web analytics
Film Final solution Racial right

Heydrich, 6

Today I watched the film from this moment until Otto Hoffman’s speech is interrupted by a phone call from Himmler to Heydrich. The segment made me think and even aroused my emotions.

For example, it came to my mind that Christians of the racial right evoke the figure of Friedrich Wilhelm Kritzinger, portrayed in the film by Franz Rudnick.

Kritzinger was a German civil servant and Secretary of State in the Reich Chancellery: one of the participants in the Wannsee Conference that established the policies of The Final Solution. After the conference, he attempted to resign from his post in the Chancellery, but his resignation was rejected because ‘it would be worse without him’.

After the war, Kritzinger was arrested, along with most of the other surviving members of the Wannsee Conference, in 1946. During the Nuremberg Trials, he publicly declared himself ashamed of the Reich. He was released in April 1946 but then arrested again in December of the same year. He was later released and shortly afterwards died of natural causes.

With Germans like Kritzinger and Americans like the good Christians of today, we are getting nowhere. On the one hand, they recognise that the Jews want to exterminate the Aryans. On the other hand, they put the interests of the Jew before those of the Aryan when it comes to final solutions, because if it comes to a war to the death between the two races, by feeling compassion for the enemy one is tacitly betraying one’s ethnicity.

I don’t think Christian racialists will see the obvious unless they repudiate the religion of their parents. We saw what happened in Germany after the war. The Anglo-Americans easily denazified the German nation by simply using Judeo-Christian ethics as the default morality, and the ideals of National Socialism were quickly forgotten by these Germans who became, like the rest of Westerners, vile bourgeoisie from the 1950s to the present day.

I think it is even treason to go around saying that the film is making things up and that the SS weren’t exterminationists. That’s why I like David Irving and Mark Weber, because despite being sympathisers of Hitler and the Third Reich they don’t fall into this neochristian temptation of wanting to ‘baptise’, with Christian morality, these SS hierarchs who appear at the round table.

If things continue to go wrong and the Aryans are going to be exterminated, I think only the last generation of whites will discover that from WW2 onwards all Westerners, racialists included, made an astronomical mistake.

Conversely, if the racialists were consistent with their premise of racial protection, they would have to have as martyrs all those at the table who were killed by the Allies when the war ended, except Kritzinger because he never abandoned Judeo-Christian morality. Moreover, if English-speaking racialists were consistent, they would try to learn German to understand National Socialism thoroughly, and even to speak in a language that sounds tougher, more manly, than other European languages.

Otto Hoffman’s little speech, portrayed by Robert Atzorn, which starts here, shows the exact tone as the (still non-existent) priests of the sacred words should be speaking, even if we have zero political power. Remember what Savitri implied: the first step to conquer the world is to have this kind of thinking.

Final solution Racial right

Heydrich, 5

Beginning at this point Heydrich says: ‘The Führer sees himself as the Robert Koch of politics: eradicating the bacteria to save the organism. It’s either them or us’.

One of the clearest signs that the racial right isn’t a serious movement is that it fails to point out the simple fact that the American zeitgeist has been the exact antithesis of this pronouncement: something that was realised decades ago by Ben Klassen[1], who blamed Christianity for the fanatical philosemitism of Americans. When we see American senators and other politicians saying these days that their support for Israel is unconditional, and will be unconditional as long as the US exists, we have a perfect portrait of today’s Jew-loving (and therefore Aryan-hating, since as Heydrich said ‘It’s either them or us’) zeitgeist.

I said I would not mention names and I will keep that promise for the rest of my blogging career but who, among the notable anti-Semites of the racial right, post images of Heydrich as the patron saint of their sites? The truth is that there is no homage to this SS hierarch or any other notable Nazi. Nor will there be, for the simple fact that those who belong to the racial right continue to worship the crucified; and it is considered disloyal to side with the crucifier even if the crucified was a subversive Jew and the crucifier an Aryan (remember that for Nietzsche the only respectable figure in the New Testament was Pontius Pilate).

