web analytics

Category: Metaphysics of race / sex

Categories
Film Metaphysics of race / sex Sense & Sensibility

Sense & sensibility

In three sessions, at midnight I once again watched the 1995 film Sense and Sensibility.

I think a priest of the holy words should see it, say, every two years. Of the eleven films I recommend, this is one of my three favourites, in that it visually depicts the ethnostate we must reach: After the extermination of the Neanderthals, a world with diminished technology, without a single non-white or mudblood (as in the film), where it is possible to court English roses as the axis around which all culture revolves.

I watched the film before going to bed. There were several times in the evenings that I couldn’t credit the beauty of the actresses’ white skin, as white as snow. If Eros is the dialectical force behind all this metaphysical theatre of the fourteen words, the only thing I can say about the absence in the racial right of these images is that we are in the Christian era. Remember: it was in the Greco-Roman world and in the Italian Renaissance that the Aryan figure triumphed in the most splendid palaces and public places, something that ended when Christianity prevailed again after the Reformation and Counter-Reformation.

Among the commenters, only one Englishman observed several years ago that I was the only one in the racialist blogosphere who kept harping on and on about the beauty of the Aryan woman. As those of you who visited this site when it was hosted by WordPress will remember, there were paintings of ethereal nymphs on the sidebar that motivated me to keep writing.

If, as Jung said when Hitler was in power, there are two collective unconscious, one Jewish and another Aryan, the collective unconscious that has currently taken possession of the white soul is undoubtedly the Jewish one. Otherwise we would already be seeing, everywhere, representations of Aryan beauty in non-commercial but religious and political contexts, as we could in the streets and temples of Greece and Rome.

As I hadn’t seen Sense and Sensibility for a while, I think I’ll watch Pride and Prejudice, filmed a decade later, for the next few midnights…

Categories
Metaphysics of race / sex

Alcibiades

The beautiful Greek vs. the ugly Athenian

The last words of my previous post on Heydrich give us pause for thought. From this moment in the video linked in the comments section, we hear words that show the gulf between us and the contemporary racial right. I refer to a phrase, already quoted in my recent PDF Crusade against the Cross, that Socrates’ ugliness was practically a refutation to the ancient Greeks.

Alcibiades, ‘the most beautiful man in Greece’ according to the video, represents the ideals of this site; and Socrates represents the methodology of the contemporary racial right. In short, what really counts is physical beauty, the rest follows from there (art, politics, religion, social system, etc.).

As the author of the video said, Nietzsche is very difficult to understand because he is like a fish criticising the water around him. And as I said in one of my first posts about Heydrich, although I will no longer drop names of racialists whose POV I criticise, I can criticise them without mentioning them.

There are a couple of notable racialists who for years now have been talking about Nietzsche without understanding him (one of them has even appeared in the MSM). They don’t get it because the water is Christian ethics, and today that morality has enslaved both the Westerners, including the racialists, and that projection of the West that is Latin America. None of them even realise that they are living in a fish matrix.

Nietzsche would be like the fish that began to develop primitive lungs to get out of the ocean, and we would be animals starting to become adapted to the uninhabited land.

The video linked above is informative, although it bothers me that it contains advertisements from its sponsor.

Categories
Film Metaphysics of race / sex

Enchanted night

Many years ago I saw Andrei Rublev and, as I talked about the film yesterday, I was subsequently rewatching some scenes. I hadn’t realised that Durochka betrays Andrei and her Russian ethnicity by eloping with the Tatar when Andrei had taken her back to the monastery; not immediately after the Tatar massacre in Vladimir. But I wanted to talk about something else, my favourite scene of the film: the religious festival called Kupala Night, in 1408, when some Slavs hadn’t yet been forced to convert to the Semitic religion.

In the film, camping for the night on the riverbank, Andrei and his apprentice Foma are gathering firewood when Andrei hears the distant sounds of a celebration upstream in the forest. Going to investigate Andrei alone, he comes across a large group of naked non-Christians, who are performing a torch-lit ritual for the summer solstice. Andrei, dressed austerely as an Orthodox monk, is intrigued, but is caught spying on a couple making love and is tied to the crossbeam of a hut in a mockery of Jesus’ crucifixion.

A blonde woman named Marfa, scantily clad in a fur coat, approaches Andrei. After explaining that her people are persecuted for their beliefs, she drops her coat, kisses Andrei and unties him.

