web analytics
Categories
Racial right Voltaire

NAXALT

I add the translations from Karlheinz Deschner’s books on the criminal history of Christianity or Eduardo Velasco’s essays; or the quotations already written in English from David Irving’s books on Himmler, Brendan Simms’ on Hitler, Savitri Devi’s magnum opus, the mysterious author of Might is Right or Goodrich’s Summer 1945 when the muses don’t come to me. But this morning a muse visited me.

I’d like to comment on the recent contest organised by Counter-Currents on the so-called NAXALT, about which several essays were published.

First of all, that little riddle of liberals against the racial right is only understandable under the skies of Christian ethics. In the video I embedded the day before yesterday, Tom Holland tells the fascinating story of a theologian from the first centuries of Christianity who was already promoting migration to our lands for humanitarian reasons! In other words, if we pull out the root, Christian ethics, NAXALT doesn’t even appear on the horizon. We can already imagine the Chinese or the Israelis agonising over coloured migration arguing ‘Not All Xs Are Like That’. Such malware didn’t exist in the Aryan collective unconscious before the advent of Christianity.

Jared Taylor, brought up very Christianly by his parents, argues exactly that ‘Not All Jews Are Like That’ when confronted with the JQ. That typical stance among normies and even some racialist neo-normies was refuted when anti-Christian William Pierce published ‘Seeing the Forest’ in 1999. If some quarters of the right wing still refuse to see the forest, it is because of the Christian morality that has enslaved the Aryan collective unconscious for centuries.

Mixing metaphors, The West’s Darkest Hour represents a few steps closer to crossing the psychological Rubicon than the mid-stream stagnation in which the American racial right finds itself. That is why, ideally for me, a new breed of racists who have crossed the Rubicon should emerge that differs from today’s racialists. Ideally, young males would understand this site and become intellectual guerrillas, disseminating our ideas in the forums of the stagnant.

I will allow myself a few autobiographical paragraphs.

My bellicose attitude in the secular arena is a legacy of the Catholic bellicosity of my father and the Jesuit who baptised me: my father’s protector before his marriage (the Wikipedia photo of this Jesuit is taken precisely from my First Communion).

Portrait de Voltaire (Musée Carnavalet).

Voltaire’s bellicose attitude was instilled by his early teachers: Jesuits. Ironically, the names Ignatius of Loyola and François-Marie Arouet go together! Speaking a little immodestly, my style is like that of Voltaire. It has two main qualities: clarity and brevity. Unlike the pundits of the racialist webzines, I avoid circumlocutions and don’t get bogged down in long arguments. I just show the absurd in a couple of strokes. And if there is one thing that should be preached with Jesuit zeal and crystal clarity, it is that the scale of values of both ‘atheists’ (in fact, secular Christians) and Christians is the factor that prevents us from seeing the forest.

‘If you could write lucidly, simply, euphoniously and yet with liveness you would write like Voltaire’. —Somerset Maugham

Categories
Racial right

Commentators

by Benjamin

Having briefly read ‘The Yoke of Woke’ I see Tobias Lang inadvertently echoes Orwell’s Notes on Nationalism. Much as he’s correct to notice postwar Jewish subversion, he’s still promoting these Jews to an all-powerful force, much as with the ‘transposition of colour’ where non-whites are innately superior in that they are dominant and thus somehow to blame for everything. I see, as you always write, and as Wagner said, that these commentators simply cannot turn their gaze onto themselves and process that it’s their neochristian morality that allows the Jews to do this [emphasis by Ed.], and which keeps them otherwise weak and focussed on loving their enemy out-group, and their capitalist system that facilitates this individualistic, atomised ‘soul-saving’. He puts out his counterargument, but I don’t see at any point him dwelling on Christianity and honestly critiquing it the same way, thus sidestepping addressing Cofnas adequately. I take it it’s simply beyond them, much as with dealing with their ancestors’ catastrophic failures in turning on Germany, and indeed their own anti-Nordic miscegenation. To be honest, I grow tired of reading the entire white nationalist right continually preach on and on about Jews (especially the ‘every single time…’ line) whilst gaslighting the other, more fundamental aspects of their long dissolution. To fight back, they must first be honest enough to recognise what they are, not just what they are subjected to. They might as well be whimpering leftists otherwise, made saintly in the role of the oppressed, these conservative reactionaries. They dig their own graves.

