for the Russians who, in Ukraine, are now fighting the globo-homo ‘Empire of the yin‘.

As a sign of the ‘Oedipus complex’ that plagues our civilisation, we have the passions and fears that the word ‘fascism’ arouses in the modern world. What communists, socialists, progressives, democrats and the like hate and fear from ‘fascism’ is the organising severity of a patriarchal society that puts everyone in his place.

What do I think the future of this issue might be? The present abortion of matriarchy is doomed to disappear as soon as the slightest turmoil is unleashed. On the one hand, it has produced a weak society incapable of defending itself and will be overwhelmed by those who have not fallen prey to its scourge (e.g. Islam). On the other hand, the current pseudo-matriarchal society is doomed to extinction for the simple reason that those who profess it don’t preach the need to have children, falling into the most immense contradiction, for a society that believes it is indisputably in possession of the absolute truth (like the current one), should preach offspring to eternalise itself and ensure a future at all costs, in the face of societies that think differently, which are the majority. Over time, his surrealistic utopia will lose ground to the merciless harshness of the times to come, and will eventually be replaced by a patriarchal reaction more in tune with the reality of the world and of man, which is the need for abundant and strong offspring.

The awakening of the white race will, of necessity, be accompanied by a reworking of the old Aryan patriarchy. Sorry to spoil your party, oh herd of decadent Loewe-scented cattle, but the subnormalities are over and so much of what you took for granted is over. There will come a day when you will have to fight to the death just to enjoy the 1% of goods that now seem normal to you! Your disgusting promiscuity, your mental vacuity, your superficiality and your stilted bourgeois sophistication will be extirpated and woe betide you if you cry, stamp your feet or call Superman. Considering the past decadence and the catastrophic situation in which the race—which is the only thing that matters in this world—finds itself thanks to your repellent moral and spiritual baseness, the coming reaction must be exactly the opposite.
 

By way of Appendix: The peoples of the north and the ‘civilisation of the mother’, from Adriano Romualdi’s La Question d’une Tradition Européenne:

The emergence of a European physiognomy from the mists of High Prehistory took place in the fifth millennium b.c.e. This event was accompanied by a spiritually significant choice: the rejection of the ‘Mother Civilisation’ and the affirmation of the Indo-European Urvolk (‘original people’, German) as an essentially virile and patriarchal community.

The Neolithic, the age of the first agriculture and the first settlements, the age in which families become tribes and tribes become villages, is inaugurated on the European continent with the penetration of the Eastern and Mediterranean elements. These are the Thessalian Sesklo-Dimini cells, heirs of the near-eastern communities that spread up the Danube and proliferated throughout Central and Balkan Europe. This is the so-called Danubian culture, with its banded pottery (Bandkeramik), rough wooden hoes and large collective houses. This culture conveys its spiritual message through small figures depicting a naked female deity. She is Mother Earth (Gê Metêr), the Great Mother of harvests, the dispenser of fertility who holds the keys to life and death. She is the naked goddess, whose kingdom extends from Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, Crete, Malta and beyond. Throughout Western and Atlantic Europe, from the Iberian Peninsula to the British Isles, the dagger-wielding goddess also appears in megalithic engravings. The Eurasian and Euro-African sky of the Mother penetrates, through the Mediterranean race with its Lybian, Ligurian, Iberian and Pelasgic proliferations, to the heart of the European continent.

However, the Mother’s domain does not extend as far as northern Europe. This is the region around the southern Baltic, the area of the beech, yew, birch, and spruce; the area of the wolf, the bear, the salmon, the beaver; the territory that linguistic geography presupposes for the Indo-European Urheimat (‘original home’, German). It is also the territory of the Nordic race where, from the beginning of the 5th millennium, local groups of hunters and fishermen, heirs of the Magdalenian community of the Ice Age, reorganised themselves into a new agricultural culture alien to the world of the Danubians and the Great Mother.

The Norse megalithic culture, with its great stone tombs bearing witness to a firm political and gentile structure, together with its two offshoots, the culture of globular amphorae and the culture of chorded pottery, constitute the original matrix of the Indo-European languages and are responsible for a violent transformation that will affect Europe and vast regions of Asia.

