I recently said that I don’t talk about news on this site unless we use a news story to discuss metapolitics. From this angle, I can use the recent American election to illustrate one of the ideological pillars of this site.
Everyone knows what Christianity is. But those who have read Tom Holland will understand what we mean by atheistic hyper-Christianity, which we sum up in one word: neochristianity. In short, all Western atheists are neochristians since Christianity has not only the dogmatic side but also an axiological side. To give just one example. In my previous post I mentioned The Turner Diaries: a novel that ends when the Aryans exterminate the non-Aryans on the whole planet. Since that novel is never mentioned on white nationalist sites as the blueprint for what needs to be done, we could label them all as Judeo-Christian or Neo-Judeochristian. Why? Because the proclamation of human rights in the time of the French Jacobins, as Holland saw in his book, is at heart a proclamation of Christian ethics, albeit stripped of its religious trappings.
In his book Dominion, Holland included this image that imitate Moses’ commandments.
So there are no authentic apostates from Christianity in the West, except those who think as the late William Pierce thought in his novel—and in his history of the white race, where he said that all Aryan conquests failed because they failed to exterminate the natives. (This Hitler, Himmler and Heydrich did plan with their Master Plan East because, unlike the American racialists, they did dare to cross the psychological Rubicon: transvalue all Christian values.)
Once the POV of this site is understood, it becomes clear that the recent American election was a contest between the basically Christian values of those who voted for Trump and the neochristian values of those who voted for the mulatta. The problem is that both factions are two sides of the same coin. It was clear from Biden’s inaugural speech, from the Woke vocabulary he used, that whoever wrote it had already left traditional Christianity behind in pursuit of neochristianity: which takes the principle of Christian equity to its ultimate consequence (those who have not yet read Dominion should read it, abridged by me here).
Which faction is worse, the new or the old? It is very common among the American racial right to say that the new one is worse, but an accelerationist who has in mind the metaphor of the frog gradually burning out without noticing it would reply that maybe the old one is worse.
I don’t know which is worse. It is irrelevant. What counts is that the Pauline principle that there will be no more distinction between Greeks—that is, whites—and Jews came, in its secular transmutation in the 1960s, to be metastasised so that we would see blacks as brothers and ‘liberate’ our women. In our century Wokism took that principle to its ultimate consequences with homo ‘marriage’ and transgender empowerment. The latter may seem grotesque but it is grounded in Christian ideals, as I said in my 2019 post ‘On empowering birds feeding on corpses’, where I talk about the Franciscans of the 14th century.
The conservative revolution that is causing so much excitement among those rejoicing at Trump’s victory has to be understood from this meta-political angle. It is not a genuine revolution, as was the German NS. Rather, it is two Christian factions fighting each other: one very liberal and the other conservative. But salvation lies in abandoning Christian ethics altogether: which is why I changed the subtitle of this blog today from ‘Gens alba conservanda est’ to ‘Post-1945 National Socialism’.
Unlike today’s racialists Hitler understood Xtianity.
While Hitler tried to reduce his exposure to petty party disputes in prison, it is striking that he tried to maintain engagement with the wider world, especially potential ideological sympathizers and funders in Italy and the United States. Despite the fact that he allowed Göring to find sanctuary in Italy after the Putsch, Mussolini was careful to keep the Nazis at arm’s length.
That left America. In early January 1924, not long after the start of his incarceration at Landsberg, Hitler penned a letter of accreditation for his envoy Kurt Lüdecke. He asked Lüdecke ‘to promote the interests of the German freedom movement in the United States and especially to collect money for them’.
At the end of January, Lüdecke set off with Winifred and Siegfried Wagner to Detroit. Despite Lüdecke’s invocation of the ‘solidarity of white men’, and his offer to promote the kind of international anti-Semitism demanded by the Dearborn Independent, he was unable to persuade Ford at their meetings to provide any funding for the movement. Lüdecke repeatedly visited Hitler in Landsberg in May and June 1924. In 1924, a National Socialist Ortsgruppe was founded in the German quarter of Chicago, and there also appears to have been some sort of presence in New York City; a year later, Hitler personally thanked one of his activists in America for sending back money for the movement. In general, however, the attempt to reach out to the United States was a failure.
Hitler was under no illusions about the timescale for the national and racial regeneration of Germany. The failure of the coup had cured him of any vanguardism. He was now thinking in terms not of years, or even decades, but of centuries. In late June 1924, he made a public announcement that ‘the re-establishment of the German people is by no means a matter of the acquisition of technical weapons, but rather a question of the regeneration of our character’.