Half an hour into the film, with the cold tone and routine of a bureaucrat Heydrich says: ‘the physical annihilation of 100,000 Polish, Baltic and Russian Jews’. In all honesty: could you conceive of a racialist Christian becoming president of the US speaking in that tone? Isn’t it obvious that to speak like that it is first necessary to use the Bible of our ancestors as toilet paper, literally? What are the chances that those who are now Zionists will in the future wipe their asses with the torn pages of their Bibles? What are the chances that they will become like Heydrich and company? Nine years ago I quoted Jack Frost and it is worth reciting:

In order to accept being called a racist or a Nazi with equanimity, normal American whites would have to reconcile that with their country’s history of being violently opposed to racism of any kind, from the Civil War forward. They would have to admit to themselves and to others that all of that bloodshed in trying to stamp out racism had been shed in vain, and in fact, worse than in vain, in an evil cause. They would have to admit that their ancestors were evil, and that they themselves had also been evil before they saw the light and became racists.

It’s safe to say the chances of that happening on a mass scale are almost zero.

Around the 37th minute of the film, Heydrich mentions the sum of eleven million Jews to be exterminated, in total. Once again: Can you imagine a Christian on this side of the Atlantic thinking in such terms? You have to become anti-Christian, like Alex Linder and William Pierce, to dare to think like that!

Is it understandable why this site is a crusade against the cross? As long as American ‘racialists’ continue to worship the Jew hanging on the cross they will never think in terms of true survival. In the film, Heydrich also wanted to deport the Jews from England to the camps in Eastern Europe. But in real story they stayed there and Winston Churchill literally pissed in the Rhine River after WW2.

There is no need to remind the reader of the current situation in the UK. Of the people I dealt with personally on my last visit to the island ten years ago, since then one suffered thirteen months’ imprisonment for saying unkind things about Jews (Jez Turner), and two others are now serving years…


[1] Klassen’s family were originally Dutch Mennonites, who for a time lived in Prussia and then in 1804 moved out to the Ukraine. Klassen himself was born to Bernhard Kornelius Klassen and Susanna Penner in Rudnerwiede, part of a historical German-speaking Mennonite colony, close to the Crimea, then part of the Ukrainian People’s Republic; the area would later become part of the Zaporizhia Oblast during the 1930s.

Racial right Savitri Devi

Heydrich, 3

In the film, the meeting that starts at this moment makes me think…

Had it not been for the Anglo-Americans, these are the kind of meetings that would exist today in the centre of a Europe completely conquered by the Third Reich instead of the meetings where the Russians now have the power over the destiny of Europe.

If the white race is to survive, sooner or later the English and Americans will have to make a truly astronomical humility cure—i.e, swallow their pride—and do a centuries-long penance for the blunder their ancestors committed in the 20th century (and 21st century by continuing to defame Hitler).

Incidentally, as far as my Tuesday post about the impostor is concerned, I learned a lesson.

I shouldn’t drop names when criticising the racial right because, sometimes, I will need their favours. For example, the moderator of Counter-Currents did me the courtesy of clarifying, in the comments thread, that the impostor who in various racialist forums has been trolling me for six years was a troll and not the real César Tort. Like it or not, from now on I won’t drop names because I have had the experience that some moderators of other racialist forums have been so susceptible to my criticisms that they continued to let the comments of that impostor pass, under my name, even after I repeatedly informed them by email that the impostor wasn’t me.

So from now on my criticisms of the racial right will omit the names of the specific persons, so as not to unnecessarily hurt their susceptibilities.

In any case, the regular visitor to this site is well aware that my ideological difference with them lies precisely in the fact that they don’t think like Heydrich and his SS gang, as we see at the round table in the film. The racial right still lives under the sky of Christian morality, and we want to practice genocides like Genghis Khan for the simple fact that we must comply with the four words (‘eliminate all unnecessary suffering’). And if humans are the devils of the animals on earth, to save them we must dispatch them. Always keep in mind that the first measures taken by the Nazis when they came to power were precisely to prohibit vivisection and many other unnecessary sufferings of our cousins!

Those who do not feel such compassion for animals will never understand National Socialism, and I would suggest that they stop visiting racialist forums and read instead Savitri Devi’s Impeachment of Man, which touches on the issue of unnecessary cruelty to animals.

In the next post of this series, I will see if it is worth quoting some specific words of these SS officers at the round table…

Axiology Might is right (book) Racial right

Might is right, 1

by Ragnar Redbeard

Editor’s Note:

I don’t presume to have read all of Ragnar Redbeard’s book, but I might be adding some excerpts in a new series, such as the following passage from the preface.

It is interesting to compare this book published in 1896 with the lectures of those on the American racial right 128 years later (e.g., this recent one), who are still stuck in unwarlike Christian ethics.

