web analytics
Categories
Christendom Revilo Oliver

Xtianity:

A religion for sheep, 1

by Revilo P. Oliver
Published by Liberty Bell Publications in 1980,
under Oliver’s nom de guerre Ralph Perier.

OUR contemporaries are coming to a radically new understanding of the Jewish problem. One by one, and independently of one another, several of our best minds have re-examined the historical record or analysed the forces that are today driving our race to suicide. And each of them has come spontaneously to the conclusion that Christianity was a Jewish invention, devised for the specific purpose of enfeebling and paralysing the civilised peoples of the world, on whom the Jews were preying in antiquity and have preyed ever since.

A century ago, Nietzsche perceived that our civilisation, although it seemed to have an absolute mastery of the whole world, was infected by a degenerative disease, a cancer of the spirit that would destroy it, if our people did not have the intelligence and the fortitude to excise the malignancy. He came to the conclusion that Christianity was a “transvaluation of values,” a mental virus cunningly invented and propagated by the Jews to implement “Jewish vengeance and hatred, – the deepest and sublimest hatred in human history.” Our contemporaries, whether or not they have read the Genealogy of Morals, reason largely from events that have occurred or from historical evidence that became available since Nietzsche’s day. They come to substantially the same conclusion.

The origins of Christianity are extremely obscure. No historical record of its beginnings has survived, and scholars can only draw deductions from the earliest historical references to it and inferences from its confusing and incoherent mythology.

One thing is certain. Christianity was originated by Jews and based on oral traditions about one or, more probably, several of the Jewish agitators and miracle-mongers who bore the extremely common Jewish name of Jesus and called themselves christs. The word ‘christ’ comes from a Greek word that means ‘oil, grease,’ but which was used in the Jews’ uncouth dialect of Greek to mean ‘a messiah,’ that is, a man appointed by the Jews’ tribal god to lead his Chosen barbarians to a definitive victory over the civilised peoples, whom they implacably hated. One of the cleverest tricks of the Fathers of the Church in promoting their cult was to give to non-Jews the impression that ‘christ’ was the name of a person, and even to this day many Christians ignorantly believe that their god was a man who was baptised “Jesus Christ.”

Nietzsche saw that successful promotion of Christianity depended on a pretence of reciprocal hostility between Christians and Jews. It depended on making the Jewish cult, when peddled to the goyim, seem non-Jewish and even anti-Jewish. “Was it not,” he asked, “a necessary feature of a truly brilliant politics of vengeance, a far-sighted, subterranean, slowly and carefully planned vengeance, that Israel had to deny its true instrument publicly and nail him to the cross like a mortal enemy, so that ‘the whole world’ (meaning all the enemies of the Jews) might naively swallow the bait?” This policy, however, produced an unexpected backlash, which was only with difficulty brought under control.

It would take a volume even to summarise the scandalous and scabrous history of Christianity from its known beginnings around the middle of the second century to the triumph of a particularly shrewd and aggressive sect in the fifth century. There were hundreds of sects, each with its own bundle of gospels, peculiar doctrines, and adroit theologians, but among them there were dozens of sects that took seriously the purported antagonism of the Jews to the new religion.

One of the earliest of the Christian sects of which we have some record, and for almost two centuries one of the largest, was the Marcionites. It is noteworthy, by the way, that until quite recently, the earliest extant inscription from a Christian church came from a Marcionite church that was built in 318 and, of course, destroyed when the victorious sect got the power to persecute.

The Marcionites believed that the Jews were “the synagogue of Satan.” They denied that their Jesus had been a Jew. They saw that it was preposterous to claim that an incarnate god could die or would foolishly have himself crucified. They held that it was outrageous to identify the supreme god, who was a just god and loved all mankind, with the capricious, ferocious, and highly immoral god described in the Jews’ story-book, which Christians now call “the Old Testament.” The Marcionites naively thought those stories historical, but regarded them as a chronicle of the crimes perpetrated by the Jews and their supernatural accomplice, a much inferior deity whose abused power the supreme god had justly revoked. Other Christian sects took the logical step of frankly identifying the Jews’ god with Satan. This plausible identification commended itself to goyim who had to live with Jews and suffer their depredations.

We have no means of estimating numbers, but it is possible that early in the third century, taking the numerous sects as a whole, a majority of the Christians repudiated the notion that the wily Jews were God’s People and that the Jesus who was divine could have been a Jew. The anti-Jewish sects, however, appear to have thought of themselves as merely religions and to have believed what was said in their scriptures about love, faith, and peace. Content to believe certain dogmas and to observe rules that would assure them postmortem bliss, they seem to have had no interest in political intrigue and conspiracy, for which they had no talent. So they eventually fell victims to a gang of crafty, ruthless, and tightly-organised theologians, who are now known as the Fathers of the Church and given a prominence they cannot have had in their own time, when they must have appeared to be just another clique of salvation-hucksters.