‘Spiritual renewals,’ Hitler continued, ‘require, if they are to be more than just a passing phenomenon, many centuries [emphasis in the original]’ to be ‘successful’. Five months later, Hess recorded that Hitler ‘is under no illusions about the extent to which the “idea” can be implemented by him’. ‘The ripening of ideas, the adapting of reality to the idea and the idea to reality,’ he continued, ‘will probably require many generations.’
Hitler, Hess went on, saw his own role as merely ‘setting up a new marker in the distance’, ‘loosening the soil’ around the existing pole, which ‘represented a major era in the development of mankind’. The task of ‘ripping out’ the pole and advancing it some way towards the goal, by contrast, would be the task ‘of another, a greater man yet to come’. In other words, after the certainty of 1923, Hitler was once again unsure whether he was the messiah himself rather than just John the Baptist, the ‘drummer’ of 19 19-20.
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s 2 ¢
According to Vaishnava cosmology, Kalki is destined to appear at the end of the Kali Yuga, the last of the four ages. His arrival will mark the end of the Kali Yuga and herald the beginning of the most virtuous age.
This is most interesting. Post-1945 European National Socialism is best represented by the philosophy of Savitri Devi, who by the end of her books used to invoke the Hindu archetype of Kalki in the sense—translated into Christian metaphors—that Hitler had been a sort of John the Baptist and that the Aryan leader who would really vindicate his people in the darkest hour would use many more ‘lightnings’ than Uncle Adolf had used; that is, he would be an exterminationist (something we could visualise with William Pierce’s novel The Turner Diaries).
The previous two posts, in which I quote what Robert Morgan recently said in The Unz Review, are not about Trump or his VP marrying an Indian. The topic, as the red-lettered categories at the top of those posts say, is about the working hypothesis of white nationalism: that Jewry is the cause of Aryan decline. In a nutshell, Morgan’s comment illustrates that this isn’t true. It was we—and this I say—who doomed ourselves since, as Emperor Julian said in the 4th century c.e., we abandoned the true Gods in favour of the Jews.
That sin reigns throughout American white nationalism, so the typical American racialist reverses cause and effect, as was made clear not only in Morgan’s brief comment but in the red-letter links in the words ‘succeeded’ and ‘has seen’ that I put in the first of the two posts.
The paradigm shift is such that this site almost gets no comments. In spite of this tomorrow I will resume my quotes from Simms’ book on Hitler. I like that intellectual biography of Uncle Adolf’s thinking because the author shows that, while Hitler started with exactly that Judeo-reductionist POV he eventually realised geopolitics, the need for Lebensraum (cf. my last post on Eduardo Velasco’s essay on the Heartland) and things very similar to what John Mearsheimer has been saying about why his country destroyed Germany (and thus is ‘the enemy of Europe’, Francis Parker Yockey would add).
All this escapes and will escape the American monocausalists because, in their tunnel vision, they are not only unable to see what Hitler saw, but also such things as what William Pierce saw in his book.
There he mentions subversive Jewry but Pierce’s broad historical context makes us see history under a very different light from the history coming from the pen of Christians and neochristians. To give just a couple of examples: Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar appear not as heroes but as villains from the point of view of that book, which is also my POV (thanks Pierce: you were the most intelligent American of all US history!).
Editor’s note: this is Robert Morgan’s reply
today about what I posted yesterday:
______ 卐 ______
Hola, amigo!
Once again, our thoughts overlap. I especially agree with this:
The orthodox interpretation of white nationalism is that Jewry is the primary cause of white decline and that traitorous white men are like poor Manchurian candidates whom evil Jews hypnotised with malicious propaganda.
Certainly this is an apt summation of Kevin MacDonald’s view too, stripped of its “evolutionary psychology” trappings. The message of his signature work The Culture of Critique is that the Jews’ victory over gentile culture was won through propaganda, which is seen by him as able to both initiate and steer various social movements among the gentiles, or in other words, to manipulate them as though they were puppets. In my view, this way of looking at matters is not only completely wrong, but also very damaging in that by its misdirection it leads people to regard effects as if they were causes. Ellul put it very well:
Propaganda must not only attach itself to what already exists in the individual, but also express the fundamental currents of the society it seeks to influence. Propaganda must be familiar with collective sociological presuppositions, spontaneous myths, and broad ideologies.
By this we do not mean political currents or temporary opinions that will change in a few months, but the fundamental psycho-sociological bases on which a whole society rests, the presuppositions and myths not just of individuals or of particular groups but those shared by all individuals in a society including men of opposite political inclinations and class loyalties. A propaganda pitting itself against this fundamental and accepted structure would have no chance of success.