From 3200 b.c.e. onwards, the whole of central, eastern and Balkan Europe was raided by the Northern Peoples. The Globular Amphorae Culture and the Stringed Pottery Culture, departing from their headquarters in the Germanic plain, invade the peaceful communities of the Motherland with their hammer axes, transforming the archaeological picture as far as Greece and Ukraine.

Significantly, this irruption was accompanied by the irruption of solar symbols. The Swastika was born, the oldest example of which appears on a ceramic from the Globular Amphorae Culture found in Poland; the radiated cross and the squared discs, with a dot in the centre or surrounded by rays, were born.

This is a vast symbolic range that finds its greatest flowering in Troy, the frontier city between Europe and Asia, marking the passage of Indo-European peoples into Asia Minor. The Swastika, the primordial symbol of generation and the resurrection of light is associated with the first appearance of the Indo-European peoples in the heart of the fourth millennium, and only fifteen hundred years later it reached India and China.

In the heart of Anatolia, the tombs of Alaja Hüyük, as a prelude to the future splendour of the Hittite kingdom, show us, alongside hammer-headed pins of the northern barbarians, banners decorated with swastikas and other solar symbols. One of these banners features a large stag in the middle of two smaller bulls. We are witnessing the subjugation of telluric, southern, maternal symbolism.

The bull, a symbol of the blind generative force, linked to the ideology of fertility, crudely represented alongside the naked goddess in the most archaic European agricultural cultures, is contrasted with the deer, the animal of the hunters of the North, Seelentier des nordischen Menschen (‘animal of the soul of Nordic men’, German) and, according to Weisweiler, ‘animal of the Arctic civilisation’.

The deer is significantly associated with the symbolism of the sun and light:

Den Sonnenhirsch sah ich von Süden her gehen
Seine Füsse standen auf der Erde
aber die Hörner reichten zum Himmel

These verses of The Edda are illustrated by several prehistoric figures, starting with those from Valcamonica, in which the stag’s horns are stylised in the form of a sun disc.

Similarly, it is significant that in Ireland, when the Celtic element meets the aborigines of Iberian stock, the stag and the bull play a central role in the sagas. Where the words oss, dag and ag, which in the Leinster saga name the stag, in the Ulster saga have come to mean bull.

Behind this clash of symbols, behind the spread of the battle-axe peoples and the spread of the Indo-European languages, lies an event of great spiritual significance.

The paternal principle is pitted against the ‘Mother Civilisation’; Olympian virility against the taurine and maternal myth of fertility; the ethos of the ‘societies of men’ against the enthusiastic promiscuity of ancient Matriarchy.

The echoes spread throughout Europe, where more than a thousand years later, Doric and Latin migrations would create the premises of the classical view of life. But, even more, the effects of this sudden expansion of the Nordic, white and Indo-European stock are felt in the most distant centres of irradiation: on the plateaus of Persia and the threshold of India.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Feminism Patriarchy Real men

Matriarchy

vs. Patriarchy, 3

by Eduardo Velasco

 

Matriarchy: Society and Idiosyncrasy

Matriarchy is distinguished by hedonism, promiscuity, concupiscence, indulgence, narcosis, passivity, laziness, drunkenness and an overloaded, opulent, baroque sensuality.

Everything is permeated with ‘free will’.

Spiritual influence belongs to the matriarchs. Women have a disproportionate influence on society through sexual suggestion and by monopolising the upbringing of children away from their fathers.

Things are kept quiet for fear of offending. Ambiguity and ‘political correctness’ are born.

Value is placed on material possessions and wealth.

Leisure time is mainly taken up with dances, feasting, parties, orgies, acrobats and dancers.

Embellishments, make-up, dresses, colours, luxury, well-being, spices and dyes are valued.

Matriarchy pampers the weak. Peaceful and weak collectivities flourish, too rooted in their piece of land and unable to conquer, explore, pioneer or endure uprooting and loneliness. The archetypal matriarchy is a timorous, docile, humanitarian, anti-heroic, pacifist and pusillanimous society. Peace is extolled and everyone fornicates with everyone. ‘Make love not war’ is a very typical neo-matriarchal slogan.

The spineless man is appreciated for his docility. The cowardly and weak are protected as one of the group. No one has the right to punish or reproach, authority is dissolved.