The monk runs away and gets lost in the dense forest, scratching his face. The next morning, he returns to his people when a group of soldiers appear on the riverbank chasing the non-Christians who had celebrated Kupala Night, including Marfa. They capture her companion but she escapes naked by swimming in the river. A beautiful scene! But Andrei and his fellow monk look the other way in shame because, according to the Semitic religion, it is sinful to watch a beautiful female body naked.

In the next episode, on a road during summer, Andrei confesses to another monk that he cannot do the task assigned to him by the bishop of Moscow. Although Andrei didn’t relapse into paganism after the enchanted night, as a principled artist he doesn’t want either to terrorise the Russian people, and refused to paint the Last Judgement. (As I was saying recently, Hitler realised that Christianity brought spiritual terror to the Aryan man.)

Later comes the Tatar invasion which, in 1983, I saw on the big screen of the cinema inside the Russian embassy in Mexico City. Although I don’t want to re-watch that scene on YouTube now, I remember it as a masterpiece that evokes my fantasy of the greenseer north of the Wall that can see the historical past as it happened.

Categories
Feminism Film Metaphysics of race / sex Patriarchy

La Belle et la Bête


This film, Beauty and the Beast was released when the Allies were perpetrating the Hellstorm Holocaust on the defenceless German people.

It’s been so many years since I saw it on the big screen, that I only used to remember when Belle’s father enters the Beast’s castle and we see how the torches with human arms light his way; as well as the ending, the couple’s ascent, as the audience applauded (something very rare in cinema theatres). Yesterday when I saw it again, in French and with subtitles in my native language, I remembered some things, but many others I had forgotten.

Although I hadn’t seen it for decades, the reason I included it in my list of 50 films that influenced me is because what I do remember perfectly well is my interpretation. I thought, for many years, that this fairy tale symbolises women’s sexuality. At first glance, our urges seem bestial to little women. But under the sacred institution of marriage, the beautiful one begins to realise that behind the animal lies a prince, and then they can live happily for the rest of their lives. In other words, only from the moment Belle can assimilate sexual relations with a Beast like us, can she ingratiate herself with Nature.

Without mentioning that movie, The Double Flame, a book that has been translated from Spanish into English, the Nobel laureate in literature Octavio Paz, who was my neighbour before he died, talks about how the ‘red flame’ of the horny male becomes a ‘blue flame’ over time in a couple’s relationship. But let’s do some history.

There are multiple variants of La Belle et la Bête. Its origin could be a story by Apuleius entitled Cupid and Psyche. The first published version of La Belle et la Bête was by the French writer Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve in 1740, although other sources credit Gianfrancesco Straparola with recreating the original story as early as 1550. The best-known written version was a much-abridged revision of Villeneuve’s original work, published in 1756 by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont. The first translation was made into English in 1757. Although there are many variants of the story throughout Europe, Beaumont’s version is the most famous and is the basis for almost all subsequent versions or adaptations.

It is a story that has circulated throughout Europe for centuries, both in oral and written form and, more recently, in film adaptations. In addition to the interpretation I was left with in my soliloquies (how women’s sexuality works), the fairy tale can also be interpreted as the love of a father, who adored Belle above her sisters, with pure paternal-filial love. But besides the fact that the girl perceives sexuality as something perverse, any man who feels a sexual desire for such an innocent creature can only be a beast.

The above-mentioned 1946 French film, directed by Jean Cocteau, is the first film version of the 1757 tale of the same name and is recognised as a classic of French cinema.

This adaptation adds a secondary plot, with the appearance of a villain: a suitor of Belle’s named Avenant. He intends to take advantage of Belle’s visit to her father to kill the Beast and steal his riches, while Belle’s sisters, the villain’s accomplices, delay Belle’s return to the castle. When Avenant enters the magical pavilion, which is the source of the Beast’s power, he is struck by a fiery arrow from the statue of the Roman goddess Diana, which transforms him into a beast and reverses the curse of the original creature.
 

