Dominion (book) Tom Holland

Dominion, 3


How the Woke monster originated

Eusebius claims in his Ecclesiastical History that, as a young man, Origen secretly paid a physician to surgically castrate him: a claim which affected Origen’s reputation for centuries, as demonstrated by these 15th-century depictions of Origen castrating himself.


______ 卐 ______


In what follows I will comment on some notable passages from Tom Holland’s Dominion chapter ‘Belief AD 177: Lyon’. For the previous two instalments of this series (a series that I put on hold for a few months due to the huge task of proofreading Savitri Devi’s book), see here and here.

Ignatius (35-109 c.e.) was one of the church fathers. When on page 114 Holland wrote, ‘while travelling through Asia Minor on his way to Rome, Ignatius, a bishop from Syria, had proudly defined it as katholikos: “universal”,’ I thought that it is essential to know the history of Christianity. It is an open book leading us, page after page, to the x-ray of the white soul: from the racial pride and tribalism of the Aryan man we see in the Spartans and the republican Romans to a subject who, in the time of the Roman Empire, lived immersed in a katholikos or universal melting pot of the various races conquered by Rome, including the Jews. On the next page Holland says:

Naturally, not sharing Marcion’s contemptuous attitude towards Jewish scripture, Irenaeus made sure to reinstate it at the head of his own canon. It was, so he declared, essential reading for all Christians: ‘a field in which hidden treasure is revealed and explained by the cross of Christ’… Alongside Luke’s gospel, he included John’s, and the two others most widely accepted as authoritative: one attributed to Matthew, a tax-collector summoned by Jesus to follow him, and the second to Mark, the reputed founder of the church in Alexandria. Compared to these, so Irenaeus declared, all other accounts of Christ’s life and teachings were but ‘ropes woven out of sand’.

A very common thing in white nationalism is to blame the Jews as the subversive tribe they indeed are, but leaving whites off the hook. In real history, a history that nationalists have never wanted to read (say, those written by William Pierce and Arthur Kemp), we see imperial lust, similar to what the US government is now doing with Russia and China, as the culprit. And of the pagan world just before the Judeo-Christians took over we can say exactly the same:

In 212, an edict was issued that would have warmed the old Stoic’s heart. By its terms, all free men across the vast expanse of the empire were granted Roman citizenship. Its author, a thuggish Caesar by the name of Marcus Aurelius Severus Antoninus, was a living embodiment of the increasingly cosmopolitan character of the Roman world. The son of an African nobleman, he had been proclaimed emperor in Britain and was nicknamed Caracalla—‘Hoodie’—after his fondness for Gallic fashions.

This granting citizenship to all peoples of the empire reminds me that, when I was a child watching American and English films, I identified American or English with the white race. It was within my lifetime that I saw how a once proud race began to see universalism as normal to the extent of importing millions of non-whites into their respective countries. But we need to know when this madness really began.

The interest that many Greeks took in Jewish teachings, and that many Jews took in philosophy, had always been circumscribed by the prescriptions of the Mosaic covenant. Christianity, though, provided a matrix in which the Jewish and the Greek were able to mingle as well as meet. No one demonstrated this to more fruitful effect than Origen [pictured above—Ed.]. A devotion to Christianity’s inheritance from the Jews was manifest in all he wrote. Not only did he go to the effort of learning Hebrew from a Jewish teacher, but the Jewish people themselves he hailed as family: as the Church’s ‘little sister’, or else ‘the brother of the bride’. Marcion’s sneer that orthodox Christians were Jew-lovers was not one that Origen would necessarily have disputed. Certainly, he did more to embed the great body of Jewish scripture within the Christian canon, and to enshrine it as an ‘Old Testament’, than anyone before or since.

While the dynamics of Jewish infiltration of Aryan culture have not changed since the days of the Roman Empire when it was still pagan, what Western nationalists fail to see is that Christianity was at the very heart of this subversion.

Jewish the great mansion of the Old Testament may have been; but the surest method for exploring it was Greek. ‘Whatever men have rightly said, no matter who or where, is the property of us Christians.’ That God had spoken to the Greeks as well as to the Jews was not a theory that originated with Origen. Just as Paul, in his correspondence, had approvingly cited the Stoic concept of conscience, so had many Christians since found in philosophy authentic glimmerings of the divine.