I should add that Tobias seems to suggest somehow that without criticising hostile Jews (as would be natural for them) like he is prepossessed to do, all his opponents/oppressors are Marxists. I’d say cultural Marxists, though they do exist, are rare outside of academia and student life. What about the vast group of normies, the white everyday people, the 90%+ of society? They’re not tied to cultural Marxism. Normies would be the clearest point for expressing that our society’s values are shaped by generations of Christianity. The everyday people aren’t schooled in any of these progressive theories, and they’re not activists regardless. Still, preternaturally, they radiate egalitarianism. And it’s the same with the right. It seems like conservatives have backed themselves into a corner over this and created yet another oppressor myth to make themselves feel better (although I do not deny Jewish subversion, obviously). I don’t understand why they have such reticence to examine their own side, and their own people (as a race, and not as a political faction). I certainly don’t think whites are, on the whole, innocent victims, passively absorbing outside abuses, much as their suffering is prominent to us. Surely there is something rather narcissistic about their mantra of dogged self-defence also, as they continue to gloss over the problem. Losing the warped metaphysics and suicidal doctrines of a ridiculous long-entrenched foreign religion does nothing to physically diminish our potential as a race. I simply don’t understand why they hang onto it (when I think to myself on it, it’s beyond me totally), were it not for cowardice and false pride narcissism. It makes no sense.

Categories
Racial right

2 ¢

Regarding recent articles in The Occidental Observerone by Kevin MacDonald—about how Tobias Lang contradicts Nathan Cofnas, who believes that Christianity underlies the aetiology of Wokism, I’d like to give my two cents.

Cofnas is correct (cf. the books cited in Neo-Christianity) but misses the point that Jewry is a potent ethnocidal catalyst in an ethnosuicidal process that was already simmering long before whites allowed Jewry to become empowered.

On the other hand, Lang is right to acknowledge Jewish subversion but wrong not to realise that, without Christianity, whites would think as Titus and the Romans thought when they razed Jerusalem to the ground: when exterminating Jews was a legitimate sport in the Greco-Roman mindset.

In other words, if Constantine had been defeated a few centuries after Titus and Hadrian, every American white nationalist would have oil paintings of characters equivalent to Heydrich and Himmler in their living and dining rooms.

Never forget that whoever tells you in their new testaments that you must love your enemy is your enemy!

Categories
New Testament Racial right

Hi Jamie,

Did you mean to post this comment in the other thread (about ‘might is right’)?

What I have been trying to say for years with these New Testament (NT) posts is that white nationalism is too primitive a movement as far as Christianity is concerned.

For example, even a Catholic apologist for resurrection dogma like the British Ian Wilson, with whom I have, by the way, exchanged some correspondence in the past, was able to recognise the analysis of the NT that has been made of it since Reimarus in Enlightenment times.

White nationalists, on the other hand, have ignored that work which is centuries old and which now culminates in scholars who have abandoned the Christian faith such as Dennis MacDonald and Richard Miller (both of whom were fundamentalists in their youth and were educated in Divinity Schools learning ancient Greek, since the original NT is written in that language).

The fact that American white nationalists have been unable to at least acknowledge the existence of a whole field of study—the exegesis of the NT since the Enlightenment—is emblematic of why I am so critical of them. After all, if the Jews wrote the gospel that ought to raise our alarm systems!

To take just one example: MacDonald, who, I reiterate, began his career as a fundamentalist and ended up a rationalist, deduced that the motivation of the evangelist Mark seems to be to put Jesus above the Homeric heroes Hector and Odysseus. He even goes so far as to use the word ‘transvaluation’, which we have used here in the sense of the inversion of values! (I mean how Christianity transvalued the healthy Aryan values of the Greco-Roman world to the subversive Semitic values of the Jews.)

Categories
New Testament Racial right

So fundamental…

Uncle Adolf and his ilk thought that Jesus had been a non-divine Aryan who fought against the Jews in the Temple in Jerusalem—see this recent video interview with Hitler scholar Richard Weikart.

