web analytics
Categories
Psychology

Hamelin’s lemmings

Last month I wrote ‘William James’ principle’, that the deepest principle in human nature is the absolute need to be appreciated:

The phenomenon of groupthink has always intrigued me…

In groupthink what counts is how we place ourselves internally before the opinion of others…

Behind the groupthink is the great finding of William James, ‘The deepest principle in human nature is the craving to be appreciated’. It is this principle that moves whites to the phenomenon of virtue signalling: if I join the ethos of the masses, I will be appreciated, even if it is a suicidal ethos…

If we begin to know ourselves, as the oracle of Delphi advised, it is possible to start the exit from this folie en masse that whites currently suffer. We should not mind ‘being appreciated’ but speak out like the child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretence.

The last phrase was an allusion to Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes. When I wrote the article quoting James, I ignored the genetic whys of the above phenomenon. Recently, I discovered that, for the old white psyche in winter, if you were not appreciated, it meant certain death. Just picture yourself as living in one of the prehistoric Ice Ages when Nordic whites were struggling for elemental survival. Not falling from the grace of the tribe must have been engraved with incandescent neon letters in the Nordic mind.

Now everything makes sense! Nutty whites are following the Judeo-liberal Pied Piper of Hamelin, even toward the precipice, because they are afraid of losing the love of their tribe. Of course: only the ignoble, the lemmings, follow the piper, which brings me to Andrew Hamilton’s most important piece of writing ever published, ‘Flawed Racism’, excerpted below:

The mass media and state-controlled education [the Piper of Hamelin] have displaced the family in the formation and transmission of attitudes, beliefs, behavior, and culture. In addition, the mass media winnows candidates for public office at every level, thereby exerting effective control over the (formerly) democratic political process.

There are many unexplored reasons why TV, movies, video games, pop music, and other forms of media exercise such tremendous influence over our ideas and behavior. A “simple” one, I believe, is the (literal) hypnotic effect they have on us.

The Jews, as William Pierce recognized, control the mass media of news and entertainment (which he invariably denominated the “controlled media”). There is perhaps no other truism of modern life that he emphasized so repeatedly. It is somewhat surprising, therefore, that he never developed, or at least never publicly articulated, a theory of media control, or analyzed the nexus between media messages and human psychology and behavior. Instead, he stated his case axiomatically:

By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by parents, schools, or any other influence… To permit the Jews, with their 3000-year history of nation-wrecking, from ancient Egypt to Russia, to hold such power over us is tantamount to race suicide…

William Pierce also taught that the vast majority of whites are neither good nor evil; they will think and behave in whatever manner the powers that be direct them to. Most people that is, will conform and obey, no matter what. (Pierce called them “lemmings.”)

Only a tiny handful, he said, are truly good or evil—he estimated 1 to 3 percent in either direction. For some reason he believed the number of “good” people, though exceedingly small, was roughly double the number of intrinsically bad people.

My own inclination is perhaps closer to the Christian belief that humans are afflicted with original sin, and can only be saved (become good) through a process of change and redemption.

What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good.

Nevertheless, people’s beliefs and behaviors can change radically. Change (for the worse) during my lifetime has been massive. Of course, it is easier to destroy than to build.

Unfortunately, if Pierce’s assumptions are correct—and, apart from his optimistic overestimation of the number of good to evil people, they appear to be—then it is comparatively easy with modern technology and dedicated ruthlessness for a small, domineering elite to continuously identify and destroy the tiny handful of good people on the margin, as they did under Communism and have continued to do in the post-WWII era.

As a result, whites opposed to genocide or totalitarianism have failed to gain any traction.

‘What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good’, wrote Hamilton.

Right after he published his piece in November of 2012 I wrote that it could be summarized with the thought that humans, including the overwhelming majority of whites who behave like lemmings, are not really good.

Categories
Videos

Check, Stefan – your move

A JFG review of contradictory statements made
by Stefan Molyneux about his Jewish heritage:

https://youtu.be/M8ul4429H84

Categories
Christendom Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books)

Christianity’s Criminal History, 105


 Editors’ note: To contextualise these translations of Karlheinz Deschner’s encyclopaedic history of the Church in 10-volumes, Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums, read the abridged translation of Volume I.
 

