The previous entry, “4 Words Explained!,” is fundamental. Together with the rephrased quotes from Francis Parker Yockey that appear in a post linked to the featured article, it reflects what it means to “transvalue all values.” These words are a Nietzschean formula that indicates the only path to saving the Aryan from the extinction it suffers throughout the West.
It is very illuminating to compare our POV with that of the granddaddy of the American racial right. In his recent article, Jared Taylor has realised that his nation’s project has failed. In fact, his article is titled “The American Experiment Has Failed (Adapted from remarks given at the American Renaissance conference, Nov. 15, 2025).” Taylor simply describes the bare facts of why the US has failed. But he ignores the aetiology of white decline:
I cannot foresee the political will to persuade or force 100 million citizens to bugger off. It wouldn’t be practical and in some cases I would argue it wouldn’t be moral. American Indians: where are they supposed to go? And we brought blacks here against their will.
This is Christian ethics. A Christian, Nick Fuentes, was once asked what book he would recommend. Since Nick isn’t a scholar he didn’t know what to say. I would say that the most important books to have come from the pen of an American are The Turner Diaries (fiction) and Who We Are (nonfiction): both by William Pierce. Let’s read another passage from Taylor, taken from his most recent lecture at AmRen:
I envy the simple choice our ancestors had: Kill the enemy or die trying. If the choice were that simple, every man in this room would do his duty, cheerfully.
Why is it that the racial right, unlike our ancestors—and unlike the Russians who are killing lots of Ukrainians right now!—no longer wants to kill the enemy?
Taylor’s article, originally published in AmRen, has been reposted on The Unz Review. As of this writing, I don’t see a single comment in the discussion threads of either forum reminding visitors of Pierce’s great novel, which in my opinion is the only way for white Americans to reclaim their territory: by exterminating all non-whites who refused to leave.
The problem with Taylor’s piece is that it describes the problem but doesn’t offer a deep analysis of why Aryans in general, and white Americans in particular, lost their Lebenskraft. Revilo Oliver said that if a race loses its thirst for life, that thirst can never be recovered; and all indications are that since 1945, whites have lost it around the world. I don’t know if I should be as pessimistic as Oliver because, unlike him, I believe that the energy devolution that will occur this century, and at the beginning of the next, will open one last window of opportunity for Aryans to redeem themselves from their ethnosuicidal sins.
Last month I was posting videos about how children’s stories had a completely different origin from the later fairy tales, and I gave the example of Snow White and Hansel and Gretel (in the original stories they were infanticidal mothers, not stepmothers: an important topic of my writings on child abuse at home). Now I’d like to talk about Jack and the Beanstalk.
The key symbol is the harp or the story to lull the white man to sleep (the rulers have offered their subjects a false story or worldview). But let’s take it one step at a time.
If my predictions are correct, Mother Nature (stealing the harp) will help the Jack of this century to seize the riches of the entire Jewish oligarchy and traitorous whites. In a video titled The Crash Course, originally published in October 2008, Chris Martenson, based on neo-Malthusian concepts, tries to explain energy devolution. A couple of years ago, Martenson developed these concepts into a book that can be purchased on Amazon.
The basic reason why the Aryan has lost his Lebenskraft (life force) is due to the incredible comfort of living, since the 1950s, in an environment of false abundance (peak oil), coupled with the Christian ethics that even atheists suffer from, and the current story or anti-Nazi “harp” to lull the white man to sleep.
Very well. Since oil will become increasingly scarce, if what the neo-Malthusians say is true, that means billions of humans will die unnatural deaths. At any event, all of them were born because of capitalist greed and the Christian ethics whose ideal is to help every coloured child. Nature will punish this white man’s sin of pride by exterminating the vast majority of humans, whom we here call “Neanderthals.”
Something of this kind happened in the Middle Ages. The Black Death of the 14th century was a devastating bubonic plague pandemic that swept through Eurasia and North Africa, reaching its peak between 1347 and 1353. It is estimated to have caused the death of between 80 and 200 million people, wiping out between 30 and 60 per cent of the European population.
This new plague, now in the form of an energy devolution, will be our great window of opportunity. Well, I won’t be around when billions die, but adding something of my own making to the video’s metaphor, there’s a difference between the harp and playing it.
The harp—billions dead in a century that will dwarf the Black Death of the 14th century—requires a musician. And that musician is the Aryan of the future, an SS Nazi redivivus. Playing the harp means repudiating Christian ethics, which is nothing more than stupidly following the commandments that some 1st-century Jews wrote for Gentile consumption, the so-called New Testament.
So if Nature itself will provide us with the harp that will kill billions, we also have to do our part and learn how to play it: kill the remaining non-whites (see, for example, what happened to all the Chinese by the end of The Turner’s Diaries).
This is something that Jared Taylor and his readers will never dare to say: we must sacrifice the religion of our parents, which is nothing more than a Jewish psyop so that the Aryan will immolate himself.
In this video uploaded today, Megyn Kelly appears accompanied by Tucker Carlson at a public event to talk about his decision to interview Nick Fuentes.
Tucker proves the whole point of this blogsite, The West’s Darkest Hour! He used the term “Christian ethics” to explain why he isn’t an anti-Semite; said that a Jew, Paul the Apostle is “my personal hero” and regarding neochristianity he added: “That’s where the idea of human rights comes from”!
He also explains that when such Xtian ethics are removed from the Aryan collective unconscious, exterminationism arises (which he calls “genocide”).
