web analytics
Categories
Blacks Catholic Church Demography Emigration / immigration Ethnic cleansing Madison Grant Miscegenation Neanderthalism Protestantism Racial studies Universalism

The European Races in Colonies



Madison Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race, published in 1916, is a classic in race studies. Below, a few excerpts from the chapter, “The European Races in Colonies” (no ellipsis added):


For reasons already set forth there are few communities outside of Europe of pure European blood. The racial destiny of Mexico and of the islands and coasts of the Spanish Main is clear. The white man is being rapidly bred out by Negroes on the islands and by Indians on the mainland. It is quite evident that the West Indies, the coast region of our Gulf States, perhaps, also the black belt of the lower Mississippi Valley must be abandoned to Negroes. This transformation is already complete in Haiti and is going rapidly forward in Cuba and Jamaica. Mexico and the northern part of South America must also be given over to native Indians with an ever thinning veneer of white culture of the “Latin” type.

In Venezuela the pure whites number about one per cent of the whole population, the balance being Indians and various crosses between Indians, Negroes and whites. In Jamaica the whites number not more than two per cent, while the remainder are Negroes or mulattoes.

In Mexico the proportion is larger, but the unmixed whites number less than twenty per cent of the whole, the others being Indians pure or mixed. These latter are the “greasers” of the American frontiersman.

Where two distinct species are located side by side history and biology teach that but one of two things can happen; either one race drives the other out, as the Americans exterminated the Indians and as the Negroes are now replacing the whites in various parts of the South; or else they amalgamate and form a population of race bastards in which the lower type ultimately preponderates. This is a disagreeable alternative with which to confront sentimentalists but nature is only concerned with results and neither makes nor takes excuses. The chief failing of the day with some of our well-meaning philanthropists is their absolute refusal to face inevitable facts, if such facts appear cruel.

In the Argentine white blood of the various European races is pouring in so rapidly that a community preponderantly white, but of the Mediterranean race, may develop, but the type is suspiciously swarthy.

In Brazil, Negro blood together with that of the native inhabitants is rapidly overwhelming the white Europeans, although in the southern provinces German immigration has played an important role and the influx of Italians has also been considerable.

Throughout history it is only the race of the leaders that has counted and the most vigorous have been in control and will remain in mastery in one form or another until such time as democracy and its illegitimate offspring, socialism, definitely establish cacocracy and the rule of the worst and put an end to progress. The salvation of humanity will then lie in the chance survival of some sane barbarians who may retain the basic truth that inequality and not equality the law of nature.

Australia and New Zealand, where the natives have been virtually exterminated by the whites, are developing into communities of pure Nordic blood and will for that reason play a large part in the future history of the Pacific. The bitter opposition of the Australians and Californians to the admission of Chinese coolies and Japanese farmers is due primarily to a blind but absolutely justified determination to keep those lands as white man’s countries.

In Africa, south of the Sahara, the density of the native population will prevent the establishment of any purely white communities, except at the southern extremity of the continent and possibly on portions of the plateaux of eastern Africa. The stoppage of famines and wars and the abolition of the slave trade, while dictated by the noblest impulses of humanity, are suicidal to the white man. Upon the removal of these natural checks Negroes multiply so rapidly that there will not be standing room on the continent for white men, unless, perchance, the lethal sleeping sickness, which attacks the natives far more frequently than the whites, should run its course unchecked.

The Negroes of the United States while stationary, were not a serious drag on civilization until in the last century they were given the rights of citizenship and were incorporated in the body politic. These Negroes brought with them no language or religion or customs of their own which persisted but adopted all these elements of environment from the dominant race, taking the names of their masters just as to-day the German and Polish Jews are assuming American names.

Looking at any group of Negroes in America, especially in the North, it is easy to see that while they are all essentially Negroes, whether coal-black, brown or yellow, a great many of them have varying amounts of Nordic blood in them, which has in some respects modified their physical structure without transforming them in any way into white men. This miscegenation was, of course, a frightful disgrace to the dominant race but its effect on the Nordics has been negligible, for the simple reason that it was confined to white men crossing with Negro women and did not involve the reverse process, which would, of course, have resulted in the infusion of Negro blood into the American stock.

The United States of America must be regarded racially as a European colony and owing to current ignorance of the physical bases of race, one often hears the statement made that native Americans of Colonial ancestry are of mixed ethnic origin.

This not true. The Nordic blood was kept pure in the Colonies because at that time among Protestant peoples there was a strong race feeling, as a result of which half-breeds between the white man and any native type were regarded as natives and not as white men.

Concentration of whites in the American Continent


In the Catholic colonies, however, of New France and New Spain, if the half-breed were a good Catholic he was regarded as a Frenchman or a Spaniard, as the case might be. This fact alone gives the clew to many of our Colonial wars where the Indians, other than the Iroquois, were persuaded to join the French against the Americans by half-breeds who considered themselves Frenchmen. The Church of Rome has everywhere used its influence to break down racial distinctions. It disregards origins and only requires obedience to the mandates of the universal church. In that lies the secret of the opposition of Rome to all national movements. It maintains the imperial as contrasted with the nationalistic ideal and in that respect its inheritance is direct from the Empire.

Race consciousness in the Colonies and in the United States, down to and including the Mexican War, seems to have been very strongly developed among native Americans and it still remains in full vigor to-day in the South, where the presence of a large Negro population forces this question upon the daily attention of the whites.

In New England, however, whether through the decline of Calvinism or the growth of altruism, there appeared early in the last century a wave of sentimentalism, which at that time took up the cause of the Negro and in so doing apparently destroyed, to a large extent, pride and consciousness of race in the North. The agitation over slavery was inimical to the Nordic race, because it thrust aside all national opposition to the intrusion of hordes of immigrants of inferior racial value and prevented the fixing of a definite American type.

There has been little or no Indian blood taken into the veins of the native American, except in States like Oklahoma and in some isolated families scattered here and there in the Northwest. This particular mixture will play no very important role in future combinations of race on this continent, except in the north of Canada.