The mysterious Redbeard (a pen name) wrote:


______ 卐 ______


Virtue is rewarded in this world, remember. Natural law makes no false judgments. Its decisions are true and just, even when dreadful. The victor gets the gold and the land every time. He also gets the fairest maidens, the glory tributes. And—why should it be otherwise? Why should the delights of life go to failures and cowards? Why should the spoils of battle belong to the unwarlike? That would be insanity, utterly unnatural and immoral.

Behold the crucifix, what does it symbolize?
Pallid incompetence hanging on a tree.

In the wars of the Great Cæsar, and Grim Hannibal, in the times of Belzchazzar, the Pharaohs and all; the days of Rienzi and Roland the Bold; all banners are waving for women and gold.
It is might against might, remember, by land and sea, man against man, money against money, brains against brains, and—everything to the winner.

Racial right

Cancer patients

The brief exchange between Will Williams, an anti-Christian racialist like us, and a Christian commenting on Counter-Currents, reminds me of my dilemma: I want to save Anglo-Germans from the ongoing extinction but most are like a cancerous patient who refuses to see that his cancer is due to smoking.

In other words: the rampant self-loathing from which today’s Aryan suffers is ultimately due to Christian ethics and guilt that grows every day like cancer. For example, the alluded Christian stated: ‘despite [William] Pierce’s brilliance, his agenda is seen as morally repugnant’ by racial right groups—not realising that to wipe out orcs is the only way to survive (remember: millions of them have already invaded the Aryan lands)!

Fortunately, Jared Taylor, the granddaddy of American race realism, is already realising that his country is a goner, as we can see in his latest video.

How long will it take my northern neighbours to appreciate what I say on page 73 of my recent psychobiography on Nietzsche?

Racial right

On eunuchs

A Eunuch’s Dream (1874, Cleveland Museum of Art) depicts a eunuch who wanted to marry a harem slave. He experienced a vision of her while smoking his opium pipe, but her little companion holding a knife dripping with blood reminds us that the eunuch’s anatomy precludes the fulfillment of his dream.


______ 卐 ______


I started the Crusade Against the Cross series, now a book, a month ago. Before I return to what I used to do, quoting Simms’ book on Hitler, I would like to say a few things about the racial right. I never tire of analysing the subject precisely because of what I was saying yesterday about how Europeans lost their manhood.

On this side of the Atlantic, whites also lost their manhood, although at least some of them still defend some of it with the Second Amendment. But that’s not remotely enough. What racialists need now is to shift their paradigm: from believing that the Jewish problem is the primary cause of white decline, to realising that the Christian problem is that primary cause. And to do so requires balls: intellectual manhood that racialists on this side of the Atlantic still lack.

Recently, for example, Counter-Currents (CC), one of the most representative sites of American white nationalism, surveyed its visitors. I was enthusiastic about this initiative and answered the survey questions myself.

In doing so, I noticed that the survey taker asked many questions from the System’s POV. For example, he asked the respondents whether they considered themselves to be male, female or a third sex (we can imagine a survey of imperial Germans if the Third Reich had won the war!). Likewise, the CC survey asked whether the respondent suffered from autism or ADHD.

For years I have complained that racialists haven’t realised that psychiatric labels like ADHD are relatively recent, and have been used to tame brave male children with drugs. I brought this to Greg Johnson’s attention himself, as he read my article ‘Why psychiatry is a false science’ in an expanded version in which I included some passages about ADHD and white children.

The problem with the kind of questions like the one in the CC survey is that they don’t adequately rebel against crazy or pseudo-scientific fads (that there are more than two sexes or that there is such a thing as ADHD). But that wasn’t the worst of the survey. It would have been fascinating to see how many of the respondents were Christian, or sympathetic to Christianity for example. But on Saturday, Johnson published an article saying that he will keep some of the poll results to himself! What a disappointment. And we cannot know if any CC readers were upset, because Johnson is known to sometimes not let some comments through (I gave up trying to comment there when he wouldn’t let me discuss Nordicism).

Now let’s turn to another of the most respected sites on the American racial right: the one chaired by Kevin MacDonald. Tobias Langdon is a featured author at The Occidental Observer. On Sunday, Langdon published an optimistic article that opens with these words:

“The West is doomed!” “France is finished!” “Britain is over!” I’ve never understood expressions of despair and defeat like those. They’re obviously self-indulgent and harmful things to say, so how could people with any common sense and self-control utter them? Unless those people aren’t what they pretend to be, of course. No genuine friend of the West should announce that “The West is doomed!” Or announce the same of any part of the West, whether they happen to live there or not.

