Could a German who likes this video translate it with AI to see if it makes his compatriots grow some balls? (unlike Nick, all the white men I know behave like eunuchs!).
Greg Johnson says Nick doesn’t read. I am poor but could someone send Nick a copy of Hellstorm, and once he has assimilated it, a copy of Who We Are by Pierce?
The moment he incorporates this knowledge, with his balls he will take our message to another level…
It seems that not even Hitler had the full picture of the world and of how rotten the English were which might have cost him the war. Céline perhaps had the better understanding of how far gone the other Aryans were, he even blamed the Germans for their relaxed behaviour in Paris, instead of fomenting a revolution they were indulging themselves in bars. What should we make of Hitler failing to blame Christianity in his Testament?
I have seen The Village, it is quite curious that an Indian made films with mostly a white cast for a long time. Should we put the Aryan woman on such a pedestal? Didn’t David Lane regret later the second variation on the 14 words? Shouldn’t we simply want to survive because that’s what life is? Struggle? Will? Power? I am an incel myself, but I cannot care that much to put a woman on a pedestal. And women today are as traitorous as men if we care to give them agency, which I don’t think we should but still. Sure, some are beautiful, but what if they were uglier?
Our race is our race, and our race shall outlive the other races, especially the Nordic, or exclusively so—I am a Nordicist myself. Fuentes will never be a radical, that’s why he can be in the open, unlike us. His purpose will be to make other whites self-castrate. The truth is out there, we can look around us and look at History and we will get to Adolf Hitler! No man more noble, he who doesn’t get to Hitler alone will never get to him! Germany had a gold population back then, National Socialism being born in the trenches of the First World War.
Meanwhile, the Amerikwans went to war for a government that allowed niggers to roam in millions their territory, absolutely insane people for which no politics can be possible, every Amerikwan should scream daily in forgiveness to the murder of Germania and of our continent which is the only real treasure of this failed human species!
Heil Hitler. May the convergence of catastrophes save us from extinction, whites on their own are too far gone to wake up!
Something that strikes me about mornings is that it’s the time when inspiration strikes. For example, I went to bed and woke up planning to spend the morning reviewing the chapter against Sigmund Freud in my Hojas Susurrantes, which I’m translating into English. But inspiration struck while I was getting ready, so I decided to write this post instead.
______ 卐 ______
I’d like to clarify what I have said in my two previous posts, about the movie The Village and Nick Fuentes (here and here). The crucial phrase doesn’t appear in the articles, not even in the question I posed in the last one (“Does such 21st century American film exist…?”), but rather in the comments section and even in parentheses: “Who needs Jews when we have white nationalists?”
I will explain it in this entry.
I’ve been reading the recent articles about Fuentes published on Counter-Currents. I think we’re all missing the main point.
Fuentes is like the kid who says the emperor has no clothes. At 27, he doesn’t have my maturity, or the erudition of the authors of C-C. Compared to me or my mentors William Pierce and Savitri Devi, Fuentes seems like a child. But it’s important to remember that it’s precisely that naive cry to a cowardly public—that the emperor has no clothes—that’s the first step in making them see the obvious.
In racialist forums I’m ignored for taking the message of white nationalism to its logical conclusion: violent revolution à la Third Reich. And I’m not just referring to the question I asked yesterday, which was left hanging (although I admit that only a film expert could answer it). I’m referring to the fact that regarding those crucial words conflating my last posts (“Who needs Jews when we have white nationalists?”) I haven’t received any response on X either, where I tweeted them a day ago. Of my 259 followers on X, nobody has said a word yet. As I was told in an email yesterday, they leave me talking to myself “because increasingly—silently, clandestinely—their egos are bruised by the scolding truth brings, and they are otherwise in distaste, having disagreed silently in the background but without the balls to add more.”
But let’s return to Fuentes, who, unlike my followers in X and here, is always willing to discuss important issues with great frankness. He’s like the kid in the story because he speaks the truth—as far as he understands it—about the ethnocidal levels of migration and feminist ethnosuicide: the cancer in the Aryan collective unconscious of our times (cf. what I said yesterday about The Village).
In fact, young Fuentes is far more mature than the veterans Jared Taylor and those of VDARE, insofar as he has already awakened to the JQ (see this clip). On the other hand, by obeying the Christian mandate to love all human beings (remember that from our POV most are exterminable Neanderthals), Fuentes falls into a great contradiction (see, for example, this other clip).
