web analytics
Categories
David Irving Fair Race’s Darkest Hour (book) Final solution Heinrich Himmler Holocaust Turner Diaries (novel)

Strong meat

One of the advantages of rereading what one has written years ago is that the faults of the old manuscript become visible. Yesterday I reread my ‘Why I am not a neo-Nazi’ originally published in March of 2014, and I see that the text had an unnecessary tail in which I criticise Covington’s feminism, almost half of the original text.
But most of the article is redeemable and I will add it without the tail as the last essay of the 2018 edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour. The essay shows that my differences with white nationalists are inconceivably deeper than what a casual visitor of this site may surmise. They are Christians and atheist neo-Christians—all of them. Conversely, I am a true apostate of the religion of my parents, which means rejection not only of the theological side but of the axiological side as well. Pay special attention to the quotation of a Swede about the Holocaust in the text below.


Virtually all white males have been brainwashed about what really happened in the Second World War, and they have been feminized. Characterologically they are basically the antipodes of the Spartans, the Vikings or Himmler’s SS men. Even white nationalists are reluctant to repudiate the conquests of ‘feminism’, and by this I don’t only have in mind allowing women to vote (keep in mind the last paragraphs of Yockey’s essay), but allowing their ‘right’ to inherit wealth or property (also keep in mind what we said about Austen’s novels and the causes of Greco-Roman decline in Pierce’s long text).

The humiliating empowerment of white women throughout the West is directly proportionate to the cretinisation of white males. Now that I have reproduced my translations about the prime example of polar Yang in Aryan history, Sparta, I would like to qualify that what we need is Aristotle’s proverbial golden mean. Sparta produced the best soldiers in world history but perished because it ignored what we now know: that enslaving non-whites is fatal in the long run. What we need is the Hegelian synthesis between yang Sparta and yin Athens: a sort of modern Rome. That is exactly what National Socialism was all about. Inspired in Rome, and let us remember the virile Roman salute, the Third Reich incorporated and eliminated—Hegel’s aufheben—the contradictions in both extremes: it was highly cultured as well as a tough military state.
I consider myself a spiritual inheritor of the Nationalist Socialist legacy. But I reject neonazism. Why?
Because neonazis are basically white nationalists plus Nazi paraphernalia. We have already seen that, unlike the NS men, these groups love degenerate music, Judaized Hollywood and non-reproductive sex. Many of these décadents are also anti-Nordicists who would dismiss the command cited in the very first lesson of Stellrecht’s Faith and Action already quoted in previous pages: ‘But if your blood has traits that will make your children unhappy and burdens to the state, then you have the heroic duty to be the last’.
The surreal thing is that even the pure Aryans hate Nordicism. Conversely what I love about Himmler is that, precisely because he was not handsome, he admired the hyper-Nordics of a Norwegian town he visited and harboured the thought that its people could become a paradigm for the Reich. Remember Stubb’s words about white nationalists:

Not only does it [Nordicism in general and National Socialism in particular] retrigger all the anti-racist conditioning they thought they’d gotten rid of, but it makes them ask ‘where does it end?’ ‘At what point can we finally stop paying attention to each others genetic (and non-genetic) flaws?’
The answer is that it doesn’t end: that all life is struggle and hierarchy and that the Aryan race will never be perfected nor entirely freed from threats. But that’s not what they want to hear. Pierce made eugenics the core of his religious outlook as a means of protecting the eugenically-selecting society. But I see little concern for the subject among modern white nationalists. Can you imagine a racial state with a comprehensive eugenic policy which didn’t consider the reversal of mongrelisation to be a major objective? [Stellrecht’s ‘heroic’ advice] That it wouldn’t make its population look more like Swedes and less like Sicilians, as time goes on? It’s hard to do so, which is why I believe ‘anti-Nordicism’ in white nationalism has, among other things, shut down much of the discussion on the subject.

On September 2013, in Harold Covington’s Northwest Front blogsite, several commenters subscribed politically correctness by bashing Covington in order not to offend the feelings of contemporary Greeks. A saner Northwest Front commenter said, ‘Those among us who don’t have the ability to look at a picture of half-Turks and tell they’re not White weren’t ever going to amount to anything on behalf of the White race’. The other side, the ‘revolutionary’ neonazis, ignored that DNA tests have even revealed nigger genes among quite a few of the Portuguese; and we have already seen El Greco’s painting of crossbreed Spaniards as well as Pierce’s statement that ‘a 5 percent decline in average IQ would cause our civilization to collapse’, which applies to Sicily and Greece even before the Turkish invasion.
This cowardly lack of recognition of the very Letter A in Indo-European studies is not the only thing that annoys me about the embryonic movement known as white nationalism. Over the internet boards I find it bothersome when typical neonazis demand that I dismiss the Holocaust stories as hoax; and that if I fail to do it my morals are beyond the pale.
As someone who has spent many years studying controversial subjects (the pseudoscience in both parapsychology and biological psychiatry), I know perfectly that you must spend at least a decade of your life trying to digest the scholarly literature of both sides of an academic debate. I am in my fifties now and don’t have the time nor the motivation to research the Holocaust claims and counter-claims. For me it is enough to point out that two former Holocaust revisionists, Mark Weber, the director of the Institute of Historical Review, and David Irving, our best historian of the Third Reich, have changed their minds over the years, both accepting now that a few millions of Jews probably died during the war. Irving’s forthcoming book on Herr Himmler quotes historical records proving that, even though the six-million figure is an invention, a couple of millions of Jews probably died as a result of harsh Nazi treatments.

