web analytics

Tag: Christian problem (CP)

Categories
Racial right

TOO

KevinMac continues to pass the microphone to Christians in his webzine, The Occidental Observer (TOO).

Since, in my last couple of comments on TOO, starting here, a commenter responded to me with a personal attack (‘neopagan’, etc.) instead of addressing my argument (the mixing of blood perpetrated by Iberian Catholics in the Americas), I think that that couple of comments on the 11th and 12th of this month should be my last attempts to communicate with the TOO commentariat.

Christians, even racialist Christians, are too dishonest people to sit at the same table with.

I have said it more than once and it is worth repeating: We need a new generation of racists who are infinitely closer to Hitlerism than to the American racial right, including those who visit and comment on TOO.

Categories
Bible Holocaust New Testament

The Bible

by Gaedhal

Marcus Eli Ravage, a Jew himself, points this out in A Real Case Against the Jews. Why, he asks, do you Antisemitic Christians accuse us, the Jews, of writing The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion—most likely written by an Orthodox monk in collaboration with the Russian Secret police, the Okhrana—when it is provably true that we wrote the Bible!

And what sort of world does the Bible envisage? Well Yeshangyahu—or Anglicised to “Isaiah”—tells us. The goyim shall bow down to the Jew and lick the dust off the soles of his feet. The leaders of the Goyim shall keep the feast of Booths in Jerusalem. Incidentally, when we see our leaders cringing at Yad Vashem and Auschwitz, and when we see our leaders visiting the Wailing Wall, this, in my view, is the beginning of the self-fulfilment of Isaiah’s “prophecy”. In my view, the Holocaust is simply another holiday, like Purim or Channukah, that was added to the religious calendar. The leaders of the Goyim are already keeping Jewish holidays by observing “Holocaust Remembrance Day” and visiting the Wailing Wall. Indeed, the term Holocaust comes from the Greek Old Testament, and means: ‘A whole burnt offering to Yahweh’.

As the Psalms say: ‘Why do the Goyim rage and imagine a vain thing?’ The ‘vain thing’ referred to here is the temerity to imagine a life free from Jewish domination. As the acolytes of Karl Marx would put it: Revolution is inevitable. Or as Star Trek puts it: “Resistance is futile: you will be assimilated”.

The New Testament is no better. Rabbi Jesus shall be the “Messiah” or anointed king ruling a worldwide empire from Jerusalem. Any resistance to His rule shall be met with lethal force. Jesus treads the winepresses—filled to the brim with goyim blood. The Protestants in Northern Ireland, sing of being knee-deep in Fenian—i.e. Catholic—blood. Well, the Jewish soldiers and Jewish horses in Revelation shall be bridle-deep in Goyim’s blood. Jesus wears a tunic dipped in Goyim blood. Jesus kills the children of Heretical sects of Judaism, after first subjecting their founders to a gangbang.

‘Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.’ (Revelation 2:20-23)

The Bukkake being concluded, Jesus will strike the children spawned by such a coupling with death. Revilo P. Oliver called Revelation ‘a hymn of hate’, whereas Steve Wells, of The Skeptics’ Annotated Bible calls it the worst book in the Bible. John, in his fever dream, dreams up more and more inventive ways to murder his religious and ethnic enemies.

Ravage was amazed that Christians would accuse Jews of writing the Protocols, when it is provably true that they wrote the Bible, and that the Bible has much the same ends. I never read the Protocols, myself, so I don’t know.

However, accusing Jews of writing the Protocols requires no epistemic humility. However, admitting that you and all of your ancestors for more than a thousand years have been duped by the Jewish long-con of Christianity does require epistemic humility.

Some people are congenital atheists. Aron Ra, Alex, and Christopher Hitchens never bought the Christian swindle, even though they were brought up Christian. With me, it was not so. I was well and thoroughly duped and gulled by Christianity for about 30 years. However, I have the epistemic humility to admit this.

As Mark Twain put it: it is far easier to dupe people than to get them to admit that they have been duped.

Categories
Conservatism Conspiracy theories Racial right

UR conservatives

by Robert Morgan

They [Unz Review conservatives] continue to whine endlessly about “brainwashing”, globalist or Jewish “agendas”, and most ludicrously of all, the decline of “real” Christianity. According to conservatives here at UR and elsewhere, those are the causes, not the logical consequence of the Bible’s racial egalitarianism working out in politics and civic life. These conservatives… will spin a thousand intricate conspiracy theories rather than face the truth. That the answer could be as prosaic as America’s culture of anti-racism developing inevitably from their own Christian beliefs is something they can’t comprehend.

Categories
3-eyed crow Racial right

Black bread

On my morning walk to buy a loaf of black bread to go with my salad at lunchtime (in my intermittent fasting I skip breakfasts), I had a thought.

