web analytics
Israel / Palestine


The West’s Darkest Hour disappeared for a few hours as of 2:20 pm. The server informed me that they made some adjustments. Apparently, the problem has been fixed.

This short clip from 1992 of Ted Koppel’s interview with President Nixon is fascinating to back up what I said yesterday about the ‘Christian Cup’ (note that John Mearsheimer, who comments on the clip with Judge Napolitano, wrote a great book about the Israel lobby).

The ‘bond’ Nixon speaks of between the US and Israel is, according to the president, a ‘moral commitment’. This is analogous to what Tom Sunic recently said in The Occidental Observer, of which I quoted this. Then Mearsheimer talks about the extraordinary relationship between the US and Israel. It reminds me of what Charlton Heston used to say about his marriage: rather murder than divorce!

It is increasingly clear, at least to me, that rather than Israel the real perp is the US (cf. Sunic’s Homo Americanus, especially the chapter ‘A War Crime of the Bible’ referring to WW2 ).

Israel / Palestine Transvaluation of all values War!

A final solution…

to the Palestinian problem

Above, Davidster (Star of David) by Dick Stins, a holocaust memorial in The Hague. The text at the side in Dutch and Hebrew is from Deuteronomy 25:17, 19: ‘Remember what Amalek has done to you, do not forget.’ On the other hand, about the ongoing genocide in Gaza, Netanyahu has said: ‘You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible’, which is based on 1 Samuel 15:3:

Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

What the Jews are doing doesn’t shock me. What is fascinating from the POV of The West’s Darkest Hour is that American evangelicals see nothing wrong with this Palestinian Holocaust, simply because the victimisers are the chosen ones (remember what I recently quoted from Tom Sunic). Had the victimisers been pure Aryans, like these evangelicals or what Himmler and his henchmen did—God forbid!: i.e., the god of the Jews, which is why, when I talk about genuine spirituality, I don’t use any more the word ‘God’ but ‘Gods’ in the plural in reference to the words in Delphi’s oracle; this is what transvaluing all the values means.

Just look at the Xtian hawks in the American Congress: they don’t care about the Palestinians, only about the chosen ones! Is it clear now why we have been saying since 2012 that the Christian problem ‘encompasses’ the Jewish problem?

Ben-Hur Israel / Palestine

Nostalgic overture

The genocide being perpetrated in Gaza is grabbing the attention of the alternative media, including the racial right. We should welcome this Israeli blunder insofar as, thanks to it, the tribe will lose its aura of victimhood and become a victimiser at least for a section of the Western population. But this spotlight could be misleading when it comes to the most important news of the moment. I am referring to the recent long-range strike missiles launched on Russian territory whose button was probably pressed by NATO itself. As Colonel Douglas Macgregor has just said, the war has entered a new phase: a very dangerous phase that could escalate into a direct US confrontation with Russia, since NATO is, after all, the military arm of the US on European soil.

Changing the subject, there is something I would like to add to my Friday article, ‘The Narrow Door’. Precisely because (except in my case) there are no people who have written this new kind of autobiography, not only is there no psychological healing for those who were mentally wounded as minors, but the mind of the surviving mutant isn’t understood.

For example, yesterday I read the phrase ‘Christianity is essentially a spent force’ in an article in The Unz Review which suddenly made me feel a passing nostalgia for my years when Christianity was still at its prime, to the extent that I listened to the overture of the 1959 film Ben-Hur and even the opening scenes. Since I come from a family of musicians I feel that music perfectly portrays how many Westerners still felt about Christianity decades ago: when that religion was still in good shape. I saw the film as a child and teenager several times over the years on the big screen, while in the country where I live, it used to be re-released from time to time.

But how did I engender that nostalgia yesterday with the first half hour of Ben-Hur if I am anti-Christian, my readers may ask? Precisely because I fulfil the Delphic mandate I can make contact with the César I once was: someone like Bran the Broken touching a Weirwood root in the cave of his mentor to find some solace in a nostalgic memory of the old self he once had.