1:50 pm update

I just reread some passages from a disciple of Jung that are worth including in this entry. On pages 137-138 of Man and his Symbols by various authors (first published in 1964), under the heading ‘Beauty and the Beast’, Joseph Henderson said:

Girls in our society share the masculine hero myths because, like boys, they must also develop a reliable ego-identity and acquire an education…

I saw an example of this in a young married woman who did not yet have any children but who intended to have one or two eventually, because it would be expected of her…

She had a dream at this time that seemed so important she sought professional advice to understand it. She dreamed she was in a line of young women like herself, and as she looked ahead to where they were going, she saw that as each came to the head of the line she was decapitated by a guillotine. Without any fear the dreamer remained in the line, presumably quite willing to submit to the same treatment when her turn came.

I explained to her that this meant she was ready to give up the habit of “living in her head”; she must learn to free her body to discover its natural sexual response and the fulfilment of its biological role in motherhood. The dream expressed this as the need to make a drastic change; she had to sacrifice the “masculine” hero role.

As one might expect, this educated woman had no difficulty in accepting this interpretation at an intellectual level, and she set about trying to change herself into a more submissive kind of woman… A universal myth expressing this kind of awakening is found in the fairy tale of Beauty and the Beast…

The story can be said to symbolize a young girl’s initiation—i.e. her release from her bond with the father, in order to come to terms with the erotic animal side of her nature. Until this is done, she cannot achieve a true relationship with a man.

Compare this wise psychoanalyst with the anti-motherhood shit that the System tells young women these days.

Categories
Conservatism Feminism Metaphysics of race / sex Racial right

On silly Ann Coulter

A couple of days ago, on The Occidental Observer, Ann Coulter was annoyed by these words of Nick Fuentes: ‘Hitler is great, women should be forced to marry young and have children.’ Doesn’t Ann realise that in Jane Austen’s very decent world, women were forced to marry because they couldn’t inherit property? Doesn’t she realise that, by virtue of those values, the British Empire became so powerful?

Ann Coulter is certainly not a racist. She’s an asshole like the rest of the Republicans that ignore what Ludwig Klages said in Cosmogonic Reflections #25 about mankind and race: ‘We must draw a sharp distinction between the man who sees the world as divided between the “human” and the “non-human,” and the man who is most profoundly struck by the obvious racial groupings of mankind (Nietzsche’s “masters”). The bridge that connects us to the Cosmos does not originate in “man,” but in race.’

That is what I call genuine spirituality (in contrast to the ‘spirituality’ that the Jewish authors of the New Testament have drummed into our heads). In the second chapter of Savitri Devi’s book, which will be available as a PDF the next month, we read some prescient passages on how it is that the Christians of the 1930s had an intuitive knowledge that made them see that National Socialism was nothing less than the paradigm that replaces the old paradigm: the Jewish god by an Aryan God. Thanks to the Nick Fuentes / Ye scandal, nowadays we see some of that debate even in discussion threads among Christians, such as this Occidental Dissent thread, where a certain Dicarlo said:

I don’t agree with you, Brad [i.e., Hunter Wallace, who mocks Ye et al]. We’re losing because the jews have unlimited money, and control every platform where Whites need to get out the truth. They have shut down our ability to get out the truth. You might as well advise, never say “jew”. :rolleyes:
 
There’s nothing cartoonish about Adolph Hitler or the Third Reich. Their mortal enemy is the exact same enemy Whites face today, the jews. Of course there is a problem that most Whites have been lied to so much and drummed down to a point where the truth means nothing to them. We can only soldier on. George Lincoln Rockwell was right!
 
It doesn’t matter what you tell the normies—those who don’t want to think or know, the jews and their completely controlled media sources are going to lie, cover up, distort, over and over about any topic Whites bring up. Your criticism of praising Adolph Hitler, or the WW2 topic, is just a result of repetitive jew demonization of it [emphasis added]. There is no proper approach to wake up the White normies. All one can do is keep telling the truth about what the jews are doing and have been doing since Rome.

Since Rome… I wonder if Dicarlo has been reading this site, e.g. our excerpts from David Skrbina’s book?

Categories
Aryan beauty Metaphysics of race / sex Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 68

There seems to be in this, on the part of the young Adolf, a deliberate refusal of sexual life, not, of course, for vain ‘mortification of the flesh’ but with a view to the use of the ‘sacred flame of life’ in the conquest of the higher states of his being and, finally, in the conquest of realisation, of the experience of the unthinkable beyond the being and non-being of Dante’s ‘supreme heaven’; the One of Plotinus; the Brahman of the Sanskrit Scriptures.

