web analytics
Categories
Hate

Responding to the Jew

I rarely talk to normies or Jews on the internet. But now that I was checking my Twitter account, the software automatically feeds users with some recent tweets from notable people and I came across a recent popular tweet from Jew Lex Fridman (‘Hate is a poison that destroys the mind. Choose love’). I responded by simply quoting Mauricio (‘You need to transvalue your views on Hate and War. Hate is a source of pure, raw power. The best source of Power. Aryans need to re-learn how to tap into that source and use it effectively to destroy their enemies completely, forever’), although I had originally entertained the idea of quoting what Alex Linder says about hate: that defaming it is a psyop of our enemies to disarm us.

This is precisely what has happened throughout the West. Jung said that an archetype can literally possess the soul of humans through the collective unconscious. And the archetype that after World War II took over the white man, including atheists, is the Jesus-as-a-hippy archetype: peace and love (think of the best movie filmed about this archetype: Jesus Christ Superstar, a movie by Norman Jewison). Hence the cure is to show racialists, as we recently saw in Weikart’s book on Hitler, that the German Chancellor knew that Christianity was, from its inception, a Semitic plot to brainwash the white man.

What is really alarming is that I have seen words very similar to Fridman’s written by the admins of very popular blogs of the American racial right. That’s why I have said that the Christians in the cartoon above are worse, in the sense of incredibly and unimaginably stupid and even more dangerous, than any subversive tribesman.

Categories
Catholic Church Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books) Merovingian dynasty

Christianity’s Criminal History, 149

– For the context of these translations click here –

 
From the 4th century the bishops also exercised public law functions, and in late antiquity they became ‘lords of the civitas’ (cities), and the foundations of monasteries, increasingly frequent in their cities, further increased their power.

The high clergy steadily seized all possible powers. It took advantage, for example, of the release from military service, which it so inflexibly imposed on others. The same was true of the release from taxes and duties, which it naturally imposed on others. At least until the 5th century, the bishops were exempted from the annual grain tax (annona) and from the land tax on all church property, as well as from the munera sordida (dirty work) and the extraordinaria (special allowances). They fought for emancipation from other public obligations and for new rights, such as the right of asylum for their churches, which was so abused.

They also acquired ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the privilegium fori. And they increasingly extended their juridical authority. They had almost unlimited jurisdiction over their clergy, and in certain cases even over the laity, while they could only be condemned by an episcopal assembly. And secular judges, who without their authorisation pronounced on canon law, were excommunicated.

The clergy needed the bishop’s permission to do anything. The bishop also held sway in the monasteries. It was the bishop who decided on the legates to the monasteries, subjected the abbots in matters of appointment and penalties, and had almost unlimited authority over the monks.

But the influence of the bishops was all the greater because the Germanic kingdoms of the 5th and 6th centuries did not touch the possessions of the Church at all. Moreover, the Church’s possessions were increased by the extensive donations of the kings in the 6th and 7th centuries, as well as by many other transfers of property. In a short period, the Church became ‘the largest landowner after the king’ (Stern/Bartmuss).

 
The throne and the altar

It is true that the growing power and wealth of the Church led to certain tensions and disagreements. But monarchy and episcopate saw that they depended on each other and worked together. The hierarchical structure of the Frankish national church supported the political system, and the political system in turn favoured it. It was the old Do ut des business. A ‘tight intertwining of state and church’ (Aubin) prevailed. It was precisely the most powerful families of the Merovingian kingdom—the lineages of the Waldeberts, the Burgundopharones, the Crodoins, the Arnulfingians and the Pipinids—who reinforced their old privileges through Christianity and even through the work of the saints who came from their ranks, the ‘domestic saints’.

Of course, these princes also recognised the ecclesiastical authority of the pope, who in turn could hardly impose his decisions against the royal will. The Merovingians often had ecclesiastics in their court administration and bestowed episcopal sees as sinecures on meritorious fighters. They showered some prelates with enormous possessions and privileges, but almost all were treated with great veneration.

The most powerful bishops had particularly extensive holdings, occupying an almost feudal position. Some even maintained personal relations with the emperor of Byzantium. They were protected and dominated by Merovingian kings, who became the princes’ godfathers. They not only accepted their violence but supported it, complacently sanctioning their wars and cruelties.

