Category: Islam

A Matrix for the white peoples

Post author By C .T.
Post date February 16, 2015
18 Comments on A Matrix for the white peoples

Isn’t it incredible that what George Lincoln Rockwell said at UCLA in 1967, a couple of months before he was assassinated, about the actual perps of the largest genocide in Western history is still censored in the media? Alexander Solzhenitsyn was the author of a two-volume work, Two Hundred Years Together, about the history of Russian-Jewish relations between the years 1795 and 1995. It is the only non-fiction book by Solzhenitsyn besides The Gulag Archipelago.

Alas, the Jews and the Zionist gentiles in the Anglo-Saxon world are so powerful that they have managed to censor the Russian-English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together for more than a dozen years! The publishing houses in the US, Canada, the UK and Australia, including the universities presses, are such cowards that Solzhenitsyn’s last major work, published since 2001-2002 in Russian, has not been translated to English!

What can we think about the powers that be regarding the fact that the most significant historical datum of the 20th century is still hidden from the masses?:

“You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the ‘Russian Revolution.’ It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators.”

—Solzhenitsyn, quoted by David Duke

When I was younger Soviet dissidents had to smuggle copies of Solzhenitsyn’s work into the Soviet Union. Today totalitarianism has been inverted and it is us who are smuggling unauthorized translations of Solzhenitsyn’s last major work from Russia into the West, thanks to the internet.

There’s no question about it: whites have been plugged in a matrix for seventy years now.

Postscript of February 18:

I have now printed and read Roger Devlin’s long review of Two Hundred Years Together, originally published in The Occidental Quarterly (here and here). It looks like, although I do not claim that Solzhenitsyn’s quote in above post is fraudulent, it certainly goes against the grain of what, according to Devlin, Solzhenitsyn opined about Russian Jews in his last book.

Similarly, after watching ISIS’ recent mischief in Libya I retract what I said last month, that “whites have a better chance to survive under Sharia than under the current Judeo-liberal system.” While it is true that the current system is a fast track for Aryan extinction, under Islam extinction would only be postponed a little longer.

One of the advantages of our continuing education through the Internet is that our worldview may be slightly modified as new bits of data are encountered and properly digested. This said, the basics of my catechism in the form of a compilation of many authors in The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour, which 2015 edition has just been released, are still intact.

Tags History, Jewish question (JQ), Russia

Christopher Columbus Civil war Ethnic cleansing Final solution Inquisition Islam Mainstream media Spain Tomás de Torquemada

Isabel (TV series)

Post author By C .T.
Post date December 23, 2013

I’m relocating this paragraph, originally posted on October 30:

I’ve just watched the first season of Isabel, a 2012 Spanish-produced historical and fictional TV series about the life of Queen Isabella I of Castile, and I am afraid to say that the Spanish media is now Hollywoodesque. The Jew Andrés Cabrera (1430-1511), who in real history held a key position in the control of the royal treasury, is depicted as an innocent lamb and the anti-Semite Juan Pacheco (1419-1474), interpreted by Ginés García Millán (extreme left on the pic below), as an unscrupulous and ambitious fanatic. Long ago was that era when the Spaniards founded the first Judenfrei city in the American continent (a city where I was born and still happen to live in…).

Now (December 23), that I watched the second, 2013 season of the series, I found myself making copious notes, especially how the scriptwriters handled the expulsion of the Jews from Spain by the end of the 15th century. But before that it is interesting to see that in this season the Archbishop of Toledo tells Ferdinand of Aragon, “She [Isabella I] has stolen you the right that by natural law is only of males,” the right to rule.

Feminism in the 15th century? In the first episode of this second season it is said that this couplet was sung in a Castilian tavern:

Isabelle and Ferdinand reign backwards
Governs the lady and not the Aragonese
Like Henry our former king, Ferdinand,
faced with a female gets smaller…

In Spanish it rhythms. Despite its political correctness, the series surprised me because it is the first time in my life that I see on film a reenactment of the civil war between the old Christians (ethnically non-Jews) and the new Christians of Spain (ethnically Jewish).

In Isabel the first major conflict between these two groups is located in Burgos, and it reminded me that in Separation and Its Discontents Kevin MacDonald writes specifically about this conflict. It shocked me to learn in Separation that the Jews were allies of the medieval kings, who used the subversive tribe in their conflicts against their own people. In the Isabel series, Isabelle at least is depicted as reversing this process and demanding: “Mark them all with a round, scarlet ring on their clothing to facilitate their identification wherever they are.”

The converso Andrés Cabrera shouts after such measure, “She didn’t hesitate in humiliating them! She has paid allegiance with infamy!” It is interesting that in the whole series it is the first time that this “converso” is critical of the crown (in the previous season he had always been loyal to Henry IV of Castile). But Isabelle, nonetheless, names the very respected figure of Abraham Senior, a rabbi, as her collector of taxes—still following some steps of the traitorous medieval kings.

Following the advice of her two influential advisors, the rabbi and the converso Cabrera, Isabelle commands Cabrera to destitute the mayor of Segovia, substituting him for a cousin of the converso.

Once in power the Jew betrays the queen’s confidence and there’s an uprising when even the queen’s daughter is on peril of being abducted by the rabble that suffered the taxes of the new mayor. But the betrayal is not depicted clearly so as not to give the impression that blame should be placed on the subversive tribe. While the converso Cabrera is sent on exile, it is a shame that the producers missed the opportunity to illustrate for the Spanish audience how the “rise of the Jews” runs parallel to the dispossession of the natives to the point that the natives react. The producers knew their history well, but were very reluctant to offend sensitivities and watered down the crude facts.

The influential and most respected rabbi Abraham Senior, in addition of being very white, is depicted as noble, temperate, compassionate and wise. In contrast, a Christian rabble is shown throwing a stone on his head. The inhabitants of Burgos “have thrown false accusations against my own,” claims the rabbi. However, even in this politically-correct series once in a while the point of view of the Old Christians is heard. A Dominican monk says vehemently:

“Your Grace: The Christian converts have only costume. Their mission is to infect our religion from within to destroy it. May God have mercy with a benevolent Castile with heretics.”

But the series had to immediately amend the rant somehow. Fray Hernando, a Hieronymite monk and confessor of the queen, asks in private the Dominican why he is full of hate. The Dominican refutes him with proof that the conversos in fact “Judaize” in private, the word in vogue in those times to mean that the conversos continue to circumcise their children and maintain food restrictions. “The rage of the old Christians is righteous” he says.

Then a great conflict explodes between the Jews and the Christians of Seville. “This Dominican slandered us!,” says a Jew (pic above beside the queen). Unfortunately, instead of representing the conflict fairly, the episode puts a bigoted woman saying that a medicine of a Jewish physician could invoke demons: a typical inversion of the Spanish theatre of yore when the Jews were depicted as wicked and the Christians noble. After a scene the king Ferdinand congratulates the Jew physician for having made fertile Isabelle again. He is overjoyed.

The actors chosen for the emir of Granada in the Alhambra and his heir are good-looking, which means that they are not to be seen as the “bad guys” of the series. The emir is also a good lover who treats the white Christian woman who was abducted as a westerner would treat his wife (nothing of the sort of how abducted white women were treated in the harem).

Back in Seville, a cardinal suggests Isabelle to found a tribunal for the faith, the Inquisition, in Spain. But just as the old emir and young heir are depicted almost as good, the conversos of Seville are depicted as innocent and noble. Nonetheless, “the tribunal of which you speak, that still does not exist, would condemn only those who claim to be Christians but lie,” says Fray Hernando once he opened his eyes that some conversos were, indeed, “Judaizing” privately.

A home of conversos, depicted almost as pure doves, is assaulted by a mob of enraged Christians who cut the throat of a child and write on the wall the word “MARRANOS” with the child’s blood before leaving.

“Look to what those dogs that call themselves Christians are capable to do to a child,” with a close-up on the dead child, says the father. “Do you believe,” the converso tells his daughter, “that one of these good Christians we have as servants lifted a finger?”

Then the extended Jewish family of the converso arrives to wash the body of the assassinated child and the converso puts a crucifix inside a box, while all present recite something in Hebrew. The daughter, however, who is a maid of the queen, knows that this is highly dangerous business and suffers inwardly.

Fray Hernando, the queen’s confessor tells Isabelle: “Purifying the faith of converts will be a mission full of obstacles,” and the Inquisition starts its first activities in Spain. In Seville’s square Tomás de Torquemada warns: “There will be no pity. Every Christian who suspects of someone who Judaizes should report it.”

After these first actions Fray Hernando warns Torquemada that the dungeons are filled, even with innocents, though he concedes that some of them “Judaize.” Burning at the stake is still forbidden, and Torquemada’s first action was the confiscation of goods and mandate the use a penitential garment, the sanbenito, for a Judaizer woman who still celebrated the Sabbath and other Jewish ceremonies.

