‘Men like us need to devise our own mental tricks to not go nuts like Nietzsche. We carry the Sacred Fire, and we must be very careful who we show it to. In dissident circles this is called “hiding your power level”.’
Categories
Category: Racial right
Categories
Dominion, 11
Or:
How the Woke monster originated
The following passages are taken from the section ‘Laying Down the Law’ of chapter ‘Revolution, 1076 Cambrai’ of Dominion:
[Pope] Urban’s speech had reverberated to miraculous effect. A great host of warriors drawn from across the Latin West had taken a familiar road. As pilgrims had been doing since the time of the millennium, they had journeyed across Hungary to Constantinople; and then from Constantinople to the Holy Land. Every attempt by the Saracens to halt them had been defeated. Finally, in the summer of 1099, the great army of warrior pilgrims had arrived before Jerusalem. On 15 July, they stormed its walls. The city was theirs. Then, once the slaughter was done, and they had dried their dripping swords, they headed for the tomb of Christ. There, in joy and disbelief, they offered up praises to God. Jerusalem—after centuries of Saracen rule—was Christian once again.
So extraordinary was the feat as to be barely believable—and the news redounded gloriously to the credit of the papacy. Urban himself died a fortnight after the city’s capture, too soon for news of the great victory that he had inspired to reach him; but the programme of reform to which he had devoted his life was much burnished by the winning of the Holy City. Emperors since the time of Charlemagne had fought wars of conquest beneath the banner of Christ; but none had ever sent an entire army on pilgrimage. Warriors present at the capture of Jerusalem reported having seen ‘a beautiful person sitting atop a white horse’—and there were some prepared to wonder if it might not have been Christ himself. Whatever the truth of the mysterious horseman’s identity, one thing was clear: the Holy City had been won, not in the name of any king or emperor, but in that of a much more universal cause.
But what name to give this cause? Back in the Latin West, the word starting to be used was one that, until the capture of Jerusalem, had barely been heard. The warrior pilgrims, so it came to be said, had fought under the banner of Christianitas: Christendom. Such a categorisation—divorced as it was from the dynasties of earthly kings and the holdings of feudal lords—was one well suited to the ambitions of the papacy. Who better to stand at the head of Christendom than the heir of Saint Peter? Less than a century after Henry III had deposed three popes in a single year, the Roman Church had carved out a role of leadership for itself so powerful that Henry’s grandson, the son of Henry IV, was brought in 1122 to sue for peace. In that year, in Worms, where his father had once commanded Gregory VII to abdicate, Henry V agreed to a momentous concordat. By its terms, the fifty-year-old quarrel over the investiture of imperial bishops was finally brought to an end. Although ostensibly a compromise, time would demonstrate that victory was decisively the papacy’s. Decisive too was the increasing acceptance of another key demand of the reformers: that the clergy distinguish themselves from the great mass of the Christian people— the laicus, or ‘laity’—by embracing celibacy. By 1148, when yet another papal decree banning priests from having wives or concubines was promulgated, the response of many was to roll their eyes. ‘Futile and ludicrous—for who does not know already that it is unlawful?’
Increasingly, then, the separation of church from state was an upheaval manifest across the whole of Christendom. Wherever a priest was called upon to minister to the laity, even in the humblest, the most isolated village, there the impact of reformatio could be felt. The establishment of the Roman Church as something more than merely a first among equals, as ‘the general forum of all clergy and all churches’, gave clerics across the Latin West a common identity that they had not previously possessed. In the various kingdoms, fiefdoms and cities that constituted the great patchwork of Christendom, something unprecedented had come into being: an entire class that owed its loyalty, not to local lords, but to a hierarchy that exulted in being ‘universal, and spread throughout the world’.