When the Fathers of the Church finally got their hands on the police powers of the state, doubtless with much covert help from the Jews, they extirpated the anti-Jewish Christians with fire and sword, the natural instruments of Christian love as understood by ambitious holy men. Despite all the pious massacres in the fifth century, the anti-Jewish “heresy” has reappeared from time to time in later ages. It is found today in certain “fundamentalist” churches and, most clearly, in the group of loosely affiliated sects called “British Israel,” whose members probably have never even heard of the Marcionites or their other ancient precursors.

“British Israel” may be another ploy that backfired. It began in England at the time when Disraeli was crawling up to the British Prime Ministry and peerage. In its original form, it taught that the “ten lost tribes” supposedly taken captive by the Assyrians had been Anglo-Saxons, who migrated en masse from Assyrian territory to the British Isles. A handsome genealogy was concocted to show that Queen Victoria was a lineal descendant of a bandit chief named David. It followed, therefore, that God’s Own People, to-wit, the Anglo-Saxons and the Jews, reunited at last after many centuries, should jointly rule the world. That notion, however, imposed too great a strain on even Christian credulity.

Bizarre “geneology” issued by a “British Israel” group; many of their claims are now echoed by “Christian Identity” churches.

Today, the “British Israelites” accept the story that the “ten tribes” were Anglo-Saxons or, at least, Nordics, and hot-footed it from Assyrian territory to the British Isles or, at least, northern Europe. They further claim that the Jesus of Holy Writ was an Aryan, despite his distinctively Jewish name and the distinctively Jewish (or conceivably Egyptian) name of his supposed mother. They rely principally on some of the early Christian forgeries which explicitly describe that Jesus as having had blue eyes and blond hair and beard. They do not use, and seem not to know, the tradition, attested as early as any of the other Christian tales, that one of the Jesuses was the son of a Jewess by a soldier named Pandara/Panthera, who probably was not a Jew and could well have been a Macedonian or other Greek in a Seleucid or Roman army.

We must feel a considerable sympathy for the “British Israelites” of the present. They candidly recognise the Jews as the eternal enemies of our race. They are the best of the Christians and are making a valiant effort to free their religion from its Jewish trammels and make it conducive to the survival of our race. Unfortunately, their doctrine is historically preposterous and, what is even worse, demoralising. It makes our race the accomplices and beneficiaries of the ferocious god, Yahweh, who, according to the “Old Testament,” helped his pets swindle, plunder, torment, and butcher their betters in Egypt and Canaan.

Categories
Gaedhal (commenter) Revilo Oliver

Primary cause

by Gaedhal

I seem to be one of a few who pay attention to ‘real Christianity’, and what is abroad in this declining movement.

Thus, the Riemenschneider[1] vs. Joel Webbon situation has probably not been analysed from a Team-White perspective.

Generation Zyklon is mostly ‘none’, and so now, on the White Side, we can criticise Christianity as the Jewish psyop it always was to our heart’s content. Revilo P. Oliver and William Luther Pierce, privately, came to the conclusion that Christianity was antiwhite, but, at least initially, they were extremely reticent in attacking it. Oliver released a pamphlet, under a pseudonym, in which he said that not only was Christianity anti-white, it was the primary cause of the white demographic eclipse that we are currently enduring.

In this video, James White says that you should love black believers more than white non believers. Indeed, if your daughter rejects Jesus, James White tells you to hate her. The Jewish Messiah came to sow division amongst gentiles:

Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division (Luke 12:51).

Also, you should hate her.

If any one comes to me without hating his father* and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple (* NRSV CE).

Christianity is Jewish psychological terrorism against whites. Cesar and Kyle Hunt understand this, and their respective websites, West’s Darkest Hour and Renegade Tribune, understand this.

James White quotes these two vile verses. White is a true believer in Christianity. Speaking of White’s version of Christianity, Foote, the leader of the secular society said:

‘a hateful creed in its true colours’.

By this, he meant that Christianity is a hateful creed of threats and empty promises, and that White’s version of Calvinist Extremism is in all likelihood, the truest expression of Christianity. This is not to say that Christians ought to be hated. I do not say this at all. Christians have a persecution complex, and hating them only plays into this. As I said before: the best response to Christianity is to politely ignore it. In a recent pieville slice, Linder said that Christianity should be banned in the white ethnostate. I disagree with this. However, I absolutely do agree with him that any antiwhite preaching by Christian ministers should be a death sentence.

Christianity is dying of itself as the KJV puts it. We should just leave it alone and allow it to die a natural death. I think that this was Saint Adolf Hitler’s attitude in his table talks. Hitler could be quite liberal—in the true sense of this word, i.e. tolerant and generous to opinions that were not cynically subversive—when he wanted to be. Liberalis in Latin means: ‘free’ or ‘generous’, and Hitler was an admirer of the true liberality of the Classical world. This, of course was replaced by the Inquisitions, witch-hunts and book-burnings of the Christian Dark Age.