The native Americans [i.e., whites] are splendid raw material, but have as yet only an imperfectly developed national consciousness. They lack the instinct of self-preservation in a racial sense. Unless such an instinct develops their race will perish, as do all organisms which disregard this primary law of nature. Nature had granted to the Americans of a century ago the greatest opportunity in recorded history to produce in the isolation of a continent a powerful and racially homogeneous people and had provided for the experiment a pure race of one of the most gifted and vigorous stocks on earth, a stock free from the diseases, physical and moral, which have again and again sapped the vigor of the older lands. Our grandfathers threw away this opportunity in the blissful ignorance of national childhood and inexperience.

The result of unlimited immigration is showing plainly in the rapid decline in the birth rate of native Americans because the poorer classes of Colonial stock, where they still exist, will not bring children into the world to compete in the labor market with the Slovak, the Italian, the Syrian and the Jew. The native American is too proud to mix socially with them and is gradually withdrawing from the scene, abandoning to these aliens the land which he conquered and developed. The man of the old stock is being crowded out of many country districts by these foreigners just as he is to-day being literally driven off the streets of New York City by the swarms of Polish Jews. These immigrants adopt the language of the native American, they wear his clothes, they steal his name and they are beginning to take his women, but they seldom adopt his religion or understand his ideals and while he is being elbowed out of his own home the American looks calmly abroad and urges on others the suicidal ethics which are exterminating his own race.

As to what the future mixture will be it is evident that in large sections of the country the native American will entirely disappear. He will not intermarry with inferior races and he cannot compete in the sweat-shop and in the street trench with the newcomers. Large cities from the days of Rome, Alexandria, and Byzantium have always been gathering points of diverse races, but New York is becoming a cloaca gentium which will produce many amazing racial hybrids and some ethnic horrors that will be beyond the powers of future anthropologists to unravel.

Categories
Ancient Rome Catholic Church Christendom Inquisition Judeo-reductionism Miscegenation

With and without Jews: The same old story

Or:

There are other histories and pre-histories
besides the American story



In a recent article at Counter Currents George Hocking said:

The current tendency of American whites to embrace their self-destruction clearly resembles past suicide cults but is a phenomenon on such a vastly larger scale that it even dwarfs the fratricidal slaughter of World War I trench warfare. Its origins are no mystery since Kevin MacDonald thoroughly and brilliantly described them. They are almost entirely a direct consequence of a Jewish Establishment and its supporters gaining increasing dominance of American intellectual discourse and media during the last century.

This is what in my recent posts I have called “monocausalism,” the belief that there’s nothing wrong with us and that the Jews are the main culprits of the runaway liberalism that is destroying the West (“almost entirely a direct consequence of a Jewish Establishment”).

In a sense American monocausalists are right: the Jewish influence on American society has been overwhelming and ubiquitous. And it has been a malign influence. The trouble I see with monocausalism is perspective and meta-perspective.

Perspective

Monocausalists focus almost exclusively in the United States of the 20th and 21st centuries. On the other hand, I include the history of Latin America, where the native Iberian Spaniards and the criollos (pure Iberian whites born in the Americas) sans Jews betrayed their ethnicity through massive mestization.

The beauty of studying the history of the Americas conquered by the Spanish and the Portuguese is that, since the Jews were ruthlessly persecuted and literally eliminated by The Inquisition, it is not possible to blame them for what happened on this side of the continent. (For an introduction to a racial history of the blunders committed in New Spain by people of pure European origin see this brief piece that I translated for Counter-Currents.)

Monocausalists are not only myopic about what happened throughout the whole subcontinent conquered by the Spanish and the Portuguese, but of what happened at the other side of the Atlantic as well. The story of the Spanish conquests in the Americas is not the only story that can be described as “ethno-suicidal without the Jews.” Yesterday I purchased a copy of Gibbon’s History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and it surprised me to learn that Gibbon starts his history from the 1st century of the Common Era, when Rome was at its apex and when, at the same time, an embryonic cult was formed in one of Rome’s provinces, the Jesus cult. (I look forward to read the six volumes of Gibbon’s magnum opus, which surely will give me ammunition to annotate what I have already said about Porphyry and Julian.)

Meta-perspective

The fall not only of the Greco-Roman world in Europe but also of the Roman Empire at the East is another textbook case of the suicidal tendencies among the white people where Jews, who were emancipated only after the French Revolution, cannot be blamed either. (Burning whole libraries of classical knowledge, as the Christians did once they reached political power, was nothing short of cultural suicide.) What I find most intriguing is that people like Hocking are completely missing that MacDonald, in addition to his approach to the Jewish Question, has laid the basis for a scientific understanding of our suicidal traits in his studies about “altruistic punishment” and our “out-group altruism”: inseparable traits from the mental causes of why Whites emancipated the Jews in the first place. Studying the white psyche beyond history, well into prehistory, as MacDonald and others are starting to do, is what I would call “meta-perspective.”

What I am trying to say is extremely simple: to understand the white people there are more histories than the American history or the Jewish influence in Europe since the 19th century. Never forget the history of Rome, the history of Spain, let alone how the white psyche was formed in the glacial eras…

My family’s priest

I would like to end this entry with a personal vignette.

This photo, that I uploaded for the Wikipedia article of Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, was taken during my First Communion of May 12, 1966. As can be read in the Wikipedia article, Fr. Sáenz was a harsh critic of the Second Vatican Council and of the post-conciliar popes; was declared excommunicated in 1972, and presently is considered one of the founders of sedevacantism.

Fr. Sáenz, who died in 1976 not very far from my home, helped my father to study music in Madrid thanks to his old Jesuits friends in Spain. Fr. Sáenz also celebrated the mass of the wedding of my parents, baptized me and blessed my home of the Street Palenque at Mexico City (I have a super-8 homely film registering the event). What the Wikipedia article omits is that Fr. Sáenz abhorred that the Second Vatican Council made official peace between the Catholic Church and Jewry after centuries of enmity. After the council, Fr. Sáenz started to see Jews everywhere, even Jewish symbols on the Pope’s chasubles. At the Archdiocese of Mexico City the late Fr. Faustino Cervantes Ibarrola once told me that Fr. Sáenz estaba trastornado” (“became a disturbed person”).

I mention all this because Fr. Sáenz was both right and wrong. I very much doubt that Paul VI wore malicious Jewish symbols at his chasubles, which reminds me the monocausalists’ paranoia of smelling Jews under every stone and even labeling “Jew” anyone whom they strongly disagree with (I myself was once called “Jew” in a featured article at Majority Rights… because I don’t believe that the Mossad orchestrated 9/11!). But Fr. Sáenz, like Mel Gibson’s father—another sedevacantist—, was certainly right that something horrible wrong happened in the Church after the council.