Then a tragedy occurs. The whitest dove of the series, the candid teenage Jewess who worked as the queen’s maid, is caught when trying to conceal evidence in the royal palace: evidence incriminating her father. She is sent to the torture chamber.

The visual details of her torment are shown to the naïve Spanish viewers in this episode that was aired recently. Under torture the candid Jewess confesses that she was only trying to save her father’s skin and is released. Isabella finally permits capital punishment. The converso father is caught and, unwilling to repent publicly by means of kissing the cross while he is tied on the stake, is burned alive.

The episode ends with a voice in off shouting: “The Jewish plague that ravages Christendom! The plague!”

In the next episode something is missing. In real history the Alhambra musicians had been blinded so that they did not see the naked women dancing. In this sanitized Alhambra none of these barbarities is shown when filming the musicians.

“El Cordobés,” the queen’s best friend and a soldier under the command of Ferdinand (second form left to right in the first pic at the beginning of this entry), one of the non-whites of the series, is shown as militarily wiser compared to Ferdinand after a humiliating defeat inflicted by the Moors.

The converso problem is introduced again but this time in the kingdom of Aragon. In the whole series of Isabel it is shown the conflict between the Christians and Jews and between the Christians and the Moors, but not between the Jews and the Moors. In Aragon a meeting is celebrated with the representatives from the three groups. A converso makes an oath of obedience to king Ferdinand. But other furious conversos assassinate the Dominican monk who would preside the Inquisition in Aragon. The Jewish conspirators are caught, decapitated and their heads shown on stakes.

In the next episode non-Christians are about to be expelled from Malaga. It shows the Iberian blunder in a nutshell: to believe that sprinkling drops of water on Moors or Jews will solve the problem once and for all. (Remember that a thousand years earlier the Iberian Goths fell into the Galilean cult, thus abandoning their healthy anti-miscegenation laws.) Instead of using the race standard, a powerful Spaniard says that they must “expel from Malaga all those who don’t believe in our lord Jesus Christ.” The converso Cabrera and Abraham Senior are worried about the fate of hundreds of Jews in the Alhambra, that will be invaded soon. Here we go again with the non-racial standard in the words of Isabelle about a boy, the heir of the emir who had fallen under her power:

“Today Juan de Granada has been baptized. He was born under the yoke of Islam but thank God he has escaped its clutches. He has reached our faith and as our brother in Christ we welcome him with joy.”

“Our brother in Christ”… This reminds me the words of how American Christians speak about the Negro. In this film shot, just when pronouncing those solemn words in court before the noblemen, a very dark Christian woman is seen beside the mother of the baptized boy.

Ferdinand gets sick during the military campsite and Isabella takes her Jewish physician to the war zone. Later it is told that 450 Jews of Malaga are now slaves: most of them women who talk Arabic or Hebrew and dress like Morisco women. Cabrera and Abraham speak of the huge quantities of gold that they must gather to free them.

Then the episode takes a nasty turn: blood libel. An innocent Jew is taken before Torquemada accused of kidnapping and ritually murdering a Christian kid. (Incidentally, on this subject I disagree with both Andrew Hamilton and Harold Covington. Like MacDonald, I believe that those kind of charges were spurious, although they reflected the legit rage of the old Christians.) On the rack of torture the accused Jew is, once more, depicted as an innocent sacrificial lamb. You have to watch the series and see the face of the man while the Inquisitor wants to extract a confession about “the abduction and murder of that innocent creature.” Alas for the Jew they continue the torture as he cannot confess a crime that he didn’t commit. Torquemada doesn’t want to hear that those who owed money to the Jew invented the accusation and the influential Abraham Senior is allowed to visit the accused in the dungeon.

I must say here that the physiognomic distinction between Christians and Jews is erased in the series. Any viewer would only see two Iberian whites talking to each other in the above scene between Abraham and the accused. This differs from the iconography of the peninsula of those centuries when the races were painted together (e.g., here).

Later Abraham Senior speaks with Torquemada and, naturally, the scriptwriters put Abraham as noble and Torquemada as wicked—black and white. Says Abraham when talking to the accused:

“You know that from time to time the Gentile rage is unleashed against us.”

After another discussion between Abraham and the accused, the latter is left crying with a little face that makes most viewers feel pity.

Christopher Columbus appears many times in these later episodes. The scriptwriter and director make him say, “…a Granada that agonizes under the yoke of Castile.” Soon after Ferdinand and Isabelle tell her physician, “Remember that in your hands is the life of the heir of Castile and Aragon,” the ill son of the kings whom then Jew saves.

More tortures are shown on the poor thing until he claims something that a Mesoamerican would have said in real life, “I was. I murdered that boy. I opened his chest to pull out and eat his heart…” Then Torquemada makes him confess who are his “accomplices” and the poor thing has no other choice but to incriminate other ethnic Jews to end the torture.

A little later in the episode the words of Columbus expose, once more, European idiocy in a nutshell: “…to extend the Catholic faith into unknown lands.” A Spartan, a Visigoth or a NS German would have said instead, “to extend our race into unknown lands.” Extermination or expulsion of non-whites into a corner of the continent was well beyond the Christian sensibilities of those times. Thus the blunder of baptizing Moors in the Iberian Peninsula would be committed again, at the other side of the Atlantic, but this time in a whole continent and on a massive scale. (What was the point of allowing such measures against the kikes if Iberian whites could not protect their own ethnicity in America? Shouldn’t a solution to the kike problem automatically mean a solution to further Iberian white decline? Food for thought for those who still stick to their monocausal monologues in their echo chambers.)

In the following scene Torquemada (left on the pic) launches a speech against the accused, two Jews and six conversos that, in his mind, murdered the Christian child ritually. They are to be burned alive at the stake in addition to confiscating their goods. The Grand Inquisitor even humiliates them further by making them know that the confiscated funds would be used in a newly founded Christian monastery.

The whole script of this second season that started in September and finished this month follows the lachrymose, now mandatory version of the history of Jewry. Overall, the reviews of Isabel have welcomed the series, given the number of nominations and awards, both national and international.

Intellectually, traditional Spaniards have been completely disarmed to talk back that the actions of the Inquisition are understandable, and even positive, when viewed from the viewpoint of the clash between two ethnic groups. Within their current, postconciliar Catholic paradigm they will never be able to prevent further demoralization. On the other hand, if Separation and Its Discontents was translated and became a bestseller in Spain, they could understand this historical conflict.

The final episode depicts the peaceful takeover of the Alhambra and has Isabelle hesitating about establishing the Inquisition in Granada. The queen also says, “It is a great opportunity to bring our faith to the Indies.”

It may seem incredible but with the benefit of hindsight—having read MacDonald’s book, which PDF is linked above—the pro-Western reader has to conclude that, leaving all PC BS propaganda aside, Torquemada was the real hero of this story. He is shown as telling the queen:

“The Jews are the real danger to our faith, the source of all heresies. You must remove the evil from our kingdoms. Once Islam has been defeated they know it is their turn. Teach them a lesson! It’s time!”

Words that have to be pronounced again in Europe once the Eurabian problem is solved later in this century! Ferdinand discusses with Isabelle for the first time the final solution to the Jewish problem: expelling them all, and reminds the queen that they have already been expelled from France and other kingdoms. Torquemada wants to expel every ethnic Jew; Isabelle wants to spare those who would embrace Christianity. For Torquemada it is clear that it is impossible to really convert a Jew.

On 31 March of 1492 the expulsion starts with a public declamation by Torquemada: “We demand that all Jews get out from our kingdom” while sad Jews listen. Later in this last episode king Ferdinand says, “The Jews will never disown their faith.” Then the exile is visually depicted.

“I need you. Who will heal my family now?” tells a concerned Isabelle to her parting physician.

The season ends with this episode #26, with a stunning image of the three caravels of the first of Columbus’ expeditions parting into the Atlantic ocean. Those who know Spanish can watch the entire series for free: here.

Tags Jewish question (JQ)

Goths Islam Islamization of Europe Literature Reconquista Spain

On Spain and literature – I

Post author By C .T.
Post date November 13, 2013

Annoyed at the infamous TV series Toledo I tried to find some consolation in the epic film El Cid, “a romanticized story of the life of the Christian Castilian knight Don Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, called ‘El Cid’, who in the 11th century fought the North African Almoravides and ultimately contributed to the unification of Spain.” But even that movie released in 1961 starts with a politically-correct scene. El Cid, interpreted by Charlton Heston, spares the live of a Moorish king in the hope that the Moor will behave in the future after an anti-Christian raid (and in fact he behaves like a gentleman in the rest of the film). Then in the royal palace El Cid has a private conversation with the woman he loved, acted by Sophia Loren, and makes a speech about his pacifist intentions when he is accused of treason for having spared the life of the Muslim king.