In addition to the ever-increasing Church lands—which represented an enormous and, to say it again, inalienable source of income—there were other financial advantages. Such were, for example, the offerings, the raising of taxes, the tithe, which was invented in the 5th century as a kind of alms until the end of the 6th century when it was transformed from a moral obligation into a legal duty, with corresponding penalties for transgressors. Anyone who refused to pay it was excommunicated. A document, drawn up shortly after the Council of Tours (567) and signed by the metropolitan of the place and three of its bishops, demanded that the faithful pay the tithe, and not only of goods but also of slaves. This is the first time that the tithe is mentioned in a Merovingian text. The Synod of Macon threatened excommunication against anyone who violated the correct application of the tithe. In 779, under Charles ‘the Great’, it became a compulsory tax.

The bishops, who had long since ceased to come from the middle class of society—Chlothar II (584-629) made it a rule that they should be chosen from among the members of the upper nobility—oppressed the people with the rest of the ruling class. Sometimes they ruled like true despots. They hardly fornicated and drank less than the laity. Sitting at the king’s table, they spoke of their perjuries and adulteries; Bishop Bertram of Bordeaux was even suspected of having had something to do with Queen Fredegund. They often appointed their successors themselves.

It happened that some towns even had two bishops at the same time. Thus, in Digne-les-Bains, two bishops divided the ecclesiastical property between them, before a synod deposed them both. Something similar happened in the monasteries, which also represented from the 5th century onwards important points of support in the urban sphere for the episcopal government of the cities, since from the 6th century onwards they multiplied considerably and from the 7th century onwards they belonged to the most important landowners in the country, often becoming richer than the cathedrals of the bishops themselves. At the end of the 7th century, when there were more than four hundred monasteries in the whole kingdom, such monasteries and churches owned a third of Gaul!

Categories
Maxfield Parrish

Fallen Leaves

Years ago I had a site called Fallen Leaves where I collected my texts related to the mistreatment of children and adolescents. The WordPress designer of the Quentin theme, the theme I used in the old incarnation of this site, then came up with the Quintus theme: the theme I originally used in Fallen Leaves. When I realised that this new theme italicised all the quotes, I was disappointed and suspended my work on trauma on that site.

I then used the same domain to upload everything I had written about the Catholic Church’s most famous relic, and not only removed the Quintus theme, but the site title itself. Fallen Leaves became The Medieval Turin Shroud. But I didn’t want to delete some of my Fallen Leaves entries.

Now that I’m doing a backup of those old sites I found that I had written more than ten entries critical of a Jew who talks about child abuse on the internet. I was surprised that I had written so many posts about him; it was no longer clear in my memory.

In my personal life I don’t interact with Jews; only with mestizos, castizos and criollos (the latter are the descendants of Spaniards who haven’t stained their blood in Mexico). The Jew I used to criticise in Fallen Leaves was the first Jew I ever had problems with in my life. I never met him personally but, since there were only a few of us on the internet who read Alice Miller, it didn’t take me long to meet him online.

For a normie like I was when I met this guy, it is easier to begin to glimpse what the Jewish problem is if his subversion begins to manifest itself. But I post this entry only because I was surprised that there were so many texts I wrote about him years ago.

By the way, the visual experience of my Fallen Leaves before I abandoned the Quintus theme (an unwise and irreversible move on my part) was completely different: the background was green and the large top image was the above painting by Maxfield Parrish. You can still see there close-ups of the fresco Garden of Opportunity that tastes to me of what the ethnostate of the future should be like, where ephebes can go and pick up nymphs to perpetuate the fair race…

Categories
Child abuse Hojas Susurrantes (book) Quotable quotes

Toxic parents

‘Narcissist parents lie, cheat, delude themselves and even murder their offspring’s souls to project and maintain a false image of themselves, because admission of responsibility would threaten their false self-image’, wrote someone who understands trauma.

Interestingly, Lulu Inc. is allowing my books dealing with child abuse, so I will try to publish once again the translation of the first of my books on the subject.

Categories
Racial right

What a transformation…!

Twelve years ago, in my mother tongue, on one of my now abandoned blogs (which still boasts the face of Eowyn) I wrote:

"I will remove my YouTube video that accompanied this post because in these treacherous times... criticising Christianity is counterproductive".

I mean, a dozen years ago I still believed, as many white nationalists today still believe, that to defend Christianity was to defend the fair race!