If we see Christianity and the French Revolution’s human rights as two sides of the same axiological coin, let us venture to say that the perfect symbol of our counter-revolution would be for thousands of blonde beasts starting to wear T-shirts emblazoned with Himmler’s face while burning churches, crucifying all those who tried to destroy their race and wiping their asses with the remains of the pages of the now destroyed Bibles all over the West, but especially in the US. And the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which symbolises the historic inauguration of Neo-Christianity, must be razed to the ground as well.
If I were to publish it as a printed book, I would use the final scene of Stanley Kubrick’s Spartacus as its cover: the Appian Way, a Roman road used as a military supply route for the conquest of southern Italy and to improve communications. As Tom Holland says, crucifying the rebels in this way was a billboard to let people know what happens to those who raise their hand against the empire.
Following what I said in my previous post about The Turner Diaries and what Uncle Adolf allowed H & H to perpetrate—a relative power in contrast to the absolute power over earthlings of Hugo Drake in his exterminationist ship—, obviously in a realist revolution we would never have the powers of someone like the fictional Drake. Therefore, we have no choice but scare the degenerate whites like in Pierce’s Day of the Rope.
That, I insist, doesn’t mean we’re unnecessarily cruel. I would crucify the child psychiatrists, yes: but not for unnecessary cruelty. I would do it because only with tremendous power, like that of the “bad guy” in the 007 movie, would it be possible to exterminate in the cleanest way possible, practically without the Neanderthals suffering.
All this stuff about the Appian Way or the Day of the Rope is nothing more than lack of absolute technological power. Lacking it, we revolutionaries have to scare the shit out of the degenerate whites (and non-whites, obviously). Only fear, the age of terror that always follows a bloody Revolution, does the psyop to dominate the rabble. Remember Voltaire’s letter to the Marquis de Condorcet: “Il y a une autre canaille à laquelle on sacrifie tout, et cette canaille est le peuple.”
All this is very sad, because I don’t want those I wish to exterminate to suffer unnecessarily. But white people today are like spoiled children, and the difference between fiction, like that James Bond movie with Roger Moore, and the sordid real world is precisely that, lacking power, we have to put on a little show to, as I tell myself in my silent soliloquies, asustar a los venaditos (scare the little deer); that is, the naive/spoiled humans.
The Organization then established certain patterns in Detroit which were soon followed elsewhere. All captured White troops, as soon as they had laid down their weapons, were offered a chance to fight with the Organization against the System. Those who immediately volunteered were taken aside for preliminary screening and then sent to camps for indoctrination and special training. The others were machine-gunned on the spot, without further ado.
The same degree of ruthlessness was used in dealing with the White civilian population. When the Organization’s cadres moved into the White strongholds in the Detroit suburbs, the first thing they found it necessary to do was to liquidate most of the local White leaders, in order to establish the unquestioned authority of the Organization. There was no time or patience for frying to reason with shortsighted Whites who insisted that they weren’t “racists” or “revolutionaries” and didn’t need the help of any “outside agitators” in dealing with their problems, or who had some other conservative or parochial fixation.
The Whites of Detroit and the other new enclaves were organized more along the lines described by Earl Turner for Baltimore than for California, but even more rapidly and roughly. In most areas of the country there was no opportunity for an orderly, large-scale separation of non-Whites, as in California, and consequently a bloody race war raged for months, taking a terrible toll of those Whites who were not in one of the Organization’s tightly controlled, all-White enclaves.
Food became critically scarce everywhere during the winter… The Blacks lapsed into cannibalism, just as they had in California, while hundreds of thousands of starving Whites, who earlier had ignored the Organization’s call for a rising against the System, began appearing at the borders of the various liberated zones begging for food. The Organization was only able to feed the White populations already under its control by imposing the severest rationing, and it was necessary to turn many of the latecomers away.
Those who were admitted—and that meant only children, women of childbearing age, and able-bodied men willing to fight in the Organization’s ranks—were subjected to much more severe racial screening than had been used to separate Whites from non-Whites in California. It was no longer sufficient to be merely White; in order to eat one had to be judged the bearer of especially valuable genes.
In Detroit the practice was first established (and it was later adopted elsewhere) of providing any able-bodied White male who sought admittance to the Organization’s enclave with or hot meal and a bayonet or other edged weapon. His forehead was then marked with an indelible dye, and he was turned out and could be readmitted permanently only by bringing back the head of a freshly killed Black or other non-White. This practice assured that precious food would not be wasted on those who would not or could not add to the Organization’s fighting strength, but it took a terrible toll of the weaker and more decadent White elements.
Tens of millions perished… and the total White population of the country reached a low point of approximately 50 million by August of that year. […]
As the war of extermination wore on, millions of soft, city-bred, brainwashed Whites gradually began regaining their manhood. The rest died. […]
Since then he has been issuing idiotic proclamations about “restoring the Constitution,” stamping out “communism and pornography,” and holding new elections to “re-establish the republican form of government intended by the Founding Fathers,” whatever that means.
And he has denounced our radical measures in the south as “communism.” He is appalled that we didn’t hold some sort of public referendum before expelling the non-Whites and that we didn’t give individual trials to the Jews and race-criminals we dealt with summarily.
Doesn’t the old fool understand that the American people voted themselves into the mess they’re in now? Doesn’t he understand that the Jews have taken over the country fair and square, according to the Constitution? Doesn’t he understand that the common people have already had their fling at self-government, and they blew it?
Where does he think new elections can possibly lead now, with this generation of TV-conditioned voters, except right back into the same Jewish pigsty? And how does he think we could have solved our problems down here, except by the radical measures we used?