At the end of Tucker’s interview, he asked Fuentes if he would run for president in the future, and Fuentes said perhaps. Tucker asked him what he would do in power, and Fuentes replied that, since the Left wants to crush us (remember that if Harris had won, the First Amendment would have been at her mercy), the Right should crush the Left as a prophylactic measure.
Fuentes is right. Trump promised a Wall in his first term, and there’s nothing of the sort. In his second term he has promised to destroy Antifa, and the same thing happened: there aren’t thousands upon thousands imprisoned like Nayib Bukele is doing in El Salvador, or much better: what Hitler asked Himmler to do in Dachau, a place I love with all my heart and which I visited this very year!
César Tort, the Editor of The West’s Darkest Hour in Dachau Camp, Germany (see my report on that trip here).
Fuentes’s humanitarian sentiments in the second clip are that American whites must resign themselves to the fact that 100 million non-whites will be residing in the US, even though the Enemy imported them without any plebiscite. This represents a major contradiction with what he told Tucker, the same contradiction as Trump’s unfulfilled promises. Tellingly, both Tucker and Fuentes concede in that interview that it is precisely Christian scruples that compel them not to solve the problem (as Himmler was solving it before the deluded Anglo-Americans intervened).
This said, the adolescent way in which Fuentes speaks, shattering post-WWII taboos, is the right one. He speaks out in a crude manner, like an innocent child with no self-consciousness surrounded by adults under the delusion that the emperor has clothes. It doesn’t matter that compared to us, the 21st-century National Socialists, Fuentes seems like a kid. He uses the exact tone that the Aryan collective unconscious needs to awaken!
Let’s compare Fuentes’s most controversial statements in the clips the Left has been circulating with the boring C-C articles or those published by Jared Taylor and VDARE. Alex Linder compared them to those gatherings of posh people who eat crustless sandwiches and speak in politely low voices. With those bourgeois types we’re not going to get anywhere! We need classy thugs. We need an archipelago of Dachau camps throughout the West! Linder spoke with the right tone—the way potential revolutionaries speak.
Since Linder is no longer with us, I think that for the American collective unconscious, a voice like Fuentes’s is the first baby step across the psychological Rubicon in our direction.
Alex Linder, scourge of the synagogue, scribe of the damned, last true witness to the clarity of fire in an age of smiling decay, has passed into shadow.
Before there were podcasts, before dissident Twitter threads, before the algorithm played gatekeeper to speech, there was VNNForum: ugly, unfiltered, untamed. It was not polite, it was not hopeful, and it was not safe. It was a clearing in the poisoned woods, where men came to speak aloud the truths that shattered their lives.
It was was on VNNForum, among threads black with rage and bright with forbidden logos, that some of us saw the world as it truly is. It was there, two decades past, that I first glimpsed the contours of the void. Names like @KarlRadl flickered like dark sentinels in that space, cutting through illusion with diamond-bladed contempt.
Through it all, Linder held the center like a pyromancer. He was not there to comfort; he was there to burn. He built a pyre, and on it, he incinerated the lies of the Levant with a clarity so severe it scorched the eyes of a generation raised on half-truths. For that, he was demonized, harassed, exiled from society; and yet he never stopped. There was no grift, no “rebrand,” no pivot to YouTube monetization.
He published The Aryan Alternative when it meant something to print heresy. He quoted Mencken not to sound clever, but because he meant it; because like Mencken, he saw through the American delusion: its Puritan moralism, its democratic fraudulence, its saccharine pieties masking a merchant’s rot. Linder stripped it bare.
And the cost was everything.
The enemy erased him from polite memory. They will not mourn him. They will not speak his name.
But we will.
Because he stood when others knelt; because he told the truth when it had no market value; because he said “Jew” when the rabble huddled behind the euphemism of “globalist.” He chose to be hated rather than be false.
He dies like so many of our prophets: poor, mocked, defiled. He will be cited by no think tank, footnoted by no historian; yet he will live longer than the whole parade of conservative cowards who called him “too much.”
He was too much: too sharp, too clear, too honest for this age.
So let this be sung in the ruins:
Alex Linder stood alone.
Alex Linder named the Enemy.
Alex Linder never knelt.
And for that, may his name be etched in iron while the world of lies rots beneath its own weight.
“Why so hard!”—said to the diamond one day the charcoal; “are we then not near relatives?”—
Why so soft? O my brethren; thus do I ask you: are ye then not—my brethren?
Why so soft, so submissive and yielding? Why is there so much negation and abnegation in your hearts? Why is there so little fate in your looks?