Rather, all effective propaganda is based on these fundamental currents and expresses them. Only if it rests on the proper collective belief will it be understood and accepted. It is part of a complex of civilization, consisting of material elements, beliefs, ideas, and institutions, and it cannot be separated from them. No propaganda could succeed by going against these structural elements of society. But propaganda’s main task clearly is the psychological reflection of these structures. —Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes, p. 38-9
Both the successes of the Jewish critiques of gentile culture and the Donald Trump phenomenon are better explained by Ellul’s view than MacDonald’s. For example, I would argue that America’s Christian heritage, and the very Christian commitment it had already made as a society to regard the negro as the white man’s equal following the Civil War, laid indispensable groundwork necessary for Boas’ views to be accepted. Because of this history, America needed to believe in racial equality as a biological fact, and Boas, the clever Jew, came along to take advantage of this. The gentile public was eager to buy what he was selling.
Conversely, propaganda failed to take down Donald Trump precisely because it went against some of America’s most deeply held beliefs. American culture respects a winner most of all, and he is the archetypal winner: a billionaire, a courageous fighter (his cry of “Fight! Fight! Fight!” after being shot was electrifying! LOL), a flagrant womanizer and a fucker of supermodels. The contrast between him and the effete, doddering Biden, Obama’s shoeshine boy, couldn’t have been greater or more sharply drawn.
Nevertheless though, MacDonald is wrong again in being encouraged by Trump’s victory. The decline of the white race will continue under Trump just as it has been, and likely even accelerate. It’s fitting that Trump’s a Zionist, because America is itself Zionist. His family is interbred with Jews, and his Veep is married to a street shitter[emphasis by Editor]. They set a fine example! We must reconcile ourselves to the fact that race mixing is the face of empire, and it would be crazy to expect less of it under Trump imperator.
As we know, this site is not about politics but about metapolitics. I will only talk about actual politics if something huge happens; for example, if a war of extermination of the Muslim world breaks out against Israel, or if Putin drops atomic bombs on Europe if NATO dares to bomb his mother Russia. From this angle, Trump’s victory is not important news. But I can use it to present a clear case of ‘metapolitics’ in the sense of paradigm-shifting for those of us who want to prevent whites from going extinct.
The orthodox interpretation of white nationalism is that Jewry is the primary cause of white decline and that traitorous white men are like poor Manchurian candidates whom evil Jews hypnotised with malicious propaganda.
Here at The West’s Darkest Hour we see reality from a different prism. We believe that Western history took a wrong turn with Constantine, who wanted to subjugate the white men of the Mediterranean by introducing ‘spiritual terror’ (Adolf Hitler’s term): Judeo-Christianity, which his successors succeeded in doing. The distortion produced by the inversion of Aryan values into Judeo-Christian values perfectly explains the scale of values that, in the modern world, has mutated into an atheistic hyper-Christianity, as the historian Tom Holland has seen.
Having laid the groundwork for a paradigm that competes with the Judeo-reductionism of the American racial right, it is good to hear what one American dissenter from that narrative, Dr Robert Morgan, has to say in response to Kevin MacDonald. I refer to the recent article published in The Occidental Observer, ‘The Trump Victory Is Huge!’, republished yesterday in The Unz Review. The first paragraph of Morgan’s comment is a quote from MacDonald’s article:
______ 卐 ______
The New York Times ran between 5-10 articles and op-eds every day hating on everything about Trump, including his family, and I am sure the same was true of MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, The Washington Post, The LA Times, etc. They have lost their credibility, spending their huge advantage in spreading propaganda on lies… No one with any brain believes a thing they say related to politics.
Surely if there is any lesson to be drawn from this it’s that propaganda’s power isn’t unlimited. We have just seen the result of eight years of constant anti-Trump propaganda. The full power of nearly all media in the country was turned on him in an effort to destroy the man. The full power of the deep state via lawfare was used against him, and academia was also against him. Assassins even tried to kill him. Every conceivable avenue of attack was tried, and yet they all failed. He’s a giant; an American Caesar.
Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonourable graves.
– William Shakespeare Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene II
Unfortunately for MacDonald, once this is admitted, the validity of his entire body of work is called into question [emphasis by Ed.]. Unless I’m very gravely mistaken, it’s the thesis of his book The Culture of Critique that it was through their constant propaganda efforts that Jews succeeded in undermining gentile culture. For example, he attributes the success of Freud’s ideas to “brainwashing”.