Of course: I have lost my Christian faith since Fr. Sáenz gave me the communion and am not approaching the subject from a sedevacantist viewpoint. To my present mind, both pre-Council and post-Council Catholicism are possibly legit interpretations of Christian doctrine (“Catholic,” it must be remembered, means “universal”). Both Torquemada and St Francis may be considered legitimate interpreters, albeit opposite, of the New Testament and the legacy of the Church Fathers.

Finally, I must say that my childhood memories of Fr. Sáenz’s lovely home, which I recount in Hojas Susurrantes, are nothing but idyllic.

Categories
Axiology Christendom Demography Eschatology Ethnic cleansing Jesus Miscegenation

Blonde aunt

or:

Christian axiology, our main enemy

Mi-tia-Blanquita




My (late) aunt Blanquita
Her son was my classmate
in a Mexico City
grammar school






In my life I have declined a couple of marriage proposals for the simple reason that the Mexican ladies were not pure whites. And last year I lost an internet friend, the Catholic administrator of the paleoconservative site La Sexta Redoma: a Spaniard who, when I confessed that I had just rejected one of such proposals, commented:

But you would have whitened her descendants. That is what Spaniards did in the XVI-XVIII [centuries] in Mexico.

So here we go again after half a millennia! While 16th-century Spaniards were extremely tough on Jews they were, at the same time, fairly tolerant of the natives—with Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians had souls and declared them fit to marry the bachelor conquerors!

This astronomical blunder caused the mess that any racially-conscious visitor can see with his own eyes in the city where I studied grammar school with my blond cousin (Blanquita’s eldest son). I refer to the thoroughgoing mestization of Mexico, with overwhelming Indian blood over the European: the primary cause of Mexico’s backwardness and ultimate historical demise in the coming decades.

Alas, like my former friend who claims to strenuously defend the West (his blog receives many thousands of hits from very conservative Spaniards each day), Protestants are also tolerating massive miscegenation at the North of Río Grande. Some of the most devout, particularly the Evangelicals, are actually saying: “Racism is the worst sin.” A flabbergasted Paul Gottfried who has met them comments: “I don’t know why ‘racism is the worst sin,’ even in terms of the Bible.”

This suicidal behavior of both Catholics and Protestants moved me to reproduce, in my previous entry, a 10,000-word post collecting blog comments blaming Christian meta-ethics for the ongoing destruction of our gene pool. Here I will re-quote some of the phrases by Conservative Swede that in that post I gathered under the title “The Red Giant”:

Our progressivist paradigm is based on Christian ethics. The Left is all about Christian ethics. What the left-wing is doing is not destroying Western civilization, but completing and fulfilling it: what I call “The Finish of the West.” The current order is the last and terminal phase of Western Christian civilization.

Among the bloggers who claim to defend the West, Swede’s worldview strikes me as the antithesis of Tanstaafl’s point of view. Tanstaafl is perhaps the foremost critic of those who believe that westerners are committing racial and cultural suicide. It’s not suicide, Tanstaafl tell us, but homicide: the nefarious influence of the Jews in our civilization. Con Swede, on the other hand, dismisses Judaism as a truly substantial factor. He believes that Christianity’s moral grammar, and more specifically secular Christianity, is the basic etiology of Western malaise.

I believe that strictly monocausal explanations of our current predicament are myopic. At least from the religious viewpoint the etiology is basically twofold: both Christianity and Judaism are the culprits. Der Juden merely represent a very strong catalyst of a chemical reaction that had started since their emancipation by the gentiles during the French Revolution. However, since the homicidal interpretation of our problems has become almost orthodoxy in white nationalism, let’s continue to quote Swede, whose suicidal POV is virtually unknown in the white movement:

It’s the Western Christian civilization that feeds all these processes (population explosion etc.). So the Western Christian civilization is in fact the worst enemy of what I call European civilization: another reason for wanting the Western Christian civilization to go away. For the very same reason that Christian ethics abhors infanticide, [presently] it causes the population explosion in the world.

Incidentally, I’ve written a whole book on infanticide through history and the heroic role played by Christianity in the abolition of it in Europe (see e.g., here). In this year I’ll publish rest of the English translation in this blog.

But Christian ethics cannot stand the sight of little brown children dying. They must help them, or they will freak out. According to Christian ethics it is forbidden and unthinkable to think in terms of not saving every little brown child across the planet. But the consequences of this mindset are catastrophic, not only to us but also to them, as I have already explained. But since people are so programmed according to Christian ethics, what I’m saying does not seem to enter their heads. The thought is too unthinkable to be absorbed. It’s an utter taboo.

Absolutely. In fact, recently a white nationalist woman said in a very well known white nationalist radio podcast that abortion of non-whites is immoral: the opposite of what the Nazi Germans, who had revaluated Christian values, did: legalizing abortion in such cases.

This is derived from the deepest moral grammar of Christianity. The population explosion is not caused by liberalism, it is caused by Christianity in its most general form.

My emphasis above! Obviously, blaming everything on the Jews is a crude form of ideological myopia. This is why Swede believes that “the fall of the Western Christian civilization should be celebrated,” and that “this is the paradigm that stands in the way of our saviour.”

However, it must be noted that in the threaded discussion Swede got mad at me when I pointed out that the logical conclusion of his worldview would be to restore the image of Hitler and the Nazis before our brainwashed psyches. His outrage when I confessed my views surprised several commenters precisely because of the Nietzschean stance that Swede had manifested in that very thread:

It’s not until the westerners thoroughly revise their view on World War II that a change of paradigms can take place.

Strange that when I just tried to do that the Swede started to insult me. But he’s right about one thing: Christian axiology is our main enemy today. If this is so, fuck Christianity. After all, no Jew has real power in Muslim countries precisely because Islam doesn’t preach the craziest inversion of values: Love your alien neighbor, and even your enemy!