A funny thing is happening in Calvinist Extremism. A lot of the younger Calvinist Extremists are experiencing a racial awakening; are discovering what they naively call ‘the Jewish Question’—when, in reality, it is the Jewish Problem—and they are beginning to question World War 2 Allied Propaganda. They are beginning to reject the Post War Consensus. Hey, maybe that the Jews and the communists won the greatest war ever fought might not be a good thing. As Cesar might put it: they are beginning to dip their toes in the Rubicon… And then Boomer Christians like Doug Wilson and James White come in to attempt to gatekeep, and to attempt to corral these men back onto the Con-servative reservation. Christianity—just as with Sicut Judaeis Non—is a gatekeeping operation. When the Jews get into trouble, they ring up the Christians so as to gatekeep, and to provide controlled opposition, and to propose non solutions such as throwing Holy Water over them or exiling them… so that their luckless descendants will again fall prey to them in a century, or so.

With this ‘Antioch Declaration’, we see that Christianity is still working as it was set up to; as it was intended to. Christianity is both a control grid for the Jews, and it is also a buffer zone between Jews and whites.

As Urban Jungle Girl put it: boomers such as James White must take their vile anti-white creed with them when they die.

__________

[1] Riemenschneider is German for: ‘strap cutter’ i.e. a maker of leather straps. German surnames are an excellent way to build up vocabulary in the language of the Fatherland.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s note:

Oliver released a pamphlet, under a pseudonym, in which he said that not only was Christianity anti-white, it was the primary cause of the white demographic eclipse that we are currently enduring.

In six instalments I’ll post it the following days.

Categories
Der Antichrist (book) Friedrich Nietzsche

Christianity:

The communism of antiquity, 1

by Alain de Benoist

In The Antichrist, Nietzsche does not hesitate to affirm that:

What stood as aere perennius,[1] the imperium Romanum, the most magnificent form of organization ever to be achieved under difficult conditions, compared to which everything before or after has just been patched together, botched and dilettantish, those holy anarchists made a ‘piety’ out of destroying ‘the world’, which is to say the imperium Romanum, until every stone was overturned…

Christianity was the vampire of the imperium Romanum, – overnight, it obliterated the Romans’ tremendous deed of laying the ground for a great culture that had time. – You still don’t understand? The imperium Romanum that we know, that we are coming to know better through the history of the Roman provinces, this most remarkable artwork in the great style was a beginning, its design was calculated to prove itself over the millennia – nothing like it has been built to this day, nobody has even dreamed of building on this scale, sub specie aeterni [2] – This organization was stable enough to hold up under bad emperors: the accident of personalities cannot make any difference with things like this, –first principle of all great architecture. But it was not stable enough to withstand the most corrupt type of corruption, to withstand Christians

This secretive worm that crept up to every individual under the cover of night, fog, and ambiguity and sucked the seriousness for true things, the instinct for reality in general right out of every individual, this cowardly, feminine, saccharine group gradually alienated the ‘souls’ from that tremendous structure, – those valuable, those masculine-noble natures that saw Rome’s business as their own business, their own seriousness, their own pride.

The priggish creeping around, the conventicle secrecy, dismal ideas like hell, like the sacrifice of the innocent, like the unio mystica[3] in the drinking of blood, above all the slowly fanned flames of revenge, of Chandala revenge – that is what gained control over Rome, the same type of religion that Epicurus had already waged war against in its pre-existent form. You should read Lucretius to see what Epicurus had fought, not paganism but ‘Christianity’, I mean the corruption of the soul through the ideas of guilt, punishment, and immortality. – He fought the subterranean cults, the whole of latent Christianity, – at that time, to deny immortality was nothing less than salvation.

____________

[1] A line from Goethe’s novel Elective Affinities.

[2] From the standpoint of eternity.

[3] Mystical union.

Categories
Gaedhal (commenter) Richard Carrier

Marcan myth

by Gaedhal

This is an excellent article by Richard Carrier on all the impossible and magical events in Mark’s Gospel. And remember: Mark’s gospel is really the only historical ‘evidence’—if such it be—that this Jesus character even existed. The other Gospels are really only fictitious elaborations of Mark; novels plagiarised from the Marcan source-text. If a Jesus incident occurred, and Mark doesn’t relate it, then either Matthew, John or Luke made it up so as to advance a theological agenda.

The above is a slight exaggeration. I actually do believe in hypothesised sources such as Q; however we have zero historical, archaeological or documentary evidence of Q. Mark is the only source of the alleged life of Jesus that we have any empirical evidence for.