Finally, it is reasonable to conclude that Freud’s real analysand was gentile culture, and that psychoanalysis was fundamentally an act of aggression toward that culture. The methodology and institutional structure of psychoanalysis may be viewed as attempts to brainwash gentile culture into passively accepting the radical criticism of gentile culture entailed by the fundamental postulates of psychoanalysis. – Kevin MacDonald,The Culture of Critique, p. 133
He employs similar reasoning to explain the success of Boasian anthropology, and the Frankfurt School. Propaganda is seen by him as a very important tool with which to undermine gentile culture; indeed, he says that Boasian anthropology and the ideas put forward in The Authoritarian Personality are in themselves prime examples of such Jewish propaganda. Thus, the “culture of critique” is just another way to phrase what he sees as the Jewish effort to undermine white civilizational confidence through constant propaganda. MacDonald quotes Ben Stein:
Television and the movies are America’s folk culture, and they have nothing but contempt for the way of life of a very large part of the folk. . . . People are told that their culture is, at its root, sick, violent, and depraved, and this message gives them little confidence in the future of that culture. It also leads them to feel ashamed of their country and to believe that if their society is in decline, it deserves to be. (Stein 1976, 22) – Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, p. ix
But why did the propaganda fail in the case of Trump, but supposedly succeed in all those other cases? I know it’s a radical idea, but could it possibly be the case that people are not mere puppets, at the mercy of whatever propaganda they are subjected to, but instead have some moral agency of their own, an ability to discriminate and make their own decisions? I hesitate to suggest such an insane thing, but is it possible that instead of not having a brain, those 67 million Americans who voted for Harris actually think she was the better choice?
I believe that, as the good scientist MacDonald claims to be, he must admit the possibility. But if so, then it seems clear that, by the same logic, those gentiles who fell for Freudianism, Boasian anthropology, the ideas of the Frankfurt School, and the rest of the Jewish critique may also have had their reasons. They were not mere puppets. They not only had brains, but thought those critiques well made. In other words, they yielded to the propaganda because they wanted to.
Therefore if Trump’s victory shows anything, it shows they were equally capable of rejecting the propaganda, but didn’t.
Editor’s note: I will not translate the entire book on Heartland that Eduardo Velasco published on the now defunct Evropa Soberana site in Spanish (here, here and here). I limit myself to translating only a few paragraphs from the final section:
______ 卐 ______
Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s The Closed Commercial State (1800) is a tedious book, utopian and pedantic in its rationalism, but it is worth our attention. On the one hand, it had a certain influence on the development of what Spengler would call ‘Prussian socialism’ or ‘Prussianism’, and on the other, it defends the exact opposite thesis to that of globalisation, i.e. that a country should seek autarchy to extricate itself from the network of international trade, becoming, so to speak, an endorheic state of exclusively internal (commercial, economic) flow. Thinkers of all political persuasions have seen interesting things in Fichte’s work, liberals as well as socialists, communists, anarchists, fascists and Nazis[1] so it is not a work to be dismissed lightly.
We return, then, to Prussia, the land that before the Second World War was home, according to Mackinder, to ‘one of the most virile races of mankind’, a race that was to suffer between 1944 and 1946 an ethnic cleansing of extreme brutality. While England was ruled by a cosmopolitan aristocracy of shipping, trade, commerce and banking speculation, Prussia was ruled by a provincial, military, land and productivity aristocracy. Fichte sent a copy of The Closed Commercial State (ECC) to Frederick William III, supposedly to influence his economic policy.
Fichte was inspired by the peasant society of the Germanic world and the economic organisation of the old German cities. It is impossible not to see in his work affinities with Lycurgus, Plato and Thomas More. The German philosopher’s economic ideal was a completely self-sufficient state, with ‘nothing to demand from its neighbours and nothing to cede to them’. Fichte says that in such a state, ‘the government does not aim at acquiring commercial predominance, which is a dangerous tendency, but at making the nation completely independent and autonomous. If a single nation has achieved supremacy in commerce, its victims must use every possible means to attenuate this supremacy and restore the balance’: a clear reference to the power of Great Britain.
The danger of the commercial supremacy of a single nation was that the international trade handled by that nation took over all the goods of a rival state until that state had only one commodity left to sell: itself. In this way, ‘the state sells itself, sells its independence, collects a permanent subsidy thus becoming the province of another state and a means to any of its objectives’.
In this regard, it is worth remembering that, although autarchy is today surrounded by taboos, in classical Greece it was the ideal to which people aspired, even if it was not always completely attainable. Aristotle, in his Politics, considered autarchy to be the ideal situation for a state. Hesiod went further and proposed autarchy for each family household. Tellurian Sparta, the most respected state in classical Greece, was a closed, autarchic economy thanks to its conquest of fertile Messenia. Thalassic Athens, by contrast, was heavily urbanised and had to rely on grain markets such as Egypt and southern Ukraine.
Fichte divided society into three strata: producers, merchants and craftsmen. Then came the military, teachers and statesmen. Of all these castes, the most dangerous for Fichte was the merchants since, through their possession of commodities and especially money, they tended to escape the authority of the state and ended up imposing their own rules.