What we badly need throughout the West after the coming financial crash is what Nietzsche called the Umwertung aller Werte, the transvaluation of the most toxic Christian and Secular Christian values back to the Greek, and particularly Roman, values: precisely what Mussolini and Hitler tried to do. This is the crux in the Swede’s gospel:

With Christ as part of the equation, the Christian ethics of the Gospels became balanced. Humans were seen as imperfect and it was Christ who covered for us with his self-sacrifice. In Secular Christianity each person has to be like Jesus himself, doing self-sacrifice, since there’s no other way to realize Christian ethics. On top of that, with the Industrial Revolution and the surplus it created in our societies, we came to the point where all the good deeds of Christian ethics could finally be executed by giving off our surplus to all the poor and weak foreign people around the world: food, Western medicine, and other aid.

We should remember that our progressivist paradigm, which is always going left, is based on Christian ethics. And Christian ethics means the inversion of values. So it’s the weak that is considered good, while the strong is considered evil.

How Nietzschean (and again, the emphasis is mine)!

The only people that are guaranteed to survive until the end of days in Christianity are the Jews. Swedes, Italians etc., are of no significance whatsoever. We see all these tenets of Christianity manifested around us today: even in how the struggle for ethnic survival of the Jews is accepted within our current paradigm, while it is not accepted for the other people of our civilization.

Each ethnic group needs her great mythological narrative, starting with the birth of her people and guaranteeing their existence until the end of times. Without such a narrative the dissolvement of the ethnic group eventually becomes self-fulfilling: there’s nothing holding it together.

The Swede is not only wrong in rejecting Nazism out of hand. I’d go as far as, in all seriousness, propose that we replace the calendar era introduced by Dionysius Exiguus in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini in reference to a Jew called Jesus (real Hebrew name: Yeshu). Instead of the conception of Yeshu, with AD counting years after his birth, the new era may use the year of 1945, when the most tragic Aryan character that ever walked the earth died and his corpse set on fire. Remember the final words of William Pierce’s masterpiece: “But it was in [that] year, according to the chronology of the Old Era—just 110 years after the [death] of the Great One—that the dream of a White world finally became a certainty.”

Leaving Christian ethics has nothing to do with becoming secular (as I explained above). To the contrary, it makes it worse! What is needed is to introduce another great mythological narrative into the minds of the Germanic people. This is the only way to replace the moral grammar of Christianity. Something with roots in our long history. This must be done by political means, by a regime with such a focus.

Which, of course, reminded me the National Socialists’ infatuation with Wagner. The Swede continues:

What I have suggested is: 1) A new great mythological narrative where our own ethnic group is given the pivotal position; 2) A constitution where citizenship is reserved for people of our ethnic group. 3) Alien ethnic groups, typically from the Third World, that do not identify with our ethnic group, will have to be removed one way or the other.

Spain’s Counter-Reformation experiment in the Americas was an utter disaster: the best refutation of the Judeo-reductionist trends in white nationalism I can think of, since the Jews were not involved in promoting massive mestization. Had the Swede’s program been implemented in the conquered Aztec Empire that my former friend mentioned—the Catholic Spaniard who ethno-suicidally advised me “to whiten her descendants”—, no brown swarms would presently inundate the streets of the town I happen to live in. However, after the dollar crashes and the world falls into chaos, what will happen to these Untermenschen? The Swede concludes:

So the concrete effect of Christian ethics here is to make the number of people that will die in starvation and suffering as high as possible once [the dollar collapse] hits (we are speaking of billions thanks to Christian ethics). Only the devil himself could think out such a brutally cruel scheme, and Christian ethics of course, in which case it’s according to the idiom “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Will “billions die and we will win”? I find it hilarious that in a nationalist German blog I have been scolded by a commenter who has pointed out that I liked the final solution fantasies of a New Yorker. Hilarious I said, because it looks like we won’t need much staining of our hands with mud blood. No. As will become apparent in a forthcoming post, Mother Nature will probably wipe them out, just as the Swede predicted.

My wildest dream is that, in the future, the female inhabitants of Mexico, a nation that might revert to the name it had when pure whites were in charge—New Spain—will look like my aunt Blanquita.

Meanwhile I shall remain a bachelor…

Categories
Ancient Rome Miscegenation

It is the Ring, stupid!

“The struggle against international finance and loan capital has become the most important point in the National Socialist programme.” —Hitler


Since I became racially conscious, finding out the basic etiology of Western malaise has been a torture to my mind. “Paleologic” nationalists, those who believe what they want to believe independently of evidence, attribute every catastrophe to the Jews: even the French Revolution, the American Civil War and 9/11. Paleologicism is a regressive mode of mentation analogous to the cognitive processes of present-day schizoids, whose thinking is often identical to the magical thinking of primitive men (cf. my psychohistorical explanation of paleologic thought vs. Aristotelian thought here).

I believe that the Jewish Problem should be addressed and solved first, especially by reclaiming the American media and Hollywood that have been hijacked by the Jews. However, in my previous entry and elsewhere I have also said that the story of New Spain demonstrates that, while the Catholics were extremely tough on Jews and Judaizers, they were tolerant of the natives with Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians had souls and declared them fit to receive the sacraments, including marriage to the Spaniards.

Behold eight minutes of a 1973 film about how, before my great-great grandfather moved to Mexico City from Catalonia, Jews were handled in the town where I was born. Keep in mind that the viceroyalty of New Spain lasted three whole centuries. Incidentally, the actor that plays the role of the Grand Inquisitor, now deceased, lived a few blocks from my home (in the clip some Amerindian faces appear: blasphemers to be punished for sure, but not killed). It is a pity that the Inquisitor’s discourse has no English subtitles because it gives the picture of the zeitgeist in New Spain: keeping this land free from “heretics” and those who follow “the dead law of Moses.” After the Inquisitor’s impassioned speech the other Dominican said:

“We welcome this Auto de fe for punishment of some and an example to all. It punishes offenses against religion and morality. These Judaizers [crypto-Jews] will be delivered to the justice of the secular arm, to which we ask forgiveness and compassion.”

Then the man richly dressed in a yellow suit, the representative of the secular arm noted the prisoners’ various offenses against morality and public order. In New Spain the Jews always got special treatment. The non-Jews would be punished with:

“flogging, banishment, galleys, imprisonment or confiscation of property. And the relapsed Judaizers present and absent are condemned to be burned in flames of fire, until they become ashes and nothing remains of them in the memory of this land.”