David Irving in 2012

But I would like to go beyond Irving’s scruples. Rephrasing a passage of Peter Helmkamp in Controlled Burn, Joseph Walsh commented in my blog: ‘The truth is that the glad stirrings of genocide lurk in the heart of every man, yet only the Nazis had the courage to acknowledge the truth’. Another commenter, a Swede, went even further:

What is certain is that the Holocaust would not have produced any debilitating psychological effect on non-Christian whites. (By Christianity I mean ‘Christian morality’. Most atheists in the West are still Christian, even if they don’t believe in God or Jesus.) Being emotionally affected by the Holocaust presupposes that you think:
1) Victims and losers have intrinsically more moral value than conquerors and winners
2) Killing is the most horrendous thing a human can do
3) Killing children and women is even more horrendous
4) Every human life has the same value
None of these statements ring true to a man who rejected Christian morality. In fact, even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathize with them. If you told the Vikings that they needed to accept Jews on their lands or give them gold coins because six million of them were exterminated in an obscure war, they would have laughed at you.

It must be comical for the Nietzscheans of the North that, unlike the monocausalism ubiquitously present in the neonazi and white nationalist movement, Himmler acknowledged other factors: ‘Our people’s thinking was misled by the forces of the Church, Liberalism, Bolshevism, and Jewry’. And let us never forget Hitler’s own words in one of his table talks: ‘The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity’. If neonazis were true Nazis and had transvalued Christian/Neo-Christian values they would be trying to demonstrate that Himmler’s Posen Speech in 1943 is genuine, not a hoax as they claim, and even find genocidal inspiration from the speech.
Of course: they will never do it because all of them are Neo-Christian pseudo-Nazis. Speaking with a little humour I would say that neonazis, white nationalists, and American southern nationalists subscribe what we may call the Harry Potter approach to the Jewish problem. Throughout those novels for children, the female author presents us a Harry who never uses ‘Avara Kadavra’, the killing spell against the bad guys; Harry only uses the disarming charm, ‘Expelliarmus’. But only in novels and movies for kids the good guys, who never are depicted as cold assassins, can win. In real life you have to make a transition to the dark side, to Himmler’s ways, to become a soldier.
I have read The Turner Diaries twice. When I read it for the first time, or rather listened the audio version with Pierce’s own voice, I was still struggling with the last remnants my Neo-Christian programming. I didn’t like the Breivik-like cruelties such as dispatching an entire group of pro-white warriors for not taking care of the Jewish problem in Toronto. And in the novel’s Day of the Rope I was troubled by the description that many innocent young whites also die. Then I read most of Covington’s Quintet and sensed a moral difference. Covington’s characters are not so bloodthirsty, not so genocidal exterminators. I could imagine myself doing the things in Covington’s novels but in the past some passages of the Diaries made me wonder…
But now that I have definitively left behind Christian ethics I can see that Pierce was ultimately right. As NS soldiers in the coming racial wars, altogether imbued in the martial qualities of gravitas and severitas, we must behave. The huge difference between the Quintet and the Diaries is that in Pierce’s world not only an ethno-state is born: in the final pages it is described that only the white race shall inherit the Earth. In Covington’s world that is dismissed because it would mean genocide on a scale not even performed by the Bolshevik Jews. But as Pierce said in Who We Are, already cited way above:

The hard lesson taught by the different results of the European colonization of North America, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, India, and southern Africa is that the only type of colonization with lasting significance is racial colonization; and that racial colonization can succeed only when Whites are willing and able to clear the land of non-White inhabitants and keep it clear.

This idea in both Who We Are and the Diaries is so strong meat that I will elaborate on it only in Day of Wrath, and in the autobiographical books in Spanish that I’ll write after the completion of the present one.

Categories
Asia Miscegenation Nordicism Racial studies Who We Are (book) William Pierce

Three-eyed raven, 5

Or:

Ethnosuicidal Spencer

 

The future 3-Eyed Raven
beside the Heart tree at Winterfell.