Doesn’t Harding understand that the chaos in his area will continue to grow worse until he identifies the categories of people responsible for that chaos and deals with them categorically—that it is physically impossible, considering the relative numbers involved, for him to deal with the Jews, the Blacks, the Chicanos, and the other troublesome elements on an individual basis?
Apparently not, because the idiot is still making appeals to “responsible” Black leaders and to “patriotic” Jews to help him restore order. Harding, like conservatives in general, can’t bring himself to do what must be done, because it would mean punishing the “innocent” along with the “guilty,” the “good” Negroes and the “loyal” Jews along with the rest—as if those terms had any meaning in the present context. And so, afraid of treating individuals “unjustly,” he is floundering around helplessly while everything goes to hell and the civilians in his area die like flies from starvation. Generals should be made of sterner stuff. […]
We are laying the foundations here for the new social order which will serve our race for the next thousand years.
And to be able to live and work in a sane, healthy, White man’s world—that is something which is beyond valuation for me. These last few weeks have been wondertul. It is terribly depressing to think of leaving this White oasis and plunging once again into that cesspool of mongrels and Blacks and Jews and sick, twisted White liberals out there. [pages 173-175]
______ 卐 ______
Then, after they learned to fear us, they were all too eager to please us. But they weren’t really interested in the rights and wrongs of the struggle; they couldn’t be bothered with soul-searching and long-range considerations. Their attitude was: “Just tell us what we’re supposed to believe, and we’ll believe it.” They just wanted to be safe and comfortable again as soon as possible. And they weren’t being cynical; they weren’t jaded sophisticates, but ordinary people.
The fact is that the ordinary people are not really much less culpable than the not-so-ordinary people, than the pillars of the System. Take the political police, as an example. Most of them— the White ones—are not especially evil men. They serve evil masters, but they rationalize what they do; they justify it to themselves, some in patriotic terms (“protecting our free and democratic way of life”) and some in religious or ideological terms (“upholding Christian ideals of equality and justice”). One can call them hypocrites—one can point out that they deliberately avoid thinking about anything which might call into question the validity of the shallow catch-phrases with which they justify themselves—but is not everyone who has tolerated the System also a hypocrite, whether he actively supported it or not? Is not everyone who mindlessly parrots the same catch-phrases, refusing to examine their implications and contradictions, whether he uses them as justifications for his deeds or not, also to be blamed?
I cannot think of any segment of White society, from the Maryland rednecks and their families whose radioactive bodies we bulldozed into a huge pit a few days ago to the university professors we strung up in Los Angeles last July, which can truly claim that it did not deserve what happened to it. […]
No, talk of “innocents” has no meaning. We must look at our situation collectively, in a race-wide sense. We must understand that our race is like a cancer patient undergoing drastic surgery in order to save his life. There is no sense in asking whether the tissue being cut out now is “innocent” or not. That is no more reasonable than trying to distinguish the “good” Jews from the bad ones—or, as some of our thicker-skulled “good ol’ boys” still insist on trying, separating the “good niggers” from the rest of their race.
The fact is that we are all responsible, as individuals, for the morals and the behavior of our race as a whole. There is no evading that responsibility, in the long run, any more for the members of our own race than for those of other races, and each of us individually must be prepared to be called to account for that responsibility at any time. In these days many are being called. [pages 196-198]
To answer your question regarding your latest post, I agree with you in that I too think (lawful? as if that would be allowed!) secession is not enough, and would be better achieved itself through violent aggressive revolution.
There are too many enemies otherwise, and they cannot be left alive, as with their grasp on modern technology, and, as the quotation of extermination says, in paraphrase, what if 10, or 10,000 aren’t enough, and you need to eliminate nigh on 10 billion. One can only do that through long-term—perhaps intergenerational—Turner Diaries-style insurgency. Secession feels a little like these ‘prepper’ hippies who retire to the woods in cabins and think that is enough to save them from civilisation’s degradation, with the problem unsolved all about, just over their horizon, or indeed Covington’s effective ‘Murka II’, where, without ideological fanaticism and stringent adherence to iron rule patriarchal norms, it slips back into just another (feminist) democracy.
As you commented on the final author saying—revolution being a state of mind, I think I go with the former commenters (I can’t remember if it was originally Greg Johnson, Larry Auster, or Alex Linder) that the fanatic attitude of hatred as much as the mythological ideals of what our race was and should be thinking of Cro-Magnon point for a historical example—coupled to the 4-words is enough for me to feel there is already revolution, even if not among many people; even if they are simply waiting in frustration for an opportunity.
Personally, I find the (second half of the) 14-words harder to fight for, almost a given to me, and harder to feel passion over (perhaps it’s because I have a long-term partner, so am in some sense complacent, small-minded or selfish over that). But to answer O’Meara’s point then, it’s not about inheriting the Leviathan as much as de-fanging and de-clawing it permanently, and tossing the remains into that ‘ashpit of history’, so nothing like our current situation can ever arise again, a real scorched earth tactic psychologically, and only then could I realistically think descendants could plan for a peaceful pure Aryan society in aftermath, having that opportunity awarded automatically to then, as the only survivors, left then to expand across the globe in further war, and wipe out remaining enclaves of enemies. At the moment, there’s too much war in my mind to think of a simple dislocation.
I hope this gives my basic thoughts reflecting on your latest piece.