Alas, following their Pope’s bull, unlike the Anglo-Saxons the Spanish conquerors married the local Indians, with time producing the Untermensch stock that depresses me every day I have to leave my home. But the lesson for nationalists is that we cannot blame the Jews for the colossal miscegenation that occurred in this part of North America and even in Central and South America.



Amerindians washing gold for the Spanish conquerors


Whom or what should we blame instead? In the specific case of New Spain, I would blame both the lust for gold—or to put it poetically: the One Ring which in Richard Wagner’s Rheingold symbolizes capitalism—and universal Christian values: where the value of white ethnicity is considered irrelevant. The fact that the One Ring is presently wielded by the Jew doesn’t erase that in the recent past the white people wielded it. In Wagner’s opera there’s a curse: “Whosoever holds the Ring, by the Ring they shall be enslaved,” and even the hero of his monumental Tetralogy, Siegfried, dies as a result of holding it.

Did capitalism chew Norman Rockwell’s America and spit out Obama’s? Today Greg Johnson published “Brooks Adams on the Romans” of which I’ll quote only three excerpts:

In chapter 1, “The Romans,” Adams illustrates how capitalism ruined Rome.

Rome was never really a people, never a nation. It was merely a system, a machine. From the very beginning, Rome populated itself by opening its gates to refugees from other cities. The Roman machine liquidated this founding stock [the farmers] and replenished itself with foreign blood until it became too weak to assimilate new peoples.

In ancient Rome, as in modern America, the economic system and its imperatives are treated as absolute and fixed, whereas the people are treated as liquid and fungible.

As the case of the Spanish Empire we can hardly blame the Jews for what happened to the Roman Empire. Johnson also published today “The Romans,” the mentioned chapter of Adams’ book originally published in 1895 on how the “One Ring” (capitalism) ruined Rome. I’ve read it and it reminded me Harold Covington’s eloquent speeches of “Iron Man” versus “Economic Man,” but Adam’s chapter is hard to understand for those unfamiliar with political economy. I’ll only quote a couple of sentences. At the beginning of his chapter Adams claims that, “on the disparity between these two types of men [farmers and usurers], the fate of all subsequent civilization has hinged.” And at the end of his chapter Adams concludes:

By the year 400 [A.D. Roman] disintegration was far advanced; the Empire was crumbling, not because it was corrupt or degenerate, but because the most martial and energetic race the world had ever seen had been so thoroughly exterminated by men of the economic type of mind…

Johnson also published “Brooks Adams’ The Law of Civilization & Decay” by Anthony Ludovici who says that Adam’s picture is one-sided. Ludovici calls our attention to Otto Sieck’s thesis that negative character changes are brought about by miscegenation. As to a connection between miscegenation and mercantilism Ludovici writes: “I confess I can see no such connexion. But it may exist.” He concludes:

It is here, it seems to me, that Brooks Adams’ work is defective. Nowhere does he give sufficient attention in the influence of stock changes and stock deterioration or modification, through random breeding with peoples who may or may not influence an original type adversely. He refers to the exhaustion of the energy of a race, which occurs under the pressure of economic competition; but is this the only way in which a race may be devitalized?

I’d like to respond to Ludovici. At least in the case of New Spain, always ruled by pure whites and which at its peak was more prosperous than her neighbor, the United States, the crossbreeding of the races allowed to the lower classes was an epiphenomenon of the lust for Aztec gold (and lust for silver at the southern side of the Spanish empire in the Americas). Thus I venture to say that, since whosoever holds the One Ring—whether Roman, Spaniard, American or Jew—shall be enslaved by capitalism, defeating the present wielders of it won’t be enough.

When we create the ethno-state we will have a unique opportunity to destroy the Ring itself.

Categories
Miscegenation

Secession, our only hope…

The idea of fighting for a republic populated only by Whites; to secede from a degenerated America, boggled my mind back in 2009 when I read Michael O’Meara’s seminal articles “Toward the White Republic” and “The Sword” at The Occidental Quarterly.

Today, two years later, at The Occidental Observer (TOO) Farnham O’Reilly has been publishing a series of articles of which I will republish only the latest one, “What Will Work, Part Nine.” It is an inspiring word for all those who, like me, believe that the next step toward a White Republic is to continue spreading these ideas until the minimum mass for actual revolution is reached.

Only then will secession become possible.




In discussions with others regarding the TOO responses on the topic of secession, some are discouraged by the number of negative reactions — ostensibly from racially conscious kinsmen — saying that, for one reason or another, White people cannot or should not secede. Yet, let’s remember the respondents are not representative of most White Nationalists. While perhaps one-third are really solid, clear thinking individuals, another third may be best described as Internet hobbyists. The remaining are, frankly, shills or malcontents of one stripe or another.

I really don’t mind the shills; I suspect most TOO writers have them, and while they work for the Enemy they are at least sincere. Really, it is an intriguing game of chess with them, for they are the best sophists, often agreeing in part yet coming across with compelling arguments that leave honest readers with the impression that, one way or another, Whites just cannot have total victory and total sovereignty. This impression is strengthened when the shill splits — not unlike an amoeba — assuming two different identities that begin to argue with one another, with the less polished half losing credibility. Yet, somehow the pseudo-dialog still leaves the reader with the impression that we can never have our Homeland — ever. As for the malcontents, they simply work from a premise of envy or hatred. Not happy unless they are miserable, these folks are of our own blood and will plague us to the end.

Many readers raise the point that the U.S. government “won’t let us secede.” But, that is what secession is all about! Yes, it is not for the faint of heart, but secession is quite possible, and would be brought about not through military victory, but by way of economic expediency. Just how the mechanics whereby a more powerful nation concedes territory and autonomy to a weaker one through economic necessity will be left to others to discuss in private — ample historical precedence as well as some very fine blueprints set in fictional settings exist.

We have all heard it is wise to not underestimate your enemy. But, it is also wise not to overestimate him! The Jews and their collaborators are only as strong as their servants, and we would do well to remember the last conflict the American military ever truly won was that against the diminutive Caribbean nation of Grenada.