Emperors and kings, although they might try to take a stand against it, would repeatedly find themselves left bruised by the attempt. Not since the age of Constantine and his heirs had any one man exercised an authority over so wide a sweep of Europe as did the bishop of the ancient capital of the world. His open claim was to the ‘rights of heavenly and earthly empire’; his legates travelled to barbarous lands and expected to be heard; his court, in an echo of the building where the Roman Senate had once met, was known as the ‘Curia’. Yet the pope was no Caesar. His assertion of supremacy was not founded on force of arms, nor the rank of his ministers on their lineage or their wealth. The Church that had emerged from the Gregorian reformatio was instead an institution of a kind never before witnessed: one that had not merely come to think of itself as sovereign, but had willed itself into becoming so. ‘The Pope,’ Gregory VII had affirmed, ‘may be judged by no one.’ All Christian people, even kings, even emperors, were subject to his rulings. The Curia provided Christendom with its final court of appeal. A supreme paradox: that the Church, by rending itself free of the secular, had itself become a state. [pages 233-235]
Once the papal state was formed, Tom Holland mentions the formation of the first university and, very relevant to our research, the formation of so-called canon law. He then writes:
[St] Paul’s authority on this score was definitive. ‘The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbour as yourself.”’ Here, for Gratian, was the foundation-stone of justice. So important to him was the command that he opened the Decretum by citing it. Echoing the Stoics much as Paul had done, he opted to define it as natural law—and the key to fashioning a properly Christian legal system. All souls were equal in the eyes of God [bold by Ed.]. Only if it were founded on this assumption could justice truly be done. Anything obstructing it had to go. ‘Enactments, whether ecclesiastical or secular, if they are proved to be contrary to natural law, must be totally excluded.’
Much flowed from this formulation that earlier ages would have struggled to comprehend. Age-old presumptions were being decisively overturned: that custom was the ultimate authority; that the great were owed a different justice from the humble; that inequality was something natural, to be taken for granted. Clerks trained in Bologna were agents of revolution as well as of order. Legally constituted, university-trained, they constituted a new breed of professional. Gratian, by providing them with both a criterion and a sanction for weeding out objectionable customs, had transfigured the very understanding of law. No longer did it exist to uphold the differences in status that Roman jurists and Frankish kings alike had always taken for granted. [Remember: for the Merovingian and Frankish kings it was not the same to kill a blond-haired, blue-eyed man as it was to kill a Mediterranean mudblood—Ed.] Instead, its purpose was to provide equal justice to every individual, regardless of rank, or wealth, or lineage—for every individual was equally a child of God…
Image of pages from the Decretum of Burchard of Worms, an 11th-century book of canon law.
How, for instance, were the Christian people to square the rampant inequality between rich and poor with the insistence of numerous Church Fathers that ‘the use of all things should be common to all’? The problem was one that, for decades, demanded the attention of the most distinguished scholars in Bologna. By 1200, half a century after the completion of the Decretum, a solution had finally been arrived at—and it was one fertile with implications for the future. A starving pauper who stole from a rich man did so, according to a growing number of legal scholars, iure naturali—‘in accordance with natural law’. As such, they argued, he could not be reckoned guilty of a crime. Instead, he was merely taking what was properly owed him. It was the wealthy miser, not the starving thief, who was the object of divine disapproval. Any bishop confronted by such a case, so canon lawyers concluded, had a duty to ensure that the wealthy pay their due of alms. Charity, no longer voluntary, was being rendered a legal obligation.
That the rich had a duty to give to the poor was, of course, a principle as old as Christianity itself. What no one had thought to argue before, though, was a matching principle: that the poor had an entitlement to the necessities of life. It was—in a formulation increasingly deployed by canon lawyers—a human ‘right’.
Law, in the Latin West, had become an essential tool of its ongoing revolution. [pages 238-239]
Countless times I have said that white nationalists, who are generally sympathetic to Christianity even though they are not all Christians, are ignorant of the history of the West in general and of the Church in particular. It is amusing to see them anathematise the current pope, as if his liberalism were a phenomenon of our century. They constantly complain in their forums: ‘Alas, the Jews have subverted Christianity!’ In fact the first, baby steps to equalise men by law, based on St Paul the Jew, had already been taken a millennium earlier.
Because I have a bad habit of wanting to argue with people on the American racial right, things like this happen to me.
I have to discipline myself. At this point, it is naive to believe that any of them, let’s say those who believe that Jewry is the primary cause of our misfortunes, are going to answer my favourite argument: the catastrophe of miscegenation in Latin America when the Inquisition had the Jews well under control. I must resign myself to accepting that the only discussion of these topics will be possible in the discussion threads of The West’s Darkest Hour. The rest of the racialists don’t want to play what I call ‘the real chess’, the battle of ideas, with me.