The hostility to the classic culture of the first Greco-Christian writers

We already showed above how decidedly, with what resolutely rude expressions, Tatian, the ‘philosopher of the barbarians’, the self-proclaimed Herald of Truth, about the year 172 and against everything that had rank and renown in Greco-Roman culture vilified philosophy, poetry, rhetoric and the school.

The writer Hermas inserts at the very beginning of his jibe of the non-Christian philosophers the words of Paul, ‘The wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God’ without allowing another truth to prevail than that of the Gospel. In a rather coarse way, ignorant of any deep and superficial sense, Hermas describes philosophy as ‘lacking in foundation and utility’, of ‘pure adventurous, absurd, chimerical and abstruse speculation’, even though he only knows his victims through mere readings of compendiums.

The same with the majority of Christian authors. Ignatius of Antioch, a fanatical adversary of Christians from other orientations to his (‘beasts with human figure’) and first in using the term ‘catholic’, repudiates almost the entire teaching school, and any contact with Greco-Roman literature, which he apostrophises as ‘ignorance’, ‘foolishness’, its representatives being ‘rather lawyers of death than of truth’. And while he affirms that ‘the end of time has come’, ‘nothing of what is visible here is good’ and sarcastically asks, ‘where is the boasting of those who are called wise?’, he affirms that Christianity has overcome all this and has ‘eradicated ignorance’. He is considered ‘one of the great peaks of early Christian literature’ (Bardenhewer).

Towards 180, Bishop Theophilus of Antioch decrees in his three books Apologia ad Autolycum (Apology to Autolycus) that all the philosophy and art, mythology and historiography of the Greeks are despicable, contradictory and immoral. Moreover, he rejects in principle all worldly knowledge and refers to the Old Testament praiseworthy, ‘lacking in science, shepherds and uneducated people’. Incidentally, Theophilus, who did not become a Christian and a bishop until he was an adult, owed his education to the classical world. That world whose representatives, of course, ‘have raised and continue to falsely pose the questions when, instead of speaking of God, they do it about vain and useless things’; authors who, not possessing ‘an iota of truth’ are all of them possessed by evil spirits. It is evident, then, that ‘all others are in error and that only Christians possess the truth, having been indoctrinated by the Holy Spirit, who spoke through the prophets and announced everything in advance’.

Apart from Tatian, Ignatius and Theophilus of Antioch, also Polycarp and the Didache radically repudiate ancient literature. The Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Letter of Barnabas and the Letters to Diognetus do not mention it. The Syrian Didascalia (complete title: Catholic Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles and Holy Disciples of our Redeemer), falsified by a bishop, says: ‘Get away from all the writings of the pagans, for what have you to do with foreign words and laws?… What do you miss in the word of God, that you throw yourself to devour those stories by pagans?’

Only the Father of the Church Irenaeus and the ‘heretic’ Origen, among Christians who write in Greek during the first centuries, lend almost full recognition to all branches of knowledge. However, Irenaeus disapproves almost the totality of Greek philosophy, to which he does not grant a single true knowledge. And Origen, who precisely makes very wide use of it, rejects the rhetoric as useless. All the Greco-Christian writers agree, however, on one point: all place the New Testament far above all the literature of Antiquity.

David Duke’s impassioned speech yesterday

In my yesterday’s post I embedded this YouTube clip featuring notable pro-whites discussing the Midterms. I watched most of it and it was fun, especially when James Edwards proposed that Richard Spencer ran for president with him, and Spencer agreed.

Those who have not heard about the Jewish Question should listen to David Duke’s impassioned speech during the show (it is a 6-hour show so you can skip the rest).

Unlike the others, Duke is right that we must constantly name the enemy (toxic Jewish influence in the West). He said ‘This is the fundamental issue why we are in this position’. He also said ‘I am Christian’. But as a Christian, he completely omits a fact that non-Christians like Tom Sunic can see: that the sort of Puritanical Christianity that conquered the northeastern part of the American continent, together with their Mammon worship, was sympathetic to Jewish takeover.