The German-rationalist view was that the magical events in the gospels actually occurred, but that their cause was natural [Editor’s note: see the classic 1906 work of Biblical historical criticism The Quest for the Historical Jesus by Albert Schweitzer]. Jesus walked on a puddle, and this was misconstrued as his walking magically on water. However, this view was ultimately destroyed by David Friedrich Strauss. Strauss proved that the magical events in the gospels are completely mythological or ahistorical.

It simply will not do to delete the magical lies of the Gospel of Mark, and then claim that the remaining mundanity actually happened historically.

In my estimation, there is zero history in the New Testament.

However, the likes of Mike Licona tell us that the Gospels are sober history that give us the ‘gist’ of events that actually occurred, albeit embellished by special effects like zombie-uprisings, earthquakes, and Temple veils’ being split. However, the problem with the con that Licona is trying to pull is that Jesus’s resurrection from the dead, the conversation that the disciples had with magical disembodied beings called ‘angels’, and Jesus’s levitation into the sky followed by his magical disappearance could likewise be classed as ‘Apocalyptic special effects’. Remember: Licona is a con-artist, just as all apologists are. He is just slightly less of a con-artist than the likes of Gary Habermas and J. Warner Wallace. YouTube atheists should stop patting Licona on the head, for this.

Aubrey Plaza once described Acting as ‘lying for money’. This also describes the Apologetics’ profession.

David Madison recently wrote a blogpost about the article from Richard Carrier.

Categories
Axiology

Two factions

I recently said that I don’t talk about news on this site unless we use a news story to discuss metapolitics. From this angle, I can use the recent American election to illustrate one of the ideological pillars of this site.

Everyone knows what Christianity is. But those who have read Tom Holland will understand what we mean by atheistic hyper-Christianity, which we sum up in one word: neochristianity. In short, all Western atheists are neochristians since Christianity has not only the dogmatic side but also an axiological side. To give just one example. In my previous post I mentioned The Turner Diaries: a novel that ends when the Aryans exterminate the non-Aryans on the whole planet. Since that novel is never mentioned on white nationalist sites as the blueprint for what needs to be done, we could label them all as Judeo-Christian or Neo-Judeochristian. Why? Because the proclamation of human rights in the time of the French Jacobins, as Holland saw in his book, is at heart a proclamation of Christian ethics, albeit stripped of its religious trappings.

In his book Dominion, Holland included this image that imitate Moses’ commandments.

So there are no authentic apostates from Christianity in the West, except those who think as the late William Pierce thought in his novel—and in his history of the white race, where he said that all Aryan conquests failed because they failed to exterminate the natives. (This Hitler, Himmler and Heydrich did plan with their Master Plan East because, unlike the American racialists, they did dare to cross the psychological Rubicon: transvalue all Christian values.)

Once the POV of this site is understood, it becomes clear that the recent American election was a contest between the basically Christian values of those who voted for Trump and the neochristian values of those who voted for the mulatta. The problem is that both factions are two sides of the same coin. It was clear from Biden’s inaugural speech, from the Woke vocabulary he used, that whoever wrote it had already left traditional Christianity behind in pursuit of neochristianity: which takes the principle of Christian equity to its ultimate consequence (those who have not yet read Dominion should read it, abridged by me here).

Which faction is worse, the new or the old? It is very common among the American racial right to say that the new one is worse, but an accelerationist who has in mind the metaphor of the frog gradually burning out without noticing it would reply that maybe the old one is worse.

I don’t know which is worse. It is irrelevant. What counts is that the Pauline principle that there will be no more distinction between Greeks—that is, whites—and Jews came, in its secular transmutation in the 1960s, to be metastasised so that we would see blacks as brothers and ‘liberate’ our women. In our century Wokism took that principle to its ultimate consequences with homo ‘marriage’ and transgender empowerment. The latter may seem grotesque but it is grounded in Christian ideals, as I said in my 2019 post ‘On empowering birds feeding on corpses’, where I talk about the Franciscans of the 14th century.

The conservative revolution that is causing so much excitement among those rejoicing at Trump’s victory has to be understood from this meta-political angle. It is not a genuine revolution, as was the German NS. Rather, it is two Christian factions fighting each other: one very liberal and the other conservative. But salvation lies in abandoning Christian ethics altogether: which is why I changed the subtitle of this blog today from ‘Gens alba conservanda est’ to ‘Post-1945 National Socialism’.

Unlike today’s racialists Hitler understood Xtianity.

Categories
Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald Miscegenation

Morgan’s postscript

Editor’s note: this is Robert Morgan’s reply
today about what I posted yesterday:

 

______ 卐 ______

 
Hola, amigo!

Once again, our thoughts overlap. I especially agree with this:

The orthodox interpretation of white nationalism is that Jewry is the primary cause of white decline and that traitorous white men are like poor Manchurian candidates whom evil Jews hypnotised with malicious propaganda.