Everything that preserves life and tends to make life more bearable for the weak is valued. Harshness is removed, and everything is softened. The goal is the enjoyment of a long and pleasurable life.

In matriarchy one tends to enjoy quietly and uncompromisingly and catches pleasure on the fly as soon as it presents itself, in a rather pseudo-tropical mentality. The ‘playboy’, the ‘dandy’ and the fat man are typical products of the matriarchy, and impossible in a real patriarchal society. The pursuit of easy pleasure sets the tempo of matriarchal peoples.

All life is sought to be protected and preserved, even if it means isolating it from the harshness of the real world. Well-being and comfort are sought.

Greetings are elaborate and promiscuous. Manners are nervous, there is a tendency towards indiscretion, groping and getting too close to the interlocutor. Their voices are raised in absurd situations, but they are afraid to shout when the situation calls for it.

As Julius Evola said, matriarchy is a carrier of egalitarian social forms of anarchist or communist character. Ants and bees live in pseudo-communist matriarchies. The ‘Mother Church’, with its manhood-castrated priests, is another matriarchal figuration, however much it may shock the fans of The Da Vinci Code.

Dogmatic, utilitarian and materialistic rules and precepts are obeyed.

The lazy laughter of corrupt women and spineless men, the indulgence and the pampering, the mocking, sad and empty look of the weak, the coughing of the sick, the whining, the depressions, the inconstancy, the capriciousness of over-pampered children, the whining of the bereaved, the inbreeding, the wailing of the disconsolate, the aberration and neutralisation of powerful and vital instincts are characteristic of Matriarchy and a society deprived of order and the influence of fighting men.
 

Patriarchy: society and idiosyncrasy

Patriarchy is marked by effort, struggle, will, purpose and action, and is distinguished by asceticism, self-control and sobriety. Women are excluded from state or decision-making processes (see the Senate of Rome or the Germanic Thing), and it is the men who mould the new generations to their whim, although it is taken for granted that a man is usually not complete until he has a complementary female spirit by his side to inspire him and bring him some magic.

Everything is imbued with order, ritualism, severity and simplicity. In India, the Aryan invaders call their dark-bred enemies ‘those without rites’.

In patriarchy, the man dominates the family. There is always some sort of supreme patriarch, leader, king or emperor. Children are made to grow up with their duty in mind to take over power from their parents’ generation. The first-born predator of power is the hope of the future and gives character to his society. Social hegemony belongs to the young, vigorous, aggressively impulsive warrior who thirsts for power and to make his mark on the world.

Things are said up front and almost crudely (think of the modern Baltic and Slavic countries). Fights and duels of honour abound.

Value is attached to value itself, and material possessions are only valuable insofar as they express status (as arms, shields, armour, horse and plundered booty once expressed the position of the military caste). Likewise, great value is placed on that which is difficult to achieve, that which is within the reach of the select minority.

Leisure time is occupied mainly with sport, hunting, study, religious meditation and military training, resulting in people who are athletic, warlike, vigorous, spiritual, predatory and ready for anything.

Simplicity, coarseness, naturalness, austerity and toughness are valued. This results in Spartan lives of constant hardening.

Patriarchy pampers the strong and directly worships war, courage, daring, risk and heroism. Severe and aggressive societies flourish, tending to invade, conquer and possess new lands, under the mentality that ‘might makes right’. Patriarchy is thus the system capable of giving birth to heroes through a patriarchal life. Pioneers, explorers, restless and searching men, brimming with ambition and the will to power are forged.

The cowardly, the docile, the useless and the mannered are hated to death. Boys despise girls and girls fear boys.

Boldness, honour and courage are valued. Violence, harshness, force and even brutality are respected. It accepts risk with morbidity, plays with death and pain, and flirts with discomfort, stress, horror and fear, thinking that it strengthens men. A life of honour and glory is valued, even if it is very short (this choice is condensed in the brilliant Greek figure of Achilles). Heroism and sacrifice are worshipped, even if it means a life of suffering and toil. Eugenics, comradeship, the sacredness of the teacher-pupil relationship, mors triumphalis and euthanasia are ideals of the patriarchal mentality.