Duke also said, ‘Only when (((they))) are defeated are we able to make the gains that we have to save our people’. But perhaps having in mind the recent Pittsburgh massacre he added that this sort of action ‘is evil or wrong’. As a good Christian, he also said on this topic, ‘…hurt all Jews—I don’t believe we have to hurt anybody’. Later he said, ‘All [races and cultures] have the rights to create their own society’ and by the end of the show Duke recommended pro-whites to do something inside the Republican Party.

Although I liked Duke’s interventions the most compared with the other voices on yesterday’s show, the difference between he and Hitler cannot be more conspicuous. I recommend those who want to see how should a real white advocate think to become familiar with Hitler’s table talk on Christianity.

Categories
Democracy Videos

Mere reactionaries

The fact that white nationalists and southern nationalists are voting (and that former neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer recommends voting) demonstrates that they merely are reactionaries, not revolutionaries. In a few minutes the #212 show of The Public Space will start. Election night will be the subject of that show featuring Duke, Spencer, Collett, Edwards, Striker, RamZPaul and others.

https://youtu.be/nwft5009EzU

I doubt that any of them will start talking like a true revolutionary, which makes me think, Who beside me has included these folks within the NPC category? Or do you honestly believe that non-violent democracy will save the white race from the current extermination program?

Categories
Hate Racial right Sponsor

Writing is not for me

These days I’ve been fantasizing what I would do if I had the means to do it. I would reduce the entries of this blog to a minimum and hire a secretary to continue with the translations of Deschner.

Since as a child I wanted to be a film director, the most natural thing for me would be to have a Crossfire program inspired in that TV program of the 1980s, when Pat Buchanan argued with a liberal and I saw them in my job in Novato, California.

It is natural that the massive hits are on YouTube of the Alt-Lite (for example, Molyneux) and the Alt-Right (Gariépy) more than on websites and blogs. We can imagine the number of hits that a daily crossfire encounter, from Monday to Saturday, would get featuring two of the most radical voices of The West’s Darkest Hour.

In addition to that audiovisual program, I would like to visit all the Western countries that are receiving massive migration. In a white area I would have a picket on the street, ‘I am a Tourist, Speak to me in English’.

I confess that I have the obsession to answer a question that I am unable to answer in this blog. In Europe and North America, Australia and New Zealand, I would interview only Aryan males. After the usual courtesies I would ask the direct question, ‘Do you hate the culture that is exterminating your race?’

Recently in the comments section of this blog a British nationalist declared that it was difficult to hate. As it happened to me when I met the people of the London Forum, all the English people left me perplexed. The most natural thing is hatred when there is an explicit extermination program, to the extent of putting images of mixed couples everywhere in the largest city of Europe. And the nationalists don’t hate? Why…?

Sometimes I wonder if the people I know are not NPCs and I am alone in a virtual world to which I have been punished, a kind of solipsism.

Why white men do not hate with their entire mind, with all their body, with all their soul and all their heart (the reversal of Jesus’ commandments)? Who don’t they see the sin against the Holy Spirit of life everywhere (Aryan women with blacks)?

Let’s put it bluntly: As a mudblood myself I don’t get white people. I do not know what they have in their heads.

If I had power, you know what I would do: you only have to see the central chapter of my book Day of Wrath to find out. But apparently, not even white nationalists hate. They look like NPCs in a virtual game that only torments me.

But as a therapy, if I had the means, I would make that trip to interview as many Aryan men as I could and transmit my elemental hatred (and my state of absolute astonishment and perplexity that my interlocutor did not feel exactly the same).

What are their reasons? A whole race is being exterminated and goes to the streets as if nothing? And why don’t even white nationalists hate like me? It would be great to interview them too, at least the best known.