Retrieving all those selves of the past makes one better equipped to understand a present-day Christian who, unlike me, hasn’t apostatised from the religion of our parents. These are very healthy mental exercises because, if we imagine them in Venn diagrams, my present mind ‘encompasses’ the mind of the former César, although the mind of the lad of that time cannot encompass the mind of the present adult: it wasn’t so expanded. In other words, I can empathise with a Christian just by an exercise like the one I did yesterday with the majestic overture to that film, but a Christian cannot return the favour as he hasn’t expanded his mind to the degree of an insightful apostasy. To use a metaphor I’ve used for years in my soliloquies, I can see them but they can’t see me.

Incidentally, at the end of ‘The Narrow Door’ I said that those young people who would like to contribute their work to reprint our books of the featured post could write to me, and I added that they could contact me via the ‘Donate and/or contact’ entry, which until yesterday posted my Tutanota email. Unfortunately, I’ve been unable to access my Tutanota account for a few days now, so I’ve just changed my email address to a Gmail account.

Deranged altruism Gaedhal (commenter) Israel / Palestine

The new subordinationists

This 13th-century fresco in a church in Perugia, Italy, depicts the Trinity
as a being with three faces representing Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

One of the apparent mysteries of the anti-white religion today is Subordinationism.

Influenced by Stoic philosophy, the subordinationists held a Trinitarian doctrine according to which the Son, and sometimes also the Holy Spirit, were subordinate to the Father not only in submission and role but with actual ontological subordination in varying degrees. Many early Christian theologians postulated a hierarchical classification of the persons of the Trinity, although their position was later considered heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople.

Years before I discovered white nationalism, something funny happened to me with a beautiful, fully Aryan woman with whom I had a coffee in Mexico City together with her brother, a chess-playing friend. I told them that I had just seen a film shot in one of the Muslim countries, which ends with a pubescent girl being deflowered by her elderly husband. I intended to defend the girl.

The liberal woman jumped up in anger. She railed against the film and the message of the director of the Muslim country. I didn’t understand why, if she was more or less a feminist and I was defending a pubescent girl, this liberal woman was so furious. Once I discovered the white nationalist forums, I found the answer.

The point is that, for the new subordinationists, there is a hierarchy in their new Trinity: equality of race, gender and sexual identity. So if two persons of the trinity come into conflict (Muslims are sandniggers and at the same time they live under a patriarchy), the second or third persons of the trinity are subordinates to the father god, i.e. race (liberals see Muslims living in Europe as a noble race just because they aren’t white).

Unlike the Council of Constantinople which declared subordinationism heretical, the new religion of the West is subordinationist: first and foremost is the non-white race (God the Father) and gender equality and sexual identity are subordinated to this Father. This explains my confussion with that liberal woman many years ago. (Incidentally, her brother, a certain Demetrio, who sided with his sister during our argument, later committed suicide.)

With this in mind, let us now think of the grotesque phenomenon of the elites supporting Israel to such an extent that they are even beating and jailing non-whites who dare to support Palestine in some European cities! Why do they do that? Didn’t race—non-whites in Europe—take priority, and even more so if some Israelis are phenotypically whiter than Palestinians? True, but the fact is that, in the new subordinationist theology, there is hierarchy even among non-whites.

The anti-white religion that was created after the Second World War is an exact reverse of Hitlerism. So if Hitler and the Third Reich considered the Jews a subversive tribe, in the new religion they have literally become the chosen people. But the most sinister thing of all is that it is the Aryans themselves who have chosen kikes as the chosen ones, so much so that not even the brown migrants who support a people subjugated for decades by Israelis are now tolerated.

For these new heretics the slogan seems to be: Subordinationist hierarchy above all! In the new Aryan Trinity, the Jew has become the sacrificial Lamb whom we are all supposed to love including his new state, Israel. In his comment today, Gaedhal wrote:

I would rather not write about politics on this thread. There are much more profitable and productive things to write about, like programming. However, yet again, the world—thanks to the US and Israel—stands on the brink of another conflagration.

