So HUMBLE yourselves, drop your hatred of negroes, and get work down at an inner city homeless shelter feeding pregnant black women and wayward crack-heads. Drop your racism! God loves all colors, especially the dark ones. After all, they’re the ones who’ve suffered the most.
That’s Christianity. There’s no way to make it pro-white. Christians must help the poor, stupid and weak. That means muds.
“It’s a taboo for white nationalists to talk about it, but we don’t stand a chance unless our men become killing machines, and our women birthing machines.”
—Young White
Recently Greg Johnson interviewed Vox Day (real name: Theodore Beale) about Beale’s most recent book, Cuckservative, coauthored with J.R. Eagle.
Beale is a Christian and, commenting about the high priests of the mainstream churches, said: “They are not Christian” and added “True Christianity, the Christianity that exploded in the lands that became Christendom, is on your side” (emphasis in Beale’s voice).
By the end of the interview Beale said that he wishes the best luck to the Nigerians in Africa. In spite of the fact that he was speaking of mass, non-white deportation from the West he wants it to be carried away bloodlessly, according to elemental “human decency” and Johnson agreed. Beale also said that he wants “none of the old Nazi rhetoric about fleas” referring to the human parasites that invaded Germany (Jews). He and Johnson want deportation according to a Christian sense of decency: “They are all human; they are all worth of human respect.” Both interviewer and interviewee expressed their concerns to avoid a “horrific Third World War” and that “We can avoid this.”
Johnson and the writer who goes under the penname of Vox Day thus ignore the laws of history. As the pendulum of western axiology has swung to the extreme yin, presently is coming back with extremely Yang vengeance. Compare their pious BS with The Turner Diaries climax or with what I said in the introduction of my most recent book about the need to exterminate the human Neanderthals (English translation of the first draft pages: here). Pay special attention to what I say about exterminable 3rd worlders in order to terminate animal torture (something that can also be said about other “humans,” including quite a few whites).
Beale and Johnson, of course, are a Christian and a neo-Christian respectively—archetypical feminized Western males. I have explained “neochristianity” in The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour and have exposed Johnson’s neochristianity many times in the main site. Here I must take issue with Beale’s statement that “true Christianity, the Christianity that exploded in the lands that became Christendom, is on your side,” referring to white nationalists.
Like every Christian racialist, Beale is altogether ignorant about the history of our parents’ religion. Many times I have said that Christianity made its historical debut by committing “the sin against the holy ghost,” mestization. Universalism was in the DNA of its very foundational city, Constantinople; and since the days of Constantine mainstream Christianity has never been on the side of the Aryan race qua Aryan race. The Old Church started with universalism (“Catholicism” comes from Greek katholikismos, “universal doctrine”) and universalism itself, amalgamated with out-group altruism, is killing the latter-day Aryans in what remains of Christendom.
Over the forums the Christians have replied that miscegenation started in pagan Roman. Very true: but they fail to acknowledge that our parents’ religion made things much worse not only in Constantinople but in Rome itself. As a TOO commenter once said: “Until Whites get rid of universal morality they will be forever lost.”
Johnson and Beale fancy themselves as a race-wise breed morally superior to those Germans when my parents were children. The truth is that American White Nationalism represents a giant step backwards from German National Socialism. If Fox News hosts are the cuckservatives of the white nationalists, “New Right” racialists like Johnson and Beale are the cuckservatives of the national socialists. Let us repeat what we have said before:
Hearken White men!: The Aryan Race needs a religion of hate, not a religion of love!
Himmler himself advised us to get rid of universalist morality and considered the Churches “the enemies of the National Socialist worldview” because of “their doctrine of the equality of humanity” (see Der Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler’s worldview in a single article here).
“Patriarchy is coming back. It’s just a question of whether it will be a White Patriarchy or an Islamic one.”
—Brothermattiex
Watching the hypocritical Fox News these months I’ve seen many times Sean Hannity criticizing what he calls “radical Islam.” He has been saying that the clash of our civilizations consists that Muslims under Sharia don’t allow women to go outside their homes without a male companion. He has also been saying that, unlike us, Sharia Muslims don’t castigate marital rape or the “denigration” of women as second-class citizens; and that in Saudi Arabia women must cover themselves as their husbands want, etcetera.
I am about the age of Hannity and use the word “hypocrite” because the guy is concealing the fact that, in the last decades, sexual mores have shifted almost a hundred and eighty degrees in this continent.