I do not want to reach a premature conclusion. But my working hypothesis is that they do not hate because the Jew told them not to hate, and the white nationalists obey the Jew, even the atheists. Maybe there is another explanation and that would be the goal of my hundreds of interviews. I wonder if in Germany or Austria it would be illegal to ask this type of question to the Aryans who pass by the street and see my picket ‘I am a Tourist, Speak to me in English’.

On the other side of the Atlantic I cannot imagine what would happen when I interviewed the white nationalists who send money, say, to a Greg Johnson. ‘Do you really believe that Batman’s essays will save the race?’, I would ask. ‘Why, instead of reading Johnson’s webzine, you have not become an idolater of The Turner Diaries, to the extent of spreading the novel everywhere?’, I would ask.

How interesting it would be, in my program, to be able to interview Richard Spencer, who recently expressed himself against the Diaries. I would let him know that throughout Latin America the mestizos and the few remaining Creoles are like little Jews who do not give a damn about the fact that Nordish whites are dying out. (Interestingly, the pure Indians I know do not hate the gringos.) I would ask Spencer why he hates the Diaries when the feeling of unconditional love for the Other is not reciprocal. Non-reciprocity is a phenomenon that can be observed not only in Latin America but also in North America. What would the atheist Spencer say? That we must love them even though they don’t give a damn about white extinction, and many even celebrate it?

I am a creature of pure hatred. I doubt very much that any of the interviewees could dissuade me from my exterminationist ideology. But at least the torment of solipsism, of feeling that they are all NPCs in a virtual game that only torments me, would begin to dissipate throughout the interviews.

Categories
Feminism Jane Austen Roger Devlin Women

On banning feminists

Last Wednesday I explained my reasons why those who cry ‘Jew!’ while losing an argument should be banned on this site. Now I would say the same about ethno-suicidal feminists. Simon Elliot (pic: here) for one did not cry ‘Jew!’ certainly, but he told me:

Men usually like it when women are attractive, and since you don’t, and you *claim* not to be an old testament fanatic, the only conclusion I’m left with is that you must be a homosexual. I see no other explanation.

All false. I do like attractive women and I’m not a homo. But I am not banning Simon for that comment, who by the way uses the avatar of a girl in his Twitter account (this one). I am banning him because his feminist ideology is destroying in his country what I care the most: Lane’s 14 words. This for example was his very last comment on this site:

You are clearly in agreement with Anglin, that repulsive little gremlin, when it comes to women. The consensus here is clear. Unless they’re pumping out babies to be used as cannon fodder in your race war, they’re worthless whores who may as well drop dead. So much for your love of English roses. You will destroy them if you arrange for them to reproduce with hyper-masculine males. I warned you of that, and you can resent it all you want, but it remains true. Genetics is a bitch.

I will leave others to respond to that.

Tonight I am watching how nasty British feminists are (‘Jordan Peterson destroyed by feminist NPC | Facts and logic not even needed, TPS #209’). Simon is a typical feminist Briton. Ever since our initial interactions he confessed he hates Roger Devlin. (Unlike the troll Anglin whose style I happen to like, Dr. Devlin uses an academic prose in his scholarly papers against feminism.)

pride-and-prejudice 2005 filmI am now closing the thread where Simon made his last comment. Contra him and other ethno-suicidal Britons, I would say that if our civilization is under the grip of liberal mores, especially the belief that non-discrimination on race and gender is the highest moral value, when values are transvalued back to Austen mores our women will be having six or more kids.

If whites are to survive as a people the vagina gentium must be reopened, whether our spoiled women, or feminized Britons, like it or not.

Categories
Julian (novel) Literature

Julian, 46

Julian presiding at a conference of Sectarians
(Edward Armitage, 1875)

 
As I stood there looking up at the tarry shields, a youth approached me. He was bearded; his clothes were dirty; he wore a student’s cloak and he looked a typical New Cynic of the sort I deplore. I have recently written at considerable length about these vagabonds. In the last few years the philosophy of Crates and Zeno has been taken over by idlers who, though they have no interest in philosophy, deliberately imitate the Cynics in such externals as not cutting their hair or beards, carrying sticks and wallets, and begging. But where the original Cynics despised wealth, sought virtue, questioned all things in order to find what was true, these imitators mock all things, including the true, using the mask of philosophy to disguise licence and irresponsibility. Nowadays, any young man who does not choose to study or to work grows a beard, insults the gods, and calls himself Cynic. No wonder philosophy has earned the contempt of so many in this unhappy age.