And if ye will not be fates and inexorable ones, how can ye one day—conquer with me?
And if your hardness will not glance and cut and chip to pieces, how can ye one day—create with me?
For the creators are hard. And blessedness must it seem to you to press your hand upon millenniums as upon wax,—
—Blessedness to write upon the will of millenniums as upon brass,—harder than brass, nobler than brass. Entirely hard is only the noblest.
This new table, O my brethren, put I up over you: Become hard!—
As I recently said in the comments section of my latest posts, I would never have been so abrasive in my criticism of white nationalists—mere charcoal—if they had behaved like Alex Linder: a true diamond. In a very unique way, throughout my blogging career I have interpreted Linder’s advice, “Attack the conservatives!” to mean that today’s racial right ideology is basically conservative, not revolutionary; Christian, not anti-Christian; feminized, not truly Aryan. Therefore, they must be attacked.
Here are the articles on this site in which I tried to choose Linder’s words that best reflect his thinking, which evoke my favourite passage from Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, quoted above as an epigraph to this small tribute to the now deceased Man:
I was informed that Alex Linder has passed away (see an eponymous site here and the sad news on X here).
If our friend Jake has a backup of the WDH Radio Show from June 2, 2017 when Joseph Walsh, Jake and I spoke with Linder about the Christian Problem, it would be great to link it in this obituary. It’s the only recording that features Alex Linder, Jake and yours truly in a podcast (remember: the 2017 recording was gone when SoundCloud deplatformed us).
Update: Link to the backup of that episode of the WDH Radio Show is here! (see first comment below). Also, like us Linder was an exterminationist.
“The application of force alone, without moral support based on a spiritual concept, can never bring about the destruction of an idea or arrest the propagation of it, unless one is ready and able ruthlessly to exterminate the last upholders of that idea even to a man, and also wipe out any tradition which it may tend to leave behind”.
Physical distortion and mental malformation are the direct result of two thousand years of bad-breeding: that is to say, of mongrelism, of democracy, of equality… Christian-ism, originating in the despairful and fallacious philosophy of a crucified wanderer (suffering from acute morbus sacer) is now developed into an organised and world-wide conspiracy of clericals, politicals and decadents directed en masse, with Jesuitic cunning against all the primitive and heroic virtues.
Our clean-skinned ‘heathenish’ ancestors with all their vital forces unimpaired, were really the nobler type of animal. We on the other hand, with our corrupt, irresolute, civilised hearts, our trembling nerves, our fragile anaemic constitutions, are actually the lower, the viler type—notwithstanding the baseless optimism that courtly rhymers drivel into their ‘Heirs of all the ages’, etc.
No people can long retain hardihood and independence, whose minds become submissive to a false ideal.
Blessed are the strong for they shall possess the earth—Cursed are the weak for they shall inherit the yoke. Blessed are the powerful for they shall be reverenced among men—Cursed are the feeble for they shall be blotted out.
Blessed are the bold for they shall be masters of the world—Cursed are the humble for they shall be trodden under hoofs. Blessed are the victorious for victory is the basis of right—Cursed are the vanquished for they shall be vassals forever.
Blessed are the battle-blooded, Beauty shall smile upon them—Cursed are the poor-in-spirit, they shall be spat upon. Blessed are the audacious for they have imbibed true wisdom—Cursed are the obedient for they shall breed creeplings.
Blessed are the iron-handed, the unfit shall flee before them—Cursed are the haters of battle, subjugation is their portion. Blessed are the death-defiant, their days shall be long in the land—Cursed are the feeble-brained, for they shall perish amidst plenty.
Blessed are the destroyers of false-hope, they are true Messiahs—Cursed are the God-adorers, they shall be as shorn sheep. Blessed are the valiant for they shall obtain great treasure—Cursed are the believers in good and evil for they are frightened by shadows…
Blessed is the man who hath powerful enemies, they shall make him a hero—Cursed is he who ‘doeth good’ unto others, he shall be despised.
Blessed is the man whose foot is swift to serve a friend, he is a friend indeed—Cursed are the organisers of charities, they are propagators of plagues. Blessed are the wise and brave for in the struggle they shall win—Cursed are the unfit for they shall be righteously exterminated [emphasis by Ed.].
Blessed are the sires of noble maidens, they are the salt of the earth—Cursed are the mothers of strumous tenderlings for they shall be shamed. Blessed are the mighty-minded for they shall ride the whirl-winds—Cursed are they who teach lies for truth, and truth for lies, for they are abomination.