Well, well… What about forgetting old and new movies altogether and focus instead in the Spanish literature of the Middle Ages? What will we find there? Big surprise: the historical “Cid” found some work fighting for the Muslim rulers of Taifa of Zaragoza! This happened after his falling out of favor of Alfonso VI, king of León and Castile, who in 1081 ordered Rodrigo Díaz’s exile.

But what else can the literature of the age say about the ethno-nationalist mores, values, moral grammar and zeitgeist of medieval Spain? Let’s take a look…

This is a photograph of Soledad Anaya Solórzano (1895-1978), who graduated in Spanish letters at Guadalajara in Mexico. From 1920 to 1923 she served as Director of Primary and Higher Education in the Mexican government. She also taught Spanish literature, a field that she mostly loved, and was the Principal of the Secundaria Héroes de la Libertad until her death (the Middle School in Mexico City where I studied). Of course, when Miss Anaya taught me she was in her late seventies and looked a little older than in the photo, but she still was in command of her intellectual capacities. Anaya never married and was the single author of Literatura Española (1941), a textbook of more than thirty editions that we used in her classroom and I will use below and in the coming entries on the subject of Spain. I must say that in the first chapters of Anaya’s textbook, first published during the Second World War, she unabashedly uses the word “arios” (Aryan) when referring to the first conquerors of the Iberian Peninsula.

However, about the first ancient text that Anaya analyzes, the 8th century legend of King Rodrigo and the Loss of Spain (pages 28-31), the jew-wise reader is shocked to see that no accusation is made of Jews inviting any Muslim into the peninsula. The old legend tells instead that Florinda, a Visigothic maid (a purely Aryan young woman) was seduced by King Rodrigo, another Iberian white, in Rodrigo’s castle. As revenge the Count Julián, Florinda’s father, “opened Spain to Muslim expansion” Anaya wrote: an expansion that had been previously contained by the Count himself. The Moors then invaded the peninsula “and easily destroyed the Visigothic power that already was much debilitated.” Anaya adds that “it is not known what happened to King Rodrigo, who caused so much harm” and that the “historical happenings related to this legend occurred in 711 A.D.” Note that King Rodrigo, not Count Julián (or the Moors, or a purported Jew who opened the gates) is blamed. Presumably, the accent of the legend rested on the sense of honor among the Iberians of those remote times.

Later, on pages 40-47 of the textbook I used in my middle teens, Anaya mentions the case of the legend of The Seven Infants of Lara, which recounts other Iberian whites using other Moors to take revenge about other cases of Aryan offences! This very famous medieval tale has Gonzalo Gustios, the crying father of the seven decapitated white boys in Córdova, marrying Aixa, the daughter of Almanzor (Almanzor, who had imprisoned Gonzalo Gustios, was one of the most powerful characters in the Caliphate). Mudarra González, the mongrel son of the Christian Gonzalo Gustios and the Muslim Aixa, is The One destined to avenge the father. The victim of course is not Almanzor, the Moor that ordered the decapitation of the boys on behalf of the valiant knight Ruy Vásquez. The victim is Ruy Vásquez himself that the mongrel dispatches at the end of the story.

Once more, for the medieval Spaniard race did not seem to be the central issue at all: but a knightly sense of honor, especially during in-group vendettas.

In the next chapter Anaya approaches the ancient texts about El Cid. His life inspired the most important epic poem of Spanish literature: the Cantar de mio Cid. Now that I reread her book after forty years of reading it for the first time I was shocked to see Anaya’s sentence that El Cid was “the terror of Moors and Christians” (my emphasis). When I finished the chapter I was surprised to learn that El Cid’s fame was not entirely based on the feat of expelling some Moors from the peninsula, but mainly on the chivalrous character of this historical (and legendary) figure of the Reconquista.

This, and similar cases I’ll be recounting in these brief series about the classics of Spanish literature, moves me to expand the category of this blog previously known as “White suicide” as the “Aryan problem.”

Tags History, Middle Ages

Islam Islamization of Europe Mainstream media Reconquista Spain

Empty-headed Spaniards

Post author By C .T.
Post date November 12, 2013

Further to my post “Empty-headed Britons.” Of the television series I have been reviewing, I have found the first season of the Spanish-produced Toledo: Cruce de Destinos, premiered the last year, as the most offensive to date. It starts with a stunning scene in a Spanish garden of a wealthy family of whites in the 13th century. After some idyllic moments the family is attacked by the Moors with women, adolescents and children being assassinated in cold blood. One would expect that when the men return and see their families butchered the plot of the entire series would be revenge and expulsion of the Moors, right?

Nope! The whole series is an attempt to demonize the patriot Spaniards of such century, some of them real historical figures, that tried to expel the enemies by force. No kidding: that is exactly the ethos behind the script.

King Alfonso X of Castile is filmed as talking about “el sueño de la convivencia de las tres culturas” (“the dream of the coexistence between the three cultures”), meaning the Christian, the Muslim and the Jewish cultures as his ultimate dream for Castile. The series are perfectly Manichean: the hawks who crave for a war against the Moors and the Semites are absolutely evil; and the multicultural doves are the goods guys of the films. The first season actually ends with King Alfonso saying that his son Sancho, the hawk, is going into exile for life while the dove, his son Fernando, will inherit the crown to pursue his dream.

The whole series can be sketched thus:

• The Moors are revealed as the cruel invaders that they were in real history

• The Christian patriots who hate them are depicted as intolerant bigots throughout all episodes

• No single piece of mischief—nothing at all!—is ever committed by the Jews, who are always depicted as innocent doves

In a heated discussion in the first episode, the very one that depicts realistically the butchery of a white family, the Queen Violant of Aragon gives a speech to the main hawks of the story, the Archbishop of Toledo and the Count Miranda. The Queen says that Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek. Most surrealist of all is that the central character of these Spanish series, Rodrigo Pérez de Ayala whose eldest son and wife were among the victims of the butchery in first scene, sides the pacifist monarchs against the hawks!

Then Rodrigo returns to his home after not seeing for ten years what was left of his family. Who is the first guest to share Rodrigo’s table? Abraham Rubini, a Jew: his best friend throughout the series in fact. So much so that Rodrigo has a conversation with Abraham almost ignoring his surviving family who had been entranced to see that his father had finally came home after a decade…

The hawks Sancho and the Count Miranda are depicted as almost rapists or as rationalizing or excusing the rape of an innocent commoner girl. And—typical—the casting directors chose a very stunning actress to interpret the role of a Moorish woman: the one who speaks for the Muslim side (in the pic, sat at the front center).

In another scene, Abraham (extreme left in the pic) tells Rodrigo that Rodrigo’s role in the Castilian government must be “to defend the weak” of Toledo against the hawks. And in a discussion between Abraham and the Archbishop (standing at the right with his hands together) inside the royal court, the Christian is depicted as pig-headed and the Jew as wise. The richest Muslim of Toledo is also depicted as wise and concerned about the inexcusable intolerance of the Archbishop. It’s the Archbishop the one who incited a mob of fanatic Christians to attack the candid scholars working in Toledo’s school of translators, a school headed by Abraham. Afterwards there’s a scene where the hawk Sancho cowardly tries to stab the dove Fernando in the back, also in the royal court.

It is unnecessary continuing to recount more outrageous scenes, except adding that the series also contain typical scenes of soft-porn that have become so fashionable in recent TV series.

What alarms me is that Spaniards are largely clueless about what is happening to their media. Yes: it is true that in the blogosphere some Spanish critics have pointed out that the historical King Alfonso, also called The Wise, did not participate in such alliance of civilizations between Christians, Muslims and Jews, and that the series puts Toledo as a mainly Muslim city when really at the time they were a distinct minority in the city, surpassed even by the Jewish quarter. The TV story “invents a conspiracy of radical anti-Muslim Christians against King Alfonso, when in fact there was no such company.” But what made me laugh was a comment in “La serie Toledo” stating (my translation) that “the series could have been called ‘Zapatero in the country of the Alliance of Civilizations’.”

Even these critics don’t see the obvious: that patriot Christians have been painted with black; warrior Muslims with grey, and the Jews of Toledo with white! (In contrast to these fictional white doves, those interested to learn how the Jews behaved in historical Spain are advised to read the pertinent sections on the subject in Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents.)

Tags History, Jewish question (JQ)

Ancient Rome Autobiography Carthaginians Catholic Church Catholic religious orders Celts Civilisation (TV series) Counter-Reformation Goths Indo-European heritage Islam Kenneth Clark Miscegenation Racial studies Recceswinth Reconquista Spain St Francis

On Spain and Teresa of Ávila

Post author By C .T.
Post date November 6, 2013

Most of the television series I have been watching for critical review contain subtle and not so subtle anti-white propaganda. In a search to counter such traitorous series of the present century I also watched Teresa de Jesús, a mini-series premiered on Spanish television in 1984 that present the life of Spain’s great saint. Its dialogue is in Spanish but versions with English subtitles are available.