Speaking about Savitri Devi’s book that we recently translated for my Daybreak Press, on Monday I commented in the comments section that, although she admires Hitler, Carolyn Yeager’s sympathy for Christianity clouds her understanding of National Socialism. Something similar could be said of Tom Holland’s sympathy for Christianity. Writing about Greek philosophers and Jewish scholars, in the following passages of Holland’s prose we can read between the lines that in these times started big time the utter imbecility that eventually received the grotesque name of ‘theology’:

Just as traditions of textual inquiry honed in Alexandria had helped Origen to elucidate the complexities of Jewish scripture, so did he use philosophy to shed light on an even more profound puzzle: the nature of God himself. [page 123]

No one, after Origen’s labours in the service of his faith, would be able to charge that Christians appealed only to ‘the ignorant, the stupid, the unschooled’. The potency of this achievement, in a society that took for granted the value of education as an indicator of status, was immense. [page 124]

Origen had created a matrix for the propagation of philosophical concepts that would prove to have momentous reach. Far from damaging his reputation, his refusal to behave in the manner of a conventional philosopher ended up only enhancing his fame. Turning sixty, Origen could reflect with pride on a career so influential that even the mother of an emperor, intrigued by his celebrity, had once summoned him to instruct her in the nature of God.

Such fame, though, was as likely to stoke hostility as admiration. The age was a treacherous one. The violence brought by Caracalla to the streets of Alexandria had been an ominous portent of even darker times ahead. In the decades that followed, sorrows had come not as single spies, but in battalions. Caracalla himself, murdered while relieving himself on campaign, had been just one of a succession of emperors slain in a blizzard of assassinations and civil wars…

The gods, it seemed, were angry. The correct religiones were manifestly being neglected. The fault, in the wake of Caracalla’s mass grant of citizenship, lay not just in Rome, but in the empire as a whole. Accordingly, early in 250, a formal decree was issued that everyone—with the sole exception of the Jews [emphasis by Ed.!]—offer up sacrifice to the gods. Disobedience was equated with treason; and the punishment for treason was death.

For the first time, Christians found themselves confronted by legislation that directly obliged them to choose between their lives and their faith. Many chose to save their skins—but many did not. Among those arrested was Origen. Although put in chains and racked, he refused to recant. Spared execution, he was released after days of brutal treatment a broken man. He never recovered. A year or so later, the aged scholar was dead of the sufferings inflicted on him by his torturers. [pages 125-126]

The following pages are also very elucidating. Let us remember that the defeated Carthaginians had such a grudge against Rome that many had begun to take refuge in Judaism. But because of its universalist character, Judeo-Christianity made subversion much easier:

In the summer of 313, Carthage was a city on edge. An ancient rival of Rome for the rule of the western Mediterranean, destroyed by the legions and then—just as Corinth had been—refounded as a Roman colony, its commanding position on the coastline across from Sicily had won for it an undisputed status as the capital of Africa. Like Rome and Alexandria, it had grown to become one of the great centres of Christianity…

In 303, when an imperial edict was issued commanding Christians to hand over their books of scripture or face death, Africa had been at the forefront of resistance to the decree. The provincial authorities, determined to break the Church, had expanded on the edict by commanding that everyone make sacrifice to the gods. [page 127]

A claimant to the rule of Rome named Constantine had marched on the city. There, on the banks of the river Tiber, beside the Milvian Bridge, he had won a decisive victory. His rival had drowned in the river. Constantine, entering the ancient capital, had done so with the head of his defeated enemy held aloft on a spear. Provincial officials from Africa, summoned to meet their new master, had dutifully admired the trophy. Shortly afterwards, as a token of Constantine’s greatness, it had been dispatched to Carthage. [pages 129-130]

The Council of Nicaea

The fusion of theology with Roman bureaucracy at its most controlling resulted in an innovation never before attempted: a declaration of belief that proclaimed itself universal. The sheer number of delegates, drawn from locations ranging from Mesopotamia to Britain, gave to their deliberations a weight that no single bishop or theologian could hope to rival. For the first time, orthodoxy possessed what even the genius of Origen had struggled to provide: a definition of the Christian god that could be used to measure heresy with precision. [page 133]