Even on that same day, 23 September 2009, I read the Prozium article that Johnson reposted on TOQ Online, “Myths, Facts, Self-Interest”, from which I quote the following passages:
Americans are not analytical / empirical / objective. I have mentioned elsewhere that Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind series [LaHaye was a Christian fundamentalist —Ed.] has sold 65 million copies. Even within academia, the progressive mythos dominates entire disciplines, especially in the culture sensitive humanities. I just can’t see an appeal to science winning out (without substantial culture wind behind it); look what happened to James Watson (with all his prestige) when he stepped across the line of political correctness. Geneticists bend over backwards to avoid using the word “race” in lieu of Watson’s fall from grace. Most try to avoid it altogether (smart career move there). They bend to popular opinion and the progressive party line. Remember all that talk about how the Human Genome Project had discredited racialism? That and God talk has done wonders for Francis Collins’ career.
What can be said for self-interest? In our current political environment, it reinforces the LDC [Liberal-Democratic Capitalist] system. The career-minded, family-minded selfish individual prefers to go along with the flow. He is content to live in his whitebread suburb, shop at the Big Box stores for plasma televisions, pull the (R) lever at the ballot box in November. The first rule of conservative politics: Number One always comes first, second, and last. If such an individual is feeling really brave, he might go teabagging or do something really radical like visit a paleo website.
Just think about it: the tide of self-interest against us is so strong that White Nationalists have to cheer for a national catastrophe like a Second Great Depression, Hurricane Katrina or Kunstler’s Long Emergency to disrupt the status quo. Self-interest will come into play whenever our success appears plausible (think of the NSDAP) or catastrophic circumstances intervene. That’s when the opportunists and conservatives will flock into our ranks.
Looking at our situation objectively, even with the eye of an analytical empiricist (a bent of mind I share with GuessedWorker), what is needed right now (in the embryonic stage) is fanaticism[emphasis added by Ed.]. There are few incentives to join our movement. Racially conscious Whites are the most despised minority in America. I’m willing to wager we are hated even more than the atheists.
We need myths that are powerful enough to move a vanguard beyond their own rational self-interest. An alluring vision is needed comparable to the colorblind utopia that animates the left. It has to be expressed in art, literature, music and film; vehicles more accessible to the masses than academic texts… This is a task for artists, not intellectuals.
Regarding what Benjamin asked today (“Do you think part of this catastrophic regression has been because of the shift away from keeping personal libraries?”), I don’t think so because Prozium apparently reads a lot of books. “Prozium” was his old pen name. His real name is Brad Griffin, and since then he has been blogging on Occidental Dissent under another pen name, Hunter Wallace.
The point is: sixteen years ago Prozium was a self-proclaimed white nationalist and his blog’s subtitle, if I remember correctly, was “Western racial and cultural preservation”. Compare that to Occidental Dissent’s subtitle today: “Nationalism, populism, reaction”. What caused the shift to a reactionary mindset?
The European image that Occidental Dissent flaunted when that webzine defined itself as a “white nationalist” site.
For sixteen years I have followed the blogging career of Prozium, now known as Hunter Wallace in racialist forums. When he had bitter arguments with white nationalists, he repudiated the term “white nationalism” to define his position. As he confessed at the time, he became a “Southern Nationalist”. Years later, he decided that the best term to define his ideology was “Christian Nationalist”.
So, to answer Benjamin, I would say that it is not a large personal library that makes one wise (this man claims to have read hundreds of books). When one finds oneself in the middle of the psychological Rubicon, with water up to one’s knees, a dilemma arises: either one continues to cross the river to the other side, National Socialism (see above where Prozium himself mentioned the NSDAP), or one retreats back to the lands of Normieland (remember that on one occasion, after Prozium / Wallace took steps back, he called himself a “neo-normie”).
As I mentioned in my previous post about Greg Johnson and the vanguardist literature he used to publish in TOQ Online, the same can be said about Prozium / Wallace / Griffin: the pull that Normieland exerts on the minds of American racialists is so powerful that they rarely cross the river. To put it in a nutshell, the exterminationism on the other side scares the hell out of them!
Likewise, Andrew Anglin originally used a lot of Nazi paraphernalia on his site, The Daily Stormer. Then he Christianised his site and has been using Christian symbols. No more love for Uncle Adolf… On this side of the Atlantic, only racists like William Pierce (1933-2002) crossed the river to the extent of embracing exterminationism. So I’m glad, Benjamin, that you recommended Pierce’s book, Who We Are, to your friend. That book should be available in print! (as our anthologies were available before Lulu Press deplatformed us).
If we remember that Greg Johnson used to deliver pious homilies in his church in San Francisco as late as 2010, and that Griffin and Anglin remain openly Christian, it is clear why the magnet of Normieland moved them to retrace their steps as they were about to cross the Rubicon.
Hatnote. Below I reproduce the foreword to my new anthology which, although ideally I would have the funds to publish it as a printed book, will only be available as a PDF for the time being.
The foreword includes some passages I quoted on Saturday about a case Jung studied, but what the foreword omits is that most of the new PDF consists of edited content from another PDF, On Exterminationism, which I will delete when the new one is finished and published under another title, Neanderthal Extermination.
As I confessed recently, Vendramini’s book has changed my worldview so much that after finishing reviewing the PDF I will have to write a new featured post, which until now has been the article entitled ‘The Wall’.
The cover of Neanderthal Extermination.
Foreword
From the mid-1970s onwards, my teenage life was destroyed not only by my parents’ abuse, but also by a psychiatrist they hired to finish me off.