Pleasure and luxury are regarded with extreme suspicion and treated with great care, or even banished. Discipline, asceticism, self-control, will, training, haughty, rustic, aggressive and military character take their place. The phenomena of soldiering and militarism, as well as athleticism, are typical products of the long-term social action of patriarchy. This gives rise to imperialist peoples who glorify war. Feminist Marilyn French states (Beyond Power), not without some revulsion on her part, that patriarchy is a system that gives pre-eminence to power over life, control over pleasure and dominion over happiness. We might add that patriarchy also gives importance to control over emotions, feelings, suffering and pain (children are told that ‘men don’t cry’), and to power over the earth and matter.

It seeks to harden and strengthen life by exposing it to discomfort and thus shielding it against future bad experiences. The most representative phrases of this mentality are ‘it is for your own good’ and ‘you will thank me in the future’. Struggle and ascension prevail over the pursuit of pleasure.

In patriarchy, greetings are sober and simple. There is a tendency towards discretion, simplicity and static and solemn manners, almost martial in their runic rectitude. Patriarchy is influenced by the philosophy and way of doing things of the männerbunden (‘men’s societies’, or armies), which are one of its hallmarks and cornerstones.

Patriarchy carries hierarchical social forms of a fascist character, in which order decides everything. State and empire are originally patriarchal institutions. In the animal kingdom, just as ants and bees are close examples of matriarchy, wolves live in a quasi-patriarchal system, ruled by dominant males who renew themselves over the generations. The entire pack participates in the training and apprenticeship of the pups, and the fathers expel the offspring from the home once they have reached sufficient maturity to earn their living.

Principles and codes of honour are obeyed which have their origins in the world of spirit and ideas and which unquestionably have a long-term practical purpose. The best examples of patriarchy: the barbarian Aryan societies (such as the ancient Dorians or Germanic), the ancient Iranians, Vedic India, the Greeks, the Romans, the ancient Japanese, the traditional strands of today’s Western civilisation or the very society that was emerging in the Third Reich—especially in the Hitlerjugend and the SS—as well as the Prussian militaristic mentality of all epochs.

The shouting of fervent troops, the sternness towards women and children, the clattering of horses’ hooves, the blood spilt on the snow, the warlike ardour of young men, the weapons, the glorious idealistic art, the fire and bronze, the glitter of metal, the clatter of black boots, the military parades, the chanting and the roar of artillery and rifles are the glorious manifestations of the Aryan patriarchy.

A YouTube video is worth a thousand pictures: Viking prayer to family, lineage, ancestors and death, taken from the film The 13th Warrior, in which a patriarchal Nordic people face a prolific and sinister matriarchal people (Antonio Banderas, you suck!).

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Patriarchy

Matriarchy

vs. Patriarchy, 2

by Eduardo Velasco
 

Matriarchy: The family and relations between the sexes

Individuals live in large common households, like prehistoric caves or the great houses of the Danubian Culture.

The procreation of large numbers takes precedence, which results in a repellent jumble. Subhuman matriarchy makes females the object of a cult of abomination, deformity, and promiscuity. Children are overpampered and overprotected, to the point of sapping their initiative and entrepreneurial spirit. Nowadays, we see children overloaded with coats, scarves, jumpers, gloves, and hats, even when it is clearly not cold at all. Mothers repress them when they show initiative or independence, an entrepreneurial spirit, or when they take risks.

As promiscuity is often such that no one knows who the fathers are, the family name is passed down through the mother’s side. Even in cases where there is marriage, the man often takes the woman’s surname and goes to live in the woman’s house, as was once the case among the Basques.

Families are not solid or defined. There are incestuous and endogamous tendencies. The environment encourages pederasty and rape, as in so many primitive societies today. Because of these practices, the deformed and defective abound.

Matriarchy is no friend of hierarchies, and everything tends to blur in the presence of the collective totem and the mass.

 
Patriarchy: the family and relations between the sexes

Individuals live in single-family homes.