Langdon goes on to say that fortune favours the brave and that defeatism has been a capital crime in wartime. But he omits one small detail! No one in the mainstream articles of today’s racial right is saying what, a dozen years ago, Michael O’Meara was still saying about an eventual armed revolution. And it is precisely because of this lack of revolutionaries, albeit at the moment only at a theoretical level, that it makes perfect sense to say that France or Britain are finished (David Lane had said so in ‘Open Letter to a Dead Race’). But of course: like CC, Langdon writes for an audience of eunuchs.

There was one commenter who took issue with Langdon and posted this. Remarkably, another commenter defended Langdon Christianly, even talking about the god of the Jews as if (1) that god exists, and (2) capitalising the word ‘God’ as implying that we Gentiles must worship it. That’s fairly common on that supposedly Jew-wise webzine!

Before this site gets back on track, I must quote from the last page of Crusade against the Cross, actually a quote from the last page of Nietzsche’s Der Antichrist:

Law against Christianity [1]

Given on the Day of Salvation, on the first day of the year one (30 September 1888, according to the false calculation of time).

War to the death against vice: the vice is Christianity

First article.—Every type of anti-nature is a vice. The priest is the most vicious type of person: he teaches anti-nature. Priests are not to be reasoned with, they are to be locked up.

Second article.—Any participation in church services is an attack on public morality. One should be harsher with Protestants than with Catholics, harsher with liberal Protestants than with orthodox ones. The criminality of being Christian increases with your proximity to science. The criminal of criminals is consequently the philosopher.

Third article.—The execrable location where Christianity brooded over its basilisk eggs should be razed to the ground and, being the depraved spot on earth, it should be the horror of all posterity. Poisonous snakes should be bred on top of it.

Fourth article.—The preacher of chastity is a public incitement to anti-nature. Contempt for sexuality, making it unclean with the concept of ‘uncleanliness’, these are the real sins against the holy spirit of life.

Fifth article.—Eating at the same table as a priest ostracizes: you are excommunicated from honest society. The priest is our Chandala, —he should be ostracized, starved, driven into every type of desert.

Sixth article.—The ‘holy’ history should be called by the name it deserves, the cursed history; the words ‘God’, ‘saviour’, ‘redeemer’, ‘saint’ should be used as terms of abuse, to signify criminals.

Seventh article.—The rest follows from this.

Friedrich Nietzsche – The Antichrist

I quote this just to show the gulf that separates me from the typical American racialist. Unlike Langdon’s goofy optimism, I am convinced that to save the Aryan man it will be necessary to implement the ‘Law against Christianity’ when we revolutionaries come to power. There is no other way to save him since it’s precisely Christian ethics that has been screwing the Aryan mind.


[1] Nietzsche’s ‘Law Against Christianity’ has been eliminated from numerous editions of The Anti-Christ: A Curse on Christianity because the editors simply cucked before the Judeo-Christian ethos of the masses.

Friedrich Nietzsche Racial right


against the Cross, 21

Sometime before he sent his mad letters, when Nietzsche was charring in Turin, he wrote Ecce Homo: How One Becomes What One Is, which no longer contains any new ideas. Ecce homo was only the presentation of his books under the delirium that he was soon to split history in twain. A few months later, when the martyr of the spirit was interned in the psychiatric hospital in Jena, Adolf Hitler was born. Nietzsche would later be taken by his mother to Naumburg. When her mother died, Elisabeth took her brother to Weimar, where he lived until 1900. The interior of that house, the Nietzsche Archive, can be seen in the video linked in my post this morning.

Adolf Hitler grew up, matured and, when he was already at the height of power, visited the house of the Nietzsche Archive. As a reward for the visit, Elisabeth gave him a relic: her brother’s walking stick!

Unfortunately Hitler didn’t win the war, so the West is now ruled by an anti-Hitlerian, anti-Nazi, anti-national, anti-White, anti-Gentile, anti-male and anti-heterosexual ideology. Because the Anglo-Americans ‘won’ the war, and told—and tell—the story that rules the West, I have to reiterate what I have so often said about the other side of the Wall.