 
Generally white nationalists see me as a very rare fellow since, without being Aryan, I proclaim nordicism. They ignore that it is precisely because my ancestors lost their Aryan blood what motivates me to warn others not to lose it.
I’m not the weird one in promoting nordicism. They are the freaks. A reading of William Pierce’s book immediately uncovers the fact that over the millennia whites tried to preserve their race through a religion (as in India) or through a harsh political system based on iron laws (as in Sparta) or putting public notices so that the blacks did not pass from a certain geographic latitude (as in Egypt) or burning alive the Aryan that married a mudblood (as did the Visigoths in Spain before Christianity deceived them).
What is more, what is labelled ‘nordicism’ is, in fact, orthodoxy in racial studies from Gobineau and Chamberlain to Grant and Günther and the National Socialists. The latter, for example, took nordicism for granted to the extent that they prevented the Germans from marrying those Slavs whose bloodline was compromised (Richard Spencer did exactly the opposite in his personal life). Even today’s scholars share the nordicist premise (see, for example, Kevin MacDonald’s review of the book Raciology by Vladimir Avdeyev here or here).
Only in recent times, when in the mid-1990s the term white nationalism started to be used, its supporters wanted to make tabula rasa of the knowledge accumulated in the last centuries and tried to reinvent the wheel starting from scratch. Many of these people are so ignorant that they do not even want to read books: they just watch the news of what is happening in the world from the point of view of racist internet sites. Something as elementary as ordering Pierce’s book from Amazon Books and studying it is foreign to them in their superficial way of acting in the world.
Moreover, even the most educated white nationalists suffer from this problem. Like pedantic university students these nationalists quote charlatan Aleksandr Dugin, but at the same time they are incapable of recognizing elemental patterns in the history of the white race.
Yesterday evening, for example, I discovered an interview with Richard Spencer with a mongrel in which Spencer asserted that the ethnic state of his dreams could absorb mulattos and mestizos, as long as they believed in the Western cause!
Presumably Spencer would admit these mongrels, mestizos and mudbloods as ordinary citizens, who would have the right to marry whites. ‘Race is a big family’ Spencer said, in the sense that he is not ‘Puritan’ to the extent of rejecting black and Amerindian blood within the gene pool of the white state. Spencer added that the numbers of mongrels are very small although earlier in the interview the interviewer had released the data that interracial couples consist of 10 percent of the population.
In Who We Are Pierce wrote:

Before we deal with the next Indo-European peoples of the Classical Age—the Macedonians and the Romans—let us review briefly the history of our race to this point, and let us also look at the fate of some Indo-Europeans who, unlike those we have already studied, invaded Asia instead of Europe.

Pierce then explains how the ‘Indo-Europeans’, that is the Nordish peoples, conquered the Middle East but perished through racemixing precisely because they held the view that Spencer now holds. According to Pierce it happened to the Hittite Empire, the Persian Empire and in India. Unlike what Spencer and most white nationalists believe, ‘only total separation can preserve racial quality’.
My prediction is not only that white nationalists will continue with their ethnosuicidal ideology. They will continue to ignore the classics of racial studies whose names I cited above, even the American Madison Grant. In their pride they will continue to see themselves as superior to the nationalist socialists of the last century, when their inferiority is obvious.

Categories
WDH radio show

WDH Radio Show – Episode 5

Warning: The audio recording of this episode is poor

Crossing the Charlottesville Rubicon

— Listen to it here —
 
WDH hosts: Joseph Walsh and Jake F.
Special guest: Chris White

Though I, C.T., recorded this episode I chose not to participate.

Categories
2nd World War Deranged altruism Holocaust Kevin MacDonald

Carolyn on Kevin

In my previous post I wrote: ‘White nationalism is an impossible chimera between truths and lies, between courage and cowardice, light and darkness’. This abridged article by Carolyn Yeager on Kevin MacDonald supports my claim.
 

Kevin Macdonald recently participated in a videocast of “Torah Talk” with Luke Ford, a non-Jewish student of Torah and Talmud, and two young friends or students of his. It lasted one hour and 50 minutes and resulted in some interesting insights into Kevin’s limitations as a leading White Nationalist voice.

MacDonald was taken by surprise with the first question asked of him: What are your thoughts about holocaust revisionism?

Yeah, um, I guess I’m not, uh, I’ve never had any sympathy really, before—I, I haven’t seen, I haven’t seen anything that I would really, you know, convince me. And I have—frankly, I haven’t dealt into it very much. My view is that it’s not important for what I’m doing and I don’t think it’s really important—I, I think what’s really important is the culture of the holocaust, you know how it’s taught in school, how it’s used to defend Israel, and it’s used as a weapon against people who oppose immigration, and all those things—ah I think those are very important things to discuss. So whether it actually happened, exactly [slurs some words] and all that is something that I don’t think uh is possible to even go there anymore, is just… just uh… third rail.

Hey, wait a minute! Is this the reputedly brilliant professor of evolutionary psychology speaking??? This sounds not only downright dumb but also evasive as hell.

  • I’ve never had any sympathy
  • Never seen anything that convinced me
  • Don’t think it’s really important
  • Haven’t dealt into it very much (weakening the above three comments, if not nullifying them altogether)
  • Not possible to “go there anymore”

Not possible to go there anymore? But then he adds… “third rail.” He should have added the word “comfortably”—it’s not possible to go there comfortably, without putting oneself at risk. By that he signals premature defeat: The Jews have won on this and we have to allow them their victory. It’s too late to do anything about it. The price exacted is too high. By calling it “third rail” he’s dubbing it too dangerous, too highly charged for any sensible man to approach.

Are these brave men or foolish men? Kevin clearly considers them foolish, and maybe not too bright. He’s saying that what he’s doing is important but what they’re doing is not important.

  • What’s really important is the culture of the Holocaust

But wait a minute! If the Holocaust didn’t happen, how can a “culture” of it exist? Or the trappings of such a culture be justified? So he obviously thinks the Holocaust did happen, or believes he must accept that presumption, but doesn’t want to come right out and say so. Because? Because so many listening to him would argue with him about it.