Without ceremony, the New Cynic pointed at the wall. “That is Aeschylus,” he said. I looked politely at the painting of a bearded soldier, no different from the others except for the famous name written above his head. The playwright is shown engaged in combat with a Persian. But though he is fighting for his life, his sombre face is turned towards us, as though to say: I know that I am immortal!

“The painter was self-conscious,” I said neutrally, fully expecting to be asked for money and ready not to give it.

The Cynic grinned at me. Apparently he chose to regard neutrality as friendship. He tapped the painting. A flake of paint zigzagged to the ground. “One day the whole thing will disappear and then who will know what Marathon was like, when this picture’s gone?” As he spoke, something stirred in my memory. I recognized the voice. Yet the face was completely strange to me. Confident now that we were friends, he turned from the painting to me. Had I just arrived in Athens? Yes. Was I a student? Yes. Was I a Cynic? No. Well, there was no cause to be so emphatic (smiling). He himself dressed as a Cynic only because he was poor. By the time this startling news had been revealed to me, we had climbed the steps to the temple of Hephaestos. Here the view of the agora is wide and elegant. In the clear noon light one could see beyond the city to the dark small windows of those houses which cluster at the foot of Hymettos.

“Beautiful,” said my companion, making even that simple word sound ambiguous. “Though beauty…”

“Is absolute,” I said firmly. Then to forestall Cynic chatter, I turned abruptly into the desolate garden of the temple. The place was overrun with weeds, while the temple itself was shabby and sad. But at least the Galileans have not turned it into a charnel house. Far better that a temple fall in ruins than be so desecrated. Better of course that it be restored.

My companion asked if I was hungry. I said no, which he took as yes (he tended not to listen to answers). He suggested we visit a tavern in the quarter just back of the temple. It was, he assured me, a place much frequented by students of the “better” sort. He was sure that I would enjoy it. Amused by his effrontery (and still intrigued by that voice which haunted me), I accompanied him through the narrow hot streets of the near by quarter of the smiths, whose shops glowed blue as they hammered out metal in a blaring racket: metal struck metal in a swarm of sparks, like comets’ tails.

The tavern was a low building with a sagging roof from which too many tiles had been removed by time and weather. I bent low to enter the main door. I was also forced to stoop inside, for the ceiling was too low for me and the beams were haphazard, even dangerous in the dim light. My companion had no difficulty standing straight. I winced at the heavy odour of rancid oil burning in pots on the stove.

Two trestle tables with benches filled the room. A dozen youths sat together close to the back door, which opened on to a dismal courtyard containing a dead olive tree which looked as though it had been sketched in silver on the whitewashed wall behind it.

My companion knew most of the other students. All were New Cynics, bearded, loud, disdainful, unread. They greeted us with cheerful obscenities. I felt uncomfortable but was determined to go through with my adventure. After all, this was what I had dreamed of. To be just one among many, even among New Cynics. The moment was unique, or so I thought. When asked who I was, they were told “Not a Cynic.” They laughed good-humouredly. But then when they heard I was new to Athens, each made an effort to get me to attend lectures with his teacher. My companion rescued me. “He is already taken. He studies with Prohaeresius.” I was surprised, for I had said nothing to my guide about Prohaeresius, and yet Prohaeresius was indeed the teacher of my choice. How did he know?

“I know all about you,” he said mysteriously. “I read minds, tell fortunes.” He was interrupted by one of the youths, who suggested that I shave my beard since otherwise I might be mistaken for a New Cynic and give them a bad name by my good behaviour. This was considered witty in that room. Others debated whether or not I should be carried off to the baths to be scrubbed, the traditional hazing for new students, and one which I had every intention of avoiding. If necessary, I would invoke lèse majesté!