But now, in the darkest hour for the fair race, the only thing that can save them from the extinction facing them is a sort of improved National Socialism: a NS in which, unlike the top Nazis of the Third Reich, those of the 21st century no longer believe in the existence of Jesus.

And as Benjamin said yesterday, the biggest problem we 14-word priests (i.e., ‘improved Nazis’) have is the fact that American white nationalists are acting as gatekeepers to keep any Aryan racialists from moving into the NS camp (and let’s not talk about the improved NS).

Although very brief, on Saturday I posted the entry ‘Literary Theft’ which links to a video demonstrating that the writers of the New Testament plagiarised a story from Homer’s Odyssey. Now I would like to add something. Anyone who has read Gospel Fictions by Randel Helms will find that that was the method the Jews used in many other New Testament stories!

So the conversation between Dennis MacDonald and Richard Miller is so fundamental to understanding the POV of this site, that I can’t resist the temptation to copy and paste some of the first comments of that YouTube video:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Commenter 1 said: Great to have these two scholars converse and share not only an application of mimetic analysis, but also to reflect on the way the study of religion is conducted in academia. Many thanks for these episodes!

Commenter 2 said: Blasphemy law and tradition against blasphemy is what kept people from saying and talking about the parallels. People are afraid of hell.

Commenter 3 said: And… you’ve unlocked the key to ‘blasphemy of the Holy Spirit’. To say the gospels and Acts were patterned after Greek mythological stories, the tragedians, etc., is to say that they were written by evil plagiarists… instead of by holy and devout men who wrote down the truth as guided by the Holy Ghost.

Commenter 4 said: This is traditionally what happens when New Testament scholars aren’t versed in ancient languages and cultures. Once a biblical and ancient Near Eastern scholar understands these aspects, their entire worldview of the New Testament as well as Homer changes them in a way they can’t unsee.

Categories
Racial right

WN Christians

by Benjamin

Personally, though I once had, I have no hope that any of the Christian conservatives could ever be deprogrammed. Reading the way they talk, that Jesus fanaticism, the sheer pig-headed resolute doubling down of it… they’re gone; sealed.

What is the dissident right/WN [white nationalist—Ed.]/conservatives doing online these days? Are they consoling each other, or going to convert/reprimand their ‘leftists’, or trying to recruit normies? They are normies, really, but normies paradoxically aren’t them, if that makes any sense. All I can think to do is hope that there are people out there who just find your site, as I did, as really, I don’t think any amount of well-crafted good words can convert anyone to it. As you said before regarding the worldview, they are born National Socialists (or at least proto-NS and can hone themselves) or they are not.

When the world breaks down in collapse, these groups are enemies, just as much as anyone else. My gut instinct even tells me it’d be easier to reach out to progressives than conservative or WN Christians. The progressives at least have some mad passion, some genuine belief in something (and are incredibly naive as opposed to affectedly world-wise like [a popular WN Xtian–Ed.] et al). The Christians are merely cynical know-it-alls pretending to be enlightened. They’re craven and obedient to authority.

If these Christians and WN could be publicly embarrassed more (particularly the type of those who try to have their cake and eat it with both Hitler and Capitalist Christianity), perhaps it would draw leftists away to gloat over this, and poke them in public, and humiliate the former unbearably. WN are, to me, indubitably, the most dangerous to our success of all white factions.

It would be hard to let leftists have access to these materials but they’re binary and can be flipped. Normies otherwise, I feel instinctively, in this country at least, are only conservative to the degree that renders them all somewhat nationalist, in the BNP sense; the football hooligan sense; and then, inevitably the Patriotic Alternative sense. They can do no more. As I say though, I’ll just see who comes out of the woodwork. I thought of that civil war film you showed the other day.

I’m not sure if they’d realise it, but I wish it was them in those pits. More than leftist progressives. Keep the normies as normies; they are not good enough to be ‘radicalised’, even in juvenile capacity to the level of the showboating cynics. Two different development trees then, and one demographic who will never be developed, or put to sense, and must just be removed, somehow. All these Christians are as Muslims to me.