Megyn Kelly should have an entry in the Encyclopedia of American Loons. She is willing to waste America’s blood and treasure, defending Israel, of all places. She speaks about Israel’s right to exist. What about Irish Catholics’ right to exist? Do Jews and Israelis concede to us ethnically Irish people the exclusive right to the Island of Ireland, something clearly spelt out in the 1916 proclamation? Of course, Irish Protestants have the right to their own state, north of the border. I tend to lean Unionist, these days. Does Megyn Kelly’s Jewish friends concede this right to us?

Charity begins at home. If bad guys need to be killed, then there are plenty of bad guys to be killed on the North American continent. There are plenty of things that lethal martial force could accomplish on the North American Continent that would actually be in the interest of US citizens. I recently saw a video where an Army Vet encouraged white men not to join the US Army because, of course, none of these wars prosecuted by the US government and military is actually in our interest.

[Zionists] go so far as even wanting a war with Iran if that keeps Israel safe. How in the name of a metaphorical God is any of this in America’s interest? America has been at war, almost non-stop since Pearl Harbour. Is the world any safer, any more prosperous, any more secure from 80 years of war? Why is America full of insane pundits like Megyn Kelly?

The answer is simple. The country was founded by Christian fanatics who had to perceive themselves as the new Israelis to establish a city upon a hill. The American project has now become a self-fulfilling prophecy, and Kelly is just an aberration among millions of philo-Semitic Zionists: the basis of Jewish power. (Remember the POV of this site: the Jews didn’t take over the West by force: the Aryan traitors handed it over to the Jew, their new ‘God the Father’ after WW2. That’s why we focus on the CQ instead of the JQ.)

Gaedhal (commenter) Israel / Palestine Liberalism


On this site I have several times embedded videos of Derek Lambert interviewing New Testament critics such as Richard Carrier and Richard Miller, but I have also criticised Lambert for his Neo-Christian anti-racism.

There is something very striking about apostates from Christianity. They almost universally embrace a liberal and egalitarian faith even more extreme than the Christian universalist, something we knew from the first incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour with the post ‘The Red Giant’, originally uploaded when Blogspot hosted my site (then we moved to WordPress and now to the present address).

In his correspondence today, our our learned friend Gaedhal tells us:

Lambert was on [redacted], and I even exchanged a few emails with him. However… I just don’t like him. I have always had an intuitive dislike of him. Now he introduces his father, a volunteer in US-instigated wars of plunder, adventure and regime change.

Again, my anti-war principles are informed by the far-left podcast Citations Needed. I am trying to be fair and balanced as I can. In the same way that I don’t respect the cops, I don’t respect the troops. As I said before, if these wars were in our interest, American troops would be fighting on the North American Continent. British troops would be fighting on the island of Great Britain to defend against the ongoing invasion of that island by ‘boat people’.

I don’t care, in the slightest about the deaths of 1,000 Israeli settlers on Palestinian land. The Jews are fucking around on Palestinian land. Every now and then, some of them are gonna find out. In retaliation, the Israelis have besieged the Palestinian territories, cutting off water and electricity, which is a war crime.

It is curious how the social media are mentioning this, which is true, while omitting that the Allies did exactly the same after 1945 with millions of Germans, who died like flies. Those who haven’t read Sexton’s review of Hellstorm should stop reading this post and read the review now!

They refuse to allow humanitarian channels for the likes of the UN or the Red Cross. If Israel is fighting a total war against the Palestinians, then we can expect, from time to time, the Palestinians to retaliate. If 1,000 Irish Catholics were murdered by Muslims, the Jews wouldn’t care. Indeed, they would immediately redirect and reframe the conversation to ‘I sure hope there isn’t a backlash against the Muslim community.’ When white people are murdered by Muslims in Europe, the Jews always derail the conversation to talk about the evils of Islamophobia. Tucker Carlson is a genius for using this tactic against them. Yeah, sure, the death of a thousand Israelis is tragic, and all, but what about all the Americans who are killed by our own ‘settlers’. As I said before: solidarity is a one-way street, and the Jews have zero solidarity with me, my people, my ethnicity, my country, my continent.