Many among the racialist folk are actively deluding themselves by not recognising the Christian problem. The old saying ‘You can’t solve a problem if you can’t first define it precisely’ applies to those who believe that there is only the Jewish problem and not a Christian problem. Most racialists ignore the history of Constantine and his successors not only explained in some PDFs of our featured post, but even available in books still in print, such as The Darkening Age.

But the problem are all Westerners. From the mighty Woke liberals to the comparatively small racialist reaction, via traditionalist Christians, liberal Christians, agnostics and atheists, all find themselves bending the knee before the cross. Just look at the news these days: kids on the campuses fanatically worshipping the cross, imagining there the recently crucified Palestinian! At the opposite pole, those who belong to the anti-Semitic racial right also worship it, as can be seen in the number of articles in The Unz Review: both authors and commenters pity the same crucified Palestinian! Not to mention the traditional Christians who, literally every day, kneel in their churches in front of an image of the crucified rabbi.

While it is a breakthrough that one aspect of the Jewish Problem is finally beginning to be discussed—the state of Israel—what these people, Christians, atheists, liberals and white nationalists are unable to see is that it is impossible to win the battle by having the cross as the sign in the sky through which they will win. It is impossible to win with Christian ethics because it is a suicidal path that practises the most aggressive dysgenesis.

Unlike all of them, the National Socialists at the top of the Third Reich repudiated not only anti-racism but the very essence of what it means to kneel before the Cross: that a crucified victim is, by definition, morally more worthy than the crucifying Romans. That is why Himmler gave texts about Genghis Khan to the SS: to prepare them psychologically about what, once values are transvalued, we have to do.

Nietzsche was dazzled when he saw how Christians inverted Greco-Roman values through precisely the symbol of the cross:

This reminds me again of the invaluable words of Paul. ‘The weak things of the world, the foolish things of the world, the base things of the world, and the things that are despised, hath God chosen’: this was the formula; decadence was victorious in hoc signoGod on the cross –. Have people still not grasped the gruesome ulterior motive behind this symbol? – Everything that suffers, everything nailed to the cross is divine… Christianity won, and with this, a nobler sensibility was destroyed, – Christianity has been the worst thing to happen to humanity so far. – – [The Antichrist, §51]

The Christianity of Nick Fuentes and the rest of the white nationalists who fantasise about a new religious awakening in their country won’t save the Aryan man from extinction. We already saw what happened when the Iberian Christians conquered the Americas: they immediately became mongrelised despite their Jew-wise Inquisition. Fuentes and company will never save us because the one nailed to the cross was the rebel who raised his hand against Rome; more recently the slave that the English liberated, last century the holocausted Jew, the black American; this century the deranged transexual, etc., and the bad Aryan is supposed to have crucified him.

I would like to end this series with the plea that Nietzsche’s self-immolation after running towards the sun was not in vain.

Let us begin a movement parallel to American white nationalism: a movement in which, though minuscule for the moment—The West’s Darkest Hour—we have already taken up the crusade against the cross!

It’s time to show the nationalists that there is a higher idea than the dumb and stubborn monocausalism they preach. What does it matter if so few people visit this blog, or that hardly anyone comments on the discussion threads of my posts? What matters is to plant the insignificant—microscopic I dare say!—mustard seed in the hope that it will eventually grow and compete with the plant planted two millennia ago by Saul of Tarsus—the worst thing to happen to humanity so far!

I teach you the Overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?… The time has come for man to set himself a goal. The time has come to plant the seed of his highest hope. —Thus Spake Zarathustra

3-eyed crow Racial right

The crow

doesn’t tweet

I hate the fad of embedding discussion threads with all the colourful interface visible: something started by Andrew Anglin and now imitated by everyone, even sites of good aesthetical taste. So I’ll just copy and paste the text of the last exchange I had, on what is now called X, with a lad who has an account under the name Community Noticing:

Community Noticing: Have you ever listened to Nick Fuentes?

C.T.: Fuentes? That super Christian who wants to kill non-Christians? The fact that the racial right has spawned such a guy shows it’s bankrupt.

Community Noticing: *Expel* non-Christians, aka a good start. Fuentes is the CEO of antisemitism and nobody else comes close.

C.T.: Are you a Christian?

Community Noticing: Baptized Roman Catholic, had lost faith due to Juw subversion and some aspects you’ve blogged about. But thanks to Nick Fuentes and his medieval Germanic Christian nationalism and Catholic integralism, I see a future for the White race.