So I will focus on correcting the translation of Savitri Devi’s book which I want to publish, at least, as a PDF so that it will appear third in the featured post.
Although we’ve published the full translation of it in 103 posts under the title ‘Reflections of an Aryan woman’, some problems have arisen. For example, I suspect that Greg Johnson’s The Savitri Devi Archive has used Google translator to translate chapters 1, 10 and 11 of Souvenirs et réflexions d’une aryenne (which I originally copied from there and pasted here). That means the arduous task of cross-checking that computer translation with another translator (even though I studied French for three years, that is not remotely sufficient for a text as complex as Savitri’s).
So instead of continuing to criticise the racial right for not being Nazi like us (see also what Hunter Wallace wrote today), I will concentrate my efforts on a revision of those chapters in Johnson’s archive, to make our product more readable than the defective Google translation he apparently used.
If I don’t upload more entries soon, it is because I am very busy proofreading Savitri’s book, whose preface to the forthcoming edition I wrote yesterday. So I will try to overcome my bad habit: inviting to play chess someone who simply doesn’t want to play…
Categories
Editor’s preface
(pages 9-10 of the forthcoming Savitri’s book)
When Savitri Devi wrote the foreword that follows, I was seventeen and at the nadir of my life: mental hells into which my very Catholic father and his damned society had put me, as I confess in Letter to mom Medusa (see the book list on page 3). Curiously, a couple of years before that family tragedy I went to ask, in a bookshop, if they had any pro-Nazi books. An employee of the Librería de Cristal in the Cine Manacar in Mexico City, a fair-haired white man, hesitated a few seconds and informed me: ‘No’. True, that bookstore had the old Spanish translation of Mein Kampf, but what I was looking for was more recent literature.
If the worst country in all of Western history had never existed, the United States, Hitler might have won the war and, as I recount in The Grail, the last book in my autobiographical trilogy, the teenager I was would have been spared from the psychosis that two years after my visit to the bookstore would be brewing in my parents’ minds.
The book I was looking for at the age of fifteen was precisely this one that the reader now holds in his hands. I do not presume that this French-English translation is perfect. Far from it! But it seems to me that, of all the books by Savitri Devi (1905-1982), this is the one that best introduces us to the thought of this impressive woman.
If the American racial right is at a dead end, it is precisely because Americans have not had the nobility to see that only by making National Socialism their new religion can they save their race. Furthermore, unlike Hitler’s anti-Christian pantheism (cf. Richard Weikart’s Hitler’s Religion), the great failure of the pundits of the American racial right consists in not repudiating the Semitic religion of our abusive fathers. And abusive by necessity must be all those who traumatise their children with the idea of eternal torture, as I was traumatised as a teenager.
Although the hellish nature of Christianity reveals the twisted psychology of the Semitic mind, the typical anti-Semite ignores that the Jews created the New Testament for gentile consumption (cf. David Skrbina’s The Jesus Hoax). Anyone who invents a superheated torture chamber and then threatens billions of gentiles with it has a sick soul. Right after white traitor Constantine handed over the Roman Empire to his Semitic bishops (cf. Karlheinz Deschner’s Christianity’s Criminal History, also listed on page 3), the doctrine of hell became the greatest weapon of psychological terror used by Jews against whites. Ben Klassen was right on this point! And this is the kind of anti-Christian worldview I badly needed as a teenager to save me from the doctrines my father had put in my little head. Even now, so long after I abandoned Christianity, I am haunted by the idea of eternal damnation. As Gaedhal, a commenter on my website, The West’s Darkest Hour, told us by email:
If you fear a Jewish Hell, then you are controlled by Jews. I speak by experience. I know, rationally, that Hell doesn’t exist… However, more than thirty years of Catholicism means that I still believe in Hell emotionally. I still believe in Hell in my bones’ marrow. And this residual belief in Hell still has negative effects upon my psychology and behaviour. I probably have religious trauma syndrome…
Alas, the American racial right has been, since its origins, extremely addicted to Judeo-Christianity. I would even claim that white nationalism is an ideology that, at its core, functions as a gatekeeper preventing the transvaluation of our darkest values to Greco-Roman values: that is, the luminous values of Antiquity before the Semitic infection. Thus, white nationalists are actively preventing the Aryan man from freeing himself from the yoke that the Jews have created. How could we shake such a yoke from our necks?