Never before had a committee authored phrases so far-reaching in their impact [the Nicaean Creed—Ed.]. The long struggle of Christians to articulate the paradox that lay at the heart of their faith, to define how a man tortured to death on a cross could also have been divine, had at last attained an enduring resolution. A creed that still, many centuries after it was written, would continue to join otherwise divided churches, and give substance to the ideal of a single Christian people, had more than met Constantine’s hopes for his council. Only a seasoned imperial administrator could possibly have pulled it off. A century after Caracalla’s grant of citizenship to the entire Roman world, Constantine had hit upon a momentous discovery: that the surest way to join a people as one was to unite them not in common rituals, but in a common belief. [pages 133-134]

What neither Constantine nor the Romans in power suspected, who still carried much of the pagan tolerance in them, is that they infected the souls of the white and mudblood converts to Christianity with the intolerant virus of Judaism: a virus that would eventually infect the whole empire. Here Holland, who we should remember is sympathetic to Christianity, recounts one of the first cases of Jewish intolerance transplanted into the new Judeo-Christian world:

When Donatists stripped a Catholic bishop naked, hauled him to the top of a tower and flung him into a pile of excrement, or tied a necklace of dead dogs around the neck of another, or pulled out the tongue of a third, and cut off his right hand, they were behaving in a manner that might have appeared calculated to baffle the average Roman bureaucrat. [page 135]

Decades on from the deaths of both Caecilian and Donatus, the killings continued, the divisions widened, and the sense of moral certitude on both sides grew ever more entrenched…

Constantine, by accepting Christ as his Lord, had imported directly into the heart of his empire a new, unpredictable and fissile source of power. [page 136]

Kalki Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Savitri quote

The Führer had, says André Erissaud, ‘the feeling’—I would say, the certainty—that the Christian religion in particular had little to do with truly transcendent values.[1]

However, the whole of Western civilisation is at the same time ‘recent’ and ‘Christian.’ We must never forget this. That didn’t, however, prevent Hitler from admiring Charlemagne: the Sachsenschlüchter or ‘terminator of the Saxons’ as Alfred Rosenberg, Johann von Leers, Heinrich Himmler and a good number of other great dignitaries saw him.

Instead, Hitler saw in him the conqueror with the immense will to power, and above all the first unifier of the German people: the one who, alone at that time, had the idea of the Reich even if he had used the artificial unity of ‘faith’ to impose it, even if this faith was the Christian faith, a foreign faith. It will be remembered that Adolf Hitler insisted on the dissolving action of Christianity in the Greco-Roman world, and that he called it ‘pre-Bolshevism.’ But it doesn’t matter what this faith was (and still is) if it was the cement of a conquering Germanic Empire and, later, the occasion for the whole flowering of art that we know. Insofar as this art is beautiful it presupposes, in any case, a certain knowledge of what is eternal. The Führer thus accepted with respect, as a German heirloom, a replica of the sword of the Emperor of West.[2]


[1] Brissaud: Hitler et l’Ordre Noir, page 111.

[2] Editor’s note: I have been very critical of American white nationalism on my website, but hardly of German National Socialism. It is time to realise that Hitler and his followers weren’t perfect. To win the war you must know what you are fighting against. Both the most populist National Socialists like Goebbels, and today’s white nationalists, emphasised Jewry. But since the Semitic hydra also includes Christianity, Islam and even what happened to the Romans during the Punic Wars, Nietzsche’s ‘Law against Christianity’ alluded to in footnote #187 must be implemented in what we might start calling Kalki’s Reich.

Rosenberg, von Leers and Himmler were closer to the truth on this point than the Führer himself! But their movement failed because, like Savitri, they didn’t fully understand how infinitely toxic everything related to Judeo-Christianity has been, including its secular offshoots. If they had been genuinely wise they would have seen that the Christians on the other side of the Atlantic were their main foe. This means that all these esoteric and archaeological raids looking for the Aryan Grail, where it was not to be found, were a fool’s errand. The Grail is anti-Christianity or, to put it in more positive terms, the transvaluation of all Judeo-Christian values back to Greco-Roman values.

Souvenirs et réflexions d'une aryenne (book)

Savitri quote

[…] the rapid disappearance of the sense of the sacred, the resurgence of the technical spirit and, above all, the disordered proliferation of man in inverse proportion to his quality. Also, while knowing that they could only be, in the name of Christian anthropocentrism, his worst adversaries, Adolf Hitler was careful not to attack the churches openly, let alone persecute them.