Discovering an area of research that significantly improves my view of the world has only happened to me occasionally. In 1983, for example, I discovered an interview with Theodore Lidz in a bookshop that made me realise that not all psychiatrists were depraved individuals who sided with abusive parents in conflict with their children. When talking about possessive mothers who came to his office and co-dependent fathers who fell into a state of folie à deux with them, Lidz seemed to portray the dynamics of my family as if he had lived with us! And unlike the vast majority of his colleagues, Lidz and other professionals knew that such parents can drive their children mad. My discovery of that book marked the beginning of my familiarisation with the trauma model in the decades that followed. Unlike the pseudo-scientific model of orthodox psychiatrists, I eventually came to understand my parents’ behaviour.
But the damage to my mind due to abuse at home was already done, and I was unable to pursue a career, instead becoming alienated in cults and pseudosciences of the paranormal. The next milestone in my intellectual life came in 1990, when I began reading the sceptics of parapsychology, thanks to the group led by Paul Kurtz whom I had met at the end of the previous year at some lectures they gave in Mexico City. Thanks to their work I realised that parapsychology was also a pseudoscience.
In 2002, I discovered the books of Swiss psychologist Alice Miller: the first writer to take the side of the abused child one hundred per cent, thanks to whom I was able to heal my still wounded heart. But it was not until late 2008 that I discovered, thanks to the internet, that millions of Muslims were migrating to Europe, replacing the native population. I became so obsessed with the subject—which, unlike the others, could only be discussed on the internet—that the following year I came across articles in The Occidental Quarterly Online that revolutionised my worldview. It was only thanks to this latest discovery that I began a career as a blogger with my The West’s Darkest Hour, to which I eventually gave an anti-Christian slant: insofar as ideas about racial egalitarianism and humane universalism have a Christian aetiology, regardless of Jewish subversion in the media.
It was precisely because of this neo-Nietzscheanism that, at Christmas 2018, my next intellectual milestone was to realise that the historicity of Jesus had been seriously questioned. In my spiritual odyssey I owe this new discovery to Richard Carrier’s work on the New Testament. For someone who sixty years earlier had been baptised by the famous Jesuit Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, a friend of my very Catholic parents, Carrier’s discovery was a real milestone as the Christian doctrine of eternal damnation had virtually driven me mad in my teens and twenties.
Thus, at the ripe old age of sixty-seven, I never imagined that another author could further improve my worldview. But the miracle happened in August 2025, the month in which I am writing this prologue. I am referring to Danny Vendramini’s Them and Us.
But why was a book that attempts to revolutionise our view of the interaction between Neanderthals and our distant ancestors also a milestone? To answer that, I would have to go back once again to the fateful 1970s. It was in the same decade that my parents murdered my soul that I coined the phrase ‘the extermination of the Neanderthals’. But to understand it, I would have to go back even further, to the 1960s.
As I recount in a passage from my autobiographical trilogy, when I was a small child, going with my family to downtown Mexico City, I was horrified by the people I saw there. Compared to the beautiful Colonia Del Valle where we lived, the city centre was a horrible place, and the people I saw there seemed horrible to my eyes. So much so that years later, when I was eleven, I once told my younger siblings (I am the eldest) that I wanted to machine-gun ’em all.
It was those exterminationist desires that, in the following decade, when my parents began to mistreat me, spawned the tremendous call to exterminate Neanderthals. I cannot pinpoint the exact year when I came up with that phrase, but if we fast forward fifty years later I discovered an eloquent book that talks about how Neanderthals were, in fact, exterminated! Although a few years earlier I had heard, albeit only in passing, that Cro-Magnons had eliminated the Neanderthals, Vendramini’s book paints a picture of Cro-Magnons in such a way that their psychology seemed like a super-accurate X-ray of my old exterminationist passion.
The point is that in the 1970s I had never heard that Cro-Magnons had exterminated Neanderthals, nor in the 1980s, 1990s or the first decade of the new century. If Vendramini and others are right, how could I have sensed it? Yes: it could have been a mere coincidence. Another possibility is that Carl Jung is right. In Man and His Symbols, he said:
The archetype in dream symbolism
By “history” I do not mean the fact that the mind builds itself up by conscious reference to the past through language and other cultural traditions. I am referring to the biological, prehistoric, and unconscious development of the mind in archaic man, whose psyche was still close to that of the animal… My views about the “archaic remnants,” which I call “archetypes” or “primordial images,” have been constantly criticized by people who lack a sufficient knowledge of the psychology of dreams and of mythology.
The Swiss psychologist illustrated this with a case that impressed me:
A very important case came to me from a man who was himself a psychiatrist. One day he brought me a handwritten booklet he had received as a Christmas present from his 10-year-old daughter. It contained a whole series of dreams she had had when she was eight. They made up the weirdest series of dreams that I have ever seen, and I could well understand why the father was more than just puzzled by them. Though childlike, they were uncanny, and they contained images whose origin was wholly incomprehensible to the father. Here are the relevant motifs from the dreams.
I’ll just mention a couple of them, and Jung’s brief interpretation that describes what we call the collective unconscious:
A drop of water is seen, as it appears when looked at through a microscope. The girl sees that the drop is full of tree branches. This portrays the origin of the world.
A small mouse is penetrated by worms, snakes, fishes, and human beings. Thus the mouse becomes human. This portrays the four stages of the origin of mankind…
Precisely a mouse-like creature that survived the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was our remote ancestor. Unfortunately, something happened to the little girl:
The father was convinced that the dreams were authentic, and I have no reason to doubt it. I knew the little girl myself, but this was before she gave her dreams to her father, so that I had no chance to ask her about them. She lived abroad and died of an infectious disease about a year after that Christmas.