The philosopher thought that Europe had a great commercial advantage over the other continents, tending to take over their labour power and goods. He considered that this state of affairs could not be perpetuated forever and that one day, a large state would have to leave the ‘European commercial society’ to form its own closed productive circuit.
What Fichte was criticising in these reflections was the explosion of Europe, and he advocated an implosion: Europe could not be eternally dependent on overseas ‘backyards’ in the Third World and must one day be able to stand on its own feet. Moreover, a planned economy cannot be planned, nor can a country be like a self-balancing and autonomous microsystem, if it depends on foreign goods and production, the supply, processing and transport of which it does not control, and is thus at the mercy of the whims of the markets: price fluctuations, trade embargoes, competition with the domestic product, etc. Such economic phenomena will tend to turn the country that is subject to them into a mere province in the network of international trade, tending to specialise in one economic sector rather than hosting all of them.
In the 1930s, autarky seemed to be gaining the upper hand over international trade. Three distinctly autarkic geopolitical blocs emerged: the European Axis (Germany, Italy and allied nations), the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (the vast conquests of the Japanese Empire from Manchuria to Indochina) and the Soviet Union.
With Europe, Asia and the Heartland closed to the US export market (except, in the case of the USSR, the substantial military, economic and oil aid it received from the US and the UK), all that remained on the planet was the British Empire and the impoverished colonial Third World: a de facto and imposed US autarchy. In The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (1959), William Appleman argued that the US ruling oligarchy went to war against Germany and Japan to protect global export markets from the effects of autarky. The dynamics of the autarkic blocs were neutralised with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system (1944), with its three pillars: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the dollar as the reserve currency of international trade. The only bloc that was spared to some extent was the USSR, which formed the economic organisation COMECON, formed in 1949, the same year that NATO was founded.
The COMECON bloc, of which the Warsaw Pact was to be the military arm. Red: Member states. Yellow: observer states. Pink: belonged to the organisation but did not participate. (Editor's Note: Compare it with BRICS).
Fichte—who believed that ‘in the beginning was action’ and that property emanates from labour and productive activity, that is, that the earth belongs to whoever pours his blood and sweat upon it—did not recognise the value of money, but the value of the commodities that such money is capable of buying. For him, ‘The total mass of money represents and is worth as much as the total mass of commodities’. No matter how much money is in circulation or is created out of thin air in the form of credit, its purchasing power will always be limited by the actual goods and services that can be bought.
Wealth does not depend on how much money one has, but on how large a fraction of the total existing money one possesses. It is clear that when there is, as today, much more money in circulation (especially electronic money and interest-debt-money) than real commodities, the excess capital floating in ‘the markets’ is devoted to inflating bubbles, opening new artificial markets (for example, by turning the emotions of the individual and human nature itself into a business), manipulating needs and demand with aggressive advertising and speculating to justify its existence. Not to mention that every time the money supply is increased, the creators of money (or rather, counterfeiters of money) increase the proportion of capital they own out of the total money supply, using this capital as if it were a commodity in itself. But ‘In the simple expression “to realise something in money”, the whole falsity of the system is already contained. Nothing can be realised in money because money itself is nothing real. The commodity is the real reality.’
To bring about the closure of the commercial state, Fichte advocated the ‘abolition of the world currency’ which he identifies with gold and silver (Editors’ Note: after the collapse of the British Empire, nowadays the dollar is still the reserve currency of international trade) and the ‘introduction of a national currency’. It is difficult not to see here the influence of Sparta, which forbade the possession of gold and silver by creating a new currency which was not accepted outside the territory of the Lacedaemonian state: rough iron bars, so that they could not be manipulated or moulded, were dipped in vinegar while still red-hot; the idea was to armour against the fluctuating and shifting influence of foreign trade.
In this situation, there is no longer any exchange with foreign states, except for one-off trade pacts based on direct barter, without monetary intermediaries. This is what Germany was doing before World War II in Eastern Europe and South America: a barter trade that did not need to use international currencies in the hands of its enemies. In contrast, initiatives for a world currency have always come from globalist individuals or entities, for example, the Rothschild family. (In this video, Mr. Evelyn de Rothschild proposes an ‘international currency’ to avoid conflict. What he does not say is who will have the power to issue such a currency—presumably himself, for example.)