He did so out of political skill, and also out of fear of depriving the people of an existing faith before another had penetrated deeply enough into their souls to replace it advantageously. This didn’t prevent him from observing that the lifespan of Christianity was over; that the Churches represented nothing more than a ‘hollow, fragile and deceptive religious apparatus’[1] which wasn’t even worth demolishing from the outside since from the inside it was already crumbling. He didn’t believe in a resurrection of the Christian faith. In the German countryside Christianity had always been a veneer, a shell which had kept intact the old piety under it. And it was now a question of reviving and directing the old piety. In the urban masses he saw nothing that revealed any awareness of the sacred. He realised that ‘where everything is dead nothing can be relighted.’[2]

In any case, Christianity was, in his eyes as in ours, nothing but a foreign religion imposed on the Germanic peoples, and fundamentally opposed to their genius. Adolf Hitler despised those men who had been able for so long to content themselves with such childishness as those that the Churches taught the masses. And he was never short of sarcasm when, before those few to whom he knew intimately, he could confess the least popular aspect of his thinking. He spoke of Christianity as ‘an invention of sick brains.’[3]

What he reproached most of all was the fact that Christianity alienated his followers from Nature, that it inculcated in them a contempt for the body and, above all, presented itself to them as the consoling religion par excellence: the religion of the afflicted; of those who are ‘toiled over and burdened’ and don’t have the strength to bear their burden courageously, of those who cannot come to terms with the idea of not seeing their beloved ones again in a naïvely human Hereafter.

Like Nietzsche, he found it to have a whining, servile rotundity about it and considered Christianity inferior to even the most primitive mythologies, which at least integrate man into the cosmos. Inferior to a religion of Nature, ancestors and heroes, he liked to evoke the beauty of the attitude of his followers who, free of hope as well as fear, carried out the most dangerous tasks with detachment. ‘I have,’ he said on December 13, 1941 in the presence of Dr Goebbels, Alfred Rosenberg, Terboven and others, ‘six SS divisions composed of men who are indifferent in matters of religion. This doesn’t prevent them from going to their deaths with a serene soul.’[4]

Here, ‘indifference in matters of religion’ just means indifference to Christianity and, perhaps, to all religious exotericism; certainly not indifference to the sacred. Quite the contrary! Because what the Führer reproached Christianity, and no doubt any religion or philosophy centred on the ‘too human,’ was precisely the absence in it of true piety.

What he reproached them for was their inability to make the sacred penetrate Life, all Life, as in traditional societies. And what he wanted—and, as I shall soon try to show, the SS must have had a great role to play here—was a gradual return of the consciousness of the sacred, at various levels, in all strata of the population. Not a more or less artificial resurgence of the cult of Wotan and Thor (the Divine never assumes again, in the eyes of men, the forms it once abandoned) but a return of Germany and the Germanic world in general, to Tradition, grasped in the Nordic manner in the spirit of the old sagas including those which, like the legend of Parsifal, preserved, under Christian outward appearances, the unchanged values of the race and the imprint of eternal values in the collective unconscious of the race.

He wanted to restore to the German peasant ‘the direct and mysterious apprehension of Nature, the instinctive contact, the communion with the Spirit of the Earth.’ He wanted to scrape off ‘the Christian varnish’ and restore in him ‘the religion of the race.’[5] And, little by little, especially in the immense new ‘living space’ that he dreamed of conquering in the East, to remake from the mass of his people a free peasant-warrior people, as in the old days when the immemorial Odalrecht, the oldest Germanic customary law, regulated the relations of men with each other and their chiefs. It was from the countryside which he knew still lived on, behind a vain set of Christian names and gestures, pagan beliefs from which he intended one day to evangelise the masses in the big cities: the first victims of modern life in whom, in his own words, ‘everything was dead.’

This ‘everything’ meant for him the essential: the capacity of man and especially of the pure-blooded Aryan, to feel both his nothingness as an isolated individual and his immortality as the repository of the virtues of his race. He wanted to restore this sense of the sacred to every German—to every Aryan—in whom it had faded or had been lost over the generations through the superstitions spread by the churches as well as by an increasingly popularised pseudoscience. He knew that this was an arduous and long-term task from which one couldn’t expect spectacular success, but whose preservation of pure blood was the sine qua non of accomplishment because, beyond a certain degree of miscegenation (which is very quickly reached), a people is no longer the same people.