Again, being anti-war is both a right-wing thing and a left-wing thing. Saoradh, from the far left opposes the actions of Israel, and US-instigated wars and I from the radical right do so too. Israel is an abomination, and no real antitheist would shill for them. This is a point that Alan Green brings up: Lambert only seems to be antitheistic towards Christianity and Islam. Judaism—the source of the Abrahamic stream of pure poison—gets treated with kid gloves.

Philo-Semitism is due to the baleful influence that Christianity has had on the Western psyche. On the anti-Semitic right, it is very common for pundits to cherry-pick historical facts such as the expulsion of Jews from various reigns in Christendom. But they omit the main fact: Judaism was ultimately tolerated because the so-called Old Testament appears in both the Jewish and Christian bibles. What was never tolerated after Constantine and the following emperors—except Julian—were the 100% Aryan religions: whether they were the religions of the Greco-Roman world or, later with Charlemagne, of the Germanic world.

Lambert is a real ace at interviewing, say, Richard Miller, and in fact I bought and read Miller’s book thanks to Lambert’s interviews. But non-Nietzschean apostates become, axiologically, atheistic hyper-Christians and, worst of all, many like Lambert become openly philo-Semitic Zionists. That is why, we have said, atheists are even worse than Christians (the key to this apparent mystery is provided by Nietzsche’s epigraph to the post ‘The Red Giant’).

Degeneracy Israel / Palestine

Parisians v. Israelis

There is something I would like to say about how Hamas turned an Israeli music festival into a massacre (more than 250 people died on Saturday inside Israel at that festival—see video here). When I saw the images before the attack, when the young people were still dancing, I said to myself ironically, although I am not a theist: ‘God’s punishment for degenerate music!’

Then I realised an error of judgement. Such feelings of hatred for degenerates are legitimate for the French who, in 2015, were at an Eagles of Death Metal concert, attended by 1,500 people, at the Bataclan Theatre, when heroic jihadis entered to massacre them. But it’s no good saying the same about the Israelis. Why?

In secret soliloquies, I have told myself countless times that I should celebrate that the elites are already Woke in much of Latin America. If the point is to conquer the subcontinent in a sort of Master Plan South if, north of the Rio Grande, the pure Aryans were to wage war like The Turner Diaries, it suits me that the mestizos are in a state of complete cultural degradation. Wokism is welcome among the enemies to subjugate!

If I fantasise about this on the continent where I live, why not celebrate that there are already some Woke aspects in Israel for Israeli consumption?

‘God’s punishment’ is reserved for the Aryans we want to save from Wokism (e.g. the Parisians who were pure Aryans at that concert eight years ago). But it doesn’t apply to those whom one wants to mentally poison, subjugate and eventually erase from the face of the earth.

Israel / Palestine Kalki

Palestine, Israel, etc.

‘I know your little exterminationist game, and you are banned from playing it here. Go back to TRS’. —Greg Johnson to Tracy

In many ways, The West’s Darkest Hour is a critical site of the American racial right. It reminds me a bit of what Alex Linder used to say: that paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan and racialists like Jared Taylor should be ruthlessly criticised for ignoring the JQ. I do the same but with folks to my immediate left: the white nationalists who ignore the CQ, the Christian question.

Let’s examine two articles published today by the American racial right. Hunter Wallace’s article on the Palestine & Israel war contains a link to this enlightening documentary showing that Gaza is, in fact, a concentration camp. I liked what Wallace had to say in his points numbered 1 to 15, especially his criticism of the crazy American Zionists who, in my opinion, are worse than Nosferatu himself in that they betray their race (Wallace also mentions the latter in his article). Conversely, I don’t like, although it is fashionable in these forums, that they put images from tweets or overwrite their articles with images, as clownishly as Andrew Anglin does, and I am shocked that even Kevin MacDonald sometimes falls into this adolescent practice.