The revolution he was already meditating on could only come ‘from above’, for it was a true, the only true revolution: the overthrow of anthropocentric values that are nothing but the product of the laughable vanity of fallen man. He knew this. And such, no doubt, more than one knight aspiring to ‘God’, that is to say to the knowledge of the supreme principle, resisting more easily the temptations of the senses by evoking the idealised image of his ‘Lady’ just as Dante was accompanied during two-thirds of his ascent to the successive paradises by the radiant Beatrice: whom he had only glimpsed twice on the material plane, without ever having spoken to her. So Adolf Hitler, we believe, climbed the first rungs of spiritual development beyond the stage he could have reached without her, accompanied inwardly by the blonde Stephanie. He saw in her some of the great female figures of Wagnerian drama: ‘the German woman par excellence’, the living Germany. It was only natural that she should embody for him in human form the suggestive power—the symbolic eloquence—of both the music of the Master of Bayreuth and the immemorial Swastika.

For the initiation of the future Führer into the most universal truths was to take place under the sign of Germania, to whose particular tradition he was to become increasingly attached to identify himself. For he was both the sleeping emperor, suddenly emerging from his cave at the call of his people’s despair, and Siegfried, the warrior ‘freer than the Gods’, creator of a world of overmen: the Germanic form of He-who-returns from age to age.

It is remarkable that, ‘in full possession of himself’ [1] he had, already at the time in question, the position he was to take later in Mein Kampf concerning all the social problems raised by sex. He felt the same repulsion for venal love (even if legalized), as well as for all manner of unhealthy eroticism; the same respect for the ‘sacred flame of life’—a divine force, the source of racial immortality, which should not be diverted from its purpose for the sole pleasure of the individual, but should be put to the service of the race.

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: There is no point in continuing dropping names. But I’ve read a recent article in one of the most visited forums of the racial right in which the editor mocked the incels because they are incapable of ‘getting laid’. While I am repulsed by this movement of frustrated males insofar as they have no revolutionary ideology (merely a reactionary one), it doesn’t seem to enter the little heads of the apologists of feminism that we healthy males don’t want ‘getting laid’ but traditional wives.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
It is remarkable that in all that concerned the sexual field in general, as in other fields, he was already placing himself, for others, in the view of the legislator (while for himself only the knowledge and the power connected with it counted: the preparation for the extraordinary role he was to play in history). Amid the great corrupt city he surrounded himself, Kubizek tells us, ‘with a screen of unshakable principles, which allowed him to build his life…’ —I would say, his being— ‘in complete inner freedom, independent of the threatening atmosphere’.[2] One thinks, when reading these words, of the ‘magic circle’ which surrounds and protects the man who has reached a certain level of initiatory realisation, and helps him to continue his development in a true (although not apparent) isolation.

How long did this isolation and ‘severe monastic asceticism’[3] of which Kubizek speaks, last for Adolf Hitler? Probably until he had reached the supreme degree of knowledge: the state where he was finally fully aware not only that he was (like the tribune Rienzi) ‘entrusted with a mission’ to the people, but that he had chosen this task and decided to ‘take on human form’ in the visible world to carry it out, even if it were to end in total failure, because it was nevertheless inscribed in the eternal order of things. At this stage, the final, irreversible mutation which corresponds to initiation into the ‘great mysteries’, having been carried out, any asceticism became superfluous like the vessel whose exile, brought back to port at last, has no further use.

___________

[1] Kubizek, page 276.
[2] Ibid., page 286.
[3] Ibid.

Categories
August Kubizek Metaphysics of race / sex Poetry Savitri Devi Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Reflections of an Aryan woman, 67

If we now ask ourselves what influence, apart from that of Wagner’s music and the less immediate but still living influence of the Swastika, could have helped the young Adolf to acquire so early the power to transcend space and time in this way, we are immediately led to think of his only childhood love: the beautiful Stephanie, with her heavy blond braids wrapped around her head like a soft, shiny crown[1]; Stephanie to whom he never dared to speak because he had ‘not been introduced to her’ [2] but who had become in his eyes ‘the female counterpart of his own person’.[3]

August Kubizek insists on the exclusivity of this very special love: the ‘ideal’ plane on which he always remained. He tells us that the young Adolf, who identified Stephanie with the Elsa of Lohengrin and ‘other heroine figures of the Wagnerian repertoire’[4] didn’t feel the slightest need to talk or hear her, as he was sure that ‘intuition was enough for the mutual understanding of people out of the ordinary’. He was satisfied to watch her pass by from afar; to love her from afar as a vision from another world.