Teresa of Ávila (1515-1582) was a nun of the Catholic Church, a Spanish mystic and writer, and the founder of the Discalced Carmelites: a branch of the Order of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (or Carmelites). What struck me the most in the series is that many of the characters don’t look white at all, and in contrast with the obvious treason that I recounted in my previous post on The Hollow Crown the intention of the creators of the series was obviously different. The characters simply reflect the fact that many Spaniards are not real whites or Aryans.

See the important entry linked on the sidebar, “On anti-Nordicism.” If you want specifics about why most Spaniards are not pure Indo-Europeans let me say that the original Iberians, or iberos as we say in Spanish, men of the Aryan race, migrated from the Black Sea basin and went all over Europe up to the British isles, leaving a substantial proportion of people in the Iberian Peninsula which absorbed the previous inhabitants. Fifteen centuries before the Christian Era the Phoenicians and the Aryan Greeks (see the recent entries in this blog under the title, “Were the Greeks blond and blue-eyed?”) founded many colonies in the southern coastline, and with time merged with the original Iberians.

Six centuries before the Christian Era the Celts arrived, who also were Aryan, and fought with the residents of those lands but with time the Celts also mixed with them, giving birth to the Celtiberians. In the 6th century the Carthaginians (white Mediterraneans mixed with Semites) took over Cadiz and established some colonies. In 205 B.C. they were defeated by the Romans during the Third Punic War and expelled from the peninsula.

By that time the ethnic elements of the interbred peoples in the Iberian Peninsula were: autochthonous peoples (of unknown ethnic group?), iberos (Aryan Iberians), Aryan Celts, Phoenicians (half-bloods?), Aryan Greeks, and Carthaginians (half-bloods), producing a culture founded on the will of Celtiberians. In the first centuries of the Christian Era the peninsula would suffer further invasions from the Vandals, the Huns (non whites!), the Alans, and finally the Visigoths or Goths who proceeded from the occidental region of the Dniester River. Those were the groups that had arrived to what the Romans called the Hispanias by 409 A.D., when their empire was in the throes of agony.

The fall of the Roman Empire produced a gap in political, cultural and military power that non-whites occupied. From 713 A.D. the Arabs conquered most of the Iberian territory with the exception of the mountainous Asturias, the first Christian state that started the long period known as the Reconquista. Re-conquering the peninsula for the original Europeans would last no less than eight centuries, but this meant eight centuries of miscegenation with Arabs and Semites, both non-whites. The Moor occupation of this part of Europe ended in 1492 with the conquest of Granada by the Catholic Monarchs Isabella and Ferdinand. So many centuries of Muslim domination resulted in the peculiar phenotype of the peoples we see today in Spain, and explain why quite a few of them don’t look like real whites.

It is worth remembering that the mess started before. In the first centuries of our era the Iberian Goths burned at the stake their fellow Aryans that dared to mix their precious blood with non-whites. Alas, the king of Hispania Recceswinth committed the greatest blunder in Iberian history: a blunder still unrecognized by Spanish intellectuals or historians but a gigantic blunder nonetheless. By converting to Christianity Recceswinth abolished the long ban on miscegenation (which reminds me the Spartan ban on miscegenation), which resulted in the subsequent mongrelization of the Visigothic Iberians. The king of Hispania’s decision allowed any person of any racial origin, as long as he professed Christianity, to intermarry with the Aryan Goths. Such failure of the nerve occurred just a few decades before these territories were invaded by the Moors.

It is not surprising to see, after eight centuries of unbeatable miscegenation, the formation of a superstitious culture that eventually would be called Spain. I must confess that the most incisive opinion I have ever read about Spain appears in the foreword to the printed version of Civilisation, the 1969 television series featuring Kenneth Clark:

Some of the most offensive omissions were dictated by my title. If I had been talking about the history of art, it would not have been possible to leave out Spain; but when one asks what Spain has done to enlarge the human mind and pull mankind a few steps up the hill, the answer is less clear. Don Quixote, the Great Saints, the Jesuits in South America? Otherwise she has simply remained Spain, and since I wanted each programme to be concerned with the new developments of the European mind, I could not change my ground and talk about a single country.

But what if even Cervantes, Spain’s great saints and the Jesuits were not so terribly cool from the viewpoint of racial preservation? What if the staunch Catholicism of the Counter-Reformation, which produced Cervantes, the Saints and the Jesuits was uncongenial to white interests? These are the sort of questions that move me to say something about the 1980s’ television series of St. Teresa.

Racial phenotype of the actors aside, what struck me about these series is that its creators depicted Teresa as suffering from a typical hysteria; in her case, to the point of a catatonia she suffered as a young woman. What caused her hysterics will remain unknown, although it is interesting to read her autobiography. A copy in the original language that I have in my bookshelf says that Teresa confessed that she “was the most cherished of my father” (this comes from an English translation), and the very first words of her first chapter are: “I had a father and mother, who were devout and feared God.” Although only a very idealized parental-filial relationship appears in the first paragraphs of Teresa’s autobiography, I suspect that her psychosomatic illness attests to something that she, the so-called expert of the “Interior Castle” (the human soul), never confessed.

Whatever the dynamics of Teresa’s family it is interesting to see that even in these series, televised for a Catholic audience, Teresa is described by her sister nuns as pretending to be “the different one,” as always acting out her sufferings and psychosomatic ills. Some of the nuns interpreted her behavior as a trick to be the bossy of the nuns of the several convents she founded. Even Teresa’s hostile takeover of her original convent from the power of other nuns is depicted, albeit shown as something noble for the cause. As I have said, Teresa de Jesús has as its target group pious Catholics. So much that the (apocryphal in my opinion) story of Teresa’s miraculous levitation while praying is recounted as historical, as well as an instantaneous flourishing of an almond tree at the end of her life (“Everything she touches turns into life”).

Teresa was a religious genius only in the sense that St. Francis was a religious genius too. Both saints basically used theatrics big time to act out their emotional issues and gather large followings; followings that eventually reformed monastic orders. My Catholic father, who insufflated in me a love for St. Francis during my adolescence, was totally wrong in his statement that “the only supermen are the Saints.” I would say that Christianity has no saints in the sense of psychologically integrated, or truly emergent, individuals (William Pierce is what presently I regard as the closest specimen of the archetypal “overman”). In Teresa de Jesús for example the so-called saint is depicted as fairly tolerant about the New Christians, or Conversos with Jewish blood, while other Spaniards of the series are presented as suspicious about those rich merchants of dubious origins. Also, Teresa’s most famous vision in which an angel pierced her heart with a golden spear, in-out in-out delivering the poor woman into an ecstasy, has all the marks of an erotic sublimation in the mind of a celibate nun.

The last episode contains an epilogue describing what happened in this primitive culture after an agonic Teresa died. Hunting for relics fanatic religionists cut her hand, one of her fingers, an arm and an eye, thus mutilating her dead body. It surprised me that the creators of the series described such post-mortem atrocities, some even perpetrated by the dignitaries of the Church, as something sublime and noble.

The reformer of the Carmelite Order was canonized forty years after her death, and in the century when we were born Teresa was even named a “Doctor of the Church” by Pope Paul VI. Here in Mexico I recently visited a property of the Carmelite Order and their wealth impressed me. As I have said elsewhere, as to white interests is concerned Spain’s Counter-Reformation experiment in Europe and the Americas was “an utter disaster”…

Tags Christian question (CQ), History, Religion

Child abuse Christendom Human sacrifice Islam Israel / Palestine Judaism Old Testament

Christians: clueless about Judaism

Post author By C .T.
Post date October 9, 2013

Below, “The Conspiracy of Man,” forward to The Tabernacle and its Sacrificial System, posted by Arch Stanton as a comment in this blog:

The problem with Christianity is that people do not understand the Jewish mind behind it. To understand the New Testament, one must understand Jewish culture, history and religion. Of course the Jews make no effort to enlighten the ignorant goyim on these subjects. In fact they prohibit the transference of their religious texts under penalty of death!

Long before the Temple came the era of the Tabernacle, where the sacrifice was ceremonial bloodlust. It was a place where priests butchered animals to atone for sins against their God, Yahweh.

The Torah originally referred to the first five books of the Old Testament. The books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are Levirate laws forming the basis for Judaism’s sacrificial system. This system is naturally founded on the sacrifice of both blood offerings, in the form of specified animals, and non-blood offerings in the form of specified grains. In the early days of the sacrificial system, the Tabernacle was nothing more than a moving slaughterhouse, a place where priests butchered animals. It is telling that only the best animals, the least “blemished,” could be offered for sacrifice.