[1] Rauschning: Hitler m’a dit (op. cit.), p. 69.

[2] Ibid. p. 71.

[3] Libres propos sur la Guerre et la Paix (op. cit.), p. 141.

[4] Ibid., p. 140.

[5] Rauschning: Hitler m’a dit, p. 71.


Green v. Jones

Adam Green vs E. Michael Jones – Is Christianity a Jewish Ploy?

Only ten minutes into this debate, I think Green’s point is so accurate that I’m adding this entry even though I still have more than an hour of listening to do…


Adam Green, 2

‘When you make a Jew God, then you make all Jews God.’ —Adam Green

Nick Fuentes and E. Michael Jones, heroes in some American racial right circles for their anti-Semitism, are exposed as the traitors they are to the West from the opening minutes of Green’s most recent video. If anyone watches that video, don’t miss what a rabbi said around the 36th minute (which reminds me of my Thursday post on Adam Green). And another orthodox rabbi says something similar around minute 44.

After minute 54 Green defends himself against Fuentes’ unfounded accusations of calling him a Jew. Even worse is to hear a Protestant pastor talk about the ‘debt we all owe the Jews’ after minute 58. This sermon by an influential pastor in the US shows why I say that Christians, traitors to their race, are more detrimental to our cause than Jews.

Best quote of the episode we hear at about 1: 12: ‘The real redpill is when you realise that Christianity is a Jewish trap, a Jewish deception.’ And at 1:34 Green says he will make another video about the anti-white campaign that is going on. Near 1:38 he responds to the chats and concludes that, if you don’t want a Jew-dominated West, you have to understand that Christianity is the cause of it.

Since I’m no longer visiting the racial right sites precisely because they don’t want to see the elephant in the room, I wonder if any of them has invited Green to any of their podcasts?

Jewish question (JQ)

Adam Green

I just received this comment on the previous post:

Cesar, have you watched Adam Green of Know More News’ takedowns on Christianity, arguing it’s a Jewish scam? He makes many of the same points you make but in video format, posting lots of video evidence as well. If you haven’t seen him I think you’ll like his stuff [two links].

On Adam Green’s Twitter account, I clicked on the video of the pinned tweet and I’m looking at this video. I am liking that Green sees Christianity as an extension of JQ (I wish white nationalists would pay attention to this guy).

I think tonight I’ll watch the rest of the video…

11:30 pm. I’ve watched it. In another of Green’s videos we can even see several rabbis confirming it!

______ 卐 ______

Update 18 January

See my exchange with JR1C in the comments section. I’ll be watching Green’s videos. As JR1C says: they are a perfect complement to what we’ve been saying here with purely Aryan sources (e.g. Evropa Soberana’s literary legacy).

But with this corroboration from the orthodox rabbis themselves of our thesis, that Christianity is a psyop created by 1st-century rabbis, the support for our main thesis has been strengthened.

For those unfamiliar with what we have said here on the subject, see my quotations from David Skrbina’s book.

Evil Sexual degeneracy United States

American sexual psychoses

Translated and excerpted from an article by a German:

With the current draft of the Self-Determination Act, anyone who uses the wrong (old) first name (dead-naming) a person can be fined 2,500 €. This is how the law wants to enforce the use of the new pronouns, because whoever wants to be politically correct here [in Germany] must ask every interlocutor about the current sexual orientation before naming. Where does this fixation on intimate practices come from?

It is part of the core cultural substance of Puritanism. When the Puritans invaded North America, they found open sexuality among the Amerinds, just as the Victorians found among the Indians, which had its own spaces for homosexual or transsexual phenomena—the Indians still know the subculture of the Hijra. This uninhibited interaction confirmed the Puritans in their idea that the savages, like the ancient pagans, were possessed by the devil and were morally depraved. The Puritan colonial rulers immediately enacted their infamous sodomy laws, which of course also applied to the indigenous population.

Based on the English Buggery Act, they declared all sexual acts that did not serve the purpose of procreation to be a criminal offence, regardless of the sex of the participants, and intensified the punishments to monstrous levels: onanism, anal and oral sex were massive crimes. In the ‘freest country in the world,’ anyone who let his wife suck him off went to jail and was dispossessed. If he had sex with a rear-entry position, the God-fearing Christians would hang him from the nearest tree. Both men and married couples who practised anal intercourse were hanged. Unlike murder, the priesthood wasn’t exempted from the death penalty. The offender’s property became the property of the state.