If the Cro-Magnons wiped out the Neanderthals—in addition to Vendramini, this is a common opinion among many other scholars—the study of archaic remnants could shed light on my desire to ‘exterminate the Neanderthals’; and why it took hold of my psyche, from my adolescence, until it became a true personal religion. Although in his book Vendramini mentions Jung’s collective unconscious in passing, he attempted to give it a scientific basis with the theory of teems: that archaic remnants or primordial images could be hidden in our ancestral DNA. The big question is, could the genocidal passion that sprang from the depths of my being have been unleashed when I found myself in an extreme situation?
As for why Vendramini’s work has not been addressed in academia, it has to do with the fact that the Establishment is composed of those I call hyper-Christian atheists, in the sense that they have taken not only racial egalitarianism and catholic universalism as dogma, but also love for all wingless bipeds as the new faith of secular man. This axiological phenomenon, which is nothing more than folie en masse, began with the fateful defeat of Adolf Hitler’s Germany in 1945. The post-1945 System simply ignores any data that might inspire whites to ethnically cleanse the West of non-white invaders. For example, the neochristians who have uploaded videos purporting to refute Vendramini have resorted to gross distortions, straw men and even lies. As I said at the end of my article ‘Youtubers’: ‘Only when academia returns to the hands of scholars who don’t hate the white man—and that would only happen after a revolution—can Vendramini’s work be valued on its own merits’ [footnote].
______ 卐 ______
This book is composed of three sections. The first section quotes key passages from Vendramini’s book.
The second section collects entries from my blog, including repeated quotes from William Pierce’s The Turner Diaries, culminating in my brief exterminationist manifesto.
The third section complements the embryonic precepts of my new religion with more edited entries from The West’s Darkest Hour, and the appendix demonstrates that the ancient Indo-Aryans would share this exterminationist passion when the dark age arrived.
The modern man’s body beautification didn’t end with Cro-Magnon: it is a task that continued throughout later prehistory. In some passages from the final chapters of Them and Us, we read:
______ 卐 ______
The journal, Evolution and Human Behavior recently published a study by Canadian anthropologist Peter Frost, which claimed the genetic mutation in the hair colour gene that resulted in blonde hair occurred about 11,000 years ago and quickly spread through sexual selection. Researchers at Copenhagen University have identified the single point mutation in the OCA2 gene that is responsible for all the blue-eyed people alive today. They calculated the mutation happened between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago in Europe.
This genetic data supports NP theory’s argument that by 10,000 years ago, artificial selection and sexual selection of the nascent human phenotype was in full swing. […]
For example, so thoroughly had the genes for hairiness been expunged, rendered inoperative (turned into what are called pseudogenes) or silenced (which means they are no longer expressed) that today, anyone born with full body hair is considered a medical curiosity. Since records began in the Middle Ages, only about 34 cases of the condition, called congenital generalised hypertrichosis, have been described in the medical literature.
Because of its importance in differentiating the warring species, the Cro-Magnon human face received the full makeover. Faces became more symmetrical. Skin became wrinkle-free, clear and unblemished. The eye whites really were white, the lips fuller and the nose (petite by primate standards) protruded conspicuously from the face. Gone were the two forward-projecting gaping nostrils of the primate nose. Gone was the leathery skin. And gone too was the coating of protective body hair, even in hot tropical regions. Beauty became the prevailing guide to mate selection, and meant the opposite of what Neanderthals looked like.
Further accentuating the divide were mutational alleles for novel hair and eye colours. Amongst some Northern European groups the new lighter colours became highly-prized. From a distance nothing stamped a person one of us better than blue eyes and a coiffure of blonde, brunette or red hair, especially if it was well-groomed and decorated—something the others never did.
The 35,000-year-long process of genetic pruning was so comprehensive that it rendered Cro-Magnons almost unrecognisable from their former selves. They were now much smarter, more artistic, more creative… more human. Behaviourally though, it was a different story. There was still one step to go—one final transition before you’d let one of these Neolithic men date your daughter or sit down with you to discuss the economic meltdown over a decaf cappuccino. The last challenge was to curb—or at least control— hyper-aggression in young males. […]
Let ’s be logical about this
Hyper-aggression is derived from the emotional centres of the ‘reptilian brain.’ This means that Cro-Magnon fixed action patterns would have been inflexible, emotional responses. The non-cognitive nature of these behavioural responses is reflected today in psychological attitudes like racism, colourism, xenophobia, ethnocentrism, chauvinism, pack rape mentality, vigilantism, hooliganism and vandalism. For the most part, these are not specific behaviours. They are emotional states and psychological mindsets that, under certain circumstances, may predispose violent behaviour such as lynching, gang rapes and ethnic cleansing. Once they are triggered, these behaviours are normally resistant to cognitive constraint. […]
But despite the glacially slow progress, by 1790 the Declaration of the Rights of Man of the French Revolution was empowered in a genuine attempt to curb the devastation of barbarism, anarchy and mob rule.
A motley collection of yetis, abominable snowmen and sasquatch from popular culture and mythology, all bear a striking similarity to Neanderthal physical characteristics.
The theory argues that all the great empires of antiquity—Phoenician, Persian, Greek, Roman, Mongol, Egyptian, Byzantine, Mogul and Aztec—engaged in expansionist re-enactments of the first great conquistadorial campaign by Cro-Magnons against the Neanderthals. Their strategies and techniques have uncannily mimicked Cro-Magnon tactics—classifying the alien enemy as inferior and sub-human; killing the men and raping the women; subjugating, pillaging and enslaving; occupying enemy lands; and showing no mercy. The same innate Neanderthal responses that find expression in ethnic cleansings and internecine conflicts have also been intuitively applied by dictators and unscrupulous politicians.