Compromise will not work, implicit caste or segregation systems will not work, and enclaves will not work. Who is still in power in all those scenarios? Who has the nukes? Who has the central banking system? Who has the media? Nonwhites do not like Whites. They never have. Dig it. We can’t just all get along, for the nonwhite factions in this country — who will soon be a majority — do not want to get along, and do not want equality; they want us dead.

Only complete sovereignty, complete safety through autonomy, complete self-determination brought about by secession, will save us. United we stand, scattered we fall. We have seen how bad it is when we are a majority — has anyone given thought to the nightmare facing good White folk once we are a minority? If we do not act, there is no punishment we will not deserve. Every goal must bear a just proportion to its cost. For those who will act, there never has been a more noble cause.

Those who wish to ‘take America back’ have not honestly assessed reality. They are not even in a position to dictate their terms from a position of weakness. America — in its current physical entirety — is no longer theirs to take back. And, they do not deserve to have it back, even if they were in a position to take it. It is much like a prostitute who, upon meeting Mr. Right, decides to ‘take back’ her chastity. It can’t be done. It can’t be taken back. She sold it, and now it belongs to someone else — just like we did with America. The Jews did not betray and sell out America — Whites did that. We did it constitutionally, I might add. It is this America, the polluting, anti-Nature, race-mixing, porn-addicted, junk-food gorging, homophile, baby-killing, anti-family, instant gratification, entertainment craving, God-hating, Jew-fawning abomination that seeks to introduce its moral superiors such as Iran and Afghanistan to American democracy.

There is such a thing as national sin, the demand for payment which shall always be made in this world. America, once the safest, richest, kindest, most blessed nation, deigned not to honor the Source of that goodness, choosing instead to pursue evil beyond imagination. But to those who have been faithful to all that is good, all that is moral, all that is loyal, indeed all that has been declared to be in accordance with natural law by that ineffable Force without beginning or end, to those there is given the opportunity to come out of this diseased whore known as the United States of America before her ruin overtakes them.

For this nation of desolation has set its hand against everything good, and has upheld everything evil. It destroys the environment to extract those elements by which it may continue to foster sensual, sedentary lifestyles. It has eschewed health, preferring repulsive ingestion of garbage over good food — Americans are the fattest, weakest, most unnatural creatures on earth. It has mocked the sacred dual image by which Nature has designed all higher life forms — male and female — daring to call this holy design into question and relegating it to a matter of ‘orientation’ and ‘gender identity’. It has actively sought the destruction of the gene pool to which it owes its very existence through miscegenation, abortion, alien immigration, and all forms of sexual shame. It has celebrated and nourished the pornography industry, destroying families and robbing children of their innocence. It has chosen for its leader a man symbolic of the highest sin against Nature — a progeny of the sun and the moon — a repulsive yet narcissistic individual whose hatred for our folk knows no bounds. Finally, in all things and everything America serves — first and foremost — Jewish interests. And our people, what is left of our good people, need to come out from under her, for there is a sight of blood on her hands, and her fall, destruction and damnation will be great.

Much of what we talk about is what we don’t like; what is happening, why it is bad for us, what will happen if we don’t do anything, or perhaps how we intend on dealing with it. But seldom do we speak of what we want, what we are after, and what kind of world we want for our children.

It is hard to grasp how heavy the White Man’s burden really is, and how good life could really be without subsidizing the parasites and willful non-producers. One might think “Well, the income taxes really aren’t that bad, much lower in fact than most other developed nations. Besides, I always get a refund when I file.” But that is just the individual income tax. There are a lot of other taxes as well: tax on gasoline, tax on liquor, tax on highway users (truckers), tax on arrows used for archery enthusiasts, sales tax, payroll tax, estate tax, gift tax, corporate tax, tax on machine guns, franchise tax, tax on tobacco, ad nauseam.

And then there is foreign aid, the most obscene example being Israel, which siphons off, in the form of military aid, ‘loan guarantees’ and out and out cash gifts, enough to support each man, woman and child — legal or otherwise — in this country. In a society in which parasites and willful non-producers are absent — and there was at least one example of such a society not too many years ago — a government can serve its citizens quite well without the tax burden, and the citizens in turn will find that, while life still presents many problems, personal finances are not one of them.

If there will be anything like a national religion in the future White ethnostate, it will be a reverence for Truth. As with the ancient Druids, truth will be sought, coveted, and prized. Truth will be recognized as an absolute, regardless of any inconvenience, offense, unpopularity, or expense. We shall have truth in science, with all discoveries being welcomed regardless of iconoclasms they may bestow. We shall have truth in history — hysterical assertion shall not triumph over historical fact in our new State. Within our reverence for Truth shall be the recognition we are part of Nature and subject to Nature’s laws, and our treatment of, and interaction with the environment shall be one of love and respect.

We want an economy based on invention and production rather than speculation and consumption, on equity funding rather than debt financing. With an economy based on production, no citizen who is willing to work will be without employment or livelihood, no matter what kind of work it is. We want an end to the tyranny of oligarchy, the bitter maturing of laissez-faire capitalism with the loss of jobs, planned obsolescence, and the rich becoming richer and the poor becoming poorer, and our people being saddled with massive debt.

We want a nation where scholarships awarded on academic achievement are really given to young people based on their academic achievement, where you can send your daughter to college knowing if she does come home with a husband he will at least be a loving husband compatible with family heritage, and furthermore they will make some darn fine looking grandkids. We want a world where you can speak freely and honestly among your peers or at your workplace about any aspect of science or history without being ostracized, called names, or fired.

We want a society where you can watch a TV show without hearing profanity, seeing strange people, or being exposed to immodesty and immorality, and where there is no private monopoly on media/TV, for control of media equals control of the mind. We want a society where free speech means free speech, and not license to desecrate that which others hold sacred, or to steal the innocence of children by exposing them to filth and depravity.

We want a society where young men still find young women attractive when they are modestly dressed, and where young women can find young men who act like young men and not old boys, where kids can take walks in town at night in safety, where little boys can hunt frogs in the creek, and little girls can walk home from school safely. We want a society where food is not fast, and commutes are not slow. We want a society without repulsive malls, decrepit trailer parks, chintzy, greasy, plastic fast food establishments, and other post-war junk architecture.

We want a system where justice is bestowed on the righteous, and not purchased by the wicked, where truth is a legal defense, and where professional attorneys can make as much as the professional electricians and professional plumbers — if they work hard enough.