Blessed are the unmerciful, their posterity shall own the world—Cursed are the pitiful for they shall receive no pity. Blessed are the destroyers of idols, for tyrants shall fear them—Cursed are the famous wiselings, their seed shall perish off the earth. Thrice cursed are the vile for they shall serve and suffer.
Contrast this with an orthodox Sermonette—one that is repeated every seventh day, in thousands of sacred sanctuaries by consecrated black-robed clericals, who have been specially trained from boyhood to weepfully, unctuously rehearse the same with upturned eyes and skilful snuffle or in classic diction, sounding, sonorous, nay! Sublime—as suits the occasion.
‘This is the expression of an authoritarian state –not of a weak, babbling democracy [like the American one]–, of an authoritarian state where everyone is proud to obey, because he knows: I will likewise be obeyed when I must take command’.
—Speech at Nuremberg, September 14, 1935 (see Savitri’s Memoirs pages 172-177 to fully grasp this point).
Matriarchy is distinguished by hedonism, promiscuity, concupiscence, indulgence, narcosis, passivity, laziness, drunkenness and an overloaded, opulent, baroque sensuality.
Everything is permeated with ‘free will’.
Spiritual influence belongs to the matriarchs. Women have a disproportionate influence on society through sexual suggestion and by monopolising the upbringing of children away from their fathers.
Things are kept quiet for fear of offending. Ambiguity and ‘political correctness’ are born.
Value is placed on material possessions and wealth.
Leisure time is mainly taken up with dances, feasting, parties, orgies, acrobats and dancers.
Embellishments, make-up, dresses, colours, luxury, well-being, spices and dyes are valued.
Matriarchy pampers the weak. Peaceful and weak collectivities flourish, too rooted in their piece of land and unable to conquer, explore, pioneer or endure uprooting and loneliness. The archetypal matriarchy is a timorous, docile, humanitarian, anti-heroic, pacifist and pusillanimous society. Peace is extolled and everyone fornicates with everyone. ‘Make love not war’ is a very typical neo-matriarchal slogan.
The spineless man is appreciated for his docility. The cowardly and weak are protected as one of the group. No one has the right to punish or reproach, authority is dissolved.
Everything that preserves life and tends to make life more bearable for the weak is valued. Harshness is removed, and everything is softened. The goal is the enjoyment of a long and pleasurable life.
In matriarchy one tends to enjoy quietly and uncompromisingly and catches pleasure on the fly as soon as it presents itself, in a rather pseudo-tropical mentality. The ‘playboy’, the ‘dandy’ and the fat man are typical products of the matriarchy, and impossible in a real patriarchal society. The pursuit of easy pleasure sets the tempo of matriarchal peoples.
All life is sought to be protected and preserved, even if it means isolating it from the harshness of the real world. Well-being and comfort are sought.
Greetings are elaborate and promiscuous. Manners are nervous, there is a tendency towards indiscretion, groping and getting too close to the interlocutor. Their voices are raised in absurd situations, but they are afraid to shout when the situation calls for it.
As Julius Evola said, matriarchy is a carrier of egalitarian social forms of anarchist or communist character. Ants and bees live in pseudo-communist matriarchies. The ‘Mother Church’, with its manhood-castrated priests, is another matriarchal figuration, however much it may shock the fans of The Da Vinci Code.
Dogmatic, utilitarian and materialistic rules and precepts are obeyed.
The lazy laughter of corrupt women and spineless men, the indulgence and the pampering, the mocking, sad and empty look of the weak, the coughing of the sick, the whining, the depressions, the inconstancy, the capriciousness of over-pampered children, the whining of the bereaved, the inbreeding, the wailing of the disconsolate, the aberration and neutralisation of powerful and vital instincts are characteristic of Matriarchy and a society deprived of order and the influence of fighting men.
Patriarchy: society and idiosyncrasy
Patriarchy is marked by effort, struggle, will, purpose and action, and is distinguished by asceticism, self-control and sobriety. Women are excluded from state or decision-making processes (see the Senate of Rome or the Germanic Thing), and it is the men who mould the new generations to their whim, although it is taken for granted that a man is usually not complete until he has a complementary female spirit by his side to inspire him and bring him some magic.
Everything is imbued with order, ritualism, severity and simplicity. In India, the Aryan invaders call their dark-bred enemies ‘those without rites’.