Pennsylvania, for example, explicitly criminalized fellatio, and Massachusetts extended criminalization to lesbians, who were flogged Taliban-style. So it goes queerly through all the states. In the New Haven Law Code of 1656 hell was declared heaven. In Puritan-woken politics lesbians were threatened with the death penalty for the first time.

For centuries, this monstrous punitive and religious practice produced uptight, guilt-ridden subjects ready to atone and submit… The name of the Protestant sect of the Quakers is derived from this trembling out of fear of God. The clinical picture of anxiety neurosis includes a pronounced avoidance behaviour. Thus, evangelicals today still don’t want to have anything to do with the ‘dirty stuff’ of sexuality…

The brief period of more liberal normalcy between the 1970s and 2000s is now coming to an end. Woke sex is picking up the old thread, and it is anything but free. It is as neurotic, guilt-ridden, and defensive as the old one. Men are afraid to be alone in an elevator or room with women. The woke LGBTQIA+ priesthood is obsessed with intimate practices and categorises everyone’s identity by his/her sexual behaviour. It punishes anyone who doesn’t comply with woken laws. Apple and other corporations ban their employees from flirting. On college campuses, intimacies between students must be quasi-contracted in advance. Whoever deviates from the agreement and licks first, although according to the script he should have kissed, is up for rape. Eroticism with all its ambivalences cannot and should not arise in this climate of fear…

This brings us to the centre of queer, which is also the innermost core of the Puritans. The overcoming of the flesh, and the fearful rejection of sexuality is the bond that connects LGBTQIA+ and sodomy laws. This is also their common Christian heritage: the ‘Holy Family’ is sexless. The mother Mary conceives Jesus ‘immaculate,’ that is, without sin, from God who begets sexlessly. The father Josef is not involved in his procreation. Jesus lives at home with his mother and has no erotic interest. A religion that worships a saviour whose ‘Holy Family’ is sexless and whose apostles only speak derogatorily about sexuality, already harbours in its myth of origin a deep rejection of everything sexual.

According to Paul and Augustine, sexuality and suffering entered the world with the Fall… What comes from nature, the innate, the body, is condemned. This is reminiscent of Plato, who called the ‘body the prison of the soul,’ and of the Christian, world-despising hatred of all that is natural. Writer J. K. Rowling was massively threatened for the statement, ‘If biological sex isn’t real, it erases the reality of women worldwide.’ That’s what it’s all about, the erasure of men and women and sexuality.

But one does not underestimate… the power of the United States. The Anglo-Saxons already brutally used sodomy laws as a means of domination, and wokeness is nothing more than another US revivalist movement to subjugate other peoples with the best of consciences. American colonialism, like Christianity, sets deadlines. Time is running out, and those who have not yet adopted the last insane twist of American sexual neuroticism are lagging behind.

Adolf Hitler American racial right Autobiography Christendom Evil National Socialism United States

Editor’s preface

(pages 9-10 of the forthcoming Savitri’s book)

When Savitri Devi wrote the foreword that follows, I was seventeen and at the nadir of my life: mental hells into which my very Catholic father and his damned society had put me, as I confess in Letter to mom Medusa (see the book list on page 3). Curiously, a couple of years before that family tragedy I went to ask, in a bookshop, if they had any pro-Nazi books. An employee of the Librería de Cristal in the Cine Manacar in Mexico City, a fair-haired white man, hesitated a few seconds and informed me: ‘No’. True, that bookstore had the old Spanish translation of Mein Kampf, but what I was looking for was more recent literature.

If the worst country in all of Western history had never existed, the United States, Hitler might have won the war and, as I recount in The Grail, the last book in my autobiographical trilogy, the teenager I was would have been spared from the psychosis that two years after my visit to the bookstore would be brewing in my parents’ minds.

The book I was looking for at the age of fifteen was precisely this one that the reader now holds in his hands. I do not presume that this French-English translation is perfect. Far from it! But it seems to me that, of all the books by Savitri Devi (1905-1982), this is the one that best introduces us to the thought of this impressive woman.