I’m afraid we have caught our evolutionary psychologist in a posture of dishonesty here. I know it has been our position to give Kevin a free pass on this subject, one that goes like this: He has shown so much courage in standing up to the accusations of antisemitism at his university; if he doesn’t want to get into even more trouble over “holocaust denial,” he certainly doesn’t have to. That was a position I myself took back when I had an Internet radio show on which he was a guest four times. I did not even bring it up.

But now he is retired and it is only his professional reputation at stake, not his job. And he is being asked these questions and he is answering them (see here). And I have revised my thinking about giving others so much leeway to think as they want about it. We need all hands on deck on this issue. In Kevin’s case though, I think it would be better were he to simply say, “I’ve made it my practice not to speak about this topic which I have not studied,” and leave it at that, rather than put forth uninformed opinions as he’s doing. Of course, that would be wimpy but at least not dishonest.

But perhaps he’s afraid that would cause his peers to suspect him of being a secret denier, which he clearly does not want. So instead he hems and haws around about “importance”—that the “culture of the Holocaust” has importance while the “happening of the Holocaust” doesn’t.

That’s an odd position. Maybe we can find some insight into his thought process in his answer to the next question asked him: What are your personal feelings toward Hitler?

Toward who? Oh God, I think that the only term I can use is a disaster. I think that his own personality—I just don’t know much about it but I think his own personality got in the way of them carrying out their strategic military [goals?] in World War Two. I think he was, you know, he thought of himself as a general or something. You know, he interfered with policy that should have been left to professionals and I think that that was a—you know, that was horrible, that was a disaster. There are a lot of other things, but uh, so I think that he is not the ideal person to be in that situation.

  • Hitler was a disaster
  • Don’t know much about it
  • Interfered with military policy

His reactions toward Hitler are more vehement than toward Holocaust. They reflect the standard Anglo narrative that Hitler bungled the war, that his generals despised him, he was a flawed personality who all by himself created the disaster that occurred in Germany. No fault is directed toward Jews, or the Allied collusion with Major Jewish Organizations, or the German traitors (including in the Wehrmacht) who conspired to defeat their own country and turn as many people as possible away from their leader. As MacDonald said, he doesn’t know much about it, but the “common American wisdom”, the national narrative, is good enough for him. But then he has a few second thoughts:

But you know, having said that, if you look at the old newsreels from 1930’s in Germany, you know, the people loved Hitler and he really managed to develop a sense of sort of a very unified, culturally unified nation. Uh, they were really on page with this, and I think that was an incredible accomplishment. It’s just unfortunate how they used it, what happened in the end. Just a disaster. I-I think that is the—the, uh, the result of the Second World War is uh has essentially given us the war that we’re in now. I think the triumph of the Left is the result of WWII. I think uh is also um critically important for the rise of Jewish influence. And that is what is now with us. And can’t be undone.

  • Hitler was loved by the people
  • Unified the nation
  • Incredible accomplishments
  • The war was a disaster

Amazing. Kevin goes from admiring how Hitler unified the nation, an incredible feat, directly to the misuse of it, though he doesn’t explain how they misused it. Apparently by going to war. As though Hitler could have avoided war, with Stalin plotting to his east and Roosevelt plotting from the west (see the Potoki Papers). For some reason (we know what it is), he accepts the non-mention of the Jews behind the scenes in all this. MacDonald’s simplified history credits the triumph of the Left and the rise of Jewish influence (which are one and the same) as being brought about by Hitler’s ‘disastrous’ war. Does he have any idea how strong the Left was in Germany when Hitler started? It was an actual revolution that resulted in a communist government for a time in Bavaria!

Jews were already in a strong position since WWI. So our Kevin is not much of an historian of this period and, here again, should be answering, “I don’t know.”

The final questions in this series are:

What kind of world do you think we would have if the Axis had won?

It’s impossible to know. I uh I just don know. If the Axis had won, if they crushed the Soviet Union and then occupied Britain, um there probably would have been a stand off at that point. And then I do think it would have been bad for the Jews, in Europe, if that had happened. But I don’t think Europe would be overrun as it is now with all these non-Whites. I think Europe would have remained a White, Christian-based civilization if that had happened. I—That’s my best guess.

  • Bad for Jews
  • Europe still a White, Christian-based civilization

It sounds like he wishes the Axis had won and now blames Hitler for failing to pull it off.

Do you think there is any hope for Europe at this point, or what do you think would have to happen to fix the situation?

For Europe? You’d have to have a complete change in mental outlook, uh you’d have to have the political will to do something. They could still do something but it’s getting, you know, they don’t and it just keeps getting worse and worse. And I think everybody go—you know, the popular opinion polls do reflect anxiety about it, concern, uh, and yet they can’t seem to vote in a government that will actually do something.

So until that happens… um… they could still do it, I mean the percentages of Muslims in France and the West German countries in Europe (sic) are still pretty small. They could do something. They could just deport. Really, I mean a lot of them have no right to be there. The so-called refugees, they can go back to wherever they came from. They can repatriate these people. It just takes a political will which they are a very long way from being there.