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s note: our gospel or good news
The trauma of Neanderthal predation and Cro-Magnon hyper-aggression shaped our psyches. This is such a significant revelation that I will need to modify the featured post of this site. For the priest of the sacred words the good news is that, under the right circumstances, the desire for extermination can be triggered today as Vendramini himself, a neochristian from our POV, acknowledges.
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
“We have to fight to secure the existence and expansion of our race and of our people; to enable them to nourish their children and to preserve the purity of their blood; to secure the freedom of our Fatherland”.
—Hitler
Unlike the movies, the drama did not end with the extermination of the prehistoric Neanderthals. The rest of the hairy hominids that didn’t undergo the genetic changes that led to the ‘naked ape’ had to be exterminated.
Alas, after the passages quoted in the previous instalment (#10), Vendramini’s book falls apart. Like the normie Tom Holland, whose book Dominionhelped me understand how Christianity transmuted into neochristianity, Vendramini is also a slave to Christian/neochristian ethics. That is why in the final chapters, despite his professed atheism, Vendramini insists that contemporary humanity is one. In fact, Danny Vendramini had probably the most iconic last line in this book with saying “there is no them and us. It’s all an illusion. There is only us.”
To combat this claim, it is useful to familiarise oneself with Jared Taylor’s books on racial realism, and better still, with the first chapter of Pierce’s Who We Are. It is this first chapter, in which Pierce discusses prehistory, that serves us well in building a bridge between what we have seen so far in Them & Us and history.
Although Vendramini’s book has been truly wonderful up to this point, from the paragraph in which the last Neanderthal was exterminated onwards, the rest of his chapters must be taken with caution (“there is no them and us…”).
Even so, given that a priest of the sacred words longs to ensure the beauty of our females (the drive that motivated the prehistoric exterminators!), some subsequent passages in Vendramini’s book are relevant to understanding that the work of extermination only began with Cro-Magnon man. And had it not been for the greatest historical blunder committed by the Anglo-Americans, Himmler and the SS would have continued the work of eugenics in territories that shouldn’t belong to the Russians but to the Germans who would have fulfilled their Master Plan East.
In the chapter following the one in which, in southern Spain, the last Neanderthal suffered the fate of the dodo, Vendramini wrote:
______ 卐 ______
This hypothesis proposes that top of the hit list for eradication on six continents were deviants and those perceived to be the others. Theoretically, this could mean anyone who triggered a Neanderthal teem. Pragmatically though, it could include anyone who looked different. If your nose was too flat, your eyeballs not white enough, your pupils not circular enough or your lips too thin, you were at risk of being subconsciously perceived as a Neanderthal—and treated as such. In a world where first impressions were often a matter of life and death, coming across as dumb, crass, humourless or gruff was likely to get you killed. And because nothing creates a first impression better than posture, having a stooped (monkey-like) gait, hunched shoulders or a head that jutted forward on your shoulders was a recipe for a short life.
Because artificial selection was almost exclusively exercised by men, females would be more prone to scrutiny than males. If girls were considered too flat-chested, straight-waisted, wrinkled, thin-lipped, or if the labia protruded beyond the vulva, they would be less likely to pass on their genes.
It was as if these spontaneously self-forming death squads had all been issued with the same orders. And the same hit list. From Spain to eastern Mongolia, and from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego the same motley collection of ill-formed deviants became the target of this sustained campaign of lethal selection. Although it is sometimes argued that ‘death squads’ only emerged in the 1970s and 1980s in South America, they have existed under different guises since prehistoric times. The all too familiar lament of ‘the day men came with guns’ to rape, murder and pillage has its antecedents in the Mesolithic, when men came with flint-tipped spears—to line up the innocents and make their lethal selection. But had a CSI unit of forensic pathologists examined the bodies, they would have seen a pattern to the victims. The selection was anything but random. By this simple expedient, a unique homogeneous human physiology and behavioural repertoire began to emerge simultaneously around the world. This blunt, brutal but chillingly effective scenario is, along with mate selection derived from Neanderthal teems, the only evolutionary scenario that can explain how and why modern humans are today one species.
Learning to dance
As a result of this lethal form of artificial selection, behaviours that had previously provided little or no contribution to fitness (like the ability to dance, hold a tune or laugh at a joke) now assumed an adaptive function. When a Cro-Magnon raiding party descended on a community, the villagers’ ability to speak fluently, decorate their bodies or even crack a joke could mean the difference between living and dying. This brings new meaning to conformity—and to being ‘human’. If Neanderthals were thought of as an artless, humourless, crass bunch, then art, tattoos, music, dancing, laughter and singing would become reliable indicators of us.
This generated pressure for everyone to acquire these external identifying signifiers. Men and women began wearing jewellery, tattooing their bodies and painting them with red ochre because they found these cultural accruements to be like passports—facilitating free and safe movement.
Cro-Magnons invented musical instruments and played them as a stamp of their humanity. They told stories, brewed alcoholic drinks and sang songs around the campfire. And they painted pictures on cave walls and fashioned ivory into figurines. Back in the Mesolithic, ‘artistic’ was not an affectation or indulgence—it was a much admired survivalist skill that could very well save your life. Styling their locks, embellishing clothes, tools and weapons—in effect, ‘making a fashion statement’—became ingrained in the human psyche as an adaptive behaviour. In a very real sense, the Cro-Magnons were the first slaves to fashion.