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: Is the image I chose for the front cover of The Fair Race finally understood (a girl I met decades ago, and who I talk about in my last book)?
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Once, however, on a beautiful Sunday in June, something unforgettable happened. He saw her, as always, at his mother’s side, in a parade of flower floats. She was holding a bouquet of poppies, cornflowers and daisies: the same flowers under which her float disappeared. She was approaching. He had never looked at her so closely, and she had never seemed more beautiful. He was, says Kubizek, ‘delighted with the earth’. [5]
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: From the pen of Spanish Romanticist poet Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer (1836-1870):

Hoy la tierra y los cielos me sonríen,
Hoy llega al fondo de mi alma el sol,
Hoy la he visto…, la he visto y me ha mirado,
¡Hoy creo en Dios!

Terry Rooney’s translation:

Today heaven and earth smile upon me
Today the sun reaches the depths of my soul
Today I saw her… I saw her and she looked at me,
Today I believe in God!
 

______ 卐 ______

 

Then the girl’s bright eyes rested on him for a moment. She smiled carelessly at him in the festive atmosphere of that sunny Sunday, took a flower from her bouquet and tossed it to him.[6] And the witness to this scene adds that ‘never again’—not even when he saw him again in 1940, in the aftermath of the French campaign, at the height of his glory—did he see Adolf Hitler ‘happier’.

But even then, the future Führer did nothing to get closer to Stephanie. His Platonic love remained like that, ‘weeks, months, years’. Not only did he no longer expect anything from the girl after the gesture I have just recalled, but ‘any initiative she might have taken beyond the rigid framework of convention would have destroyed the image he had of her in his heart’.[7]

When one remembers what role the ‘Lady of his thoughts’ played in the life and spiritual development of the medieval knight—who could also be, though not necessarily, a figure we just caught a glimpse of, even some distant princess, whose beauty and virtues the devoted knight knew only by hearsay—and when we know, moreover, what deep links existed between the Orders of Chivalry and hermetic teaching, that is to say initiatory—one cannot help but connect the dots.

August Kubizek assures us that, at least during the years he lived in Vienna with him, the future Führer didn’t once respond to the solicitations of women, didn’t associate with any of them, didn’t approach any of them although he was ‘bodily and sexually quite normal’.[8] And he tells us that the beloved image of the woman who, in his eyes, ‘embodied the ideal German woman’ would have supported him in this deliberate refusal of any carnal adventure.

It is instructive to note the reason for this refusal, which Kubizek reports in all simplicity misunderstanding the implications of his childhood friend’s words. Adolf Hitler wanted, he tells us, to keep within himself, ‘pure and undiminished’ [9] what he called ‘the flame of Life’, in other words, the vital force. ‘A single moment of inattention, and this sacred flame is extinguished for ever’—at least for a long time—he wrote, showing us the value the future Führer attached to it. He tries, unsuccessfully, to elucidate what it is. He sees in it only the symbol of the ‘holy love’ that awakens between people who have kept themselves pure in body and spirit, and who ‘is worthy of a union destined to give the people a healthy offspring.’ [10] The preservation of this ‘flame’ was to be, he wrote, ‘the most important task’[11] of that ‘ideal state’ which the future founder of the Third German Reich thought of in his lonely hours.

This is undoubtedly true. But there is more to it than that.

__________

[1] The name Stephanie evokes the idea of a crown (Stephanos, in Greek).
[2] Kubizek, p. 88.
[3] Ibid. (‘die weibliche Entsprechung der eigenen Person’).
[4] Ibid., page 78.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., page 84.
[7] Ibid., page 87.
[8] Ibid., page 276.
[9] page 280.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.

Categories
Aryan beauty Galileo Galilee Metaphysics of race / sex Richard Wagner Roger Penrose

‘Time here becomes space’

Sir Roger Penrose, born in 1931, is a British mathematician, mathematical physicist, philosopher of science and Nobel laureate in physics. I recently mocked the old German philosophers’ trick of obscuring prose to start philosophical cults, as in the case of Kant. As Leszek Kołakowski said at the beginning of his monumental demolition of Marxist theory, Hegel’s ideas had already been developed earlier but in simpler language: language whose aim was to make metaphysical ideas comprehensible. That’s the way to go, rather than the artifice of deliberately obscuring the language so that philosophical ‘science’ cannot escape the walls of university scholasticism.