Only Hitler saves. Savitri Devi, Hitler’s Priestess, saw this with extraordinary clarity! And the white man who does not want to recognise this is doomed to extinction.
César Tort
8 December 2022
A couple of days ago, on The Occidental Observer, Ann Coulter was annoyed by these words of Nick Fuentes: ‘Hitler is great, women should be forced to marry young and have children.’ Doesn’t Ann realise that in Jane Austen’s very decent world, women were forced to marry because they couldn’t inherit property? Doesn’t she realise that, by virtue of those values, the British Empire became so powerful?
Ann Coulter is certainly not a racist. She’s an asshole like the rest of the Republicans that ignore what Ludwig Klages said in Cosmogonic Reflections #25 about mankind and race: ‘We must draw a sharp distinction between the man who sees the world as divided between the “human” and the “non-human,” and the man who is most profoundly struck by the obvious racial groupings of mankind (Nietzsche’s “masters”). The bridge that connects us to the Cosmos does not originate in “man,” but in race.’
That is what I call genuine spirituality (in contrast to the ‘spirituality’ that the Jewish authors of the New Testament have drummed into our heads). In the second chapter of Savitri Devi’s book, which will be available as a PDF the next month, we read some prescient passages on how it is that the Christians of the 1930s had an intuitive knowledge that made them see that National Socialism was nothing less than the paradigm that replaces the old paradigm: the Jewish god by an Aryan God. Thanks to the Nick Fuentes / Ye scandal, nowadays we see some of that debate even in discussion threads among Christians, such as this Occidental Dissent thread, where a certain Dicarlo said:
I don’t agree with you, Brad [i.e., Hunter Wallace, who mocks Ye et al]. We’re losing because the jews have unlimited money, and control every platform where Whites need to get out the truth. They have shut down our ability to get out the truth. You might as well advise, never say “jew”. :rolleyes:
There’s nothing cartoonish about Adolph Hitler or the Third Reich. Their mortal enemy is the exact same enemy Whites face today, the jews. Of course there is a problem that most Whites have been lied to so much and drummed down to a point where the truth means nothing to them. We can only soldier on. George Lincoln Rockwell was right!
It doesn’t matter what you tell the normies—those who don’t want to think or know, the jews and their completely controlled media sources are going to lie, cover up, distort, over and over about any topic Whites bring up. Your criticism of praising Adolph Hitler, or the WW2 topic, is just a result of repetitive jew demonization of it [emphasis added]. There is no proper approach to wake up the White normies. All one can do is keep telling the truth about what the jews are doing and have been doing since Rome.
Since Rome… I wonder if Dicarlo has been reading this site, e.g. our excerpts from David Skrbina’s book?
I had resolved not to upload any more posts until the translation of Savitri Devi’s Souvenirs et Réflexions d’une Aryenne was ready. But I couldn’t resist responding to an anti-Nordicist piece that Counter-Currents published on Saturday.
If I have maintained for years that the internet movement that since the mid-1990s began to call itself white nationalism is phoney, it is precisely because they broke with the Nordicist tradition that proceeds from the French aristocrat Gobineau, the British Houston Stewart Chamberlain and the German Hans F. K. Günther to Americans like Madison Grant and even the eugenicists on both sides of the Atlantic, who flourished before World War II. After the war, the Establishment suspended these activities, and recently even Grant’s bust in an American park was removed permanently by the anti-white Establishment itself.
Has the author of the Counter-Currents piece read the work of Gobineau, Chamberlain, Günther or Grant? Rather, he cherry-picks out of context from Hitler’s legacy, omitting that the Great Plan of Himmler and his henchmen was to conquer Europe for the Nordics (not just the Germans). Although I am arranging our NS POV in a very orderly fashion with the PDFs in the featured post, very few on the racial right seem to read not only our Daybreak Press books, but not even the books of other authors! Remember: The West’s Darkest Hour will always be incomprehensible to those who don’t read entire books. The following is a passage (pages 117-129) from ‘Lebensraum’ which appears in On Exterminationism:
‘If we could establish the Nordic race and, from this seedbed, produce a race of 200 million, the world would be ours,’ Himmler said eloquently. A few months after its founding Lebensborn opened Heim Hochland, the first home for pregnant women. For this purpose, the National Socialists took over the building of a Catholic orphanage in the city of Munich. Initially, the institution could accommodate up to thirty mothers and fifty-five children, and the applicants were carefully selected. Only women who met the characteristics of the dominant race were admitted. Candidates had their skulls measured, and only those with the coveted elongated skull, typical of the Nordid type, could be admitted. They also had to meet other requirements, such as blond hair, blue or green eyes and good health.