Another of Fichte’s contributions to geopolitics is his idea that states should not overstep their ‘natural frontiers’, understood as those within which a state can achieve self-sufficiency. Towards the end of his writing, Fichte leaves us with a very politically incorrect reflection:
It is evident that a nation so closed, whose members live only with themselves and very few with foreigners; a nation which preserves by those measures its particular way of life, its institutions and customs; a nation which deeply loves its Fatherland and everything national, very soon a high degree of national honour and a very peculiar national character will emerge. It will become another nation, a completely new nation. That introduction of the national currency is its true creation…
______ 卐 ______
The power of High Finance has decided to base itself in the United Kingdom, North America and to a lesser extent the rest of Western Europe because among other things there is an excellent quality manpower there.
The American troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan have a fabulous genetic heritage, perfectly comparable to the Indo-European hordes of antiquity. Even in the faces of many white American convicts, we can discern a potential crusader knight, Viking, sailor, soldier, hard-nosed farmer or hard-headed labourer. These are people gone astray, uprooted by crossing the Atlantic, without the moral and spiritual foundations that only deep Asia, along with inspiring European history—based on heroic examples, war, art, culture, work, beauty and love—can provide.
What is currently being exported from Hollywood and MTV is not American culture, as the saying goes. ‘American culture’ is the love of family and country, the right to defend them with arms, civic sovereignty, religion, liberty and independence: the values of a people whose land was not given to them by a feudal lord, but won by blood and sweat. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor George Washington has anything to do with the toxic rubbish propagated from the meccas of the Yankee subculture, and the sphere of influence of the Pentagon and Wall Street is not an ‘American empire’ any more than the Vatican is the Roman Empire and the City of London is the British Empire.
We know—because we are not deluded or cultural Judeo-Christians, nor do we believe in globalisation or the religion of political correctness—what happens in countries that forget the fundamental laws of reproduction and race improvement: they become vulgarised, corrupt, unserious, undisciplined, disorganised, weakened and Third Worldised. The darkening of the race goes hand in hand with the darkening of the mind and spirit. Parasitic weeds take over the garden and eventually choke out the noblest and most productive trees and plants…
Deliberate and systematic ignorance of human reproduction, of the importance of race and genetics in geopolitics will only have the effect that the ‘myth of blood’ will resurface with greater force and violence. Globalisation pretends to make us believe that we are all equal while at the same time homogenising us racially, a clear proof that it does not consider us all equal. Genetic and anthropological-physical studies, i.e. recognising the difference between people, are therefore an anti-globalisation vector.
____________
[1]Dr. Carl Schmidt, associated with the power groups of Deutsche Bank, IG Farben and Siemens, defended the idea of a Closed Commercial State in Europe led by Germany.
The above image appears in Irving’s book with this footnote: ‘Heinrich Himmler preserves the certificate recording his First Communion until the end.’
THE PLEASURES WHICH MADE those evenings ‘unforgettable’ also helped young Heinrich Himmler overcome his tendency to adolescent depression . ‘First of all Maja sang, “A Woman’s Love and Sorrow.” She sang the verses with tears in her eyes. I don’t think Ludwig understands her, his Golden girl, but I can’t be sure of that. I just don’t get him. Later Gebhard and Kathe played the piano.’ Kathe Loritz – also Maja – was Ludwig Zahler’s girl, and later his wife. ‘Ludwig and I shared an armchair. Marielle [Lacher] and Maja sat on the floor clinging to us both. We all cuddled, partly in love and partly in a fraternal embrace. It was an evening I won’t easily forget.’
He felt sorry for poor Maja, he wrote on November 5, 1919; and two days later there was more of the same: then he sermonized to a hidden congregation in his diary, ‘Yes, it’s true: Mankind is a wretched creature. Restless is the heart, until it rests with Thee, 0 Lord [see my comment in the comments section - Editor]. How powerless are we, we can’t help it. I can but be a friend to my friends, do my duty, work, struggle with myself, and never allow myself to lose control.’ After just a month living among educated youngsters like himself, he was beginning to question everything. Louisa no longer excited him. On Sunday morning he went to the cathedral for Mass and the sermon, and then over to her family, the Hagers: ‘Louisa was nice enough, but not the way I like.’ He spent a cheerful evening after that with Maja’s family. ‘Today I have by and large regained my spiritual balance. God will help me forwards.’
Thus as he plunged into the world of agriculture an inner turmoil began, between the strict religious doctrines impressed upon him by his parents, and the unfamiliar chemistry of student life and adolescence. ‘I work,’ he wrote on November 11, i919, ‘because it is my duty, because I find peace in work; and I work for my Germanic ideal of womanhood with whom I shall one day live my life and fight my battles as a German in the East, far from my beloved Germany.’ One evening a hypnotist came round to the Loritz household and tried his black art on them. ‘I summoned up all my powers of resistance,’ boasted Heini. ‘Obviously it did not work with me. But it did totally with poor little Maja. I felt so sorry for her when I saw her go under. I could have strangled the dog in cold blood. I worked against him where I could. . . His mind-reading was very good, but I think anybody capable of concentrating could do it with sufficient practice. I instinctively disliked the fellow, I hate this whole swindle; it only comes off if you go along with him.’