In a couple of those opera-like theatres, I saw Gone with the Wind as a child and then in my teens. Many scenes of Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) with Scarlett O’Hara (Vivien Leigh) made a deep impression in my juvenile mind:
• Throughout the film, since the opening scenes in Georgia, the costumes of women of society always hid the sexual appeal of their bodies, especially the southern belle dresses; and I am talking not only about Scarlett and the female elements in her family but of Ashley’s fiancée and the other society women (Melanie Hamilton, who eventually married Ashley, is the perfect model of how women should behave in the West)
• At the Twelve Oaks party, before the barbecue is disrupted by the declaration of war all women are taking their mandatory nap (except Scarlett who escapes the upstairs bedroom) while men discuss serious matters. It was unthinkable that a woman had a voice in such matters
• Even after Scarlett is widowed she is called “Mrs. Charles Hamilton” in the sense that her reputation still belonged to the shadow of a man who died in uniform
• Similarly, after the Entr’acte Frank (Scarlett’s second husband), Ashley, Rhett and several other accomplices make a night raid on a shanty town after Scarlett is attacked while driving through it alone, resulting in Frank’s death. It goes without saying that in that night the women of these brave men stayed at home sewing and reading decent literature: what women were expected to do
• Once married with Rhett Butler, “Captain Butler” was always greeted first by street pedestrians while walking with Scarlett. She, faithfully beside her husband in those street walks, was only mentioned after the pedestrians greeted Rhett
• Never forget the marital rape of Scarlett when Rhett carried her up in his arms telling her, “This is one night you’re not turning me out.”
In those fancy theatres of yore when I was young, the film depicted very healthy Occidental mores—before values got corrupted and completely inverted in this darkest hour of ours.
Have Hannity et al lost memory of history by implying that our culture has always subscribed feminism? What is going on in their “conservative” minds? I tell you: they are liberals, phony traditionalists. Racists should treasure Gone with the Wind instead of a thousand movies of this century as every film today, and TV program without exception, contains ethnosuicidal messages. Mention any movie filmed after the 1960s and, if I’ve seen it, in the comments section I’ll tell you the ethnosuicidal message. But of course: this is something that phony traditionalists, like every Fox News host, will never acknowledge.
Pace conservatives and even quite a few white nationalists, patriarchy is coming back throughout the West with or without a great awakening in the white race. Demography is destiny and, with dozens of millions of Muslims in Europe, the wind has already started to change. The only question is if the coming patriarchs will behave like Clark Gable or, more probably, like towelhead decapitators.
Editor’s note: I am relocating this August 5, 2015 comment by Jack Frost to this day so that it is the first post that a visitor hits when clicking the category on Hitler’s table talks. I won’t delete the old August thread but I have disabled comments on this specific article. Reason: I don’t have time to discuss with those Christian neonazis who cannot tolerate even the possibility that the talks may be genuine.
David Irving has considerable expertise in this matter, and he says they’re genuine.
Likewise Albert Speer, who was present at some of these dinner talks, attests to them in his memoirs. But also, perhaps even more convincing, the talks are the blindingly original insights of a true master.
These views of Christianity* are not derivative of anyone else’s opinions, certainly not Schopenhauer’s, and while at odds with certain of his public statements, are quite consistent with other things known about Hitler, particularly his anti-Semitism. Surely a forger wouldn’t have gone this route.
In the first place, he would have had to do original thinking that is quite uncharacteristic of forgers, and in the second place an ordinary forger would have been careful not to make any statements that were inconsistent with other things known to have been said or written by Hitler.
Their very originality speaks to their veracity. Of course, this can be turned around. People who want to believe Hitler was actually a Christian disingenuously ask why, if this was his real opinion, didn’t he put it in Mein Kampf or mention it in any of his public speeches?
But the answer is obvious. Hitler was a politician, and had to be all things to all people. No politician with such views could have been open about them in a Christian nation.
Accordingly, to Christians of his day, he appeared to be a Christian. Such hypocrisy was more or less built into the task he had set for himself.
_____________
(*) These were Frost’s August 4, 2015, 5:15 PM quotes on the same thread. Alas, as usual Dr MacDonald has now deleted the whole comments thread!
by Michael O’Meara
For white nationalists—whose cyber-based “movement” is still in its infancy—simple explanations tend to be the rule.