Shouldn’t that create, you might ask me, a little charitable empathy on my part for those nationalists, unable to finish crossing the Psychological Rubicon?

Alas, how hard it is to be charitable once you cross it (all you want is for others to cross the river)!

I remember in a Counter-Currents comment thread, about ten years ago Andrew Hamilton said to me: ‘Your thinking develops very rapidly’ or something very close to this phrase (Hamilton still had a few Christian atavisms).

Changing the subject, yesterday I noticed that some posts from the old incarnation didn’t carry over to the new one. I contacted the tech guy and he explained the reasons. It will take me a while to save up to pay him again because the links to some images are broken too: a complicated job and I have to think about what to pay first, that or an operation on the varicose veins in my leg.

For the moment I continue to save through PDFs those six other WordPress blogs of mine that weren’t censored, lest something bad happens to them…

Categories
Friedrich Nietzsche Quotable quotes

Nietzsche quote

‘After the next European war, people will understand me’.

Categories
Hitler's Religion (book) Racial right Richard Weikart

A brief reflection on Weikart’s book

It doesn’t matter that Richard Weikart is a Christian. I find his scholarship impeccable. He did us a great service even if that was never his intention because he forces those white nationalist sympathisers of National Socialism to take sides.

A considerable percentage of these sympathisers in America are Christians. The facts about Hitler’s biography that Weikart unearthed will put them at a crossroads: either they reject Judeo-Christianity, which Hitler called ‘pestilence’, or they repudiate the Führer.

Categories
Friedrich Nietzsche Quotable quotes Real men

Nietzsche quote

Happy those remote times when a people said: ‘I want to be the master of other people!’

Categories
Hitler's Religion (book) Nature Richard Weikart

Hitler’s Religion: Conclusion

In mid-January of 1940, Hitler was discussing with his colleagues a rather frequent topic of his conversations and monologues: the church. After he sarcastically imitated Niemöller, the Confessing Church leader who was incarcerated in a concentration camp, someone in his entourage indicated to him that posterity might not be able to figure out what Hitler’s own religious views were, because he never openly stated his beliefs. The person who brought this to Hitler’s attention had clearly noticed the discrepancy between his private expressions of intense antipathy to Christianity and his public religious image. Since many in Hitler’s entourage were also intensely anti-Christian, perhaps they were trying to provoke him to state his personal religious views publicly. In any case, this observation about the inscrutability of Hitler’s religious views still has merit today—even though we have far more information about Hitler available to us than most of his contemporaries had.

That, of course, does not mean everyone draws the same conclusion. As we have seen, some people today interpret Hitler as an atheist, while others insist he was a Christian…

Interestingly, when Hitler was confronted in January 1940 with the observation that people might not know where he stood religiously, he suggested that, on the contrary, it should not be difficult for people to figure it out. After all, he asserted, he had never allowed any clergy to participate in his party meetings or even in funerals for party comrades. He continued, “The Christian-Jewish pestilence is surely approaching its end now…”

Hitler clearly thought that anyone should be able to figure out that he was not a Christian. Nonetheless, Rosenberg reported in his diary later that year that Hitler had determined that he should divulge his negative views about Christianity in his last testament “so that no doubt about his position can surface. As head of state he naturally held back—but nevertheless after the war clear consequences will follow.” Many times, Hitler told his colleagues that he would reckon with Christianity after the successful conclusion of the war…

So, what did Hitler not believe? He continually rejected Christianity, calling it a Jewish plot to undermine the heroic ideals of the (Aryan-dominated) Roman Empire. He did not accept the deity of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus, or indeed any of the miracles of Jesus. There is no evidence that he believed in a triune God. Though he esteemed Jesus as an Aryan fighter against Jewish materialism who was martyred for his anti-Jewish stance, he did not ascribe to Jesus’s death any significance in human salvation. Indeed, he did not believe in salvation at all in the Christian sense of the term, because he denied a personal afterlife. Despite his public invocations to God, Hitler also did not believe in the efficacy of prayer. His God responded to people and judged them according to their works, not their words. Although he spurned Christianity, this did not lead him to disbelieve in every form of deity, however. He overtly rejected atheism, associating it with “Jewish-Bolshevism.” Further, he explicitly condemned mysticism, occultism, and neo-paganism. Thus, it is evident Hitler was neither a Christian, atheist, occultist, nor neo-paganist.