We want a government where the constitution not only confers a bill of rights, but also secures a bill of responsibility from each citizen, and where the rights of the people are not trampled by the rights of the individual.

We want a society where history books refer to the murder of 20 million Christians or 50 million unborn children as holocausts.

We want a land where our children learn about their heroes rather than about the heroes of our enemies — the man who responded to a courageous challenge by bringing a sling that could kill from afar, who started a love affair with the King’s son, who betrayed his loyal lieutenant so that he might ravish his wife in faithless treachery, and then thanked God when an innocent child paid the penalty for his transgression. It breaks my heart to think this repulsive little Hebrew is held up as a godly role model to White children in Sunday school listening in innocent, rapt wonder to the whitewashing (literally!) of his loathsome deeds.

We want a society where true artists are encouraged and honored, and where pornographers are located and executed. We want a society where live babies are preferred over live perverts, and where the slaying of the former rather than the latter is considered a crime of hate. We want a society where degeneracy is ridiculed, and Christianity is respected. We want a society where the just recompense for one’s wife being subjected to insult or unwarranted attention by another man may be transacted with guns and not words. We want a society where homemaking and motherhood is revered because it is natural, and the reversal of spousal roles is ridiculed because it is unnatural.

We want a nation where the beauty accruing from racial hygiene is preferred over the ugly anatomical disharmonies associated with race-mixing. We want a nation where any photograph of a gathering of people shows a healthy compliment of our own folk, rather than the obligatory and unnatural conglomeration of various races. We want a nation where quality is preferred to equality, and where value is based on the natural criteria of beauty, scarcity and utility, rather than the unnatural, fictitious, man-declared concept of inherent human worth, without the earning of such worth.

We want a country where dogfighting, cockfighting, bullfighting, all kosher barbarisms against our animal friends and other forms of ghoulish cruelty are rewarded with shame and death.

We want an education system that expands the definition of Special Education to include those ‘gifted & talented’, and expand those services to include, at a minimum, an equal amount spent on gifted as well as ‘challenged’ children, a system where our children can learn more about their own folk than about others, and learn more about the good things their folk have done rather than the mistakes they made. We want a society where active little boys are given 4H projects instead of Ritalin.

We want a society where ‘freedom’ is defined as being able to do as much good as one wants, regardless of criticism, rather than as much evil as one wants, so long as physical or financial injury does not occur. We want a republic, not a democracy. In other words, we want our constitution to be founded on the rights of the people, on which the rights of the individual shall not infringe, where our freedom comes before my freedom. This will be a constitution that recognizes the eternal truth which is this: the rights of all individuals cannot be protected so long as the individuals within that group have radically different values, but the rights of a group of people with similar values can be protected.

We want a land where any writing or pictures on buildings or trains will take the form of art, not hideous graffiti, where people who are hurt will get prompt attention in emergency rooms without having to wait while aliens are given priority, where dogs will receive loving care, fowl will receive proper animal husbandry, and neither will face an ugly end surrounded by sweating, screaming faces bidding the highest dollar on mutilation and death. Motorists will be insured, lawns will be mowed, and restaurants will have health inspections. We want to be able to walk our streets or into our stores and hear only the steady, friendly language of our own folk, and not the gabbling and gibbering of an alien tongue. Our military will guard our borders. No se habla español aquí.

We want a nation that loves and upholds Nature and Her laws, and that hates and opposes all that is unnatural and contrary to Her laws, a nation whose folk recognizes that creation should go up, and not down, even as it has in eons past. We want to live in a White world.

***

We have had a wonderful springtime here in the Homeland. The large snowpack has been experiencing a slow melt-off, and there are a profusion of wildflowers. The long, wet, cool spring followed by sudden summer heat has made for a very challenging farming season, but still life is very good. The ruffed grouse have finished their drumming and courtship in the woods, and the elk and deer, having wintered much lower due to the heavy snowfall, came through in fine shape. I saw two bull elk last week — both fat as ticks, with antlers forming and thick with velvet. For those who like shopping for free and nutritious groceries in the woods, the morel mushrooms were quite plentiful, as were the wild onions. The huckleberry harvest, still several months off, looks very promising.

And, for birders, the Pacific Northwest is paradise. While there are over 800 species of birds in North America, more than 350 of them may be found in Idaho alone! Much of this is due to our diverse geography, as well as the fact that, while we are a large area, we have only about 15 people per square mile. Actually, we have in many areas zero people per square mile as most folks live in or near one of three major cities. Recently my wife and I saw a pair of Pileated woodpeckers — always a haunting sight as they so closely resemble their larger southern brethren the Ivorybill woodpecker, the survival of which we and others in our communities continue to pray for, as we do for our own folk — the Children of the Sun.

* * *

Trainspotter comments at TOO:

Excellent and inspiring essay. As to the critique of America, I am ashamed to admit that Farnham is both harsh… and essentially correct. At what point do the missteps and misdeeds of the United States become fundamental to its nature as opposed to flukes and aberrations?

Importing cheap labor (including blacks), then whites slaughtering whites at least in part over blacks, reconstruction, extending the vote to blacks (in the 1800′s for crying out loud) – need one go on? And we haven’t even reached the post World War II era yet, or the absolutely disgusting present. A present where even rock ribbed red staters are peachy keen on immigration, so long as it is legal and the person wants to work hard. Want to make a buck? Want to pursue your self-interest and gorge on filthy lucre? Surely you are my kinsman, surely you are my fellow citizen. LOL! You just can’t make this stuff up.

If this bizarre attitude on the part of “conservatives” that the simple desire to make a buck makes one a kindred spirit, a good countryman, whether he be Zulu or aborigine, does not reveal the hollow shell of the United States, I don’t know what does. (I’ll note that, obviously, there is nothing wrong and much right with productive activity and building wealth – but the idea that such a desire makes a Bantu a meaningful part of my community, my people, is utterly absurd – but perfectly in vogue with the modern Kwa.)

Today, in 2011, we are witnesses with front row seats to the endgame. It’s a mad house.

Point is, this country had fundamental problems well before Brown v Board and the ensuing cesspool. I’m increasingly persuaded that these problems are inherent to what the United States is, baked into the cake as it were. Two of the major poisons being equality and excessive materialism, prominent right from the beginning.