The reductionist “anti-Semitism” that dominates WN ranks and serves as a catch-all explanation for the predicament white people find themselves in today, to cite the most prominent example, is wont to attribute every assault on white life to Jewish perfidy.
There is, certainly, no disputing the existence of this “perfidy,” for no other group—not the browns or blacks, not the former powers of international Communism, not anyone or anything—is or has been so disposed to breaching the color line, undermining America’s traditional racial hierarchy, or propelling the processes responsible for the present dispossession of the country’s white majority.
To think, however, that Organized Jewry has been the alpha and omega of this dispossession is not just simple-minded, it’s dishonorable.
It’s simple-minded because it understands complex historical processes in Kindergarten terms. It ignores other, no less culpable factors.
More fundamentally, it ignores or conflates the differences between structural imperatives and conspiratorial designs, between concrete objective forces and the subjective influences of interest and conscience.
History, as such, offers few cases where monocausal explanations suffice, for the confluence of fortune, structure, and subject (fortuna, necessita, virtu) undergirding the historical process means that significant historical changes are almost always the consequence of a combination of forces unique to their specific time and place.
By the same reasoning, monocausal explanations focusing exclusively on a demonized “other” are dishonorable because they spare whites all responsibility for their misfortunes, refuse to acknowledge the dysgenic and self-destructive forces indigenous to modern society, and ignore the numerous, inherently Jewish facets of the American project.
In criticizing this, I do so not to absolve the Jews, but to preface the subject of this essay—the anti-white consequences of the Cold War—which offers a somewhat broader explanation of white dispossession (though there are at least a couple of others that can also be made).
_________
Editor’s note: You can read the rest of the reprinted, 2011 article on Counter-Currents (here). But I much prefer the original 2010 article at The Occidental Quarterly divided in four pieces. Reason: in three threads of the comments section O’Meara responds to his monocausal critics (here, here and here).
“Europe my friends has become nothing else than a very big extermination camp for the white culture, white traditions, our religion, our customs, our way of life, our communities, our families—an extermination camp for the white race.”
Note of March 25, 2016: I’ve just removed the content of this entry—basically a link to another article at my Addenda—because I’ve deleted the Addenda article, “Links of interest”.
Editor’s note:
In this talk Hitler spoke about Aryans and Russians, and the necessity of the mailed fist in Russia, as well as the deterioration of soil (what presently is called peak oil). However, as the rest of my 192 excerpts of his 1941-1944 table talks, I’ve only quoted what I consider most important; in this case, the possibility of energy devolution:
Saturday, 5th July 1941
I think there’s still petroleum in thousands of places. As for coal, we know we’re reducing the natural reserves, and that in so doing we are creating gaps in the sub-soil. But as for petroleum, it may be that the lakes from which we are drawing are constantly renewed from invisible reservoirs.
Without doubt, man is the most dangerous microbe imaginable. He exploits the ground beneath his feet without ever asking whether he is disposing thus of products that would perhaps be indispensable to the life of other regions. If one examined the problem closely, one would probably find here the origin of the catastrophes that occur periodically in the earth’s surface.
Michelle Dockery, the English rose who plays the role as
Lady Mary Crawley in ITV drama series Downton Abbey.
Andrew Anglin has penned another article explaining feminism. While I vehemently share his anti-feminism I don’t have time for a long post. I will limit myself to state that, like most white nationalists, he blames Jewish subversion for this weapon of mass Occidental destruction called feminism.
But feminism apparently has older roots in European liberalism than in the more recent Jewish subversion. Incidentally, I much prefer the old term “liberalism” than the popular “cultural Marxism” in racialist circles (see: here). No other intellectual has better described the new religion of whites, liberalism, than Alexis de Tocqueville: “The desire for equality becomes more and more insatiable as equality increases.” From this viewpoint Western feminism is just one stage of this deranged, runaway liberalism which basic axiom is the principle of non-discrimination. (Presently, in its suicidal and terminal stage non-discrimination on race, gender and sexual orientation.)
As I said, I don’t have time. Exactly in a month I’ll reveal why I have been so busy elsewhere and perhaps will be busy for years. But those who have already read Roger Devlin and want to be entertained and educated at the same time—something almost impossible in today’s media—, could watch the current season of Downton Abbey. I still have to see the Christmas episode but the whole seasons depict how English society started to empower women in the beginning of the century when we were born.