One of the things I like about contemporary philosophers is that they write or speak in a way that makes us understand complex ideas, even the most abstract metaphysics. In the film A Brief History of Time Penrose said, ‘I think I would say that the universe has a purpose, it’s not somehow just there by chance… Some people, I think, take the view that the universe is just there and it runs along—it’s a bit like it just sort of computes, and we happen somehow by accident to find ourselves in this thing. But I don’t think that’s a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe. I think that there is something much deeper about it’.

A year ago in my post ‘Between Ice and Fire’ I concluded: ‘The dialectic of the song of ice and fire in the universe is the dilemma of whether the universe is to cool down eternally due to unnecessary suffering, or whether it is worth returning to the primal fire that makes Being explode again in countless stars…’

But yesterday I got a surprise in this YouTube interview. Penrose mentions something that had never occurred to me.

Once in the very distant future, where there are no more corpses of stars, and not even black holes that evaporate with time (remember Stephen Hawking’s phrase: ‘black holes are not so black’), leaving only photons in an expanding universe, if time ceases to make sense—then space, in our Newtonian sense, will cease to make sense. The moment time ceases to exist, space ceases to exist as well! And that would mean a new beginning or big bang insofar as astronomically large space would be, without time, nothing: equivalent again to a mathematical point or a new singularity.

I hadn’t thought of that possibility. Will the dialectic of the song of ice and fire not end with the Night King’s dream, eternal oblivion because of our misconduct (other ‘darkest hours’ may well be happening in other galaxies due to similar, astronomic stupidities of sentient beings)? It reminds me of a line from Wagner when Gurnemanz takes Parsifal into the castle to see if he can be initiated, and tells him that in that journey time becomes space:

Gurnemanz:
The king is returning from the bath;
the sun stands high;
now let me lead you to our hallowed feast;
for if you are pure, the Grail
will be meat and drink to you.

Parsifal:
Who is the Grail?

Gurnemanz:
That cannot be said;
but if you yourself are called to its service
that knowledge will not remain withheld.
And see!
I think I know you aright;
no earthly path leads to it,
and none could tread it
whom the Grail itself had not guided.

Parsifal:
I scarcely tread,
yet seem already to have come far.

Gurnemanz:
You see, my son,
time here becomes space.

See this exact moment in a performance of the Bayreuth Festival: here.

Penrose’s interview is fascinating, and in this other segment he says something I already knew intuitively: that those who fantasise about creating, say in a decade, artificial intelligence by mere computation will be in for a fiasco because consciousness is not algorithmic. As if that weren’t enough, in this other segment of the interview Penrose talks about beauty: an inherent structure in the universe and even in mathematics (remember, ‘mathematics is the alphabet with which God has written the universe’, said Galileo Galilei). This is why soulless computers, which cannot be indoctrinated by PC nuts, have chosen the white race as the most beautiful.

Since the old incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour on blogspot I had chosen a painting, Daybreak by Maxfield Parrish, to sum up in a single image my philosophy. When a woke bitch says that beauty is subjective, she’s ignoring that mathematicians have detected how certain symmetrical relationships explain her beautiful facial features. The Roman sculpture we can admire on the sidebar is not the same as a humanoid ape from our remote past: the universe is evolving biologically according to the mathematical beauty inherent in our tastes for sexual selection.

Only the eternal feminine will lead us to the Absolute. It is no wonder why uncle Adolf wanted so much for his close friends to travel with him to the annual Wagner Festival in Bayreuth. But very few understood him…

Seymour Millais Stone
Parsifal and the Grail

Categories
Exterminationism Metaphysics of race / sex Theology

Panentheism

In the article about Savitri Devi’s wise voice, Krist Krusher commented:

One problem that I have with pantheism is, that if the universe itself is god, then would that mean insects, faeces and non-whites are also part of god? I find such an idea preposterous: such a realization undermines the entirety of the idea of god. It reduces god to simply mean anything and everything. Such is not worth worshipping or venerating to me.