While this narrows the range of religious options slightly, it still leaves us with agnosticism, pantheism, panentheism, deism, and non-Christian theism. A reasonable case could be made for more than one of these options. In order solve this puzzle, however, one must not only examine the full panoply of Hitler’s religious statements but also decipher how to weigh those statements. Are his private statements more revealing of his true convictions than his public speeches? Probably, but even his private statements must be used cautiously. Are his books a better indication of his personal beliefs than his speeches? This is likely, because he seemed to be more systematic in explaining his worldview in Mein Kampf and in his Second Book. However, they also served propaganda purposes and must be used carefully as well…

One problem is that Hitler often portrayed God as an impersonal force, yet sometimes he implied God did take a personal interest in humanity, or at least in the German people’s destiny. Though he usually insisted that God does not intervene in the natural cause-and-effect relationships in the universe, at times he seemed to ascribe a role to Providence in history…

One of the reasons that I do not think Hitler was a theist is because he did not seem to think God could contravene the laws of nature. Hitler often called the laws of nature eternal and inviolable, thus embracing determinism. He interpreted history as a course of events determined by the racial composition of people, not by their religion or other cultural factors. The way to understand humanity and history, according to Hitler, was to study the laws of nature. He considered science, not religious revelation, the most reliable path to knowledge. What Hitler thought science revealed was that races are unequal and locked in an ineluctable struggle for existence, which would determine the future destiny of humanity…

Evil or sin, in Hitler’s opinion, was anything that produced biological degeneration. Thus, Hitler thought he was operating in complete harmony with God’s will by sterilizing people with disabilities and forbidding the intermarriage of Germans and Jews. Killing the weak to make way for the strong was part of the divine plan revealed in nature, in Hitler’s view. Thus, even murdering disabled Germans, launching expansionist wars to wrest territory from allegedly inferior races, and murdering millions of Jews, Sinti, Roma, Slavs, and others defined as subhumans, was not only morally permissible but also obedience to the voice of God. After all, that was how nature operated, producing superabundantly and then destroying most of the progeny in the Darwinian struggle for existence. Hitler often reminded his fellow Germans that even if this seemed ruthless, it was actually wise. In any case, he warned that they could not moralize about it, because humans were completely subject to the laws of nature.

In the end, while recognizing that Hitler’s position was somewhat muddled, it seems evident his religion was closest to pantheism. He often deified nature, calling it eternal and all-powerful at various times throughout his career. He frequently used the word “nature” interchangeably with God, Providence, or the Almighty. While on some occasions he claimed God had created people or organisms, at other times (or sometimes in the same breath) he claimed nature had created them. Further, he wanted to cultivate a certain veneration of nature through a reinvented Christmas festival that turned the focus away from Christianity. He also hoped to build an observatory-planetarium complex in Linz that would serve as a religious pilgrimage site to dazzle Germans with the wonders of the cosmos. Overall, it appears a pantheist worldview was where Hitler felt closest to home…

[H]opefully this study of Hitler’s religion sheds light on a number of important issues. First, his anti-Christianity obviously shaped the persecution of the Christian churches during the Third Reich. Second, his religious hypocrisy helped explain his ability to appeal to a broad constituency…

Finally, and most importantly, his religion did not provide him any transcendent morality. Whatever Hitler’s stance on other religious issues, his morality was entirely of this world, derived from his understanding of the workings of nature. In my view, this was the most pernicious element of his religion. Hitler followed what he considered the dictates of nature by stealing, killing, and destroying. Ultimately, however, he perished, because his God could not give him life.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s note:

I included this final paragraph from Richard Weikart’s book only to show that the Christian author of Hitler’s Religion saw Hitler in photographic negative: white he saw black, black white; dark grey light grey, and light grey dark grey.

Once one transvalues values, it becomes clear that ‘the Jewish-Christian pestilence’, to use Uncle Adolf’s words, is what is driving the Aryan on the path to extinction.

What Weikart and the rest of the Christians and secular neochristians ignore is that one can only gain power by obeying the laws of Nature, not by violating them as they do (here Hitler hit the nail on the head). In fact, violating Nature’s laws will lead to a catastrophe greater than what happened after World War II.

Hitler did love Mother Nature. Above, Alpine view of the Berghof chalet, 1936 (Heinrich Hoffmann Collection, Bavarian State Library).

Categories
Aryan beauty

European beauty