On the other hand, there is an article in Counter-Currents whose editor, Greg Johnson, is not a Christian but a secular neo-Christian. Reading it reminded me of what we have said many times on this site: secular neo-Christians are worse, axiologically speaking than traditional Christians. For example, in that article we read:

I want the [Palestine/Israel] fighting to end as soon as possible, of course. I feel the same way about the Russo-Ukrainian War, which is still going on after a year and a half of bloodshed.

This cannot contrast more with the ontological core of this site, which has the archetype of Kalki—something like being to the right of Himmler—as the saviour of the future. What we want is a civilisational collapse, a punishment for the Aryans who betrayed themselves of such biblical proportions that Christian ethics is completely vaporised among the survivors. We have no love for humanity, only an exterminationist hatred provided, of course, that the extremely few survivors will be pure Aryans to repopulate the Earth after the apocalypse.

A final word. The first comment in the Counter-Currents article is this:

I want Israel to exist, largely because when enough whites wake up to Jewish perfidy once again and do something (hopefully non-violent) about it, the guilty will have a place to go to.

Yes. If Israel is destroyed, which many on the dissident Right seem myopically to hope for, where will all those millions of displaced Jews go? Europe and America. Now that would be a catastrophe on top of a disaster.

I wonder what Linder would say about these Neo-Christians?

Israel / Palestine War!


What happens in Israel and Palestine is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is why the Aryans haven’t been behaving like Hamas after WW2 against an infinitely greater enemy (really, in 1945 the last true Aryan died).

Adolf Hitler Israel / Palestine Judaism Laurent Guyénot Old Testament Theology

The Holy Hook, 3

by Laurent Guyénot

Christians’ learned helplessness

It is beyond question that Christianity played a major role in the creation of Israel, and continues to play a major role in securing American and European support for its criminal enterprises. This has nothing to do with Jesus’ teaching or the example he set with his life and death, of course. Rather, this was due to the Od Testament, Israel’s Trojan Horse inside Christianity. By recognizing the Jews’ special status as the people of the Old Testament, Christians have granted them an extraordinary symbolic power that no other ethnic community can compete with.

______ 卐 ______

Editor’s note: Since he’s writing for The Unz Review, Laurent omits to add that white nationalism should be seen as a failed movement. Except for Hitler and his closest henchmen, every Jew-wise man knows about the Jewish problem but none wants to say who is responsible for their power.

______ 卐 ______

For two thousand years, Christianity has taught Gentiles to consent to the delusional claim of the Jews to divine election: are they not the first and only ethnic group whom the God of the universe has addressed personally, the people whom He has loved to the point of exterminating its enemies? It matters not that Christians tell the Jews that they have lost the election because they rejected Christ: the main price is theirs. To accept the biblical notion of ‘chosen people’, whatever the reservations, is to accept the metaphysical superiority of the Jews. If Christ is Israel’s Messiah, then truly, ‘salvation is from the Jews’ (John 4:22).

We are experiencing today the final consequences of this submission, which the peoples of Antiquity could never have imagined in their worst nightmares. The exalted status of the Jews and of their ‘holy history’ is the deeper reason for their influence on the affairs of the world. By accepting the triple biblical paradigm—Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land—, Christian Churches, Catholic and Protestant in particular, have become complicit with the imperialistic project of the Hebrew Bible. Therefore, there will be no definitive emancipation from Zion without mental and moral emancipation from the biblical matrix.

When reading the Book of Joshua, a Christian is supposed to approve, as a matter of principle, the extermination of the inhabitants of the cities of Canaan and the stealing of their land, since it was ordained by God. The editors of my Bible de Jérusalem explain in a footnote to chapter 3:

Joshua was considered by the Fathers as a figure of his namesake Jesus [their names are identical in Hebrew], and the Jordanian passage as a figure of Christian baptism.