Despite the importance of fertility and birth rate, the number of children is not important, but the quality of each child. This favours the emergence of strong families, eugenic selection systems and careful training and education methods. ‘Maybe few, but very good’, is the emblematic phrase of this mentality. In patriarchy, sons are treated as men from the time they are boys, while in matriarchy they are still pampered and treated as boys when they are still adults. Fathers and clan veterans seek ways of ‘manning up’ their sons through hardening initiations, and mothers have no say in this, for it is taken for granted that after a certain age (in Sparta and medieval European aristocracies, at age seven), the boy must be emancipated from female influence. Boys are allowed to run around, get hurt, get dirty and unclothed to grow up healthy and tough. Boys are encouraged to develop curiosity, fascination and respect for violence. It is especially in the ancient Aryan armies that the mentality of sacrifice, training, ceremony, fighting and dedication reaches its peak.

The ritual and solemn marriage ceremony is a patriarchal institution. The strong family, the clan, and the tightly knit community are patriarchal phenomena to the core. The wife takes her husband’s surname when she marries, and the children will have the father’s surname. There is a tendency for children to acquire the surname ‘son of’ about their paternity. This is evident in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries, with the adoption of surnames ending in –son or –sen, in Slavic countries with –vich or –witz, or in Spain itself, with the suffixes –ez.

With matriarchy one knows exclusively who the mother is. With patriarchy, the father and mother are known, and the cleanliness of the lineage is guaranteed as long as the patriarchal law is respected. The patricians formed the aristocracy of Rome. Patriarchy guarantees the purity of blood. Matriarchy guarantees its interbreeding. Deeply united families emerge and practically create their tradition and mythology, even in terms of divine ancestry. Pride in the lineage of the fathers, the zeal for purity of blood, and the desire to preserve the race—racism—flourishes. Loyalty, honour and restraint, i.e. the instinct of protection of the pure and spiritual essence, take root. The Aryan patriarchy is the only social system which considers that honour also has to do with women.

Patriarchy tends to form severe hierarchies and caste systems which are separated by genetic criteria, and which favour the distinction of the best elements and the concentration of power in their hands. Examples are the systems of socio-racial separation that arose in India, Iran, Greece, Rome and the feudal Middle Ages. Apartheid in South Africa and Rhodesia is a more modern example.

Categories
Ancient Greece Ancient Rome Eduardo Velasco

Tough replies

by Eduardo Velasco, 4

 

Skirita said:

Hi NT. I just recently discovered your blog. It is really interesting. I wanted to ask you something from the ignorance and passion that these topics produce:

  • On the one hand the Minoan culture has as a symbol the Labrys (according to your article a specifically patriarchal symbol), in another of your comments is considered matriarchal (when you talk about the hero Theseus against the minotaur and the sacrifices that were made by this kind of cultures with young girls).
  • On the other hand, studying Roman law and the Roman gods, I have found that they had a very special worship of the god Janus. This, as I understand it, is a deity from the Etruscan pantheon, and yet he was highly revered in Rome and was considered the counterpart of Mars (god of war and fighting). I understand that although the legend says that Romulus came from the lineage of Mars, after he died in unclear circumstances, he became the god Quirinus, who was later called Janus-Quirinus, and came to be the representation of the citizen, that is, the Roman when he was in peace.

I also understand that the figure of the Rex (patriarchal, hierarchical and governing) comes from the Etruscans in the Roman case, and even had a lot of typical Etruscan paraphernalia… I ask you to clarify these things because no one has ever made them clear to me and they are very confusing.

Excellent article yours. Greetings from Argentina. HH!
 

NT (Velasco) replies:

Good morning Skirita.

The use of Labrys by the Minoans is not in contradiction with their matriarchy, simply because Minos was probably not founded as a matriarchy, but as a patriarchy. The symbolism of the axe testifies to this, as does the fact that, like Egypt (and like Etruria) this civilisation drew from what is called the Nordic red race (or Brünns) [Editor’s note: redheaded whites—see here]: a variety that tended towards patriarchy (also Scotland, England and Spain drew from the same race and were patriarchal societies).

The problem is the same as always: miscegenation. When the ‘red’ ruling class of both Minos and Etruria (there are paintings of blond Etruscans and Minoans in the style of the Egyptians that we saw in the post about them) gave way in numbers in favour of the Near-Asiatic and North African type, the idiosyncrasy of the society changed. Thus, the Minoan civilisation at the time of the Achaean invasion was a pale and decadent caricature compared to what it had been. The same can be said of Etruria.