Certainly this is an apt summation of Kevin MacDonald’s view too, stripped of its “evolutionary psychology” trappings. The message of his signature work The Culture of Critique is that the Jews’ victory over gentile culture was won through propaganda, which is seen by him as able to both initiate and steer various social movements among the gentiles, or in other words, to manipulate them as though they were puppets. In my view, this way of looking at matters is not only completely wrong, but also very damaging in that by its misdirection it leads people to regard effects as if they were causes. Ellul put it very well:

Propaganda must not only attach itself to what already exists in the individual, but also express the fundamental currents of the society it seeks to influence. Propaganda must be familiar with collective sociological presuppositions, spontaneous myths, and broad ideologies.

By this we do not mean political currents or temporary opinions that will change in a few months, but the fundamental psycho-sociological bases on which a whole society rests, the presuppositions and myths not just of individuals or of particular groups but those shared by all individuals in a society including men of opposite political inclinations and class loyalties. A propaganda pitting itself against this fundamental and accepted structure would have no chance of success.

Rather, all effective propaganda is based on these fundamental currents and expresses them. Only if it rests on the proper collective belief will it be understood and accepted. It is part of a complex of civilization, consisting of material elements, beliefs, ideas, and institutions, and it cannot be separated from them. No propaganda could succeed by going against these structural elements of society. But propaganda’s main task clearly is the psychological reflection of these structures. —Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes, p. 38-9

Both the successes of the Jewish critiques of gentile culture and the Donald Trump phenomenon are better explained by Ellul’s view than MacDonald’s. For example, I would argue that America’s Christian heritage, and the very Christian commitment it had already made as a society to regard the negro as the white man’s equal following the Civil War, laid indispensable groundwork necessary for Boas’ views to be accepted. Because of this history, America needed to believe in racial equality as a biological fact, and Boas, the clever Jew, came along to take advantage of this. The gentile public was eager to buy what he was selling.

Conversely, propaganda failed to take down Donald Trump precisely because it went against some of America’s most deeply held beliefs. American culture respects a winner most of all, and he is the archetypal winner: a billionaire, a courageous fighter (his cry of “Fight! Fight! Fight!” after being shot was electrifying! LOL), a flagrant womanizer and a fucker of supermodels. The contrast between him and the effete, doddering Biden, Obama’s shoeshine boy, couldn’t have been greater or more sharply drawn.

Nevertheless though, MacDonald is wrong again in being encouraged by Trump’s victory. The decline of the white race will continue under Trump just as it has been, and likely even accelerate. It’s fitting that Trump’s a Zionist, because America is itself Zionist. His family is interbred with Jews, and his Veep is married to a street shitter [emphasis by Editor]. They set a fine example! We must reconcile ourselves to the fact that race mixing is the face of empire, and it would be crazy to expect less of it under Trump imperator.

Categories
Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald

R. Morgan

As we know, this site is not about politics but about metapolitics. I will only talk about actual politics if something huge happens; for example, if a war of extermination of the Muslim world breaks out against Israel, or if Putin drops atomic bombs on Europe if NATO dares to bomb his mother Russia. From this angle, Trump’s victory is not important news. But I can use it to present a clear case of ‘metapolitics’ in the sense of paradigm-shifting for those of us who want to prevent whites from going extinct.

The orthodox interpretation of white nationalism is that Jewry is the primary cause of white decline and that traitorous white men are like poor Manchurian candidates whom evil Jews hypnotised with malicious propaganda.

Here at The West’s Darkest Hour we see reality from a different prism. We believe that Western history took a wrong turn with Constantine, who wanted to subjugate the white men of the Mediterranean by introducing ‘spiritual terror’ (Adolf Hitler’s term): Judeo-Christianity, which his successors succeeded in doing. The distortion produced by the inversion of Aryan values into Judeo-Christian values perfectly explains the scale of values that, in the modern world, has mutated into an atheistic hyper-Christianity, as the historian Tom Holland has seen.

Having laid the groundwork for a paradigm that competes with the Judeo-reductionism of the American racial right, it is good to hear what one American dissenter from that narrative, Dr Robert Morgan, has to say in response to Kevin MacDonald. I refer to the recent article published in The Occidental Observer, ‘The Trump Victory Is Huge!’, republished yesterday in The Unz Review. The first paragraph of Morgan’s comment is a quote from MacDonald’s article:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

The New York Times ran between 5-10 articles and op-eds every day hating on everything about Trump, including his family, and I am sure the same was true of MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, The Washington Post, The LA Times, etc. They have lost their credibility, spending their huge advantage in spreading propaganda on lies… No one with any brain believes a thing they say related to politics.

Surely if there is any lesson to be drawn from this it’s that propaganda’s power isn’t unlimited. We have just seen the result of eight years of constant anti-Trump propaganda. The full power of nearly all media in the country was turned on him in an effort to destroy the man. The full power of the deep state via lawfare was used against him, and academia was also against him. Assassins even tried to kill him. Every conceivable avenue of attack was tried, and yet they all failed. He’s a giant; an American Caesar.

Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonourable graves.

– William Shakespeare Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene II

Unfortunately for MacDonald, once this is admitted, the validity of his entire body of work is called into question [emphasis by Ed.]. Unless I’m very gravely mistaken, it’s the thesis of his book The Culture of Critique that it was through their constant propaganda efforts that Jews succeeded in undermining gentile culture. For example, he attributes the success of Freud’s ideas to “brainwashing”.

Finally, it is reasonable to conclude that Freud’s real analysand was gentile culture, and that psychoanalysis was fundamentally an act of aggression toward that culture. The methodology and institutional structure of psychoanalysis may be viewed as attempts to brainwash gentile culture into passively accepting the radical criticism of gentile culture entailed by the fundamental postulates of psychoanalysis. – Kevin MacDonald,The Culture of Critique, p. 133

He employs similar reasoning to explain the success of Boasian anthropology, and the Frankfurt School. Propaganda is seen by him as a very important tool with which to undermine gentile culture; indeed, he says that Boasian anthropology and the ideas put forward in The Authoritarian Personality are in themselves prime examples of such Jewish propaganda. Thus, the “culture of critique” is just another way to phrase what he sees as the Jewish effort to undermine white civilizational confidence through constant propaganda. MacDonald quotes Ben Stein:

Television and the movies are America’s folk culture, and they have nothing but contempt for the way of life of a very large part of the folk. . . . People are told that their culture is, at its root, sick, violent, and depraved, and this message gives them little confidence in the future of that culture. It also leads them to feel ashamed of their country and to believe that if their society is in decline, it deserves to be. (Stein 1976, 22) – Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique, p. ix

But why did the propaganda fail in the case of Trump, but supposedly succeed in all those other cases? I know it’s a radical idea, but could it possibly be the case that people are not mere puppets, at the mercy of whatever propaganda they are subjected to, but instead have some moral agency of their own, an ability to discriminate and make their own decisions? I hesitate to suggest such an insane thing, but is it possible that instead of not having a brain, those 67 million Americans who voted for Harris actually think she was the better choice?

I believe that, as the good scientist MacDonald claims to be, he must admit the possibility. But if so, then it seems clear that, by the same logic, those gentiles who fell for Freudianism, Boasian anthropology, the ideas of the Frankfurt School, and the rest of the Jewish critique may also have had their reasons. They were not mere puppets. They not only had brains, but thought those critiques well made. In other words, they yielded to the propaganda because they wanted to.

Therefore if Trump’s victory shows anything, it shows they were equally capable of rejecting the propaganda, but didn’t.

Categories
Democracy Deranged altruism Might is right (book)

Might is right, 12

Reverting, however, to Chicago’s reverend Utopia-constructor, thus waileth he with cajoling crudity:

The laws of social evolution, far from being the blind, barbarous, and brutal struggle for organic existence, consists in the physical, intellectual and moral wellbeing of all the members of society, so constituted that the politico-ethical principles of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity shall have the largest possible realization throughout the social organism. The main features of the condition of progress are Christian churches, Christian schools, Christian governments, Christian ethics and economics.

Another seductive but most malignant State Socialist (Henry George) roundly proclaims that ‘The salvation of society, the hope of the free, and full development of humanity, is in the gospel of brotherhood, the gospel of Christ,’ and thereupon he proposes to make politicians the national rent-tax collectors, administrators of everything in general, and all-round distributors of state pensions to ‘the poor and needy.’

Has not mankind had sufficient experience of what politicians are?—Those black-hearted creeping thieves and frauds. Their sting is deadlier than the bite of a cobra, and in the breath of their mouth there is—death. Curses be upon ye, O! ye politicians, and upon all who advocate increasing your prerogatives!

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s note: Emphasis added in bold. What Arthur Desmond wrote above reminds me of people like Nick Fuentes, and what he says below reminds me of the racialists who are currently talking about the upcoming elections in their country. Remember that a true priest of the holy words repudiates democracy as the worst of all possible political systems.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Presidential candidates, from Jefferson, to Lincoln, (also their apish imitators) have generally indulged in equally shallow rhodomontade, because it means votes, and for votes, office-seekers would dress up in glowing language, and ray forth any devilish deception.

For two thousand years these effeminate superlatives have been trumpeted to the remotest corner of every Christian land, and yet (while enervating the morale of people) they have dismally failed to inaugurate the much foretold earthly paradise. They were preached by bare-foot monks at the inauguration of the Dark Ages, in order that those saintly lovers of the common people might creep into the administration of co-operative wealth and power. Now, the same general ideas are revived and dressed up (this time in politico- economic garb) by the eloquent agitator, in order that he may rule and plunder in the future, through the agency of the State; just as the priest once ruled and plundered through the equally rapacious agency of the Church.