I was personally a little disillusioned when I read Who We Are and found that Pierce, using his Comostheistic logic, ‘deduced’ that even Negroes were in a way brothers to Whites! The particular paragraph:

It is important to understand this, because with understanding comes freedom from the superstition of ‘human brotherhood’. We are one with the Cosmos and are, in a sense, brothers to every living thing: to the amoeba, to the wolf, to the chimpanzee, and to the Negro. But this sense of brotherhood does not paralyze our will when we are faced with the necessity of taking certain actions—whether game control or pest control or disease control—relative to other species in order to ensure the continued progress of our own. And so it must be with the Negro.

The problem with this is that it ultimately creates another kind of Brotherhood, one which if coupled with the kind of thinking that slave morality produces, would result in something as asinine as Jainism: where all life has worth regardless if it is paramecium, slime mould or cockroach! It would be such an easy thing to bend to erroneous belief.

Some will argue that the end of the paragraph would guarantee that this would never be perverted, but I know many who would warp it to think non-whites can be ‘Aryan’ too.

Evolutionists say that all creatures are connected by a common ancestor. As repulsive as it is, even spiders and we have a common ancestor (except for the very last episode that ruined the series, this series explains it all).

Divinity is obviously noticeable in some aspects of Nature such as trees, the colour of the sky with the background of the mountains and some cute mammals (including the nymphs in Nature painted by Parrish). But side by side there are real monsters in Nature.

My solution at the end of From Jesus to Hitler is exterminationism. Either way, Nature is the greatest exterminationist in the universe. For hundreds of millions of years it has been exterminating ninety-nine per cent of her species. Getting rid of obsolete species is critical to Kalki, a subject in which Savitri Devi was utterly wrong in some passages of Impeachment of Man. Naively, she idealised all animal species. Instead, we want to exterminate most of them (you can picture our little utopia with the city of Lys in Arthur Clarke’s Against the Fall of Night).

If the Cro-Magnon exterminated the Neanderthal, all the more should we exterminate the primitive versions of Homo sapiens. This is not contradicted by panentheism. On the contrary: it is an essential part of the evolution or phenomenology of the spirit. William Pierce was right; for example, my exterminationist passion is not hampered one iota by my panentheism.* Both are the axes of the same double-helix, the religious DNA that moves me.

____________

(*) Some theologians use this term as a kind of mixture between theism and pantheism. I use it because, to my mind, there is the possibility that there could be some sort of nebulous agency before the big bang. But I hate metaphysical speculations.

Categories
Metaphysics of race / sex

Mockingbird

‘Mockingbird’ is the seventh episode of the fourth season of HBO’s fantasy television series Game of Thrones, and the 37th overall. The episode opens with words that portray the imbecilic way we sometimes see women. Tyrion, after Shae’s lies at his trial unhinged him, talks to his brother in the dungeon:

Jaime: ‘You fell in love with a whore!’

Tyrion: Yes. I fell in love with a whore. And I was stupid enough to think that she had fallen in love with me’.

It is precisely because we are so hard-wired to desire the woman’s body so much that we frequently enter a state of genuine psychosis while trying to possess her. The only way I can think of to remedy such a great asymmetry of instinct, insofar as they see us as providers, is to return to the values of the time of Jane Austen. Only in this way could the hypnotic magnetism that women apparently wield—a biological program of our brains, actually—could be offset by social norms.

Away from King’s Landing, in the Riverlands, we see a feminist scene: the girl Arya kills another man with her Needle, a man who had told her obscenities in a previous episode. But I wanted to focus on another aspect of what happened at the Riverlands: the Hound’s confession to Arya about his past. Just as the story Shae told Varys—her mother’s betrayal—helps us understand how she turned into an evil woman, in this episode we hear another story that explains the Hound’s perennial angry mood: his father also betrayed him horribly. I don’t want to tell the details but from my own experience (cf. what I wrote about my uncle Julio in my autobiography) I know that this is a story that makes sense.

Left, another iconic woman in the series: the highly masculinised Brienne who is constantly mistaken for a Knight. Here we see her from behind leaving a cozy medieval inn after having her meal there.

Since the white man is making psychotic use of technology, my dream is that after the extermination of the Neanderthals à la Turner Diaries the surviving whites will go through a long historical test without technology, going through modest inns like this one, with an extremely small world population, while learning to develop their souls as Solzhenitsyn did. Given the treachery rates of the 20th and 21st centuries, only if they passed that test could they afford to relight the fire of Prometheus.