The indication as to the true purpose of the sacrificial system lay in the fact that priests took ten percent of the choicest cuts of meat for themselves and burned only the fat and viscera upon the altar as “sweet savor” to the Lord. The remaining meat was then returned to the sinner. Think about this for a moment, the Lord preferred fat and viscera to the prime cuts commanded by the priests.

Imagine for a moment, your priest as a butcher. Imagine going to church on Sunday and seeing your priest at the altar slitting the throat of various parishioners’ pets, catching their blood in a golden bowl and then splashing it around the altar as he dances around in a trance-like state chanting pleas to God for the forgiveness of sins and begging for salvation. After the service, you say to your spouse, “Boy that certainly was a different sermon this week wasn’t it dear?” Your spouse replies, “Oh I don’t know, next week is communion, when we eat the body Christ and drink his blood. Speaking of that, let’s hurry to the restaurant before the church crowd gets there.”

After making their sacrifice, the Hebrew sinner was marked with blood, mixed with other bodily fluids, on either the forehead or the big toe. This mixture ensured longevity of the mark. The blood marking was visible proof that a tribesman had paid his “sin tax.” Later, this mark was washed off in a ritual purification bath called the Mikveh, at which time the sacrificial cycle began anew.

However, this marking system had one obvious, glaring drawback. Blood is a commonly available substance produced by the higher organisms. In their attempt to control the easily counterfeited blood marking, priests forbade their followers from butchering their own animals or even possessing the instruments for doing so. This was the primary reason for the kosher slaughter, a process where the living animal’s throat is slit to ensure the pumping heart will drain the blood as completely as possible. This also led to the prohibition of various implements and practices used in the butchering process. The priests defined these as “clean” or “unclean,” but think “legal” or “illegal,” as these are in fact legalistic dictates that have almost nothing to do with hygiene.

Any contact with blood was strictly prohibited, like that produced by menstruating women or “lepers,” which meant anyone with running sores. As a result, a Byzantine legal structure arose to control the minutiae of everyday life. There is a forgettable tract in the Mishna that elaborates on the cleanliness of a bowl. The upshot of this legal commandment is that if a bowl in intact, then it is unclean; but if the bowl is smashed into pieces of which the largest piece is no larger than the tip of a man’s finger, then it is clean. This makes absolutely no sense unless one understands the bowl in question can be used to hold and mix blood products.

Eventually the phylactery replaced the blood marking. This was a small box attached to the forehead or the back of the wrist holding a scroll with a passage from the Torah. The scroll changed in accordance with the sacrificial cycle; and like tabs on a license plate, it could be checked as proof that Temple followers were current on their sacrificial tribute. Despite this modification, Levirite laws concerning blood products remained in full force.

♣

Imagine yourself as a very young child of a primitive, nomadic, tribesman. Having heard only stories, you are dimly aware of the importance of a much talked about, upcoming ritual. You are aware this ritual occurs on regular basis and the anxiousness of your parents is palpable when discussing the subject.

On the prescribed day, the day the ritual begins. You follow your parents down to a running stream. A man richly attired in strange garb stands in the middle of the stream. One by one, your neighbors walk into the stream where the man mutters strange words as he immerses them in the water while rubbing their forehead with the palm of his hand. After your father has undergone the ritual immersion, you note the red mark he always wears on is forehead has disappeared. The ritual continues until every adult in the village has undergone immersion. You hear someone nearby whispering that the sacred cycle has ended.

The following day, your mother wakes you earlier than usual and your family spends the morning in careful preparation for the day’s activities. You want to play with your friends, but your mother insists you attended to her demands. You accompany your father as he goes out among his meager collection of animals. He spends quite a bit of time inspecting the herd until he finally chooses a prized sheep. This animal happens to be one of your favorites. You have often played with the sheep, chasing them around the meadows and finally catching one, you buried your face in its soft wool. Your nose takes delight in the earthy smell of the sheep. It is the smell of life, and life seems to be everywhere among the hills where the herds roam.

Later that morning, your father takes you by the hand and with animal in tow, you are dragged to a portable slaughterhouse your parents refer to as the “Tabernacle.” Here you are to witness the important ritual they have been discussing over the preceding weeks. You enter a large enclosure surrounded by a fence made of cloth. In the middle of the enclosure is an odd tent-like structure with rude wooden columns and entry doors. A number of wooden tables, sagging oddly along the longitudinal center line, are set up in the makeshift courtyard directly in front of the tent. Soon, other families begin arriving with their animals.

Finally, the ceremony begins. A neighbor of yours steps forward and presents a prized calf to one of several strangely dressed men, like the men you saw at the stream the day before. Your parents refer to these men as “priests.” One by one, the sinners step forward and present their animal to a priest who then hoists it upon one of the many tables. Your neighbor drops to his knees in front of the priest, closes his eyes and begins chanting something unintelligible. As you are witnessing this, your father grabs your hand and places it alongside his on the prized sheep. You can feel its heart racing. The animal transmits its terror though the palm of your hand. The priest takes hold of the struggling animal and with quick, practiced motion, slits its throat with a razor sharp knife. The animal struggles, kicking and bellowing in protest, as geysers of blood erupts from its jugular vein. A froth of blood spews forth, splattering you and everyone present. You can feel the spark of life draining through its hide as the stillness of death overcomes the animal. You look down at the viscous red fluid splattered on the front of your robe. You stare with revulsion at the red stains soaking into the fibers as the stench of death assaults your nostrils and addles your sense.

Even before the animal has ceased struggling, you look up from your bloodstained robe to see the head priest/butcher moving quickly to catch the animal’s blood in a golden bowl. Now you realize the sagging tabletop forms a trough that allows the blood to flow from the end, where the priest awaits with his bowl. With eyelids half closed and muttering some strange incantation, he seems to be in a trance. Shouting, he lifts the golden bowl skyward at arms’ length before splashing the rapidly congealing blood over and around the base of the altar. The priest then comes out of his trance and begins eviscerating the animal. During this process, the animal’s bloody guts are laid aside so they can later be burned on the altar as sweet savor to the lord, who evidently has an abiding taste for burnt fat and viscera.

In just a few strokes, the priest/butcher finishes his gory task. Working rapidly, he begins cutting the animal’s joints. As he separates the portions of meat, he carefully lays aside a large portion of the best cuts for himself. He then returns the remaining meat to your neighbor, who by now has given the priest full admission of his sins.

After the sacrifice is complete, the priest produces a smaller bowl with a cupful of the animal’s blood. The priest mixes it with another bodily fluid that appears to be semen. He uses his thumb to smear a large daub of the mixture on the forehead of the entranced, chanting sinner kneeling before him with closed eyes. Then, with a loud shout, the priest/butcher declares that by this act, your neighbor’s sins have been atoned. Your neighbor staggers to his feet and like a drunk, lurches away from the butchering table with a beatific look on his face, even as the priest calls for the next sinner to step forward with his animal.

Suddenly you feel the full emotional horror of the fate awaiting the other animals brought to the ritual. All the while, these men called priests, howl, chant and dance about, reciting their ritualistic incantations that beg god’s forgiveness; it must have been a bloody spectacle. The bloodlust continues well into evening.

What you never witness is the secret ceremony inside the Tabernacle’s tent where the high priest in a final act of crazed bloodlust drinks the sacrificial blood before the mercy seat. The Levirate injunction against consuming blood is a public admonishment to restrict the use of blood products. However, the priesthood exempted itself from its own laws and secretly does not observe such restrictions. This covert act, along with the acceptable act of consuming sacrificial meat, will later be replayed by Yeshu during his last supper, when he symbolically offers wine and bread representing his blood and body to his disciples.

A few days later the priests fold their Tabernacle tent and move on. They will move to the next tribe where the sacrificial cycle will be played out once again.

Consider the effect of this gruesome spectacle on a child. Blood spewing everywhere, chanting priests mesmerized in their crazed bloodlust, driven by the howling and grunting of animals bleeding out the last of their life on the ground. The restless bleating of animals, now aware of their fate. Sinners raising their hands towards the heavens as they cry out for god’s forgiveness. Imagine your parents continually consumed with the thought of blood and the avoidance of it, thoughts that translate into an unnatural obsession about the stuff.

Extrapolate this horror out over the generational millennium and you have the foundations of a psychopathic bloodlust that is not a preference, not a peculiar, incidental twist in a few exceptional personalities: it is a culturally inbred condition, one that can neither be altered nor escaped. This culture of blood has permeated the very core of Judaism until it has become a genetic component of their race.

♣

The Bible is a book whose stories have influenced humanity in the most profound manner. Few would argue the statement that it has been the single most influential book in history. Yet few truly comprehend the true breadth and depth of its influence. Fewer still stop to consider why this ancient book has had such a powerful influence when other similar books of antiquity faded into complete obscurity; curious artifacts examined only by experts. What is it about the Bible that is different? Why is this particular book considered relevant to modern man, when its contemporaries are considered irrelevant, archaic works of ancient, primitive, tribes? What is it about these stories that drive modern man in the same manner as they drove the men of ancient times?