He loved Maja’s eagerness to help; she made a fair-copy in twenty pages of neat handwriting for him of his zoology paper, and repeated the drawings with great care. A day or two later he helped her with her math, and ‘she thanked me very much – (he drew a careful line, and did that again the next day). His heart in a whirl, zerwühlt, he wrote that Friday evening: ‘Then over to the Loritz’s for a meal. Maja was very nice – and there was the line again. (Those who research in private diaries know not to ignore such signs.)
He was still acquiring social graces. That included taking lessons in ballroom dancing, which he loathed as only a nineteen-year-old can. ‘Diary, November 15, 1919: From eight to ten at dancing-class.’ – and here he inserted three [iron] crosses. ‘All beginnings are hard,’ he added, using a German aphorism, ‘but I’ll get the hang of it. Dance classes seem pretty pointless to me, and just a waste of time.’ ‘What a disgusting fraud it all is,’ he commented. ‘But I’ll be glad once I’ve learned to do it, and I can dance with whoever takes my fancy.’ ‘If I could only look danger squarely in the eye,’ he added in one entry, ‘risk my life somewhere, fight, that would be a real liberation for me.’
‘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).
‘But we never get back our youth. The pulse of joy that beats in us at twenty becomes sluggish. Our limbs fail, our senses rot. We degenerate into hideous puppets, haunted by the memory of the passions of which we were too much afraid, and the exquisite temptations that we had not the courage to yield to. Youth! Youth! There is absolutely nothing in the world but youth!’ —The Picture of Dorian Gray
Those who think like that are immature men. Yesterday I had to delete some passages from the third book of my trilogy where I confessed things that I now rephrase and translate into English.
In those deleted pages I confessed that I had had a recurring fantasy at my very mature age: that if it were possible to travel back in time I would be infinitely happy visiting my grandmothers’ homes. ‘What would I give…!’ — I have told myself countless times now that I can no longer see them — ‘to be able to go and visit them as I did as a child and pubescent!’
Their homes were far from the disturbances of my parents’ house, where I lived. Only beautiful and wholesome memories come from those places where many of our grandmothers lived. It is easier for parents to project their psychoses onto their offspring than for mature grandmothers to do so, even if they failed to understand our future parents or treat them well when they were young. With age, the unhealthy projections evaporate.
‘That fantasy I can even have right now, to the extent of perceiving that with their deaths parts of my being have been mutilated’, I said in my diary, where I added that ‘any satisfaction I might have in the present is a pale substitute for the times when I could go to see them when my “I” was whole’. I wrote in red ink that there would have been no folie en famille at home if any of them had seen our family dynamics. This is even more elementary than the Hitler Youth because some unsupervised parents (i.e., without grandmothers or godmothers) can drive a child mad and destroy him before the pubescent child can be recruited into the Hitler Youth.
Today’s Gray cult of individualism and eternal youth is folly in an age that doesn’t understand that senescence is a fundamental part of an extended family (in contrast to the nuclear family). The youth we are to pursue is not the youth of this modern world so blinded by its individualistic obsessions of a healthy body. ‘Man is mortal by his fears, and immortal by his desires’, said Pythagoras. And if we only grow old when we abandon our ideals, it means I’ll never grow old (though I will probably die of old age).
Of course: these thoughts are decontextualised in a mere blog post rather than in an intelligible autobiography. Except for Benjamin, I know that not many are interested in my work on the psychological trauma caused by parental betrayal. But if anyone has questions, although I don’t have the space I have in a trilogy of more than 1,800 pages, I will try to answer them.
______ 卐 ______
Update of 10:30 a.m.
Since I wrote the above post yesterday almost at midnight, I forgot to say the essential.
The fact is that the aberrant custom of the modern world of sending our grandmas to the nursing home results in their grandchildren not having what Alice Miller called ‘helping witnesses’, that is, a friendly ear for the child in families where the parents begin to assault one of them.
The balance that a granny represents in an extended family is fundamental for the mental health of the offspring, and that is cancelled out in the nuclear family that believes in nursing homes.
It is only just becoming fashionable to talk about Family Systems, but it seems clear to me that we should also study the so-called Blue Zones. (People in Blue Zones areas have a diet that is 95% plant-based. Fruits, vegetables, beans, tofu, lentils, nuts, and seeds are rich with disease-fighting nutrients and are the cornerstone of their diets.)
These people live longer, and some even reach centenarians, because they live as extended families where, feeling important, grandmas don’t become as senile as in the West, as they help raise the new generations.