And this one is a passage from Daybreak (pages: 91-93):
The Germans clearly defined their ethnicity as Germanic, including Austria, the Scandinavian and Low Countries, Switzerland and parts of the old Soviet Union. Hitler even dreamt of sharing the world with the British Empire. For the eugenicists of the last century on both sides of the Atlantic, Nordicism was taken for granted. Those who advocate white nationalism either ignore eugenics or don’t care about Nordicism at all. Like the conservatives of the Republican Party who treat mestizos as equals, in order not to offend Mediterranean sensibilities white nationalists refuse to recognise that the standard of whiteness is the Nordic type. Many have no objection to conceding amnesty to the Caucasoid population in Europe with their bloodline compromised, even if that means the eventual mongrelisation of true whites.
Because the American racial right has rejected the legacy of Hitler and his predecessors in race studies, it has slipped into a slippery slope that leads to positions very similar to those of the US government, that in its FBI statistics categorises mestizos as white. The author of the aforementioned Counter-Currents article, for example, speaks of ‘white’ Latin Americans. In reality, except for true whites such as the Mexican Mennonites, of Germanic descent, who do not interbreed with mestizos, and other immigrants who have very recently emigrated from Europe, there are no pure whites in Latin America. Centuries of miscegenation with Indians and mulattoes have diluted the white gene to such a degree that more than ninety-nine per cent of the inhabitants of Latin America have tainted blood. Yes: compared to the bulk of Mexican mestizos I would be a sort of ‘castizo’ or ‘harnizo’ who phenotypically could pass for a Spaniard, but I am not Aryan genotypically speaking (unless we use the parameters of the FBI or Counter-Currents).
Pure Nordid. I would suggest that people who are unclear about how to classify the various Caucasoid groups (and remember that even Jews are Caucasoid, especially Ashkenazis who have absorbed a lot of white blood) read the appendix to The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour. The best way to refute anti-Nordicism is simply to look at a lot of pictures of the various European groups (Meds, Nordics and Semites) and their interbreeding with each other: including those with black blood such as the Portuguese.
Sicilian man. I would also suggest watching the short YouTube clips these days, in which the players of the 2022 World Cup parade in the stadium, with camera close-ups of their faces before the actual games, revealing that not only the Latin American footballers, but the Latin American public in the stadium in Qatar, and even the players and public of some European countries, are no longer authentically white. Those who still refuse to read whole books should at least read the abstract of the final article of The Fair Race, written by the Spaniard Evropa Soberana and a colleague who specialises in racial classification.
If we keep in mind the new subtitle of this site (‘May the beauty of the White Aryan woman not disappear from the Earth’), I would fight for the blonde genes above to produce the beautiful nymphs of the Daybreak painting. But what would be the point of fighting for the Sicilian’s genes if he can’t produce such beautiful creatures?
As I said, WN is phoney.
It seems like December last year, about a year ago, when Blogger cancelled the account of the Spaniard who used to blog under the pen name Evropa Soberana.
The previous month I had an article published in The Occidental Observer about a Spanish-speaking intellectual of Jewish descent whose work has had considerable influence in Mexico and Spain. It upsets me that this writer is currently travelling to several Spanish-speaking countries to promote his latest book, and that the most valuable writings in Spanish from the pen of a Spaniard have been vaporised by the System!
Fortunately, I have long since made a backup of Evropa Soberana’s site, and every Sunday I will upload to this site a PDF of each of his articles, starting with this PDF of what the site’s homepage looked like before his account was cancelled.
As my regular visitors know, a few years ago one of Evropa Soberana’s essays represented a sort of eureka moment in my spiritual development. Reading it, I realised that the Christian problem and the Jewish problem are one and the same (something Nietzsche had already glimpsed since the 1880s). Not only does that long essay appear in the first of our books that can be accessed in the Featured Post; it has also been translated into French (click here).