But my guardian shoved the students away and sat me down at the opposite table close to the courtyard door, for which I was grateful. I am not particularly sensitive to odours, but on a blazing hot day the odour of unwashed students combined with thick smoke from old burning oil was almost too much for me. The tavern-keeper, making sure I had money (apparently my companion was deep in his debt), brought us cheese, bitter olives, old bread, sour wine. To my surprise, I was hungry. I ate quickly, without tasting. Suddenly I paused, aware that I was being stared at. I looked across the table at my companion. Yes?

“You have forgotten me, haven’t you, Julian?”

Then I identified the familiar voice. I recognized Gregory of Nazianzus. We had been together at Pergamon. I burst out laughing and shook his hand. “How did such a dedicated Christian become a New Cynic?”

“Poverty, plain poverty.” Gregory indicated the torn and dirty cloak, the unkempt beard. “And protection.” He lowered his voice, indicating the students at the other table. “Christians are outnumbered in Athens. It’s a detestable city. There is no faith, only argument and atheism.”

“Then why are you here?”

He sighed. “The best teachers are here, the best instructors in rhetoric. Also, it is good to know the enemy, to be able to fight him with his own weapons.”

I nodded and pretended agreement. I was not very brave in those days. But even though I could never be candid with Gregory, he was an amusing companion. He was as devoted to the Galilian nonsense as I was to the truth. I attributed this to his unfortunate childhood. His family are Cappadocian. They live in a small town some fifty miles south-west of Caesarea, the provincial capital. His mother was a most strong-willed woman named… I cannot recall her name but I did meet her once a few years ago, and a most formidable creature she was. Passionate and proud and perfectly intolerant of everything not Galilean.

Gregory’s father was part Jew and part Greek. As a result of his wife’s relentless admonitions, he succumbed finally to the Galilean religion. According to Gregory, when his father was splashed with water by the bishop of Nazianzus, a great nimbus shone all round the convert. The bishop was so moved that he declared, “Here is my successor!” A most generous-minded man, that bishop! Most of us prefer not to name our successor. In due course, Gregory’s father became bishop of Nazianzus. So his predecessor had the gift of prophecy, if nothing else.

All in a rush Gregory was telling me of himself. “… a terrible trip, by sea. Just before we got to Aegina, the storm struck us. I was sure the ship would sink. I was terrified. I’d never been (I still am not) baptized. So if I died like that at sea… Well, you must know yourself what I went through.” He looked at me sharply. “Are you baptized?”

I said that I had been baptized as a child. I looked as reverent as possible when I said this.

“I prayed and prayed. Finally I fell asleep, exhausted. We all did. I dreamed that something loathsome, some sort of Fury, had come to take me to hell. Meanwhile, one of the cabin boys, a boy from Nazianzus, was dreaming that he saw—now this is really a miracle—Mother walking upon the water.”

“His mother or your mother or the mother of Jesus?” I am afraid that I asked this out of mischief. I couldn’t help myself.

But Gregory took the question straight. “My mother,” he said. “The boy knew her, and there she was walking across that raging sea. Then she took the ship by its prow and drew it after her to a safe harbour. Which is exactly what happened. That very night the storm stopped. A Phoenician ship found us and towed us into the harbour of Rhodes.” He sat back in triumph. “What do you think of that?”

“Your mother is a remarkable woman,” I said accurately. Gregory agreed and talked at enthusiastic length about that stern virago. Then he told me of his adventures in Athens, of his poverty (this was a hint which I took: I gave him a good deal of money during the course of my stay), of our friend Basil who was also in Athens and was, I suspect, the reason for Gregory’s attendance at the University. Wherever Basil went, Gregory followed. At Athens they were nicknamed “the Twins”.

“I am expecting Basil now. We’re both due at Prohaeresius’s house this afternoon. We’ll take you. You know we live together here. We study together. We argue almost as a team against the local Sophists. And we usually win.”