So until that happens, it’s just going to fester and there’s going to be more and more anxiety, and more and more disillusion with these elites… But, I’m amazed at the staying power of… it did look with Brexit, Trump victory and now… but then you see you’ve got the victory of Macron in France, so… and Wilders got defeated very badly in the Netherlands, the Swedish government doesn’t seem to be going away. It looks like Merkel’s going to win in Germany, so it doesn’t look (chuckles wryly) that anything’s really changed.

  • Need complete change in mental outlook
  • No mention of removing Jews
  • No political will even for removing Muslims
  • Voters falling short

Notice he doesn’t mention anything about Jews as a problem, only Muslims. Is that a problem with mental outlook? He said later in the program, speaking of white nationalists he approves of (like Jared Taylor)—when they get together they “don’t talk about gas chambers” (said somewhat sneeringly), they talk about white interests. Understand this as: We are not “disasters” like Hitler, who did have the political will to carry out an anti-Jewish policy. For them the Jews are here to stay because there’s no will to do anything about it. They’re grappling with the Muslims now. They can live with the Holocaust.

@40 min. participant Casey said: “I had to watch Schindler’s List in 8th grade, but that was it. But I got it—Hitler’s a bad guy.” His question: How to change education to give kids a more complete historical context, for example like what was happening in Weimar?

Kevin answers by shifting to Blacks and Slavery, away from holocaust.

@46 min. Luke Ford asks: A line from an article you published was “Jews are genetically driven to destroy Whites.” Is that a fair description?

Kevin: No, it’s not. I wrote a book called Culture of Critique—it’s about culture, not genetics. How they identify themselves, think about themselves. I would like to see a cultural shift.

Luke added: Andrew Joyce wrote in an essay published at TOO: “The Jews of the middle ages did no labor—almost all lived parasitically from money-lending.”

Kevin did defend this, but said, “I don’t use the word parasite… much… I don’t think you can use that word for American Jews.”

@1 hr 44 min. Kevin: “I don’t like people who have swastikas on their websites; identify with Nazism. It’s a non starter in American context. We have to be an American party, we have to be about white people, and we have to give up the sort of National Socialist idea of the past. Which was a disaster, partly of its own making. I don’t think it was well led. So we have to get away from them. It’s just bad PR.”

Kevin MacDonald tries to act casual when it comes up in interviews, but he is clearly not casual in his feelings about it. He is incredibly careful of leaving any opening for an association with him and Holocaust revisionism. By doing so, he helps the Jewish drive to keep Germans forever guilty of “unspeakable” and unnatural crimes, and unable to rise (“on their knees” as it’s been coined); which in turn helps the Jewish drive to wield their weapon of antisemitism against all Europeans; which in turn hinders all whites from feeling enough pride to defend their race because the one who is most famous for doing so is seen as a disaster to his race by his own people. But of course, Kevin would deny all this.

If Whites could stick together and work together on Holocaust revisionism, I believe success could be had. I don’t know of a single person who, willing to really look at the evidence and give it a chance, continued to believe the official narrative of the big H. It’s always a political decision to insist that it must have taken place because too much is a stake politically if it didn’t. The entire WWII global order would be shaken to its core. This is the position MacDonald is in, it seems to me, along with so many other White activists who say they put White survival and sovereignty first. They don’t. They are afraid some element in the social fabric that they don’t like will get control, and that bothers them more than giving control to the non-White. This is incredible but true.

During this program, Kevin spoke of how some anti-Jewish material he reads “makes him sick,” he didn’t want to think he played any part in encouraging it. However, he was quite easygoing when it came to the subject of Jewish behavior—no similar strong feelings emerged. He thought some Jews were aligned with White interests and could participate well in White societies. Clearly it is a matter of culture for him.

In closing, I have seen again and again that behind the reluctance to confront the Holocaust taboo lies the stronger fear of the Adolf Hitler taboo. Many truly believe the propaganda that Hitler was a disaster for Europe, thus to keep anyone like him from returning to power, Hitler must remain the one responsible for the horrible Holocaust and the Holocaust must remain real. What they don’t seem to consider is that as Germans disappear as a consequence, Europe will die along with them. Without a genuine Germany, there is no Europe.

Categories
2nd World War Holocaust Morgenthau Plan

Andy chats with Greggy

Today Andrew Anglin discussed with Greg Johnson on Tara McCarthy’s show. I heard the live show on YouTube but you can listen it on McCarthy’s BitChute account.

The amiable discussion between Johnson and Anglin shows once again what I have said: that white nationalism is very far from National Socialism. Even Anglin, who on The Daily Stormer has used Nazi paraphernalia, said that instead of swastikas in future rallies like Charlottesville it will be necessary to use ordinary American flags, not even the Confederate flag!

Anglin completely ignores that the double DNA helix that founded his country—capitalism and Christianity—are more serious factors of white decline than Jewish intrusion. It was precisely for a similar reason that Hitler had to reject the Weimar flag and devise another flag. If American white nationalists knew about the double helix (Murka was prewired to become New Zion) they would design a new Aryan flag that had nothing to do with horizontal stripes and pointed stars.

Unsurprisingly, Johnson went even further away from National Socialism than Anglin. He said: ‘Nothing that we do depends on what happened in 3rd Reich Germany’ and ‘I do not think we have to rehabilitate the Reich’.

