Proverb
Time Unveiling Truth is a painting c. 1745
–1750 by the Italian painter Tiepolo.
I like what Nick Fuentes recently said about Hitler and Jews. However, my long-standing disagreement with white nationalists like Fuentes is that they ignore the historical truth about Christianity, which reminds me of our friend Gaedhal’s most recent email:
As the Latin saying goes: Veritas est filia temporis. Truth is the daughter of time. There is a painting of Chronos, the god of time, digging up Verity/Alethia, or Truth, who was buried in the earth. Bury the truth in the midst of the earth, all you want to: Chronos, the grim time-lord, will dig it up.
Veritas est Filia Temporis et ea non est filia auctoritatis —Francis Bacon [1]
In another of his emails, Gaedhal added:
If a billion Catholics woke up—say, by reading Carrier, Letaster and Miller—and discovered that Jesus Christ is simply yet another mythical ‘borne away’ or ‘translated’ demigod, then could you imagine what this would do to Israel?
___________
[1] ‘Truth is the daughter of time, and not of authority’.
Troll ’em all!
I’m not finished with Counter-Currents because I find that webzine a real tidbit to show the principle of this site: that the value scale of white nationalists, who mistakenly perceive themselves as Jew-wise, isn’t wise at all in that it drags the tail of morality bequeathed to us by Judeo-Christianity.
Earlier I had quoted some more or less critical comments in the Counter-Currents comments section on Greg Johnson’s article ‘Palestinians & Jews, again’ where Johnson simply replied with flat statements; that is, he took Judeo-Christian morality so much for granted that he didn’t even bother to try to rebut his critics with arguments. Well, recently another C-C commenter posted a comment that demonstrates just what we have been saying, and in no uncertain terms:
Ahh, but isn’t this [Johnson’s stance—Ed.] merely a “Paretian” old Christian residue? I agree with your ethical position, but that is because a) I was raised Christian, and b) would someday like to become Christian again, provided I can resolve to my satisfaction the various philosophy-of-religion problems that originally led me away from the faith. In the meantime, I mostly hue to the old moral codes, first, because I’m psychologically and culturally oriented towards them, and second, because, in Pascalian fashion, I believe such a course would be pleasing to (and perhaps even required by) God, should He in fact exist.
As always, the fear of eternal damnation, with which our idiotic parents raised us (that’s why my autobiographical books are so important!), haunts the psyche of the Aryan to keep the commandments that the god of the Jews dictated for us Gentiles.
But if one does not believe in God, what is the meaningful ground of ethics? Eat or be eaten is the primordial law of life. Among animals, there is no ethics—and even that behavior which merely mimics human-understood ethics is limited to genetically similar creatures. Social animals, like chimps and humans, are tribal in nature. Such tribal structures mightily contribute to their members’ reproductive fitness. What imaginative philosophers might characterize as “ethical” behavior within such tribes are instinctively cooperative actions which strengthen the tribe as a whole, or else sanctions against ‘antisocial’ actions which weaken the tribe. Within a naturalistic metaphysics, from whence would be derived inter-tribal ethics?
And once again, Johnson responds with a flat, non-argumentative statement; though he now concedes that that is a discussion for another time:
No, I don’t think the only foundation of ethics is religion. Nor do I think Social Darwinism is a valid moral code. I think it is just post hoc rationalization for criminality. But that’s a conversation for another place.
Criminality? The only foundation of Western ‘ethics’ is the Judeo-Christian religion! The key is that, before Christianity, exterminationist genocide wasn’t considered criminal by the Aryans. That was malware that Constantine and his bishop minions (many of Semitic origin) began to implant in the Aryan psyche long ago. See the very important Neo-Christianity PDF of our featured post. Those new visitors who haven’t read it should read it now.
It seems to me intellectual quackery not to know that the morality with which we Westerners were all educated ultimately comes from a so-called new testament for Gentile consumption written by Jews. For now, I would just like to quote from page 83 of another of our PDFs, On Exterminationism:
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 and (4) Every human life has the same value.
None of these statements ring true to a man who has rejected Christian morality. Even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathise 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!
What can the priest of holy words do in the face of so much Christian and neo-Christian swarming American white nationalism? Rather than despair, simply Troll Em All with Nietzsche’s maxim: Umwertuung aller Werte!
As Aron Ra puts it: sociopathy and empathy are competing evolutionary strategies. Hence why we observe both in nature, and especially in man. My essay in César’s anthology, On Exterminationism, was about the problem of evil. I want to see a day when empathy reigns upon this planet…
However, in my view, empathy can only reign on this planet after we win the race war. The Chinese and the Japanese, for one thing, have no empathy for wildlife. The Chinese starve tigers to death for tiger meat, and the Japanese eat live octopuses and kill cetaceans for fun. Jews swing chickens and engage in Kosher slaughter. Halal slaughter is likewise barbaric and an affront to decency and empathy. A world that is empathetic to wildlife has to be a white world.