When the Church triumphed, the Dark Ages began, and when it is finally rooted out (together with all its social antenæ) the Heroic Age dawns once more. True heroes shall be born again as of old, for our women may yet be something more than rickety perambulating dolls and drug-stores in spectacles.

The ‘Church’ is the idol of the priestly parasite—the ‘State’ is the idol of the political parasite. Beware, O, America! that in escaping from the holy trickery of the monk, you fall not an easy prey to ‘the loving kindness’ of the politician. Even if the ‘reformer’ succeeds in re-establishing upon majority-votes, the dark tyranny of the ‘greatest number;’ we have this consolation to fall back upon, such organisation must ultimately tumble down of its own weight, and then re-divide up into warring fragments. Nothing that is unnatural can last for long.

The Universal Church is no more; all we see of it now is jealous remnants. And the Universal State, the Social Democracy, the Economic Republic, the Brotherhood of Man, should they take practical form, are pre-ordained to similar failure. All they could do, would be to postpone the operation of the survival of the fittest—drugging nations in temporary sedatives.

No matter how eagerly madmen may try to do it, there is no known process whereby they can jump out of their own skins. Christian or socialist churches, paternalisms, schools, governments, administrations, ethics, and moralisms (even if genuinely Christian and fraternal) would be wholly impotent to change the natural course of things and therefore powerless to command the survival of mental and physical cripples; even although those cripples were as canonized saints for ‘goodness,’ and as the sands of the sea shore for number. Shrieking sentimentalism is indeed a feeble lever wherewith to overturn the immutable order of the universe. It cannot do it. No! not if it were whooped till the crack of doom! Not even if it had a Lamb of God in every city, ready to be butchered each Friday afternoon, in order to make a Christian holiday.

Categories
Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (books)

Christianity’s

Criminal History, 196

For the context of these translations click here.
PDFs of entries 1-183 (several of Karlheinz Deschner’s
books abridged into two) can be read here and here.

Arnulf of Carinthia.

Arnulf of Carinthia: East Franconia and the East

Arnulf of Carinthia (c. 850-899) was the eldest illegitimate offspring of the Bavarian king and king of Italy, Carloman, the eldest son of Louis the German and his mother Liutwind, apparently a Luitpoldinger. In addition to his lawful wife Ota, Arnulf had several concubines and had no shortage of children out of wedlock, which did not bother the clergy. On the contrary, the prince, who was thoroughly devout to the Church, was favoured by the community of saints just as much as he favoured them, even though he renounced an anointing.
 

‘Hail Arnolf, the great king’

From the very beginning, there was a close relationship between the bishops and the new lord, who once called himself the ‘most determined opponent’ of all enemies of the Church, in a document the ‘son and defender of the Catholic Church’, to which he also signalled his benevolence immediately after his elevation through donations and graces. He ‘conspicuously generously’ endowed the bishops with royal estates, forests, minting, market and customs rights with a ‘previously unknown frequency’ (Fried). He convened five synods during his reign of just over 12 years. The authority of the prelates was desirable to him against the rising particular powers. Moreover, it could sanction his illegitimate kingship.

The Church, on the other hand, benefited from the ruler’s power in the conflict with the dukes and the high hereditary nobility. For this reason it immediately supported him, had him prayed for from the outset and immediately interceded for his protection under threat of ecclesiastical punishment. But of course, it also made him aware of the duties of a Christian ruler. And by supporting him, the Church supported itself. Thus began a development that gave the church more say than ever before, with all the fatal consequences that this entailed, making it ‘the most powerful in the state’ (Mühlbacher).

While there is no evidence of counts in the king’s entourage for many years, a series of bishops, many of whom were favoured by the king, continued to tip the political balance. First Archbishop Thietmar of Salzburg, Arnulf’s arch chaplain, head of the court chapel and chancellery; later increasingly the chancellor and deacon Aspert, made bishop of Regensburg by Arnulf in 891, and his successor as chancellor (from 893), Bishop Wiching of Neutra. A key politician close to the ruler was the intelligent and cunning Hatto I of Mainz, whose death (913) was attributed by some to an avenging lightning bolt. Hatto came from a Swabian family, partisans of Charles, but immediately sided with Arnulf after the emperor’s fall and was rewarded by him with the abbeys of Reichenau, Ellwangen, Lorsch and Weissenburg, and in 891 with the archbishopric of Mainz. The prelate accompanied the king to Italy twice and intervened in all important public issues. The bishops Salomon III of Constance (notary since 884, chancellor of Charles III since 885, already Arnulf’s chaplain in 888), Waldo of Freising, Erchanbald of Eichstätt, Engilmar of Passau and the high noble Adalbero of Augsburg, whom Arnulf made his son’s tutor, also carried considerable political weight.