P.S. I meant that WN are the most dangerous in that they tie up leftists (and render them angrier and more hurt) and encourage normies to promote themselves (where the latter can drift into the conservative camp also). Obviously the most empirically threatening are the conservative Christians (and the huge herd of normies from the normie -> WN/conservative Christian pipeline, with the WN acting at both promoters and gatekeepers, keeping their new recruits firmly away from proper NS ideas). Inadvertently, they function like hostile counter-countersubversives.

Unknowns, and the odd leftist growing up and changing his mind are the only option I can see then, in terms of numbers gathering. I don’t actually know how many genuine National Socialists there are.

My impassioned ‘Marxist’ friend says that since talking to me, and thinking about it a bit, he’s “no longer so far left”. We talk amicably now and again. I know he reads my articles. He seems like he understands a revolutionary mindset easier.

Categories
New Testament Racial right

MacDonald & Miller

This dialogue on paradigm shifts between Dennis MacDonald and Richard Miller, two New Testament scholars I respect, can be extrapolated to our topic.

The current paradigm in white nationalism is that Jewry is the cause of Aryan decline.

We, on the other hand, believe that Jewish influence is only possible because of the mortal sins of the Aryans (cf. for example what we have said about Constantine and Charlemagne in Deschner’s books, PDFs of which appear in the featured post).

White nationalists, mostly Christians or Christian sympathisers, ignore the new paradigm: they are stuck in the old one. For the paradigm to change requires the old generation of racialists to perish, and a new generation to be more willing to put the religion of our parents in the dock.

For the moment, the intellectual inertia that gives life to the current paradigm comes from the pundits of the most visited racialist forums, regardless of the fact that that paradigm has already been superseded, at least in the minds of those racialists who are more understanding of what is really going on (e.g., Velasco’s diagnosis of how the West’s dark hour originated: his essay on Judea and Rome).

Categories
August Kubizek Lightning and the Sun (book) Racial right

The Lightning

and the Sun, 3

There are, to my knowledge, — unfortunately, — no records of Adolf Hitler’s childhood. And, enlightening as it surely is, the little one can gather about it from a conversation with his most sympathetic old tutor, Herr Mayrhofer, (who is still living in Leonding, near Linz, and whom I met twice) and the little he mentions himself in Mein Kampf (which is not an autobiography) is not enough to buttress such a definite (and unusual) view of him as the one put forth in the present study. The one apparently authoritative picture of the future ruler’s life and character, years before he ‘decided to become a politician,’ is to be found in the very good book in which August Kubizek — the one friend he had in early youth, — has related the story of his four years’ friendship with him, namely from 1904 to 1908.[1]

In those years — i.e., when he was over fifteen, less than nineteen, — Adolf Hitler’s main traits of character were already fixed, and visible at every step of his: in all he said or did. His scale of values was already that one which was, in later years, to set him apart from every political leader of our times. And the psychological (the real) basis of his philosophy the source of his unshakable faith in it, and the key to his whole career, — was already definite. In other words, the man he was to be — the Man he could but be, under the given circumstances, — had already taken shape and was, with the sureness of instinct, with a mysterious, inner knowledge, a logic of his own that baffled all human calculations, invincibly following the path of his tremendous destiny. And the features of the rapidly awakening personality were unmistakably those, and the unfailing, baffling logic, that, of a Man of the type I have, in this book, characterised as ‘against Time’: of an inspired, ruthless and realistic — extraordinarily far sighted — fighter for a Golden Age ideal, in the depth of our Dark Age.

And, were we able to trace the history of Adolf Hitler’s evolution further into those very early years which he describes as providing (from the standpoint of events) ‘little to remember,’[2] it is not only probable but certain that we would find, in him, up to the very beginning of his life, the self-same, deeply distinctive traits of character, the self-same fundamental aspirations — the same person. Such men as he are not, as so many people seem to think, the ‘product of circumstances,’ but predestined beings who use the given circumstances to the utmost, for a purpose which far exceeds the obvious, immediate aim of their action, or, to speak the language of ancient Wisdom, — and one is, ultimately, compelled to speak that language, — great free Souls,[3] no longer bound by the law of birth and rebirth, who choose to be born in the environment (within the race, the country, the social stratum) in which, and to grow into leading men and to struggle as such under the circumstances under which they are to act the most efficiently, in the highest interest of Creation. They are children and adolescents ‘against Time’ before leaving in history the mark of their passage as Men ‘against Time.’