Johnson also complained that Hitler had wanted to colonise the Slavs and Ukraine: ‘Their plans for the Slavic East were really genocidal and that’s immoral’. Johnson omits that the entire Soviet Union was Judaized under Stalin. To my way of thinking, as in William Pierce’s novel every white people who tolerates Judaization deserves to be mercilessly conquered by an Aryan empire (as the country where Johnson and Anglin were born is now Judaized).

Johnson also spoke of the ‘well defended set of taboos’ created by Jews and white traitors over Hitler’s Germany, and that these are ‘triggers they have planted on people’ so it is ‘foolish’ to use the example of Germany.

The terrifying error of this position is that Johnson doesn’t realise that what is happening today is neither more nor less than the expansion of the Morgenthau Plan to all whites! War is not only the physical fighting, but also taking over the official narrative. Tom Sunic himself has said that the Second World War has continued after 1945. Since the Morgenthau Plan not only continues but has metastized throughout Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, what happened in WW2 must be at the centre of our vision. From this angle, the worst omission in the cordial debate between Andy and Greggy was their deafening silence about the real Holocaust of Germans perpetrated by the Allies.

Regarding the holocaust of Jews, Anglin said ‘the holocaust is a religion’, the central religion of today, and that is the ‘basis of the idea that white people are not allowed to have their own country’. He added that ‘the holocaust is the framework’ on which the narrative of today rests. Johnson countered that revisionism over the Jewish holocaust is ‘a very hard sell’.

He is terribly wrong again! Nothing could be easier than pointing out the YouTube videos that show how the Jewish press was already doing propaganda to the figure of 6 million before 1942. The press even played with the figure of 6 million fearing that the Tsar’s pogroms were to kill that number of Jews! All that is very easy to see in the videos photographing old newspapers in close-up so that visitors can see the letters (see e.g., here).

Understand me well. If life permits, I will add more translated passages from Deschner’s Criminal History of Christianity because they show that the Imperial Church invented the vast majority of Christian martyrs allegedly martyred by pagans. The Imperial Church did this to make the supporters of Greco-Roman culture feel guilty and thus justify the destruction of their temples, libraries, sculptures… If the ancient Romans had known that the martyrology was fake news they would have had more weapons to resist the destruction of their civilisation.

In other words, those who actually perpetrated the conquest by the sword were the Christians, who blamed the pagans for their own crimes. Same thing about the Jewish holocaust. Those who actually perpetrated a German Holocaust were the Allies, who in turn blamed the Germans for their own crimes.

How Johnson and Anglin do not see something so obvious is only explicable if we give plausibility to my claim that white nationalism is an impossible chimera between truths and lies, between courage and cowardice, light and darkness. Johnson sincerely believes, in his most cordial discussion with Anglin, that a white takeover of his society without revisionism is possible. As I said, the pair did not even mention The Hellstorm: the atomic bomb that potentially could destroy the Judeo-liberal narrative because it goes straight to the emotions of the masses, who ignore what actually happened in the war.

The pair also spoke of Charlottesville, religion and spirituality but it is no longer necessary to follow them.

Categories
Eugenics

Eugenics and Race, 6

Clear thinking on Race and Eugenics? We suppose it is rather early to expect the uniformed and careless mass of mankind to accept such ideas. A number of our early forbears did practice a crude form of eugenics—the Spartans for one and the Indo-Aryans for another—and the agricultural revolution in eighteenth century Europe was based on ideas of selective breeding of both plants and animals, but the true significance of biological forces has only been appreciated since the late nineteenth century, since the development of the theory of evolution and the discovery of Mendelian heredity.

What is more, these scientific views have come on the stage at a time when sentimentalism is deeply rooted in the public mind, and ‘internationalists’ preach the equality of man, regardless of biological inequalities, and try to prove that one can make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, in direct contradiction to the ancient Teutonic folk-dictum. Yet unless something is done, and done quickly, it seems that mankind, with its present mania for race-mixing (largely the product of the blind war-propaganda of the 1939-45 war), intends to throw away its heritage, renounce the future, and consign progress to the limbo…

To think and practice eugenic and racial morals ourself is our duty, but this is not enough in the troubled state of the world today. It is necessary for each and every one of us to work to bring these ideas home to our fellow beings. We must talk and write about eugenics and race; we must help to make the ideas ‘fashionable’ as quickly as we can. Let there be no confusion, also, between the two concepts for basically they are one and the same…

Today mankind, in a welter of sickly sentiment, seeks to destroy the biological and evolutionary structure on which the whole edifice of human progress is raised, thus to discard the work of thousands of generations of evolutionary specialisation and shaping. We can only prevent the destruction of this edifice if we take it upon ourselves to overcome our inherent shyness of such topics, to forget that we might possibly say something that might offend our neighbours, and start talking about race, racial hygiene and human eugenics. Only thus can we ensure that our children and—their children—will be able to find fitting partners for marriage.

Only thus can we ensure the survival of our own kind and our own species—and also lay the foundations for a noble future.

______________________

These are passages from the sixth and last chapter of Eugenics and Race, a booklet now available at 75% off from Daybreak Publications (here).