C.T.: So why do you agree with Fuentes that if their group comes to power they should kill me (and the other pagans)? They’re the ones that should be killed. As far as medieval Christianity is concerned, the topic is addressed in my translations.

Community Noticing: That isn’t what he wants, I support Nick because this is what he wants, this is what you want, this is what we all want.

C.T.: He doesn’t realise that all churches are anti-racist, including the one he belongs to. And once he said that he wanted to eliminate the pagans.

Community Noticing: False, explained here and irrelevant, because he is pro-White, he is anti-Jew, and on those two points he leads many and influences more.

This twitterer, who must be very young (see the ridiculous avatar he uses), is ignorant in multiple respects.

Firstly, he hasn’t read this site properly. The link I posted above is a translation of part of Karlheinz Deschner’s ten-volume work in German on the criminal history of Christianity: precisely the period in which Fuentes’ absurd propaganda about ‘Christian and Germanic nationalism’ is rebutted.

Secondly, the young twitterer links to a book by an apologist of Christianity published on Kevin MacDonald’s site. He ignores not only that I wrote a rebuttal in several posts, but that I included it as the last essay in my book Daybreak.

Thirdly, the typical white nationalist has a good awareness of JQ. But none of the CQ. And if worshipping the cross is the primary cause of white decline, then people like MacDonald, who publishes Christian apologists, represent a mix of good and evil for our fourteen words: proof of this is precisely that this boy linked the apologist’s book to me.

My exchange on X yesterday and today, quoted above, makes me realise that I should no longer post on such a shallow, laddish forum (compare that to the Nietzsche series I’ve been uploading!). This sort of thing happens when someone in his mid-sixties argues with a beardless kid. The kid has no idea that the older man has spent decades reading and studying the case and that it is impossible to convey this knowledge in such a superficial forum as X. That’s precisely why I put the PDFs in the featured article, but apparently, the kids who follow Fuentes don’t read books. Will they read them?

X, formerly Twitter, is designed for normies and neo-normies. The old three-eyed raven, to follow the metaphor of the featured post, never tweets. However, if there is one thing he aspires to, it is that a young person will want to receive the mantle of his legacy so that, when the old man is no longer in this world, the information collected over the years won’t be lost.

So I won’t post on X again (except a farewell). If much younger people are to communicate the message of The West’s Darkest Hour in such a forum, let them do so with proper links. But it is not the old man’s place to be on a first-name basis with a young man other than Bran the Broken.

Racial right Real men Sword

Man with sword

A few hours ago I listened to a programme I’d heard a dozen years ago: Carolyn Yeager’s interview with (now retired) blogger Severus Niflson, ‘The Heretics’ Hour: Are White Males Hooked on Weakness?’ I found it fascinating to listen to again because it shows how I’ve matured since then.

Like me, Severus Niflson grew up in Latin America but unlike me he was educated in the United States from his teenage years. As he confesses in the interview, his aim is not so much to communicate with white people in general but with white nationalists, who have to listen to some things. What I liked most about the interview is that the image Severus gives us is that of an Aryan man with his sword: the symbol of the defender of his people. If the warrior loses the sword, or if he dies, we are toast because no one will defend us anymore.

Severus talks about white nationalists in a way that is not as harsh as I do (because I believe that, in the collective Aryan unconscious, the white man, the nationalist included, has already thrown away his sword).

Severus says something very true: if we detect that even among the leaders of white nationalism some have been seduced by ethnosuicidal hedonism, through material comfort and entertainment culture, we have a problem. Already a dozen years ago, on 12 June 2012 to be exact, in my notebook about this programme I had written down that I loved the following sentences of Severus:

The more comfortable you are, the more detached from reality… You have to be careful of comfort… You have to be aware of it… We are in love of these things [cell phones, etc.], willing to give [genes and land] for them… Our generations are not connected to reality. This is the danger of modern capitalism… [Regarding Jews:] It is our fault too because we are buying [their stuff]… Our modern society is obsessed with entertainment… Most people at 40 are immature… Entertainment is escape like children… If our own leadership [has fallen] to this type of consumerism, then we have a problem.