And indeed, the same can be said of our society today. The origins are patriarchal, but the System is leading us more and more into the realm of matriarchy.

As for the ‘Romanisation’ of certain Etruscan gods or institutions, we should not pay too much attention to it, precisely because, after being Romanised, they ceased to be what they really were. What is more likely is that for example the figure of Rex was originally Etruscan patriarchal; in the Etruscan decline matriarchal, and after the Latin triumph, patriarchal again. As you say, it is confusing.

Other customs however weren’t Romanised, but on the contrary, ‘Etruscanised’ Rome, such as gladiator fights, feasting and orgies—unthinkable for a people as disciplined and martial as the Latins!

I would summarise by saying that both Etruria and Minos were almost certainly founded as patriarchates, and that they became matriarchates with the decline of those civilisations, which is when the Latins and Achaeans respectively burst onto the scene, putting things back in their place.

Here is an image that proves that there was Nordic blood among the Minoans. Pay attention, more than to the hair, to the profile of the individual: [linked here in the original thread—Ed].
 

Anonymous said:

NT, a question that has nothing to do with matriarchy. Why are the Vikings and Germanic people in general depicted as the men in the video you posted, and not platinum blond guys as they were pure Aryans?
 

NT replies:

Well simply because perfect Nordic whites are not plentiful, and even fewer Nordic white film actors. On the other hand, modern Scandinavians are also quite mixed.
 

Daniel the Argentinian said:

Nordic Thunder, I see that in the list you present at the top of the page, you show those you admire followed by those you hate or despise as opposed to the former. Examples: Sparta vs Athens; lord vs slave; strong and healthy vs weak and sick; training vs leisure; Spain vs the Moors; soldier vs hippie; fascism vs communism.

But you also place the Antichrist before Christ and Lucifer (Satan) before Jehovah, the Judeo-Christian God. Do you and your Nazi henchmen confess that you are Satanists? Clearer than water…!
 

NT replies:

First of all, apologies for taking so long to reply, but it’s just that the new comment notification service isn’t working too well.

Let’s see. Being anti-Christian is not the same as being Satanic, just as being anti-capitalist is not the same as being communist.

Lucifer wasno’t equivalent to Satan. He was reminiscent of ancient Aryan gods (such as Baldur, Abelius, Byelobog, Apollo) which the Church demonised to accuse of ‘heresy’ anyone who worshipped such gods. The ‘Antichrist’ was a way for the original Christians (who were Jews) to designate everything they hated, i.e. the strong pagan Aryan states fighting against the Jews (in this case, the Roman Empire). The Emperor was the Antichrist. The legionaries were the Antichrist. Roman art (98% of which they destroyed) was the Antichrist because it represented the glory and health of the pure human body.

I take this opportunity to remind people that Szandor LaVey, the ‘apostle’ of modern Satanism, was a Jew. Satanism sucks. It is a childish reaction against Christian dogmas. No, I don’t consider myself a Satanist, I think it’s stupid.

Without Christianity, Satanism makes no sense, just as without capitalism, communism makes no sense.

Greetings.
 

Daniel the Argentinian said:

[…] Returning to the subject of the Amazons who supposedly castrated men, and you accused me of that story, that I had invented it, well I found it in Wikipedia. Look it up in ‘Eunuch’ on Wikipedia. It says something like this: In ancient Greece, the Amazon warrior women were feared, formed a matriarchal society. According to some versions of the legend, they killed or mutilated the men who were no longer useful to them for reproduction.
 

NT replies:

As for the problem with Wikipedia, anyone can get into the articles to edit them. And it’s well known that feminists have an unhealthy fixation with male castration, which fits in nicely with making that up about the Amazons. The most the Amazons did was to go to a neighbouring tribe, where they lay with the men to get pregnant and, after returning to their kingdom, the male babies were killed.

On the other hand, I have never ceased to find this feminist fascination with the Amazons comical, because they were defeated a thousand times by the Greeks. Besides, the Amazon chiefs had the habit of falling in love with the Greek hero of the day (the Amazon queen fell in love with Hercules).

Cheers.
 

Anonymous said:

Very good article, but I would put ‘Puritanism’ in the list of ‘schizophrenias’: it is an anti-pagan, anti-Christian, anti-natural schizophrenia.
 