Categories
Currency crash

White Walkers army is coming

It is uncommon that white advocates write about the financial chaos that is coming, a real winter for the West. Below, some excerpts from an article by Tom Shackleford published yesterday on Rebel Yell and republished today on Occidental Dissent. At least southern nationalists are taking notice of the widow opportunity that will be opened for whites to reclaim their societies. After all, to paraphrase the character who died yesterday in the most popular TV series, ‘Chaos is a ladder’. (For more information on the coming financial chaos see here.)
 

As the crisis begins to set in, the Federal government may seek to bail out individual public programs based on political expediency. This will prop them up in the short term, but only delay the inevitable. It’s possible that this could be attempted on a national, comprehensive scale.

Our national debt stands at nearly 20 trillion, increasing by roughly 1 trillion each year. Debt service already eats 6% of the budget, even though interest rates are below 2%. There isn’t a defined limit on how much debt the US can take on, but doubling or tripling the debt just for pension bailouts would eventually push us over the invisible line of confidence. Nobody is sure where it is, but it’s out there. After it’s crossed, a debt crisis will ensue. This is especially serious for retirees since SS and pension funds own so much sovereign debt.
 
What if there’s a market crash?

In 2008, governments and central banks were able to avert a depression and the failure of every major bank by borrowing trillions to bail them out, slashing interest rates to zero, and creating money to buy up trillions more in assets to artificially keep prices high. This was a temporary fix (they’re still doing it) that has set the stage for a bigger calamity in the future. When the next crash inexorably arrives, they will be unable to employ this strategy a second time.

This could happen in 2 years or 2 days but it will eventually occur. As before every crisis, the dominoes are in place. What tips them over and when is unknown. It could just as easily start in Europe as the US. The consequences will be as unprecedented as they are profound. In the very least, many retirees will see the value of the pensions and private plans they depend on plummet. The ability to fund SS will also come under pressure. Many people will feel desperate and cheated, with nothing to lose. Rocky times are ahead.
 
Why is this never talked about?

I really doubt that rising presidential hopefuls like Kamala Harris or Cory Booker even understand compound interest to the point where they could perform a simple calculation. Many others understand that this issue is a real downer. “MAGA” or “I’m with her” sound much better than “You’re screwed and I have no solution”. The MSM is reluctant to discuss it because underfunded pensions implicitly call into question the wisdom of gibs and expensive 3rd world population transfers. However, the Alt-Right should be focused on it.

We’ve grown exasperated watching the latest Islamic atrocity or chimpout fail to move the needle. The sheep must be impoverished in order to become receptive to reality. Cheer up. Angry, destitute retirees are our army of White Walkers waiting to bring a rotten, unsuspecting world to an end.

Categories
Mainstream media

Updates

to “Beware of Game of Thrones”

Tonight was the season 7 final. Nothing to add here except that the series is increasingly becoming like a typical Hollywood fantasy. Season 8 will be the last.

Update of August 6:

The bad messages continue in episode #64. The Lannister army are caught in a surprise attack by the sand-nigger warriors, the Dothraki led by the bimbo Daenerys on her dragon Drogon. This valiant social justice warrior and her sand-nigger horde decimate the Lannister army, composed by Aryans.

These scripts is what Christian Americans and secular Europeans get after their brilliant idea of handing over their media and entertaining industry to a subversive tribe.

I wrote the following texts in July:

A week ago, “Stormborn,” Episode #62 of Game of Thrones contained still more liberal propaganda. For instance, in the war room of Dragonstone, Olenna Tyrell tells Daenerys Targaryen to disregard the advice of her Hand of the Queen, the male Tyrion Lannister, and just “be a dragon” by herself.

Yesterday, in “The Queen’s Justice,” the brown eunuch Grey Worm with the brown Unsullied army attack and conquer Casterly Rock, a Lannister stronghold defended by whites.

This is the first brown-white confrontation since the mudvasion into Westeros.

Categories
Julian (novel)

Julian, 9

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

 

In the summer I used to go to my maternal grandmother’s estate in Bithynia. It was a small farm two miles from the sea. Just back of the house was a low hill from whose top there was a fine view of the sea of Marmora, while on the horizon’s farthest curve to the north rose the towers of Constantinople. Here I spent many hours, reading and dreaming.

One afternoon, lulled by the murmuring of bees, the scent of thyme, the warm salt-laden air, I fell asleep and dreamed that I was having some sort of quarrel with Gallus. I wanted to escape him. So I began to run. As I ran, I took longer and longer steps until I began to bound like a deer. With each leap, I remained higher in the air until at last I was gliding over the countryside while the people below stared with wonder as I sailed over their heads, completely free. There is no dream quite so satisfying as the one of flying.

Suddenly in my pleasant voyage, I was aware that someone was calling my name. I looked about me but there was no one in sight, only pale clouds, blue sky, dark sea. I was gliding over the Marmora, towards Constantinople, when the voice sounded again.

“Who wants me?” I asked.

Then—I don’t know how—but I realized that it was the sun who had spoken. Huge and gold above the city, the sun reached out fiery arms to me. And with an astonishingly poignant sense of coming home, I plunged straight into the blazing light. And awakened to find that the setting sun was indeed shining in my face. Dazzled, I got to my feet. I had been overwhelmed by light. I was also bewildered. Something important had happened. But what?