Intergroup violence is so pervasive in human history, we tend to take it for granted. (From top) a prehistoric drawing of archers and victim from a cave in Castellón, Spain; the biblical massacre of the innocents; the shooting of Kiev Jews by Nazis; the My-Lai massacre by American troops in Vietnam; and skulls of the victims of the Rwandan genocide.
Designer babies
There is every reason to believe that the relentless selection process included newborns. Neonates displaying atypical characteristics were ‘soft targets’ and infanticide was unquestionably the simplest, most cost effective application of artificial selection.
This tells us that the most dangerous time in the life of a Cro-Magnon was immediately after birth. That was when the males would inspect each baby and euthanise any infant they considered beyond the norm. This blunt policy of infanticide probably concentrated on conspicuous Neanderthaloid indicators such as the amount of body hair, facial wrinkles, head size and body fat.
For example, while birth is a challenge for most primate species because of the large size of the foetal head compared to the pelvis, the wide birth canal in chimps and gorillas and the small head size of their babies normally allows safe, unassisted delivery. This predicts that Neanderthal females also had wide hips and small-headed babies to make birth easier and safer.
Applying the differentiation hypothesis predicts that selection pressure would be generated for a larger head size in Cro-Magnon neonates. But even if a large head proclaimed to the tribe that a newborn was ‘one of us’, this reassurance came at a price. If the baby’s head was too big, neither mother or infant would survive. […]
Eliminating the competition
The theory that blind senseless violence—that most loathsome of human proclivities—has played a pivotal role in the emergence of modern humans by eradicating vestigial Neanderthaloid remnants from the Cro-Magnon genome, may be disagreeable. However, the model now goes even further. It predicts that as Cro-Magnons colonised Africa and Asia, they inevitably encountered ancestral hominid populations such as Homo floresiensis (below) and Homo erectus. The model proposes that the perceived deviancy of these indigenous people would also trigger them and us teemic responses, that would predispose Cro-Magnons to treat them as if they were Neanderthals, even though they had never seen a real Neanderthal. In other words, the hotchpotch campaign of sexual selection and artificial selection that they applied to one another would now be applied to other species of Homo they came across.
Once labelled generically as them, indigenous hominid species would be subject to the full force of Cro-Magnon aggression. With inevitable consequences.
Could this explain what happened to all those pre-existing populations of hominids and early modern humans spread across Asia, Africa and the Americas? The archaeological evidence certainly confirms that, while there were numerous hominid species living from Africa to Asia before the arrival of Cro-Magnons, once the Cro-Magnons arrived, they all disappeared. The first to vanish were two species of Homo erectus—one in China, the other in Indonesia.
Until then, erectus had been probably the most successful hominid species of all, a tenacious hunter-gatherer who had survived for 1.75 million years and colonised half the globe.
For ages, it was believed that Homo erectus—thought to be the first hominid species to leave Africa—became extinct long before modern humans arrived in their areas. But we now know this is not the case. Recent dating of fossilised bones and artefacts reveals one population of erectus held out on the isolated island of Java until as recently as 25,000 years ago. This coincides with the time humans reached Java. After that, Homo erectus disappears from the fossil record.
Their new cognitive capacity enabled Cro-Magnons to build seaworthy vessels and cross the Timor Sea to Australia. The earliest widely-accepted date for their arrival in Australia is around 38,000 years ago, but a recent review of the data suggests occupation as early as 42,000–45,000 years ago.
When Cro-Magnons arrived, there appears to have been at least one other hominid species already living in Australia—in the south of the continent. Known as the Kow Swamp people, they had relatively large and robust bodies and thick skulls indicating they were related to Homo erectus. It’s thought the Kow Swamp people arrived when there was still a land bridge between Australia and Asia.
The Kow Swamp people appear in the fossil record about 20,000 years ago, and then abruptly disappear. Given that Cro-Magnons entered Australia from the north and the isolated Kow Swamp lived in the south, it is conceivable that the two groups did not make contact for thousands of years. NP theory suggests that when they finally did, the humans promptly wiped them out.
Whether humans were also responsible for the extinction of the diminutive Homo floresiensis—the ‘Hobbits’—on the remote island of Flores in Indonesia about 13,000 years ago, is also impossible to confirm. But again, anthropologists Peter Brown, Michael Morwood and their Indonesian colleagues, who discovered and named floresiensis, argue that they were contemporaneous with modern humans on Flores. This makes them the longest-lasting hominid (apart from humans), outlasting the Neanderthals by about 12,000 years. It also highlights Peter Brown’s claim that these resilient species of the genus Homo may have been direct descendants of australopithecus (like ‘Lucy’), one of the earliest African hominids. If so, then these resilient little fellows managed to survive in a unbroken line for a whopping five million years. Until, that is, modern humans arrived on their island. Once humans arrived, floresiensis abruptly disappeared.
This represents only circumstantial evidence of genocide and requires more proof, but some points are unequivocal. Firstly, by 13,000 years ago, of the at least seven—and possibly dozens, or even hundreds—of different subspecies of hominids which had inhabited the world, there remained only one. Secondly, their disappearance occurred only after the arrival of modern humans. Thirdly, because all other species became extinct, everyone living today can trace their ancestry to the original population of Cro-Magnons in the Levant. In effect, this ‘purification’ of the gene line was evolution by genocide. As an instrument of artificial selection, it was systematic, methodical and extremely efficient. Modern humans owe their present homogeneity to the thoroughness of the genocidal eradication of anyone considered too deviant to fit into the Cro-Magnon culture.
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