This is not to say that there is nothing good about America, but it becomes increasingly apparent that most of the good attributed to the United States is, in fact, simply an expression of the whites who peopled it as opposed to the political ideas that get all of the credit. Whites who had a continent to conquer and put to productive use. Whites who still had a meaningful culture and folkways that they brought with them from the Old World, while temporarily being freed, or at least relatively so, from an exploitative oligarchy.

Whites were extremely race conscious for most of American history (and thank god for that, or we would already be at Brazil status), but again, can this be attributed to the United States political ideology/system in particular? I think not. It was simply whites, as essentially decent and realistic people, attempting to protect their communities, and in particular the more vulnerable whites in the community, from the horrors that we see all around us today. It had essentially nothing to do with “equality” or Coolidge’s famous “the business of America is business” materialist nonsense.

If anything, America’s political ideology/system worked against these good things, always threatening to undermine them. And then it did just that, and with some extra help from the Chosen, we survey the wasteland across the fruited plain.

In short, what has been beautiful and impressive about America has been its white people coupled with a fairly unusual set of circumstances, not the political and ideological snake oil that garners civic book kudos.

So yes, perhaps we do need something fresh, new and unused. Something particularly geared to our nature, and specifically designed to protect and elevate us through the coming ages. I just don’t think that the United States can really be that anymore. In many ways it never was.

This does not mean that I’m sold on the Northwest plan. I just don’t think it will work out that way, for a variety of reasons that I’ve written about before. However, at the moment, nothing better has been put forward, so the Northwest idea wins by default. So be it.

In any event, and however we get it, Farnham is absolutely correct: sovereignty for our people must be the unalterable goal. Nothing less will do. Whether the Northwest idea in particular falls in or out of favor, gaining a land of our own must be our lodestar.

Categories
Miscegenation

A Mexican lesson for Americans

Americans who have visited their southern neighbor or observed Mexican immigrants in California and Texas and observed their overwhelmingly Indian phenotype might find difficult to imagine that in the early 19th century — just before the War of Independence, in the country that would retake its ancient Aztec name, “Mexico” — whites constituted one-sixth of the population of New Spain. In modern Mexico, because of low white and high non-white birthrates, pure whites are almost on the brink of extinction. Thus the history of this nation should serve as a warning to the Americans against open borders, miscegenation, and affirmative action.

The following translation is taken from the chapter on “Independence” in A Brief History of Mexico (Breve historia de México, [México, D.F.: Ediciones Botas, 1944, first edition 1937], pp. 255–60). The author, José Vasconcelos, one of the most celebrated Mexican intellectuals of the 20th century, wrote: “El desprecio de la propia casta es el peor de los vicios del carácter” (Contempt for one’s race is the worst of character flaws).

(Mexican whites:
An endangered species)


The independence of the Latin American nations is the result of the disintegration of the Spanish empire. None of the nations of Latin America had, by a process of natural growth, reached the maturity required for emancipation. . . . . In the colonies, the men of clearer vision and greater patriotism, for example, the bishop Abad y Queipo, gave Mexico up for lost, and rightly so, after he saw that the independence was inevitable. . . .

From the beginning, the war was supposed to destroy the Spaniards, who represented the force and culture of the country, in the same way that later a fight against the criollo was developed, and today against the mestizo—all under the pretext of freeing the Indian—in order to uproot Spanish culture and replace it with American.

The two lands most imbued with Spanish influence, Mexico and Peru, resisted independence, which happened through foreign intervention. Peru was freed by Colombians and Argentines. . . .

In the United States, the independence movement was not a race war. For Morelos, for example, to be comparable to Washington, it must be assumed that Washington had decided to recruit blacks and mulattoes to kill the English. Instead, Washington disdained blacks and mulattoes and recruited the English of America, who did not commit the folly of killing their own brothers, uncles, and relatives, only because they were born in England. Quite the contrary, each participant of the American Revolution felt pride for his British ancestry and hoped for the betterment of the English. This should have been the sense of our own emancipation, to transform New Spain into an improved Spain, better than that of the peninsula but with its blood, our blood. The whole later disaster of Mexico is explained by the blind, criminal decision that emerged from the womb of Hidalgo’s mobs and is expressed in the suicidal cry: “Death to the Spaniards!”

The absurd idea never crossed the mind of Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, or any of the fathers of the Yankee Independence that a redskin should be the President or that blacks should occupy positions held by the English. What we should have done is to declare that all the Spanish residents in Mexico were to be treated like Mexicans.

The idea that independence would tend to devolve power to the Indian was not an Indian idea. The emancipation, as already said over and over again, was neither devised nor consummated by the Indians. The idea of stirring up the Indians appears in the leaders of the emancipation who had not found positive reception for their plans from the educated classes. They resorted to the dangerous decision of starting a caste war because they were unable to carry out a war of emancipation. Not even Bolívar escapes this charge, since in Colombia he stirred up blacks against the whites in order to recruit his armies. For the people of the North, such procedures would have seemed insane, as they were.

It was therefore a crime: stirring up the underdogs against the top brass without any social improvement, merely to have soldiers. In fact, the idea of putting the Indian in front of the insurrection was an English idea. One of the first people to speak of confederating the Hispanic continent under the rule of a descendant of the Incas was Miranda. This idea was given to Miranda by the two biggest enemies of the Spanish in America, namely the French and the English.

If, during the US War of Independence, an agitator had said that the country should be ruled again by the redskins, surely he would have been shot by patriots as a traitor. But among us, talk of returning the country to the Indians is greeted with smiles. The English originators of this propaganda knew well that the Indians would not even hear it, but they counted upon the unseriousness, the vanity, and the folly of the criollos and mestizos, both of whom took sides against the Spanish. Once the Spanish were destroyed, these countries could be easily divided and thus fall prey to a new form of domination. Undoubtedly, a Mexico ruled by Indians and becoming Aztec again would be as easy prey as it was for Cortés.

Even if the Indians deserved this restoration, which is absurd to imagine, it is obvious that people do not go back three hundred years—much less in the case of Mexico, where the race itself, apart from the customs and ideas, had been transformed. Contempt for one’s race is the worst of character flaws.

___________

I translated this excerpt for Counter-Currents Publishing (here).