How can Joshua be a figure of Jesus? What has Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount to do with Joshua’s bloodthirsty fanatism? How can the god of Joshua be the Father of Christ? A crippling cognitive dissonance has seized Christian peoples, causing a chronic inability to think intelligently about the divine, and to see and resist the violence of Israel. We can also compare the Christian world to a son who has been lied to all his life about his real father, and, on top of that, told that his father was a war criminal, when in fact he is the son of a loving father. The neurotic ailments that genealogical lies and secrets may cause over several generations, though largely mysterious, have been well documented in the last fifty years (particularly by French psychogenealogists), and I believe such considerations, applied to the usurpation of our Heavenly Parent’s identity by the psychopathic Yahweh, are relevant to the psychology of nations.

______ 卐 ______

Editor’s note: Unlike Laurent, we are not theists but pantheists (see the abridgement of Richard Weikart’s book on Hitler we made for this site).

______ 卐 ______

As a matter of principle, the Christian is supposed to approve Yahweh’s sentence on those who ate with the Moabites and took wives among them: ‘Yahweh said to Moses, “Take all the leaders of the people. Impale them facing the sun, for Yahweh, to deflect his burning anger from Israel”’ (Numbers 25:4). But then, why blame the Jerusalem priestly cast for sending Jesus to the torture? Explain to me in which way they were unfaithful to the Torah! Not to mention, of course, the inherent contradiction in blaming them for the Cross since, according to the Gospel, ‘the Son of man was destined to suffer grievously, and to be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and to be put to death, and after three days to rise again’ (Mark 8:31).

The sanctification of Yahweh’s bloody leadership during the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan has made Gentiles incapable of understanding the historical foundation of Jewishness, and helpless in the face of its intrinsic violence today. It has created a blind spot in Christians’ mind: they may see the effects of Zion’s evil power, but not its cause, falsely assuming that the moral corruption they see in Jews comes from the Talmud and the Kabbalah.

Christians cannot even see the Jewish plan for world domination that is written in plain language, right under their nose. If the Jewish Tanakh had not become the Christians’ Holy Book, it would have been exposed as the proof for Israel’s racist and supremacist ambitions long ago. But when it comes to the Old Testament, Christians are seized by a severe reading disorder: when the book says ‘Israel will conquer the world’, they read ‘the Church will convert the world’.

If the ‘Jewish question’ is about the inordinate power of Israeli elite networks within nations, then the Jewish question is also a Christian question: (emphasis by Ed.) it is about the built-in vulnerability of Christian societies to this power. Deep down, anyone who grew up a Christian knows that the chosen people will have the last word, because if Yahweh is God, his promise is eternal, as he himself declares, in his inimitable style: ‘By my own self I swear it; what comes from my mouth is saving justice, it is an irrevocable word’ (Isaiah 45:23). One can even speak of Christians’ ‘learned helplessness’ in front of Jewish power, since they are taught in their Scriptures that God has always guided Israel’s merciless slaughter of his enemies—no need for Scofield’s footnotes to know that. There is also learned helplessness in having as ultimate model a man crucified by the Jews: how can the ‘imitation of Christ’ save us from the high priests’ power to lobby and corrupt Pilatus?

The Judeo-Babylonian metaphysical hoax makes God not just ridiculously anthropomorphic, but Judeomorphic. To be fooled by it is to mistake the Creator of the Universe for a topical demon rumbling and spitting fire from a Midianite volcano (Exodus 19), adopted as tutelary deity by a confederation of Semitic nomadic tribes craving for a piece of the Fertile Crescent. It is to internalize an extremely primitive and unspiritual image of the divine that is obstructive of sound metaphysical thinking: the divorce between philosophy (the love of Wisdom) and theology (the science of God) is one manifestation of this cognitive dissonance in Western thought.

In the final analysis, the jealous Yahweh, destroyer of all pantheons, is so unconvincing in the garb of the Great universal God that he is fated to be discarded in his turn. Atheism is the end result of biblical monotheism: it is the rejection of the biblical God, mistaken for the true God. ‘If Yahweh is God, no thanks’ has been the simple rationale for atheism in Christendom since the Enlightenment: Voltaire, for example, scorned Christianity by quoting the Old Testament. Yahweh has ruined faith in a divine Creator.