This was true. Both he and Basil were—are—eloquent. I deplore of course the uses to which their eloquence is put. Today they are most active as Galilean apologists, and I often wonder what they think of their old companion who governs the state. Nothing good, I fear. When I became emperor I asked them both to visit me at Constantinople. Gregory agreed to come, but never did. Basil refused. Of the two, I prefer Basil. He is plain, like me. He is misguided in his beliefs but honest. I suspect Gregory of self-seeking.

Categories
Manosphere Sex

Yoga shooter was an incel revolutionary

by Andrew Anglin

Editor’s note:

On Friday, a 40-year-old man shot and killed two people and wounded five others at a Tallahassee yoga studio before turning his handgun on himself.

 
Incels [involuntary celibates] are deserving of pity, and no one is giving it to them. Instead, they are called losers and creeps, and told that their oppression is their own fault.

Historically, every man other than the very bottom of the gene pool got laid, because we enforced strict rules against sluts. In the modern age, we have no rules enforced against sluts—instead we have the opposite: we have rules enforced to protect and comfort sluts, to enable them to maximize their whoring beyond levels you can even begin to imagine.

And yet somehow, we are supposed to be shocked that some guys lose their nerve and can’t take it anymore and shoot-up a yoga studio?

Well, apparently, the chickens have come home to roost. The incel rebellion is in full-swing.

The way to stop this is easy: you bring back traditional sexual standards. But there is no will to do that, because the Jews want white women to be whores fucking niggers.

I obviously do not support or encourage anyone to shoot up yoga studios, and in fact think this is very ungood. But you cannot expect it to not happen. It is the direct consequence of the actions of the Jews in “liberating” women to be completely godless whores.

It’s all very sad.

Categories
Alexandria Art Christendom Darkening Age (book) Evil

Darkening Age, 14

In chapter eight of The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World, Catherine Nixey wrote:
 
Further south, the firebrand preacher John Chrysostom—John ‘Goldenmouth’—weighed in. This man was so charismatic that crowds of Christians would pack into Antioch’s Great Church to hear him speak, his eyes flashing, then leave as soon as he was finished, ‘as if’, he observed, with a distinct want of monkish humility, ‘I were a concert performance.’ Chrysostom was nothing if not zealous.

Hearing that Phoenicia was still ‘suffering from the madness of the demons’ rites’, he sent violent bands of monks, funded by the faithful women in his congregation, to destroy the shrines in the area. ‘Thus,’ concludes the historian Theodoret, ‘the remaining shrines of the demons were utterly destroyed.’ A papyrus fragment shows Bishop Theophilus standing triumphantly over an image of Serapis, Bible in hand, while on the right-hand side monks can be seen attacking the temple. St Benedict, St Martin, St John Chrysostom; the men leading these campaigns of violence were not embarrassing eccentrics but men at the very heart of the Church.

Augustine evidently assumed his congregants would be taking part in the violence—and implied that they were right to do so: throwing down temples, idols and groves was, he said, no less than ‘clear proof of our not honouring, but rather abhorring, these things’. Such destruction, he reminded his flock, was the express commandment of God. In AD 401, Augustine told Christians in Carthage to smash pagan objects because, he said, that was what God wanted and commanded. It has been said that sixty died in riots inflamed by this burst of oratorical fire. A little earlier a congregation of Augustine’s, eager to sack the temples of Carthage, had started reciting Psalm 83. ‘Let them be humiliated and be downcast forever,’ they chanted with grim significance. ‘Let them perish in disgrace.’

It is obvious that this violence was not only one’s Christian duty; it was also, for many; a thoroughly enjoyable way to spend an afternoon. Those carrying out the attacks sang as they smashed the ancient marble and roared with laughter as they destroyed statues. In Alexandria, ‘idolatrous’ images were taken from private houses and baths, then burned and mutilated in a jubilant public demonstration. Once the assault was complete, the Christians ‘all went off, praising God for the destruction of such error of demons and idolatry’.

Broken statues themselves were another cause for hilarity; their fragmented remains an occasion for ‘laughter and scorn’.