In patriarchy, the man dominates the family. There is always some sort of supreme patriarch, leader, king or emperor. Children are made to grow up with their duty in mind to take over power from their parents’ generation. The first-born predator of power is the hope of the future and gives character to his society. Social hegemony belongs to the young, vigorous, aggressively impulsive warrior who thirsts for power and to make his mark on the world.
Things are said up front and almost crudely (think of the modern Baltic and Slavic countries). Fights and duels of honour abound.
Value is attached to value itself, and material possessions are only valuable insofar as they express status (as arms, shields, armour, horse and plundered booty once expressed the position of the military caste). Likewise, great value is placed on that which is difficult to achieve, that which is within the reach of the select minority.
Leisure time is occupied mainly with sport, hunting, study, religious meditation and military training, resulting in people who are athletic, warlike, vigorous, spiritual, predatory and ready for anything.
Simplicity, coarseness, naturalness, austerity and toughness are valued. This results in Spartan lives of constant hardening.
Patriarchy pampers the strong and directly worships war, courage, daring, risk and heroism. Severe and aggressive societies flourish, tending to invade, conquer and possess new lands, under the mentality that ‘might makes right’. Patriarchy is thus the system capable of giving birth to heroes through a patriarchal life. Pioneers, explorers, restless and searching men, brimming with ambition and the will to power are forged.
The cowardly, the docile, the useless and the mannered are hated to death. Boys despise girls and girls fear boys.
Boldness, honour and courage are valued. Violence, harshness, force and even brutality are respected. It accepts risk with morbidity, plays with death and pain, and flirts with discomfort, stress, horror and fear, thinking that it strengthens men. A life of honour and glory is valued, even if it is very short (this choice is condensed in the brilliant Greek figure of Achilles). Heroism and sacrifice are worshipped, even if it means a life of suffering and toil. Eugenics, comradeship, the sacredness of the teacher-pupil relationship, mors triumphalis and euthanasia are ideals of the patriarchal mentality.
Pleasure and luxury are regarded with extreme suspicion and treated with great care, or even banished. Discipline, asceticism, self-control, will, training, haughty, rustic, aggressive and military character take their place. The phenomena of soldiering and militarism, as well as athleticism, are typical products of the long-term social action of patriarchy. This gives rise to imperialist peoples who glorify war. Feminist Marilyn French states (Beyond Power), not without some revulsion on her part, that patriarchy is a system that gives pre-eminence to power over life, control over pleasure and dominion over happiness. We might add that patriarchy also gives importance to control over emotions, feelings, suffering and pain (children are told that ‘men don’t cry’), and to power over the earth and matter.
It seeks to harden and strengthen life by exposing it to discomfort and thus shielding it against future bad experiences. The most representative phrases of this mentality are ‘it is for your own good’ and ‘you will thank me in the future’. Struggle and ascension prevail over the pursuit of pleasure.
In patriarchy, greetings are sober and simple. There is a tendency towards discretion, simplicity and static and solemn manners, almost martial in their runic rectitude. Patriarchy is influenced by the philosophy and way of doing things of the männerbunden (‘men’s societies’, or armies), which are one of its hallmarks and cornerstones.
Patriarchy carries hierarchical social forms of a fascist character, in which order decides everything. State and empire are originally patriarchal institutions. In the animal kingdom, just as ants and bees are close examples of matriarchy, wolves live in a quasi-patriarchal system, ruled by dominant males who renew themselves over the generations. The entire pack participates in the training and apprenticeship of the pups, and the fathers expel the offspring from the home once they have reached sufficient maturity to earn their living.
Principles and codes of honour are obeyed which have their origins in the world of spirit and ideas and which unquestionably have a long-term practical purpose. The best examples of patriarchy: the barbarian Aryan societies (such as the ancient Dorians or Germanic), the ancient Iranians, Vedic India, the Greeks, the Romans, the ancient Japanese, the traditional strands of today’s Western civilisation or the very society that was emerging in the Third Reich—especially in the Hitlerjugend and the SS—as well as the Prussian militaristic mentality of all epochs.
The shouting of fervent troops, the sternness towards women and children, the clattering of horses’ hooves, the blood spilt on the snow, the warlike ardour of young men, the weapons, the glorious idealistic art, the fire and bronze, the glitter of metal, the clatter of black boots, the military parades, the chanting and the roar of artillery and rifles are the glorious manifestations of the Aryan patriarchy.
A YouTube video is worth a thousand pictures: Viking prayer to family, lineage, ancestors and death, taken from the film The 13th Warrior, in which a patriarchal Nordic people face a prolific and sinister matriarchal people (Antonio Banderas, you suck!).