NT replied:

Anonymous, when I speak of Puritanism I am not referring to the modest attitude of the Puritan sects, but to a non-promiscuous attitude to sex, which is what once distinguished the Germanic (heathens) from the decadent Romans, or the original Romans from the Etruscans.

Cheers.
 

Aed Caomhnóir said:

NT, I’ve been reading you for a long time now, and truth be told your blog is one of the ‘where I go to die’ places to pick up good information in these days of miscegenation and treachery in the streets.

Categories
Eduardo Velasco Patriarchy

Tough replies

by Eduardo Velasco, 3

Sigfrido said:

I found the whole exposition about the controversy between matriarchy and patriarchy very interesting. Although I am not a Nazi, I quite agree with what Nordic Thunder said. The illiterate and pseudo-historical feminist had to jump in and start spouting her cretinous nonsense! Progressives and degenerates pathologise the patriarchal worldview, describing it as ‘psychopathic thinking’.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Aryan also feels compassion, but it is pure and healthy compassion for the woman, the child and the old man who are attacked by cowardly criminals.

What he doesn’t feel is compassion for the subhuman or the degenerate; for individuals like those who killed poor Sandra Palo or Marta del Castillo—unlike the progressive or the trashy Catholic, who betray the true heroic Christianity, who gloat in the defence of the criminal and the coward.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s interpolated note: As in the United States, in Spain the nationalist and racially conscious folk aren’t atheists but generally Christian. Following my metaphor of ‘The Wall’, it is not enough to cross it as the Germans of the last century did. It is now urgent to continue, after crossing it, to travel north to the cave under the great Weirwood tree to watch the real history of those who wrote the New Testament, and to watch also the first centuries of Christendom. This is a step that, unlike Eduardo Velasco, neither nationalist Spaniards nor nationalist Americans have dared to take!

______ 卐 ______

 
In The Iliad a touching scene is described between two magnificent exponents of the Aryan world (Phrygian-Trojan in one case, Achaean in the other). I refer to the scene in which Achilles pities the weeping and venerable Priam, returning to him the corpse of his son Hector.

By the way, Nordic Thunder: I found your book on Sparta very interesting. Do you plan to publish it in PDF, or better yet in paper? I know of a publisher who might be interested.

Best regards!
 

NT (Velasco) replies:

It is perfectly licit to feel compassion and protection towards our fellow human beings (without going any further, the dozens of whites who, every day, are raped, assaulted, murdered or robbed all over the West), while that false compassion towards degenerates, criminals or Woody Allens of life, plays against the laws of the preservation of the Species, because they are counter to natural selection and mean anti-eugenic behaviour.

Since I was a child I was deeply moved by that tremendous scene in which the noble old man Priam humbly begs the very murderer of his son to return his body to him so that he can give him a proper funeral. Achilles, who had killed hundreds of people as well as mistreated Hector’s corpse, feels his heart give way to the chilling tears of the grieving King, and fulfils his pleas with solicitude.

I’m glad you appreciated the book, colleague. I don’t know how I could convert it to PDF, but it would be interesting to do it and post it on the blog so that people could download and print it at their leisure. As for publishing it on paper, it would also be a very interesting option that I’d be perfectly willing to do. I’m all ears if you have any suggestions.[1]

Regards!
 

Sigfrido said:

As Stoddard said, the problem is that the criminal, the subhuman, multiplies. The dysgenic measures of the system make this aberration possible.

Since I mentioned the case of Marta del Castillo, the latest news says that the main suspect raped her and then killed her. I would beat the shit out of those bastards, and then put them on a military plane and drop them without a parachute over the Atlantic! Of course, the progressive scumbags will continue to defend the ‘human’ nature of these vermin.
 

NT replies:

Stoddard and so many other American, English and German eugenicists warned us that the lower classes (we are talking about a biological criterion, not an economic one, although they are related to a certain extent) are less intelligent, less healthy, less pure and with fewer resources reproduce faster than the upper classes who have a precious genetic inheritance to pass on. This is precisely due to the compassion translated into aid for the dregs of society (immigrants, pseudo-gypsies) while the social nucleus that has built these advantages doesn’t benefit from them. It is taken for granted that they must make a living without any help from this sinister anti-State.