The original book was known to Jews as the Torah. These were the first five books attributed to Moses. “Torah” is an interesting word. Many words in Jewish culture have multiple constructs. Therefore, to understand the intent, such words must be taken within the frame of reference to the context in which they are used. To Jews, Torah can refer to anything from the first five books of Moses to the entire linage of Hebraic religious works, ranging from Genesis to the last volume of the Talmud. For our purpose, Torah will refer to those five books of the Old Testament attributed to Moses. This collection is commonly known to Christians as the “Pentateuch.”

The actual definition of “Torah” is likewise interesting. Again, we find a double definition in that the word is defined as both “law or legal” as well as “instruction.” From this definition, we find the Torah is in fact books of legal instruction. The reader is asked to keep this definition in mind while reading this book.

The Torah spawned three of the most influential religions on the planet today: Judaism and her unwanted daughters, Islam and Christianity; unwanted because the Jews never intended their book or beliefs to be adopted by non-Jews. It is truly ironic how few Christians realize that these two daughters have far more in common with each other than they do with their mother religion. All three religions are based on the original stories found in the Torah. All three recognize and revere the ancient patriarchs of the Old Testament. All three pay tribute to these stories as their foundational beliefs about monotheism. All three base their concepts of God upon the descriptions found in these stories. One only needs to compare these three religions with a religion like Buddhism or Hinduism to find the close relationship of mother Judaism and her two daughters.

Yet, while Western civilization has been profoundly influenced by these stories, the book in fact addresses the issues of the ancient Jews. The Bible was written by Jews, about Jews, for Jews. The information in the Torah was never intended to play any part outside Jewish culture for as it is written in the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 59a, (“Gemara… Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs”).

It has been written that the worst reference source for information about water is a fish, for a fish is immersed in the fluid. The immersion of the fish is so complete that it does not even perceive that water exists. Thus, the fish’s immersion and dependence on water precludes any objective analysis of the fluid by the fish and so is the case with the Bible. Western civilization has been so profoundly influenced by its immersion in these stories that it can no longer see the original, objective truths behind them. The Bible is not a book about the history of the Jews: it is a book about the culture and beliefs of a people instrumental in shaping our world. Essentially, the Torah is a cookbook that might well be titled in the same manner as the one in Rod Serling’s play, To Serve Man.

Throughout their history, Jews have been renowned storytellers. Much of their superior verbal skills are undoubtedly derived from the history of their religion’s long oral tradition. Storytelling has long been the common method used by primitive cultures to pass down traditional beliefs and law, but the Jews elevated storytelling to the highest level possible. For Jews, storytelling goes well beyond even an art form, it is in fact the very thread from which they weave the fabric of their culture.

From the first millennia of their existence, Hebrew law and religious beliefs were passed down in the form of storytelling. Around the time of Yeshu, heated debate arose among the Sadducees and Pharisees over whether or not to continue adhering to the oral tradition. By the time of the second Temple period, a major point of friction between the Pharisees and the Sadducees was the validity of the oral law, since the Sadducees only adhered to the written law. Attempts were made to codify a collection of rulings, but the Sadducees rejected the Pharisees’ notion of abiding by the Oral tradition before it was later committed to ink.

There are some interesting considerations inherent to this disagreement. First and foremost, an oral tradition can be much more closely controlled as to who is allowed to receive the information. By this, one can see that had these stories not been committed to the written form, modern Christians would have no more idea of their content than they have of the Hebrew language. Secondly, oral traditions lend themselves to modification far more easily than written traditions. Orwell pointed out this difficulty in his book 1984, where an entire ministry is devoted exclusively to changing the written history of a culture. The Pharisees eventually won the argument as the modern Talmud teaches “God made a covenant with Israel only for the sake of that which was transmitted orally.” Yet, to this day, Jewish boys devote much of their time memorizing and reciting long, torturous, Talmudic tracts and arguing the legal precedence set by these laws, doing so in the very same manner as their ancestors.

Today, Hollywood’s writers, producers, and directors are predominantly Jewish; so it comes as no surprise to find the Torah’s influence clearly visible throughout most Hollywood productions. This marvelous ability to fantasize and tell tall tales can be visibly witnessed in numerous Hollywood and TV shows written and produced by these Jews. While names like Spielberg, Lear and Katzenberg have replaced Biblical names like Moses, Ezekiel, and Saul, the same form of story telling is still much in evidence. When one examines the fantastic and fanciful stories written and produced by those like Spielberg or Serling, or morality plays written by Norman Lear, one has a direct window into the mind of the Biblical storyteller.

_________

My two cents:

The author of the above foreword restricts his critique to animal sacrifice. More recent scholarship has established that those sacrifices, which would be condemned by any animal rights advocate today, were the sublimation of the ancient Hebrews’ filicidal impulses toward their own children: sublimation of actual child sacrifices in even more ancient Israelite history. See the pages of my book where I address this extremely disturbing subject: here.

Tags History, Jewish question (JQ), Religion

Arthur Schopenhauer Islam

Has Christianity…

Post author By C .T.
Post date September 27, 2013

been good for the White race?

by AAB

1) No it hasn’t. It has been far from good for the white race.

Internal warfare and external threats to the White Race in Europe were not abated by Christianity. Some of Europe was converted by 5th century by the Roman Empire, which saw the enslavement and death of 3 million White Gauls, and then their slow spiritual degradation.

The rest of Europe was converted to Christianity circa 11th century (by the point of the sword I might add). Over the next millennium there was much internal warfare which led to the destruction of people, property and ideas. What’s more is that Christianity did a poor job of defending White Christendom from invaders. So not only did it cause internal warfare, but it failed to defend the Christians from external threats, thus it was a double-edged sword of evil against the white race.

Muslim Expansions in 7th & 8th Centuries

Auburn – Muhammad’s conquests, 622–632
Atomic tangerine – Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661
Amber – Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750

Remember that it was nationalists who defended White Europe from invaders. Not Christians but nationalists. Christians had no desire to help one another despite the pleas that were sent by Kings from the Balkans when the Muslim Turks were invading. Europe was defended by Stephen cel Mare of Moldavia, Vlad Tepes of Wallachia, Ivan the IV of Muscovy, Ferdinand of Spain, amongst others. These men were nationalist champions first and foremost. They fought for their kin, for their family. Nationalists were the ones who fended off the invaders, not Christians. Christianity has done nothing to give internal security, nor external security. It’s crap as a police force, and worse as a military force. It causes destruction of all those who believe it. Other races would be wise to give Christianity a wide birth also, as it would likely have the same effect on them.

2) Christianity left the White Race genetically impoverished (as it does to “all races” who believe it). The most intelligent men and women were sent off to monasteries and nunneries to study instead of raising families and being innovators (like Farnsworth, Darwin, who had families and children) which means that the race didn’t benefit from their excellent genes. Obviously a race that degrades is only going to get worse. Is that what God intended when he created the universe: That we all end up thick, and physically unfit? I doubt it.

3) Christianity has achieved next to nothing in technological terms. Compare the Christian Civilisation / Empires that sprouted circa 1500, to the Pagan Empires of the Middle-East. The Christian Empires were obsessed with “making money,” hence the phrase “the Protestant Work Ethic” which is about being nothing more than a money grubber. Here are some of the achievements of the Pagans: the library at Alexandria, the Pyramids, Agriculture, Metal working—from the R1b Hittites, and astronomy. Now what have the Christians added to that in the millennia that they’ve had cultural dominance? Where are the pyramids, where is the great library? There are none of these things. As Arthur Schopenhauer pointed out the achievements of Europe during the Enlightenment era were made “in spite” of the faith known as Christianity.

Your life and happiness will be better served by believing that which is true, and that which begets good works. You’ll get neither of these things from Christianity, but both from truth. Whether that truth lays solely in spiritual-paganism or hard-headed science I don’t know. Uppsala Online is an intelligent website that straddles both worlds: the world of science and the world of spirit, and shows that you don’t have to fudge words or babble in order to defend your position like so many Christians seem to do. The truth serves you well and is simple and crystal-clear.

Anonymous said…

Under Christianity Europe gave us modern firearms, Gothic Cathedrals, modern medicine (to be fair the Romans were far ahead of Medieval Europeans) and the printing press. Unless you’re referring to a time when Europe was 100 percent theocratic. In that case, Christianity achieved very little. The good in Christianity was put there by White men, as was the good in Paganism. Paganism, by being intrinsically ours, is the healthier/better fit.