TRS v. CC
It seems that the beheaded babies story, despite Biden’s regurgitation of it, is fake news. But I wanted to add something to what I said yesterday about Greg Johnson. In his latest article, he responds to The Right Stuff’s (TRS) criticism of Johnson for his lukewarm stance on Israel. This is taken from the comments section of Counter-Currents:
______ 卐 ______
Teutonic Path said:
In this article [i.e., Johnson’s article] you said the exterminationist position is indefensible, yet unless I am mistaken everything after that did not say why. It would seem to me that if an ethnos dies out then the challenge of getting it into a single state also goes away. Are you saying it’s indefensible because it’s practically unworkable (potentially leading to bigger problems), or is it for a theoretical reason (e.g. ethics) that you don’t mention here?
Greg Johnson responded:
Mass murder is ethically indefensible.
Sherman McCoy said:
Perhaps the existence of my people matters more than your ethics.
Greg Johnson responded:
Good luck defending your people as a genocidal maniac.
Sherman McCoy said:
I’m sure the people in South Africa being butchered by feral negroids egged on by Yiddish Communists have the consolation, as they breathe their final pained and blood-soaked breaths, that at least they didn’t do anything unethical. Because the truly important thing for the future of white people is to make sure that we appear nice. Remember, fellow white nationalists: we’re working for a future where all the races join hands to sing Kumbaya together, presumably with Rabbi Shekelberg acting as conductor.
Greg Johnson responded:
If you think morality is just a matter of appearing nice, you might be a sociopath.
Max said:
A huge number of Jews and their shabbos goyim are openly exterminationists about Palestinians, at least in Gaza. And more than a few of them are exterminationists about Europeans and their diasporas. So I’m not quite sure why it’s “immoral” for us to advocate such a policy towards Jews. Perhaps it’s optically unwise to do so openly but you seem to be taking an absurd moralfagging position here, Greg. Perhaps a Kumbaya future where Jews renounce their supremacist ideology en masse and forever is possible, but that seems like an unlikely bet, knowing what we do about their history and their present behavior.
Greg Johnson responded:
Two wrongs don’t make a right. It is idiotic to use words like “moralfagging” unironically.
Sej said:
Agreed. Notice that people cheerleading mass murder of Israelis are the same that defend Russians’ mass murder of Ukrainians in Donbas and Crimea.
Norm said:
Jews do not share your anti-exterminationist sentiment, Greg. Go on Twitter and look at all the Jews gloating about the firebombing of Dresden. What Jews are doing to Gaza is what they’d do to Europe, and what they have done to Europe. Do you think you can co-exist with a people like that? Jews follow an ideology that commands them to wipe out all European people. You cannot defeat hate with reason.
Greg Johnson responded:
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Maybe you’d be more comfortable commenting at Jesse Dunstan’s site.
My two cents for this site:
It’s quite refreshing to listen in The Right Stuff podcast that they call Johnson a ‘traitor’.
This said, the problem with TRS is that, at least the guy who speaks after minute 15, is a Judeo-reductionist. He believes that from that little piece in the desert Israel controls the West: typical monocausal paranoia that ignores that it is whites who have been empowering Jewry because of their Judeo-Christian values. For example, when in 1:26 another TRS member said ‘fuck them’ to the exterminationists, he himself is unknowingly subscribing to Judeo-Christian standards of morality (exactly what Johnson does).
I don’t recognise well the voices but I think it was Mike who said, a few seconds after the hour, what I believe about the conflicts in both Ukraine and Palestine: Mike welcomes them because they create chaos. Just contrasts it with Johnson’s stance, who, as a good neochristian, simply wants peace and happiness for every party involved, including Jews (as Linder once said, Johnson is a de facto conservative).
Parisians v. Israelis
There is something I would like to say about how Hamas turned an Israeli music festival into a massacre (more than 250 people died on Saturday inside Israel at that festival—see video here). When I saw the images before the attack, when the young people were still dancing, I said to myself ironically, although I am not a theist: ‘God’s punishment for degenerate music!’
Then I realised an error of judgement. Such feelings of hatred for degenerates are legitimate for the French who, in 2015, were at an Eagles of Death Metal concert, attended by 1,500 people, at the Bataclan Theatre, when heroic jihadis entered to massacre them. But it’s no good saying the same about the Israelis. Why?
In secret soliloquies, I have told myself countless times that I should celebrate that the elites are already Woke in much of Latin America. If the point is to conquer the subcontinent in a sort of Master Plan South if, north of the Rio Grande, the pure Aryans were to wage war like The Turner Diaries, it suits me that the mestizos are in a state of complete cultural degradation. Wokism is welcome among the enemies to subjugate!
If I fantasise about this on the continent where I live, why not celebrate that there are already some Woke aspects in Israel for Israeli consumption?
‘God’s punishment’ is reserved for the Aryans we want to save from Wokism (e.g. the Parisians who were pure Aryans at that concert eight years ago). But it doesn’t apply to those whom one wants to mentally poison, subjugate and eventually erase from the face of the earth.