One of the most noticeable traits of people ‘against Time’ — no less than of those I have described as ‘above Time’ — is that they fit nowhere in the world as it is; that their moral and aesthetic — and practical — standards: their conception of happiness and unhappiness, their idea of ‘success’ and failure, and of usefulness, in one word their values, and its, have nothing in common. And, from all that his friend A. Kubizek relates about Adolf Hitler’s adolescence in Linz, that appears precisely to have been the case of the future master of Germany, at that time a no doubt remarkably gifted but, in the estimation of cool-minded grown-ups, ‘unpractical’ youth, who had recently left the middle-school without completing the course of his studies, and nourished the ambition of becoming a great artist — a painter, or perhaps an architect — with little material prospects of fulfilling it, and who lived on his widowed mother’s meagre pension, and roamed about the streets — or the countryside — and occasionally went to the theatre (taking admittedly the cheapest seats,) and made gigantic plans and spoke — already — with compelling eloquence, — of things that interested nobody but himself, while other boys earned their living and helped their families, or were learning something ‘useful.’ ‘He just fitted into no social frame whatsoever,’ concludes A. Kubizek, after having tried to, analyse the reasons why his friend, despite capacities by far above the average, failed, even in subsequent years, to ‘get on’ professionally. ‘He had not the slightest ambition of securing himself a livelihood’ and of being comfortable. He did not wish to be ‘comfortable.’ He did not — and never was to — think in terms of comfort or of personal ‘happiness.’ What others called ‘enjoying life’ was something absolutely foreign to him. Nor could he ‘take things as they came’ and live lightly, free of worry, entirely within the present. He was, at a very early age, intensely aware that things were wrong in the world round him — wrong in every walk of life, in every domain of thought and action, from A to Z, — and he felt himself duty-bound to change them; not to change this or that in them, leaving the rest untouched, but to change them ruthlessly and radically, for they were radically wrong, and to build everything anew, according to principles different from those that had prevailed up till then.

And this was not a mere wish, a more or less vague desire or day-dream. It was a purpose that he pursued with ‘deadly seriousness’ and unfailing consistency, busying himself long before hand with the most minute details of his plans in every particular case, without for all that ever losing sight of the spirit and general lines of his creation as a whole, so much so that that ‘extraordinary seriousness’ and consistency — and merciless radicality — struck all those who knew him as the main trait of his character. He pursued it — nay, already in those years in which he was not yet politically active; already while he himself still believed that art would remain, throughout life, his first and foremost concern — with that feverish impatience which finds its expression in the words: ‘Now, or never’; with the haste inherent in all earnest action ‘against Time.’ And that impatience — that tragic awareness that ‘tomorrow will be too late’ — was to stamp his whole career as a ruler and as the Founder of the last true civilisation within the Dark Age. In it, in fact, lies the source and the explanation of Adolf Hitler’s most drastic — and most criticized — steps in later life and the sign that National Socialism, that most heroic of all reactions against our Dark Age, historically still belongs to this Age, while transcending its spirit.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s two cents:

…he himself still believed that art would remain, throughout life, his first and foremost concern….

It is here that the gulf between us and American white nationalism becomes apparent. As far as I know, the only American racialist who sensed any of this was Michael O’Meara: who wrote that only a new myth could save us. His readers in a racialist webzine didn’t understand a whit of this, believing that only by smearing data to the normies about race realism or the JQ could one modify the Aryan collective unconscious.

That is not possible for those who know how the mind works!

To use Jungian language, it is all about ‘touching the Self.’ And the royal path toward that direction is through art. Remember how Hitler loved Wagner’s art, or how Parrish’s paintings produced, in me, the eureka moment: This is what Creation (the Big Bang) was for!

The Greco-Romans also knew that displaying the Aryan nude on public thoroughfares through majestic sculptures manifested the Self in the form of the majestic Gods.