AAB said…

Though all races adhere to similar laws (logical, physical, biological etc., we’ve all got to eat and sleep!), there are differences between the races, and those differences are best satisfied by a belief system that is unique to them. A belief system along the lines of the Proto-Indo-European religion will probably be best for the White race. hyperborearising.wordpress.com seems to have a good grasp on such matters.

Finally, here’s the quote from Schopenhauer on “Christianity and Civilization”:

The reason civilization is at its highest point among Christian peoples is not that Christianity is favourable to it but that Christianity is dead and no longer exercises much influence: as long as it did exercise influence, civilisation was at a very low point among Christian peoples. All “religion” is antagonistic towards culture.

(Essays and Aphorisms, Hollingdale translation.)

Tags Christian question (CQ), Middle Ages

Islam

Was René Guénon one of us?

Post author By C .T.
Post date June 10, 2013
45 Comments on Was René Guénon one of us?

Or:

Philosophers, expats from Laputa

Having brought down kings and queens and aristocrats in the name of “equality,” it was logical [for white liberals] to declare war on Nature itself. —Hunter Wallace

Jewish power is directly proportional to the character of White people. —Hunter Wallace

In his latest article about Julius Evola, Greg Johnson said: “Along with René Guénon, Evola is one of the writers who has most influenced the metapolitical outlook and project of Counter-Currents…”

Well, Evola has been debunked here at least for my satisfaction. But remember my recent entry where I talked about what tipped my apothecary scale from Bicausalism Type-A to Type-B? “If even white nationalists,” I wrote, “have fallen into the suicidal hedonistic meme, there must be another factor besides the Jewish one.” I had in mind the rock music and the decadent sexual mores that quite a few of so-called white nationalists love, including Johnson.

What moved me to criticize philosophy in the previous threads is that visitors to nationalist sites are wasting their time over the boards instead of reading the ABC of the history of the white race, that is, the ideological fundamentals for racial preservation (see the books that I recommend in today’s page).

Regarding my highly critical view of accepted Western wisdom, so accepted that even “nationalists” share this delusion, John Martínez commented today:

Ever since you [Chechar] began to question the relevance of the discipline pompously self-entitled “philosophy” for the White cause (in addition to criticising religion by and large and Christianity in particular in this regard, as you had long been doing), a couple of commenters took the pains to split hairs and defend the honor of some philosophers and some religious views.

In one of the latest threads I personally mentioned one the main figures behind the views of some of the commenters, French Traditionalist metaphysician René Guénon [photo above].

Well, this is from the article on Wikipedia concerning the guy. This is for you and the readers of the West’s Darkest Hour to see how apropos, how appropriate the study of the works and lives of important thinkers like Guénon is for the cause of White Nationalism. I should add that by the time of the events mentioned in these passages, Guénon had already arabicized his name and become Abd al-Wahid Yahya:

In 1930, Guénon left Paris for Cairo, with the aim of gathering and translating written documents of islamic esoterism. This project was abruptly abandoned after a decision of his editor. Left alone in Cairo, Guénon declined all propositions by his friends that he return to France. Despite his declining financial condition, Guénon relentlessly corresponded with his counterparts from many countries around the world as well as continuing his own writing projects.

Although remaining in Egypt certainly exposed Guénon to the cultural ambience of Sufism and ancient esotericism for which he had already demonstrated a strong affinity, his refusal to return to Europe created undoubted hardship for him. As if in compensation for this hardship, Guénon was fortunate enough to meet Sheikh Salama Hassan ar-radi, founder of the Hamidiya Shadhiliya sufi order, which he soon joined. Guénon accompanied the Sheikh until the latter’s death in 1938. Around the same time, Guénon also met another Sufi, Sheikh Mohammad Ibrahim, whose daughter he married in 1934. This marriage resulted in four children, the last (Abdel Wahed) born in 1951. During his lengthy sojourn in Egypt, René Guénon carried on an austere and simple life, entirely dedicated to his writings and spiritual development. In 1949, he obtained Egyptian citizenship…

René Guénon died on January 7, 1951; it is reported that his final word was Allah (“God”).

By the way: did I mention that Brazilian Traditionalist philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, through whom I got in touch with the Traditionalist school of thinkers, is an ardent anti-racist pure White whose first wife was a Black woman who gave him a couple of Mestizo children?

Like you pointed out, Chechar, if the White race goes extinct (as Richard Lynn thinks will happen) and the torch of civilization passes on the North-Asians—the Chinese, Korean, and Japanese historians of the future will be baffled to see how, after some 2500 years of deeply penetrating speculation, the Western giants of thinking not only did not see what was coming, but took themselves an active part in the bringing about of the catastrophe.

Totally immersed in their religious and pseudo-wise fantasies, asses like Guénon (and Carvalho, for that matter) are too good to bother about such a trifling matter as the White race. What’s wrong with mongrelizing with Arabs and Blacks if we are all children of the same Semitic God? To speak like Hillary Clinton, What difference does it make?

These charlatans remind me of a chapter in Gulliver’s Travels, in which the narrator visits a country of sages, Laputa, where the regular folks live so absorbed in their own thoughts that their wives cuckold them right and left and they have to be constantly attended by pages, who now and them hit them on their faces with small cloth bags full of little pebbles in order to make them breathe again, since they keep forgetting to, so concentrated they are on their thinking.

The White race will soon be mongrelized to the last individual, but hey, what were you saying about the “metaphysical unity of all religions”?

My comment:

What would-be nationalists (see again my definition of a real nationalist) should learn is that both their theologians and philosophers miserably failed the white race. At Counter-Currents they still want to talk about “philosophy,” Guénon and Evola, because these guys are Type-A Bicausalists, which means that they mostly blame Jews for our woes. If the tribe is mainly the culprit, they reason among themselves, our house is basically in order.

We Type-B Bicausalists on the other hand know that it’s us who brought self-extermination to our own home; Jews, a mere epiphenomenon of our sins (see Hunter Wallace’s epigraphs above).

John: although this is an entry I’ll speak as if it was a thread comment. See how in another recent thread here, commenter Armor said that “whites are not stupid” in the context of blaming Jews for race-replacement and implying that whites are innocent—a monocausal monologue all too frequent in nationalist sites with the exception of Wallace’s Occidental Dissent.

The ignorance of so-called nationalists about elemental psychology tempts me to start a new series about intuitive psychology (which must not be confused with academic psychology), only to show our visitors how flawed human philosophers are, starting perhaps with some Zweig excerpts about poor Nietzsche.

Thoughts?

Buddhism Christendom Hinduism Islam Liberalism Philosophy

On philosophical and religious quackery

Post author By C .T.
Post date June 6, 2013
59 Comments on On philosophical and religious quackery

and its dismal implications for the white race

by John Martínez

This is your best piece of writing in WDH up to now, Chechar—at least that I’m aware of. I don’t think this is the sort of article that will have much appeal to average White Nationalists, obsessed as they are with the Joooos, Niggers and other perceived threats, but until Whites grasp the deep mental roots of the their present malaise (specially as far as Christianity and its secular offshoot, Liberalism, are concerned) they will be like a man being attacked by a swarm of bees in the middle of a pitch-black night.

A couple of points.

First, you are right to be suspicious about “Philosophy”—have you ever considered how presumptuous (“love for wisdom”) the very name of this discipline is? I have my qualms about it too.

In another post you mentioned the fact that not a single one of the supposedly greatest philosophers ever said something about the importance of race to the establishment of a great civilization like ours. That is to say, these guys have devoted millions of man-hours to discussing every single subject under the sun—except for what is perhaps the most important of them all from the point of view of our civilization: the fact that it is a White civilization and that these discussions are not taking place in Africa, Asia or what have you.

I have long thought about this glaring gap in their discussions too and it has made me conclude that by and large the field of the so called “Philosophy” is a Sahara of barren discussions—Steve Sailer apparently agrees with me—and the very fact that after thousands of years of endless discussions, unlike other hard fields like Physics of Chemistry, these guys have not reached any generally accepted conclusions at all, is a testimony to the frivolity of their activity.

It is true that fields like Literary Criticism, for example, are not “hard sciences” either, but even here, unlike the case of Philosophy, you have a number of generally accepted judgments—the centrality of Dante and Shakespeare in Western poetry and the aesthetic preeminence of Tolstoy and Proust in the Western prose fiction, for example, among many other generally accepted opinions—whereas you cannot find a single philosophic view that will be shared by all of the myriad philosophical schools and fashions that have sprouted in the past 2,500 years.

For my part, what I can say is that any occasional powerful insights I have seen coming from professional philosophers never are the results of any elaborate philosophical systems, but are instead simple products of common sense, and might very well have been uttered by any regular, intelligent people. So, why bother? You can learn much more about the human nature and the real world by reading the great classics of the Western Literature than by wading through infinitely boring volumes of pseudo “lovers of Wisdom”, as these guys pompously call themselves.