If the American racial right is at a dead end, it is precisely because Americans have not had the nobility to see that only by making National Socialism their new religion can they save their race. Furthermore, unlike Hitler’s anti-Christian pantheism (cf. Richard Weikart’s Hitler’s Religion), the great failure of the pundits of the American racial right consists in not repudiating the Semitic religion of our abusive fathers. And abusive by necessity must be all those who traumatise their children with the idea of eternal torture, as I was traumatised as a teenager.

Although the hellish nature of Christianity reveals the twisted psychology of the Semitic mind, the typical anti-Semite ignores that the Jews created the New Testament for gentile consumption (cf. David Skrbina’s The Jesus Hoax). Anyone who invents a superheated torture chamber and then threatens billions of gentiles with it has a sick soul. Right after white traitor Constantine handed over the Roman Empire to his Semitic bishops (cf. Karlheinz Deschner’s Christianity’s Criminal History, also listed on page 3), the doctrine of hell became the greatest weapon of psychological terror used by Jews against whites. Ben Klassen was right on this point! And this is the kind of anti-Christian worldview I badly needed as a teenager to save me from the doctrines my father had put in my little head. Even now, so long after I abandoned Christianity, I am haunted by the idea of eternal damnation. As Gaedhal, a commenter on my website, The West’s Darkest Hour, told us by email:

If you fear a Jewish Hell, then you are controlled by Jews. I speak by experience. I know, rationally, that Hell doesn’t exist… However, more than thirty years of Catholicism means that I still believe in Hell emotionally. I still believe in Hell in my bones’ marrow. And this residual belief in Hell still has negative effects upon my psychology and behaviour. I probably have religious trauma syndrome…

Alas, the American racial right has been, since its origins, extremely addicted to Judeo-Christianity. I would even claim that white nationalism is an ideology that, at its core, functions as a gatekeeper preventing the transvaluation of our darkest values to Greco-Roman values: that is, the luminous values of Antiquity before the Semitic infection. Thus, white nationalists are actively preventing the Aryan man from freeing himself from the yoke that the Jews have created. How could we shake such a yoke from our necks?

Only Hitler saves. Savitri Devi, Hitler’s Priestess, saw this with extraordinary clarity! And the white man who does not want to recognise this is doomed to extinction.

César Tort
8 December 2022

American racial right Conservatism Feminism Jewish question (JQ) Metaphysics of race / sex

On silly Ann Coulter

A couple of days ago, on The Occidental Observer, Ann Coulter was annoyed by these words of Nick Fuentes: ‘Hitler is great, women should be forced to marry young and have children.’ Doesn’t Ann realise that in Jane Austen’s very decent world, women were forced to marry because they couldn’t inherit property? Doesn’t she realise that, by virtue of those values, the British Empire became so powerful?

Ann Coulter is certainly not a racist. She’s an asshole like the rest of the Republicans that ignore what Ludwig Klages said in Cosmogonic Reflections #25 about mankind and race: ‘We must draw a sharp distinction between the man who sees the world as divided between the “human” and the “non-human,” and the man who is most profoundly struck by the obvious racial groupings of mankind (Nietzsche’s “masters”). The bridge that connects us to the Cosmos does not originate in “man,” but in race.’

That is what I call genuine spirituality (in contrast to the ‘spirituality’ that the Jewish authors of the New Testament have drummed into our heads). In the second chapter of Savitri Devi’s book, which will be available as a PDF the next month, we read some prescient passages on how it is that the Christians of the 1930s had an intuitive knowledge that made them see that National Socialism was nothing less than the paradigm that replaces the old paradigm: the Jewish god by an Aryan God. Thanks to the Nick Fuentes / Ye scandal, nowadays we see some of that debate even in discussion threads among Christians, such as this Occidental Dissent thread, where a certain Dicarlo said:

I don’t agree with you, Brad [i.e., Hunter Wallace, who mocks Ye et al]. We’re losing because the jews have unlimited money, and control every platform where Whites need to get out the truth. They have shut down our ability to get out the truth. You might as well advise, never say “jew”. :rolleyes:
There’s nothing cartoonish about Adolph Hitler or the Third Reich. Their mortal enemy is the exact same enemy Whites face today, the jews. Of course there is a problem that most Whites have been lied to so much and drummed down to a point where the truth means nothing to them. We can only soldier on. George Lincoln Rockwell was right!
It doesn’t matter what you tell the normies—those who don’t want to think or know, the jews and their completely controlled media sources are going to lie, cover up, distort, over and over about any topic Whites bring up. Your criticism of praising Adolph Hitler, or the WW2 topic, is just a result of repetitive jew demonization of it [emphasis added]. There is no proper approach to wake up the White normies. All one can do is keep telling the truth about what the jews are doing and have been doing since Rome.