Emphasis added. Severus talks about an interview that year with a Christian Identity supporter; Carolyn touches on anti-feminism in The Daily Stormer, and Severus responds by talking politely about patriarchy. There was a moment where Severus said that he doesn’t care about the religion of the racialist he’s arguing with and acknowledged, when talking about Catholicism that, if a racialist Catholic prioritises race over his faith, s/he wouldn’t be a true Catholic (even if that hypothetical interlocutor claims to be Christian).

And here is the issue where I now see things more maturely! The problem is that many Christians on the racial right if forced to choose between two masters, race and faith, are willing to sacrifice the former. When I first got into white nationalism I hadn’t noticed this phenomenon. Now that I have been observing it all these years, and posting many entries exemplifying it with concrete cases, it seems to me that it evokes that gospel passage that it is impossible to love two masters: the man with sword and the crucified rabbi.

At the end of the programme, Severus recommends three books:

  • Might is Right by Ragnar Redbeard
  • The False Assumptions of Democracy by Anthony Ludovici
  • Patriarchia: The Natural Power of Kings by Robert Filmer

Ludovici’s is recommended for those American white nationalists who still believe in their project of nation and, especially, in democracy: a system that is based, as Ludovici demonstrated, on the incredible stupidity of accepting the Divine Right of majorities.

Racial right William Pierce

Friendly exchange

Jamie said:

The main reason why I mentioned a video of Jewish Ben Shapiro was that he was openly discussing the Jewish roots of Catholicism and therefore, Judeo-Christianity itself.

This is natural to understand (I am afraid of saying ‘self-evident’). Christianity is Jewish. You worship a Jewish god, therefore, it is logical to realise that Jews and their values are elevated and have a strong grip on the public mindset.

Jews’ racial existence is secured at the expense of the imbecile gentiles. That’s what this spiritual syphilis of a religion ultimately brings.

What surprises me, however, is that those people that I have met and were involved in the so-called ‘movement’ don’t understand this.

They don’t understand, or don’t want to see, the conflict of interest between Aryan racial survival and the worship of a suicidal Jewish cult. Like professional ostriches, they hide their heads under the sand when the Christian Question is brought up.

I have been kicked off of many ‘far right’ groups whenever I questioned Christianity. I must admit, however, that some men in those groups have reached out to me later and said ‘Jamie, you are right. We just keep heading towards disaster.’

But I can do little more than that if I just keep getting banned / silenced by those who organise such gatherings.

Even Dr. Pierce did the same thing to some extent in his weekly podcasts. Egalitarianism is the most harmful idea, he said. Yet, he never brought up that Christianity, the main religion of most Europeans today, has been preaching equality among all races of man since the times of ancient Rome.

So, is it possible to destroy the well-organised Jews while having a Jewish religion as your own? I don’t think so.

I think criticizing Jews before Christianity (and therefore, oneself) is a dead end.

I responded:

That there is self-deception in white nationalism as far as Christianity is concerned, there is no doubt.

What you say about Pierce catches my attention. Although when I came to the movement he had already died, I realised from what I could hear from his old podcasts that he did the same thing that Hitler did: Pierce had an exoteric message for the public, but in Who We Are and in a few internal communications he was anti-Christian.

The difference with me is that I think the time has come to talk openly about Christianity: what I do on this site.

You say that you have been kicked out of the right-wing groups where you speak. They just ignore me. Since you have been in the movement longer than me, what percentage do you think its members are Christians? Even secular leaders of the movement like Kevin Mac and Greg Johnson sometimes seem sympathetic to Christianity. Don’t you think so?

Jamie said:


Yes, Dr. Pierce was anti-Christian and he always condemned it indirectly in his public speeches, even though most of his audience couldn’t piece it together.

About Christian members of the movement?

Those who follow, often, are not really Christian. Like me, they are just tired of seeing roses [i.e., beautiful women—Ed.] paired together with half-apes sub-humans (which is, for all practical purposes, what really matters in the end) and, if properly guided, they will follow you to destroy this nigger loving world.

The leaders, however, those who organise, set up websites and, curiously, have funding to do all of that, are definitely Christian, or neo-Christians.

There is no secularity in this movement. Almost all of them are afraid of criticizing Christianity out of being further alienated by the feminized masses.

But Greg Johnson is a homosexual, isn’t he? He could never feel a genuine, masculine anger at the idea of having white women with negroes.

How about Dr. McDonald? Is he even married?

Can any of them relate to the 14 words like you do? I highly doubt so, but their male audiences can, and they are frustrated, confused and leaderless.