Second, what’s the point of leaving one superstition just to embrace another? Unfortunately, that’s what people normally do. Atheists normally leave Christianity just to immediately convert to Liberalism and vice versa, for example. What’s the point of looking skeptically at Western spirituality and revering its Eastern counterpart at the same time? That’s a non sequitur. I don’t buy Buddhism, Hinduism or what have you for the same reasons that I don’t take the Abrahamic doctrines seriously: for all their bombastic claims, their allegations are not empirically verifiable, period. If I am to embrace their patent absurdities in particular, why not embracing any other absurdities in general?

Third, what you said concerning the intrinsic despair and pessimism of Buddhism is also true, and again I had also noticed it. The reason why the doctrine of reincarnation is so fundamental to Buddhism is because if you were to embrace the horrifying view this religion has of life without any faith in a life after death, you would logically feel the urge to commit suicide. People who convert to Buddhism have to be convinced to stay alive by means of inculcating in them a belief in reincarnation; and in the hope of not reincarnating by means of following the eightfold path in order to reach Nirvana and not to reincarnate anymore.

Well, any non mentally deranged person can see the madness of such a set of ideas. But unfortunately, all religious systems are ultimately as crazy as Buddhism. All you have to do is to boil their pompous, self-righteous talk down to its bottom lines and you’ll see what their proponents are really talking about.

Christians, for example, love to say that “God has a plan for your life”. It seems all very fine, until you realize that this plan is that you worship the Jew Jesus. By doing so, you’ll be awarded the opportunity to worship him forever in an afterlife, in a place called Heaven (apparently, a supernatural version of North Korea, with the Christian God in the place of Kim Jong Il), whereas, by refusing to do it, you’ll be tortured forever, being burned in a superheated chamber called Hell. It doesn’t matter how convoluted their talk, how straight their faces while they preach their ideas, or under how many pages of supposedly profound wisdom the Christians try to bury this horrific picture. The fact of the matter is that their core beliefs are as stupid as any savage’s from the Bronze Age—and arguably more wicked at that.

In my humble opinion, Whites should flush such nonsense down the toilet and follow the example of healthier races like the Japanese, the Chinese and the kikes—pace the wickedness of the latter. Shintoism, Confucianism and Judaism are simple pseudo-religious casuistry aiming at preserving the temporal social order of their respective civilizations. To put it bluntly, the ultimate goal of these doctrines is the physical preservation and prosperity of their respective peoples, so much so that they don’t even waste time elaborating on a supposed afterlife, preferring instead to concentrate on the cult of the ancestors and on practical rules of public morality. In other words, we’re talking about racial-preservation cults here. Christianity, Islam and Buddhism, on the other hand, are universalistic ideologies that see this world as a distraction from transcendental truths around which we should build all whole lives.

I’m not suggesting that Whites should create a new religion in which they worship themselves instead of the Christian God or any other non-White deity or spiritual leader for that matter (Ben Klassen, for one, was of this persuasion). White Nationalists are an intellectual vanguard of the White race and they are simply too smart to start following a new religion. It takes idiots to found a new religion (illiterate fishermen in the case of Christianity, illiterate caravan robbers in the case of Islam) and I honestly don’t think we have enough of them in this movement—at least not in numbers big enough to reach a critical mass.

Unlike a number of “philosophers”, I do think we don’t need a supernatural worldview in order to establish and maintain a stable, healthy social order. I can envision the Chinese, the Japanese and the Jewish races living far away into the future under the auspices of down-to-earth, metaphysically unambitious doctrines such as Shintoism, Confucianism and Judaism. But can you picture racial stability for the populations leaving under universalistic creeds like Christianity, Islam or Buddhism, which only acknowledge the physical world in order to repudiate it to a bigger or lesser degree in exchange for an alleged post-mortem reward of some kind? To ask this question is to answer it.

Just one more observation:

Greg Johnson once noted apropos of a Michael O’Meara book he reviewed: “I look at Christian art as merely the ideological channel through which white genius was forced for a long time to flow”, and Johnson is right—as usual.

Look, philosophies and religions come and go. But the great White art, for example, like Literature that I mentioned above, is here to stay. And above all, the race that made the articulation of the three phenomena possible is what really matters.

At the end of the day, it is for the White race that one should fight for instead of religions or philosophies “A” or “B” or “Z”—especially when these philosophies and religions are not only dubious (to say the least) but were inflicted (or at least heavily influenced) upon Whites by folks who hate them and want to destroy them.

Tags Christian question (CQ), Religion

Conspiracy theories Degeneracy Islam Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald Sexual degeneracy

What tipped my apothecary scale?

Post author By C .T.
Post date May 30, 2013
9 Comments on What tipped my apothecary scale?

Or:

Stephen Dalton’s point

Another way to see the difference between bicausalism type-A and type B is through the thought experiment of who would you blame the most, the anthropophagous Morlocks or the suicidal passivity of the blond Eloi in H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine? Those who focus on Jewry blame the Morlocks of course. But there are those who, like John Martínez, can see through the minds of the blond Swedes during the recent burning of Stockholm by Muslims and call a spade a spade: white suicide.

I would like now to say something about what I said in my previous post on paradigm shifts. In an Apothecary scale, when a pan of the scale accumulates 51 per cent of either side, the scale will tip on the bottom stop. Following the metaphor of the scale, what accumulated the needed 51 per cent on the pan for the scale’s arm to lean my mind toward type-B bicausalism was the fact that some people in the white nationalist movement promote both sexual deviants and degenerate music. Since these people are perfectly conscious of the Jewish problem, I told to myself during those “mental warfare” soliloquies I spoke of in my previous post, this could not be attributed to Jewish influence. In other words, if even white nationalists—precisely the ones, one would expect, who would pursue healthy music and sexual mores—have fallen into the suicidal hedonistic mores, there must be another factor besides the Jewish one.

Let’s put it this way. In the thread of the article “Bicausalism Type B” at Occidental Dissent, Stephen E. Dalton said:

Too many people who are involved in white nationalism are ignorant, hyper-emotional fools who obsess about the other, claiming it’s all their fault (Jews, Blacks, etc.) while not paying attention to their own faults and weaknesses. Hunter & Jack’s [OD’s admins] message is, be aware of your strengths and weaknesses, and take responsibility for them, and be aware of your enemies strengths, weaknesses, and their subversive tactics, and avoid giving into their tricks. Too many of the commentators at OD tend to believe the enemy is all powerful, that he is everywhere. “It’s the Jooos” or some other group is their battle cry. This is nonsense, and let me tell you why.

Porn used to be a small mom and pop business found in the bad parts of a town, dominated by Jews. Now it’s a multi-billion dollar business that sells its filth over the internet. Why did porn become so big? It went big time because the white majority wanted it, lusted after it, and brought it. Sure, the pornographers, and their paid whores in academia, the law, the mass media, and medicine held the forbidden fruit in front of us, but the white majority of this country took that fruit and ate it. We made this enemy powerful by giving it our time and our money. We are the ones who must take responsibility to weaken and destroy it by refusing to feed the beast.

Of all I have read in the nationalist literature, my favorite quote has been what Andrew Hamilton said in one of his articles at Counter Currents: “What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good.” I have written about Hamilton’s quote in one of the most disturbing entries here at WDH, but for the moment I prefer to pass the microphone to Dalton:

Blaming the Jews for everything is a cop out. Yes they are responsible for a lot of mischief, but so are other groups. To claim that the Boston Tragedy was a Mossad-Jewish-Israeli false flag op is the height of idiocy. It was a Muslim planned op all the way. Yet some people commenting here on this blog and elsewhere refused to see the evidence right in front of their eyes. Instead, they allowed their feelings and emotions against one group to blind them to the reality of what really happened. It is this kind of blind hatred, motivated by paleologic [thinking] (putting emotions and feelings before facts) that kept me away from what is called the racial right for years.

Perhaps Dalton picked the word “paleologic” from what I told him in another recent thread at Occidental Dissent. This is a complex issue (in my book I explain the fundamentals of the concept of “paleologic thinking” here).

When Dalton wrote his comment he had in mind those silly nationalists that believe that the recent London decapitation incident was a Jewish hoax. But these people don’t only blame the Jews, instead of the Muslims, for that single incident: they blame the Jews for the recent Boston bombings too; the killings of Adam Lanza, the Breivik incident at Norway, 9/11 and some conspiracy theorists have developed crank theories about the 2005 London bombings (in Spain these idiots also believe that the Jihad attack of 2004 at Madrid was also staged). Dalton continues:

I now know, thanks to the work of men like Hunter, Jack, and others that there are people who can think clearly on this topic, and can sift through information on events, people, and ideas, and come up with logical answers that conform to what is actually reality.

Kevin MacDonald’s The Occidental Observer is one of the few sane voices that can discuss the Jewish Question without falling into paranoid delusions.

Tags Jewish question (JQ)