Since Rome… I wonder if Dicarlo has been reading this site, e.g. our excerpts from David Skrbina’s book?

Christendom Daybreak Publishing History Jewish question (JQ) Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books) New Spain

‘Krimi’ – 2022 edition!

After much work, the PDF of the revised first volume of our translation of Karlheinz Deschner’s Kriminal-geschichte des Christentums (Krimi they call this work in Germany), Christianity’s Criminal History: Volume I, is finally ready.

Compared to the foreword I published last month, I added several paragraphs to that foreword (grey letters mean that those sentences also appeared in the previous foreword):

One thing I have noticed about virtually all dissident right-wing intellectuals and commentators, including the racialists, is that they do not try to reinvent the history of the white race as William Pierce did in Who We Are. They do the opposite: they rely on Christian or secular authors ignorant of the real history of the West. So-called dissidents do not seem to realise that, to understand their darkest hour, it is necessary to make a clean sweep of everything that is taught in universities about the humanities and to start rewriting history from scratch.

That is why I chose the weirwood tree as the symbol of my website. It reflects that what we should focus on is the historical past of the white race, the true past (read The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour listed on page 3), not on what is said even in the (semi-normie) forums of the racial right. Whoever is able to touch the millenary tree and see the past not as we are told it happened, but as it actually happened—especially the history of Christianity!—changes his worldview all at once. In his after-dinner conversations, Hitler, who had touched the sacred tree, said: ‘Christianity is the greatest regression humanity has ever experienced.’ Alas, as the Romanian philosopher Emil Cioran, who once described himself as a Hitlerist, wrote, ‘The whole world has forgiven Christianity.’

Well, not the whole world… As I confess in my philosophical autobiography De Jesús a Hitler, Christianity played a key role in the destruction of my teenage life and my twenties, something I will never forgive. The tragedy that destroyed several members of my family motivated me to embark on a long odyssey in search of the sacred tree in order to, retrocognitively, visualise my past. But Karlheinz Deschner’s ten-volume tree has too many branches and whispering leaves in which those who have barely taken their vows can get lost…

Which is why I have abridged it.

Such is the importance of seeing the historical past as it really happened, that I will put Deschner’s book second on the list in a new featured post!

Although the next book of my Daybreak Press will be Savitri Devi’s Reflections of an Aryan Woman that we translated from French, we will continue to upload entries from Deschner’s magnum opus until we can publish the second volume of Krimi.

I take this moment to remind my racialist visitors that The West’s Darkest Hour provides a different paradigm from white nationalism for understanding the decline of the West. While the Jewish problem, in our view, is a catalyst, it is not the active substance that is poisoning the white man. The active substance is Christian ethics.

Let me illustrate it by comparing Mexico to the US. It is less bad to live in a place like the 21st-century Woke US than Catholic New Spain of 1521-1821, which thanks to the Spanish Inquisition controlled Jewry to prevent subversive activities. Ironically, thanks to the heat that Americans are already beginning to feel due to the strong Jewish catalyst, the ‘frog’ is realising that they want to kill it. By contrast, without that powerful catalyst in New Spain, after three centuries the ‘frog’ ended up burned because it didn’t even feel the heat. Pure Christian ethics without Jewish subversion was enough to mongrelize the Iberian whites south of the Rio Grande without them even noticing it. In other words, the CQ is the actual poison; the JQ, a mere catalyst. Thank you, kikes, because your catalyst is so strong that it’s beginning to awaken Americans from their lethargy (cf. Greg Johnson’s article published today about the Kanye ‘Ye’ West controversy)!

Incidentally, there is a chance that an online friend will publish the above-linked PDF as the print version of Christianity’s Criminal History: Volume I on IngramSpark. It is a book that deserves to be on our bookshelves as a hard copy. (I cannot do it myself because I don’t have the time to master the software to design book covers.)