Given that, after a year, Evropa Soberana has not re-uploaded the content of his site using another platform, nor has he answered my emails since 2018, I fear the worst. Of course: I cannot know, but if a sudden death has surprised him, I would suggest that visitors who value The West’s Darkest Hour content not only save the PDFs of the Evropa Soberana backup that I will be uploading every Sunday, but the PDFs of our books that can be accessed in the Featured Post (remember, this Friday I added the revised edition of Christianity’s Criminal History authored by a German scholar). While I am healthy at the moment, an unexpected death can surprise anyone. Only by saving the most valuable content on our hard drives and DVDs will we have the elements to survive intellectually if the System decides, in the future, to cancel all our platforms.
By the way, the day before yesterday I wanted to change the Daybreak image that was the emblem of this new incarnation of The West’s Darkest Hour for another image by the same artist, Maxfield Parrish. The idea was to put up all the Parrish paintings I know of, changing them every Sunday so that you wouldn’t always see the monotony of the same image.
But the WordPress software got stuck and no longer allows me to upload images to the main page. And as I never edit the code directly, I couldn’t fix it. But it doesn’t matter: I moved Daybreak to the Featured Post and it will stay there.
I’ve been disgusted by what the racial right has been saying about Kanye ‘Ye’ West these days, after his pro-Hitler pronouncements. Interestingly, Greg Johnson has said kind things about Ye, which prompted me to comment on his forum yesterday. But many so-called racists, by which I mean commenters on forums like The Unz Review and others, are throwing dirt on Hitler’s memory because of Ye’s comments.
These people just don’t get it. If there is one thing I like about Evropa Soberana, it is that he admired the Third Reich’s transvaluation of values. Soberana was able to get to the other side of what we have been calling the psychological Rubicon because he had already rejected Christian ethics. As I told Johnson, the Christian Matt Walsh was one of those who joined the chorus in defaming for the Nth time the memory of the Führer in a way that seems indistinguishable from the pronouncements of the ADL or the SPLC.
It disgusts me that a large percentage of commentators on the new right feel such hostility towards the most admirable man History has ever produced. Such a disgusting situation motivates me that the next book to be in the Featured Post is Savitri Devi’s Souvenirs et Réflexions d’une Aryenne: most of whose chapters we have already translated from French. This is the best of her books as far as an introduction to Savitri’s thought is concerned: the greatest European admirer of Hitler after 1945.
If anyone wishes to face a very different pro-white thinking from that of many anti-Nazi commentators on the new right, you can use one of the online translators to start reading the articles of Evropa Soberana, another European, that I will be uploading from next Sunday onwards. The litmus test for he who has crossed the Rubicon is not, as many of these imbecile commenters say, to believe the 9/11 conspiracy theories. The real test is to admire Hitler—the real Hitler, not the Hitler of the allied propaganda that subsists in the minds of the so-called new right.
When I finish proofreading Savitri’s book, I will resume the new translation of the Führer’s after-dinner talks. Only then will I be able to shake off some of the crap I have recently read in the English-speaking world about Hitler.
"That's why we need a dictatorship … force the people to believe what we believe" — Maddow put together quite the Nick Fuentes montage pic.twitter.com/f9mYq4z2fU
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 29, 2022
I agree with almost everything Nick Fuentes says in this clip that a lesbian Jewess put together for mainstream TV. But from the point of view of the 14 words, it would be toxic, as Fuentes suggests, to have the equivalent of a Taliban in America forcing women to wear veils and enter Catholic churches.
The problem with this POV is that all churches, not just Catholic, admit non-whites to the altar with white women. Tonight, I couldn’t watch even a very short YouTube clip of the recent results of the Soccer Cup matches being played earlier because, inside the stadium crowd, the cameras focused on pure Aryan women next to blacks: both wearing orange shirts, Dutch fans and even young Dutch mongrels between pure Aryan and black!
I know that Catholics like Fuentes will never, ever read Deschner’s book on the real history of Christianity, a revised edition that I’ll publish this week. But that’s exactly the kind of literature that racial political commentators and live streamers like Fuentes should read.
Remember: I have lived for more than half a century in a city where Jews and crypto-Jews were super-controlled throughout three centuries by the Spanish Inquisition, and yet, because the Catholic church accepted that Iberian whites (like me, Fuentes has Iberian blood) married Indians, whites became extinct here.