Eugenics Israel / Palestine Neanderthalism Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 22

We are accused of ‘denying man’ by placing the last of the healthy animals, the smallest healthy plant—the last of the dandelions, perfect on its level—above the human waste, the mentally retarded, let alone the idiot, and the animal or plant aristocracy, above the Untermensch, even the apparently ‘normal’; the raceless and characterless human being, smug and cowardly; petty; incapable of thinking for himself, and essentially selfish.

We are reproached for advocating the physical suppression of the demented, the profoundly retarded, the idiots and monsters who, at taxpayers’ expense, clutter up the asylums of ‘civilised’ countries, and the sterilisation of people afflicted with dangerous heredity.

We are reproached, perhaps more than anything else, for having allowed German physiologists and doctors to experiment on human enemies of the Reich, taken from the concentration camps, even though they were forbidden to use animals; in other words, for having shown more consideration for the animal than for the actual or even potential ideological enemy. Above all, this is what most of our adversaries, stuffed with ‘denazifying’ propaganda for more than twenty-five years, have in mind when they declare that we ‘deny man’.

______ 卐 ______

Editor’s Note: Anti-Nazi chutzpa has no limits. The so-called Ringworm affair was a scandal involving approximately twenty thousand immigrated Jews who were mistreated between 1948 and 1960 with ionizing radiation on the head and neck area in Israel.

The idea was to poison and eventually dispatch Sephardic children, considered inferior by the Ashkenazi caste at the founding of their New Jerusalem. Israeli activists in our century consider the X-rays that these children suffered to the point of sterilisation as the most prominent example of injustices in the 1950s. But I don’t even blame them: I blame an astronomically imbecile US whose evangelicals believe they are the chosen people.

______ 卐 ______

The first step would be to agree on the connotation (and hence the denotation) of this concept of ‘man’, of which so much is made. It is, apparently, the connotation they give it that interests our detractors the most. They call ‘man’ any upright primate capable of articulate speech, to whom they automatically attribute ‘reason’ and, if they are Christians, an immortal soul created in the image of god. But it is the upright posture and the articulate language, traits that are obvious, that inform these friends of man, about the (less obvious) presence of other characteristics. What they do with all living things that exhibit these two distinctive features—what am I saying?—even of those who are completely deprived of them but who possess the human form… because our adversaries place the idiot above the most beautiful of beasts!

Here we see, once again, how true it is that the denotation of a concept is in inverse proportion to its connotation. What gives our opponents the persistent impression that we ‘deny man’ is that we are much more demanding than they are concerning the connotation of this term, and that, consequently, its denotation, in our eyes, narrows accordingly.

It is not enough for us to grant a primate the name of man, and the respect that is attached to it in cultivated languages, that this creature stands preferably on its hind legs, and is capable of emitting articulated sounds that have, for it and others, a meaning. It is not enough for us, all the more so, that it should have, without even presenting these two characters, a silhouette vaguely similar to that of one of us.

We want him to possess that minimum of intelligence which will enable him to think for himself, and that minimum of nobility will make him incapable of certain reactions to obstacles, inaccessible to certain ‘temptations’, impervious to certain debasing influences, and a fortiori incapable of petty or cowardly acts, ugly acts. We do want, if not to ‘love’, at least to respect ‘all men’ in the same way as we respect all beautiful living beings, animals and plants, in which we feel more or less attenuated reflections of the divine, the eternal.

But for this to happen they must be ‘men’ in the strongest sense of the word. We are ready to respect, as individuals, even the people, ideological adversaries, even racial enemies, whom we fought collectively yesterday, and whom we will fight again tomorrow—to respect them if, taken separately, they respond to what we expect of ‘man’: if they combine, with a non-enslaved intelligence, the qualities of character which (statistically) distinguish the races I call superior—and first of all, of course, our Aryan race and even the exceptionally noble individual from the statistically inferior races.

This will not prevent us from fighting them, if they are ideologically dangerous; all the more dangerous because they have more intrinsic value. In other words, we respect as ‘men’ those who, if they are not already ideologically ours, would be worthy of becoming so in our eyes.