In May 895, at the imperial assembly at Tribur, the royal palace near Mainz, at one of the largest and most brilliant synods of the century, the unusually numerous East Frankish episcopate celebrated Arnulf effusively as the king, ‘whose heart’, according to the Synodal Acts, ‘the Holy Spirit inflamed with fire and kindled with the fervour of divine love so that the whole world might recognise that he was chosen not by man and through man, but by God himself’. Old sayings of the prelates. For whom they choose, whom they support, is always from God (i.e., from them)!

At the synod, which according to Regino von Prüm ‘was held against many secularists who endeavoured to diminish the authority of the bishops’, the bishops were all the more eager to increase their authority. They discussed in detail legal disputes between clergy and laity, the mistreatment of clerics, and their wounding or killing, which occurred more frequently than before—even a blinded priest was allowed to appear. One canon contains the king’s order to arrest those who despised the church, whereby the killing of rebels did not cost any defence money! Furthermore, complete submission to the papacy is demanded, ‘even if a hardly bearable yoke is imposed by the Holy See’! Several chapters are devoted to the most important things, money, property, tithes, and church robbers. According to chapter 7, stolen church property is to be replaced threefold, and this concerning the pseudo-Isidoric forgeries (which are also referred to in other canons, such as 8 and 9, but on the other hand orders that presenters of forged papal letters be taken into custody).

Naturally, the king approved the resolutions. Indeed, in response to the rhetorical question as to how much he ‘deigned to defend the Church of Christ and to extend and exalt her ministry’, he first encouraged the ‘shepherds’, also apostrophised as the ‘brightest lights of the world’, to take vigorous action themselves ‘be it in season or out of season, punish, rebuke, admonish with all patience and teaching, so that in watchful care and through unceasing admonition, you may drive the sheep of Christ to the door of eternal life’. But then he emphasised all his solidarity. ‘In me, you have the most determined opponent of all those who are hostile to the Church of Christ and rebellious to your priestly ministry.’ No wonder the venerable Council Fathers rose from their seats and, together with the surrounding clergy, shouted three or four times: ‘Christ, hear us, hail Arnolf, the great King’. (Doesn’t it remind us of the cry of salvation that still rings in our ears?) In addition, the ringing of bells, the Tedeum, all in praise of God, ‘who has deigned to give his holy church such a pious and mild comforter and such a valiant helper for the honour of his name’.

The ruler particularly venerated his patron saint, under whom he even rose to become the patron saint of the empire, a saint of the realm.

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s Note: This is all background on how, over the centuries, the Aryan collective unconscious was forcibly implanted with the malware that has now mutated into a psychotic Wokism (cf. everything I have said on this site about Tom Holland’s work).

It is background because granting such a dimension of power to a human institution cannot but brainwash the white man through a ‘heard mentality’, ‘mass formation’ or whatever you want to call it.

Categories
Deranged altruism Might is right (book)

Might is right, 11

Reverend Ferdinand M. Sprague, of Chicago (who may be taken as a common specimen of the priest-politician), in a little pamphlet lately published, entitled The Laws of Social Evolution, writes thus: ‘The sheet anchor of Socialism according to its ablest exponents, is the Holy Christian religion. Its motto founded on the precept “love thy neighbour as thyself” is—“each for all, and all for each.” Its working principle for the present is altruism.’ Nearly all the canonized ‘Fathers’ of the early Roman propaganda (most of whom, by the way, were slaves, freedmen, or eunuchs) advocated similar ideals.

Even now, the anointed and sanctified head of the Catholic Church resurrects the same hoary old ‘The ethics of Socialism are identical with the teachings of Christianity’ (Encyclopedia Brittanica): utopianism in a Jesuitic encyclical addressed to his flock! (how suggestive of being shorn and skinned, is that word ‘flock’).

Again, the Epistle of James has been reprinted and widely circulated by Socialists, in order to sow and broadcast their illogical theories of a universal brotherhood, founded upon enforced labour, regimentation of the herd, and majority votes.

Many modern cities are also infested with plausible epileptoid priestlings of unreason, like Dr. McGlynn, Professor Bemis, Hugh Price Hughes, W. T. Stead, Myron Reed, and Professor Herron of California. All these men are unrivalled masters in the art of persuasive declamation. They accept the New Testament as their text book and preach therefrom to morbid multitudes the atrocious and shallow gospel of equal rights, equal liberty, equal brotherhood, as the veritable omnific word, the newly discovered emancipating protocol of the Crucified.

A god begging his bread from door to door!—A god without a place to lay his head!—A god spiked to two pieces of crossed scantling!—A god stabbed to death by an hired officer!—A god executed by order of a stipendiary magistrate!

What an insane idea. Is it an idea or rather a wasting cranial disease? Talk about ‘the heathen in his blindness’ and superstitious madness in past ages!… The hysteric idolatry of today: the deification of a Jew.