What makes me laugh at these compassionate-Pharisee progressives is that if it was their little girl who had been outraged by a sick pig, they would be the first to stand at the front row of the trial with a muzzle on, foaming at the mouth and screaming for ‘DEATH PENALTY’.
 

Sigfrido said:

Eugenicists like Stoddard, Lundborg, Günther, etc., were right. The subsidies to the trash (who can’t even be described as poor, since they are lumpen) facilitate the multiplication of the biological waste, while on the other hand, the high taxes and the polluting progressive ideas make the most valuable not breed as they should.

The other day I heard that filthy, deformed, pro-green spawn, María Antonia Iglesias, viciously attacked those who demanded life imprisonment for the canis in Seville who killed Marta. She said that asking for that is ‘inhuman’. I am disgusted by these bitches who pity subhuman bipedal vermin!

I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to participate in Adecaf’s La Comunidad del Diálogo. It is a forum set up by some Catalan NRs. I disagree quite a lot with their NR ideas but they are good people, well-educated and there are also others of different ideologies, including Nazis. It’s the only real forum on the net, and nobody gets banned.
 

Arbmon said:

Here’s a link to a page of a chick who thinks matriarchy is cool. Ha ha. It shows the ultimate matriarchal society, where they live like primitives. [link]
 

NT replies:

There’s a comment posted before mine on the page you just put up. Don’t miss it:

I can’t believe it! Now I see why matriarchy never prospered. In those societies they are all a bunch of mediocrities and conformists. Only pleasures and promiscuities reign; war, ambition, sacrifice, honour, hardening and heroism are unknown. Men are cowards, very happy to be subordinates and ignore the dignity of responsibility, pampered weaklings. That’s how things would be if women ruled: a happy but rotten world.

 
Suevo said:

What’s your opinion of the Basque matriarchy?
 

NT replies:

Well, the Basque matriarchy thing is relative, because the Basques already have enough miscegenation, but they were originally a pre-Indo-European people who were indeed matriarchal. The man went to live with the woman after marriage.

I think that these sinister matriarchal-lunar reminiscences have a lot to do with modern Basque terrorism. Those pre-Indo-European ETAs are a bunch of obsessed and repressed neurotics, and the Basque problem is not a political issue, it is a racial issue.

In the Basque Country, we often have the best and the worst of the country. On the one hand, non-Aryan vestiges such as pathetic separatism and its ugly language, and on the other hand we have brave Basques who are worth their weight in gold, such as Blas de Lezo (18th century) or Josué Estébanez (the comrade who defended himself against 60 thugs in the Madrid metro).

Matriarchy is a cancer that is being revived in this era of pacifism and miscegenation. Still, it is not solved by simply eradicating it but by going to its cause, which is the mixing of blood. When a racial policy of selection makes the blood of the Aryan invaders predominate again, matriarchy will be a thing of the past.
 

Anonymous said:

An example of an Indigenous tribe here [Argentina and Chile] could be the Mapuche people. They are matriarchal and the Spanish and then the Criollos didn’t try to exterminate them. They are still here. I think that with the looks that they mostly tend to give to those who are not of their ethnicity, they give you the evil eye. The truth is that they are nothing like the European matriarchies, the Mapuches were warriors and in fact ‘mapuchized’ many other tribes that were patriarchal. […]
 

NT replies:

Well, you have simply placed a matriarchal order above no order. I place patriarchal order above matriarchal order. Both the Mapuche and the Indian tribes of the Southern Cone (and the whole of the Americas) were unevolved peoples and far inferior to the European invaders. Let’s look at examples of the matriarchy you describe [not quoted in this translation of that Spanish thread—Ed.].

I don’t give a damn about those villages. I address myself to peoples of White Race and aggressive, expansive, solar and heroic culture where courage, the Army and triumphant death are the cornerstones of existence. No wonder patriarchy prevails over matriarchy through military conquest with guns and torches in hand, while matriarchy prevails over patriarchy through miscegenation and decadence.

Fortunately, the harshness of times to come will bring about a revival of the Aryan Patriarchy.

____________

[1] Velasco’s book has been published. See the image at the top of this post. You can read our Spanish-English translation of that book here.—Ed.