Everything is interrelated: healthy diet and healthy—rural—lifestyles, plus a healthy extended family of the same ethnic group: the exact opposite of Dorian Gray’s lifestyle (I read Oscar Wilde’s novel in 1995, when I was much younger).
None of this, which is vital, I said yesterday because I repeat I wrote it tired at midnight.
For the context of these translations click here.
PDFs of entries 1-183 (several of Karlheinz Deschner’s
books abridged into two) can be read here and here.
The Martyrdom of St Emmeram.
St Emmeram or ‘Praising God without tongues’
Emmeram, a rather mysterious bishop and martyr (difficult to say which he was less, if he was both) from the late 7th century, was accused of seducing the pregnant duke’s daughter Uta. In the days of the Bavarian prince Theodo, he was charged with luring the pregnant duke’s daughter Uta and then slain by her brother Lantpert on his way to Rome in Helfendorf (now Kleinhelfendorf, Upper Bavaria). The legend panels of the local chapel of martyrdom have immortalised the ‘event’ in pictures and verse:
O cruelty of torment and agony,
So Emmeram suffered,
His gliders were all and all cut away from the body,
The hands and feet, even the fingers too,
were all chopped off,
Acquires thereby the kingdom of heaven…
When this was, if it was, is completely uncertain and disputed, like almost everything about this figure, his origins, his episcopal office, especially the reasons that led to his murder; perhaps, but this too is quite uncertain, 685. Did the ‘martyr’ fall as a representative of Frankish power in Bavaria, striving for independence? Did he win the palm of martyrdom as the seducer of the duke’s pregnant daughter? Or did he voluntarily take the guilt of seduction upon himself, as the pious version of his first hagiographer, Bishop Arbeo of Freising, implies in his Vita Haimhrammi, but ‘probably only according to the embellishing romantic folk tale’, according to the Catholic Kirchen-Lexikon which adds, moreover, ‘which contradicts his narrative’.
Bishop Arbeo only wrote his opus in 772 and apparently for quite selfish reasons, namely, according to the Catholic Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche in 1931 (which in its latest edition of 1995 no longer mentions the ‘martyr’ at all), ‘primarily in the interest of the places of Emmeram´s veneration in his diocese’. And Bishop Arbeo, from the noble house of the Huosi, who was able to occupy the Freising bishop’s see several times, was a very enterprising prelate who was able to expand the possessions and rights of his diocese. However, almost all popular Catholic portrayals spread a more rather than less gruesome kitsch, as is appropriate for Arbeo’s supernatural exploits. After Uta’s brother has chased after the departed ‘saint’, he dies like a great Christian blood witness. Duke’s son Lantpert has hired ‘five butchers who will chop the haggard man’s corpse to pieces from vein to vein, from limb to limb’. And while he is horribly mutilated, his eyes torn out, noses and ears cut off, hands, feet and the (of course only supposedly) unchaste member, he thanks God ‘with great devotion’ for the marvellous ordeal.
Of course, Emmeram’s veneration as a saint only began decades after his death, but then accompanied by the most beautiful miracles, healings of the sick, and exorcisms of devils, not to mention Arnulf of Carinthia, East Frankish king and emperor of the last punitive miracles (because the Regensburg bishops repeatedly encroached on his ever-growing property. Even serfs were later given to the saint).
The glorious cult, revitalised in the 17th century, spread beyond Bavaria in the early Middle Ages. Under the East Frankish Carolingians, however, Emmeram achieved his greatest importance as a tribal saint, and under Arnulf he became the personal patron of the emperor, helping him in battle against the Moravians. The ruler believed that he alone was to thank for his rescue from mortal danger during the campaign against Swatopluk in 893, which is why he richly endowed the Bavarian monasteries, especially St Emmeram, which received all the jewellery of his palace, and in 899 his body no longer had its place in the Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 1995: the entire article on the monastery ‘St Emmeram’, which in 1931 was twice as long as the one on the saint himself, has now been omitted.
However, the monks of Emmeram honoured the memory of their benefactor by celebrating a solemn office every year on the anniversary of his death and by making up and forging documents in his name throughout the year, such as the one claiming that he had bequeathed them the entire Neustadt. In the face of all these scams, even ‘the actual patron saint of the monastery, Emmeram, receded into the background for a long time’ (Babl). Nevertheless, he lives on in the Kleinhelfendorf legends and not only there:
Praising God without tongue, power yes wonder.
The godless Rott could no longer live that
he now always praises God,
Thuet cut off his tongue.
But he still praises God,
burdening us with praise for this miracle,
As if the tongue were on the old ear,
Asking nothing of Wüttrich’s raving.