I told no one about this vision. However, some months later when Mardonius and I were alone together in the palace gardens overlooking the Bosphorus, I questioned him about the old religion. I began slyly: was everything Homer wrote true?

“Of course! Every word!”

“Then Zeus and Apollo and all the other gods must exist, because he says they do. And if they are real, then what became of them? Did Jesus destroy them?”

Poor Mardonius! He was a devoted classicist. He was also a Galilean. Like so many in those days, he was hopelessly divided. But he had his answer ready. “You must remember that Christ was not born when Homer lived. Wise as Homer was, there was no way for him to know the ultimate truth that we know. So he was forced to deal with the gods the people had always believed in…”

“False gods, according to Jesus, so if they’re false then what Homer writes about them can’t be true.”

“Yet like all things, those gods are manifestations of the true.” Mardonius shifted his ground. “Homer believed much as we believe. He worshipped the One God, the single principle of the universe. And I suspect he was aware that the One God can take many forms, and that the gods of Olympus are among them. After all, to this day God has many names because we have many languages and traditions, yet he is always the same.”

“What are some of the old names?”

“Zeus, Helios the sun, Serapis…”

“The sun.” My deity. “Apollo…” I began.

“Apollo also had many names, Helios, Companion of Mithras…”

“Apollo, Helios, Mithras,” I repeated softly. From where we sat in the shady grove on the slope beneath the Daphne Palace, I could just catch a glimpse of my deity, impaled on the dark green bough of a cypress.

“Mithraism was most devilish of all the cults. In fact, there are still some active Mithraists, soldiers mostly, ignorant folk, though a few philosophers (or would-be philosophers) are drawn to Mithras, like Iamblichos… I met him once, a remarkably ugly man, a Syrian, from Chalcis, I think, he died a few years ago, much admired by a small circle, but I’ve always thought his prose unreasonably obscure. He pretended to be a disciple of Plato. And of course he maintained that Jesus was a false prophet and our trinity absurd. Then—utter madness—he invented a trinity of his own, based on Plato.”

Carried away by his passion to explain, Mardonius was now hardly conscious of his rapt listener who understood perhaps every other word he spoke. Yet the general sense of what was being said was perfectly clear: Helios was an aspect of the One God, and there were those, like this mysterious Iamblichos, who still worshipped him.

“According to Iamblichos, there are three worlds, three realms of being, each presided over by the One God whose visible aspect is the sun. Now the first of these worlds is the intelligible world, which can be comprehended only by reason. You’ll find all this in Plato, when we get to him, if you get to him at your present rate. The second world is an intermediary one (this is Iamblichos’s invention); a world endowed with intelligence and governed by Helios-Mithras, with a number of assistants who turn out to be the old gods in various disguises, particularly Serapis to whom our souls return after death, Dionysus the fair, Hermes the intelligence of the universe, and Asklepios who actually lived, we think, and was a famous physician, worshipped by our ancestors as a saviour and healer.”

“Like Jesus?” “Somewhat similar, yes. Finally, the third world is our world, the world of sense and perception. Between the three worlds, the sun mediates. Light is good; darkness evil; and Mithras is the bridge, the link, between man and deity, light and dark. As you can see or as you will see—only part of this comes from Plato. Most of it is Persian in origin, based on a Persian hero named Mithras who lived, if he lived, a thousand years ago. Fortunately, with the birth of Jesus and the mystery of the trinity all this nonsense ended.”

“But the sun still exists.”

“To be absolutely precise, at this moment the sun does not exist.” Mardonius rose. “It’s set and we’re late for supper.”

That is how I became aware of the One God. In a dream Helios-Mithras had called out to me and I had beheld, literally, the light. From that day on, I was no longer alone. The sun was my protector.

I must say that during those years I needed all the solace I could get for I was continually haunted by my predicament. Would I be put to death like my father? One of my recurrent daydreams was that Constantius and I would meet, quite by chance, on my grandmother’s hill. In the dream the Emperor was always alone. He was stern but kind. We spoke of literature. He was delighted at my vast knowledge (I liked being praised for my reading). Then we became close friends, and the dream would end with him granting me my freedom to live out the rest of my life on my grandmothers farm, for one look into my eyes had convinced him that I was not worldly, that I wanted neither his throne nor revenge upon him for my father’s death. Time and again in my imagination I would convince him with brilliant argument and he would invariably grant my wish, tears in his eyes at my sincerity and lack of guile.

How curious men are! I was indeed sincere at that time. I was exactly as I have described myself. I did not want power, or so I thought. I truly believed that I wanted to live obscurely. And then? I broke Constantius. I took the throne. Knowing this now, were I Constantius and he that dreamy boy on a Bithynian hill, I would have had that young philosopher’s life on the spot. But then neither of us realized who I was, or what I would become.

Categories
Free speech / Free press

New era of censorship

I have been complaining these days about what happened to The Daily Stormer. Now Stormfront, the oldest white nationalist internet forum founded by Don Black (pic left) with the motto ‘White Pride World Wide’, a major resource for white activists around the world, has been censored.

See the articles on Occidental Dissent and Anglin’s provisional domain on the subject here and here.

I bet that (((Stefan Molyneux))) the hypocrite, a notable defender of free speech in YouTube, will continue to remain silent on the issue…