The Anglo-Saxon racial right, children of Bentham and not of sculptors, painters or poets, has no idea that what we need is a new religion: a new myth accompanied by a new art! Precisely for this reason all anti-art is a curse for producing the new Aryan awakening, which is why I don’t listen to racialist podcasts that start with degenerate music (to her credit, Uncle Adolf’s other admirer, Carolyn Yeager, never used degenerate music at the beginning or end of her podcasts).

____________

[1] August Kubizek, Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfround [Adolf Hitler, Friend of my Youth] (Leopold Stocker Verlag, 1953.)

[2] Mein Kampf, p. 2.

[3] In Sanskrit, Mukta Purusha.

Categories
Racial right

Friends

Once again: during my walks, the only exercise I do, my best thoughts come to me. A few minutes ago I thought that my standard for a possible friendship is precisely the figure of Uncle Adolf. That’s why I will continue to quote Brendan Simms. Although ideologically this biographer is not our friend, his book contains much vital information about Adolf Hitler’s ideals as far as repudiating the golden calf is concerned. And the book by Richard Weikart (abridged here), another ideological enemy of ours, contains vital information about what Hitler thought about Christianity.

The German Chancellor was perfectly aware of what, in the comments section, I said on Wednesday about how harmful Christianity is to the mental health of the Aryan man; and the same can be said of corporate capital. Never mind that, during the Third Reich, New Testament exegesis would not have developed to the level it has in the 21st century (the most recent interpretive findings reveal that Jesus of Nazareth was not even a historical figure, just a character of the rabbis’ literary fiction).

If a contemporary white man is red-pilled on both issues—the toxicity of the religion of our parents and how Big Business is antithetical to Aryan preservation—we can be friends. Otherwise, we cannot and certainly not if, out of pride, one is reluctant to question religion or the economic system we live in.

If someone is already on Hitler’s level, it is much easier to convince him that the Jesus that Uncle Adolf imagined last century as a historical figure didn’t even exist. Likewise, if someone has already realised that corporate capital has no flag, so it is trying to globalise society and even mongrelise it, he has already taken the first step towards repudiating the project of the nation he was born into.

Who is willing to (1) repudiate Christianity and (2) the project of his nation (see this comment that six years ago, on 30 August 2018, to be exact, Edwin posted on this site)?

He who, in pursuit of the 14 words[1] is willing to take both steps, is my friend.

_________
[1] Equivalent to the four words in Latin: Gens alba conservanda est.

Categories
Racial right

Definition!

Today I was planning to post another installment on Brendan Simms’ biography of Hitler when, on my morning walk to buy groceries, I came up with the perfect definition of American white nationalism.

In various pro-white lectures Tomislav Sunić has said, and here I paraphrase him, that capitalism and Judaeo-Christian ethics are the double helix of the mental virus destroying the West (the JQ is merely a secondary infection of this primary infection).

So far, so good. But the Croatian intellectual has been too politically correct to confront his colleagues on the other side of the Atlantic. My position is analogous to Sunić’s, but I say things much more bluntly and brutally—like Eduardo Velasco’s tough comments, to whom I have dedicated my last few posts.

Behold my definition:

White nationalism is the art of ‘have it both ways’ or ‘have one’s cake and eat it too’.

In other words, the American racial right wants to save the white race without questioning Judaeo-Christianity or repudiating capitalism.

In Spain, there are several sayings equivalent to the aforementioned American idioms. For example, “No se puede silbar y comer pinole al mismo tiempo” (You can’t whistle and eat pinole simultaneously). The Spaniards of another time also used to say: “No se puede repicar y andar en la procesión” (You can’t ring the church’s bell and walk in the procession). And the following saying can be used even by non-Catholic Spaniards: “No se puede nadar y guardar la ropa” (You can’t swim and keep your clothes).

That is American white nationalism in a nutshell: the self-deceptive art of doublethink! People like Velasco teach us how to get out of that trap: how to transvalue our fallen values (fallen because of Judaeo-Christianity and Mammon worship) to the values of Sparta, Republican Rome and our dear Uncle Adolf’s Germany…