We don’t need the equivalent of Taliban rule in America but the equivalent of the Third Reich’s Nuremberg laws!
Categories
Jef Costello’s article
The article ‘American Renaissance 2022’ published yesterday on Counter-Currents contains a few passages I would like to say something about:
What can explain such madness—this moral fanaticism coupled with hatred of one’s own? Taylor noted that white people seem to have a compulsion to throw themselves into virtuous causes… But the real mystery is why whites are attracted to causes that are anti-white—why, as Taylor put it, they ‘make a fetish out of opposing their own people.’ We simply do not see this at all in other races. Is there any other race that campaigns for other races to the detriment of its own? Why are we the only race that gets a dopamine surge from hating ourselves? So far as I can see, Taylor did not really offer a theory that might explain this most mysterious aspect of whites.
One of the things I have noticed is that there is no dialogue between our position, which we call here the priesthood of the 14 words, and the American white nationalists. That which Taylor and Costello find so mysterious has been answered ad nauseam on this site, and the PDFs in the featured post explain our POV didactically.
But let’s say it for the umpteenth time: whites didn’t do these suicidal follies prior to Christianity. There is nothing wrong with the ‘hardware’ of whites: only their ‘software’: the Christian ethics that even atheists suffer from. In his article Costello quotes D. H. Lawrence: ‘In attempting to convert the dark man to the white man’s way of life, the white man has fallen helplessly down the hole he wanted to fill up. Seeking to save another man’s soul [italics added], the white man lost his own, and collapsed upon himself.’
Christian ethics! But Costello doesn’t connect the dots. He also tells us:
A further characteristic they [the leftists] exhibit is hatred—not just hatred for their political enemies, but for strength, health, beauty, achievement, masculinity, femininity, family, hierarchy, religion, meat [italics added], and much else. In short, a hatred for life itself.
Nationalists might argue that The West’s Darkest Hour is such an obscure forum that hardly anyone reads it. But the above passage shows that these American racialists also don’t bother to educate themselves about the big movement that preceded them: German National Socialism. About those words I italicised, does Costello know what Hitler and his close associates thought of Christianity? Or how Hitler wanted to close the slaughter-houses after winning the war? I mention these two things—religion, meat—because Hitler was closer to today’s vegans than to the old-fashioned American racialists, Christian or not, who still sympathise with Christianity and eat meat.
American racialists will continue to tell themselves such things in their conferences (‘Oh mystery! Why are we doing these things to ourselves?’) if they don’t have the decorum to listen to voices other than their own.
I didn’t want to add more entries this month because I’m way behind in proofreading Karlheinz Deschner’s book on the real history of Christianity (I’m only on page 120 in a text of more than 400 pages). But Costello’s article motivated me to respond to him and the racial right of the neighbouring country to the north.
I am still reading Deschner’s book before publishing, in PDF, the 2022 edition. It is slow work that takes me about a chapter a day.
The annual American Renaissance conference recently took place, from which I would like to quote an abstract of the last of its papers according to the AmRen staff article:
Sam Dickson concluded the conference, as he always does. He said that aspects of our national history are difficult problems for whites. He said the American Revolution may have been a mistake, as it divided the British and American people. He also argued American culture favors too much materialism, opposes the frank and necessary use of state power, and often gives Americans the “easy way out,” of just moving away. Mr. Dickson argued that Americans are the descendants of men and women who uprooted themselves in the name of personal fortune-seeking rather than staying loyal to places their families had lived for centuries. This makes our people dangerously individualist and leaves them with only shallow roots and traditions.
Mr. Dickson argues that this easy-way-out mentality means that Americans have always avoided hard choices. Southern slaveholders were never willing to free the slaves and send them back to Africa to build a nation of their own, even though compensated emancipation and colonization would have cost the nation a fraction of the cost of the Civil War. We must delay hard choices no longer. We need a home of our own. Mr. Dickson said that if whites don’t meet this historical challenge to secure self-determination, our children will pay ever higher costs. There remains only one question: How high a price will we have to pay?
I doubt that anyone at that conference was thinking, when listening to Sam, of prices that reach the fiction of The Turner Diaries…