The racial realism promoted by Jared Taylor is doomed to fail. As Michael O’Meara said years ago in one of the TOQ Online essays that were eventually published in Toward the White Republic, it is the poet, not the scientist, who makes nations. Taylor, and as we recently saw even the neo-Nazi G.L. Rockwell, didn’t question the American System. If Homer was the poet whose myth galvanised the Aryan psyche of other times, what would be the replacement myth for the Christian myth that is killing us?

I would like to quote what I wrote in the comments section of my post yesterday:

In one of his recent emails Gaedhal mentions that he went to mass for the death of a loved one and, although he is no longer the Christian he used to be, he still knelt and crossed himself. It is obvious that these are all parental introjects that are very difficult to exorcise despite the tons of rational thinking one throws at them in the process of (pseudo) apostasy. In other words, only by knowing yourself, as the Delphic Oracle commanded, could you really begin to detect the malware that our parents installed in us as children. But that means sitting down to write spiritual odysseys which in this shallow, consumerist age, no one will want to write or even read (except me).

In other words: an Enlightenment-style critique of Christianity will get us nowhere. It is a purely rationalistic critique that doesn’t go to the marrow of why we have believed such monstrous things as eternal damnation. Just as O’Meara is right that mythopoeia is what creates nations, it is also true that the myth in turn, a secular worship of the crucified (black, trans, migrant, etc.), has to be replaced by a new myth. Hitler had excellent instincts on how to create it, but the Christian forces of the Anglo-Americans, and neo-Christian forces of the Soviets, didn’t allow such a transvaluation.

Neither Taylor nor critics of Christianity like Gaedhal will succeed without understanding how the collective Aryan unconscious works. Although the neo-Christian Tom Holland is our ideological enemy, he is absolutely right to say that this collective unconscious is still held captive—possessed I dare to say!—to the archetype that the crucified is nobler than the crucifier. Even these days, on campuses, kids are siding with the crucified Palestinians in the face of Israel’s ethnic cleansing. They are all, of course, neo-Christians and the cross is still their emblem even though Jesus is no longer nailed to it.

This is Neo-Christianity.

I am not saying that this is altogether wrong, insofar as the reaction against Israel has opened a door to address the JQ that was previously closed. But Gaedhal’s approach in my quote yesterday implies that he still dwells under the sky of Christian morality. With the new myth, we would have a very different phenomenon on campuses. Let us imagine, and this is an experiment of the imagination, millions of kids wearing T-shirts of Himmler or other members of the SS who ordered the killing of millions of Untermenschen. In this Gedankenexperiment genocide is not something to be shocked by but to emulate as long as the genocided are non-Aryans.

But what do fans of Taylor and Rockwell do? The more conventional white nationalists simply ignore Hitler, and the neo-Nazis deny that millions of Untermenschen died under the orders of the Third Reich. From my vantage point in the cave, people like Taylor and Rockwell’s epigones seem to me to be very close to each other. To use the metaphor I have been using, they are both south of the Wall. Both ‘reek of summer’ we read in George R.R. Martin’s prose. In fact, they haven’t even crossed it, let alone looked for the raven’s cave far north of the Wall.

I still think Holland’s book (excerpts here) is fundamental to grasping the POV of this site although, of course, unlike Holland, we—Hitler, Himmler, Savitri Devi and I—have transvalued values to how they were thought of before Christian malware took hold of the Aryan collective unconscious. If anyone keeps in mind Eduardo Velasco’s essay on Rome vs. Judea, he will recall that pre-Christian Greeks and Romans didn’t give a damn that Jews were being genocided in 70 c.e. Compare this indifference to today’s holocaust deniers. They are neo-Christian, faux-National Socialists who won’t cross the Wall because they are still adoring the crucified, whether Jesus is present or not on their cross.

Categories
3-eyed crow

Cold

As I came down with the flu three days ago, I have postponed for a while resuming my series on Simms’ revisionist book on Hitler, since it requires special attention. On this day, when I am still suffering from cold symptoms, I prefer to quote what our friend Gaedhal tells us in his latest email:

If Apologetics is lies and distortion—and it is—then that makes apologists liars and distortors.

In my view, Apologists are essentially drug dealers. They supply the brain chemicals that desperate people need, so as to stay sane in this cruel life. Apologists sell dopamine, and other pleasant brain chemicals. Apologetics is not a respectable profession, in my view.

In the same way that there will be an illicit drug trade for as long as people need to self medicate, likewise, religion will exist so long as people think that they need assistance from beyond the veil. Apologists sell a comforting delusion to desperate people. The way to ultimately put apologists out of business is to make people less desperate. As people become less desperate, they become less religious. We see this in Japan, and Scandanavia. However, America is a predatory capitalist hellscape, and so it is no wonder why Americans feel that they need help from an imaginary Celestial Zion.

I saw Michael Heiser doing genocide apologetics… and yet Tabor and Derek Lambert had a memorial service for this scoundrel. The Jewish exceptionalism that we see, today, in Palestine, would not be possible were it not for Christian genocide apologists like Craig, Copan and Heiser.

The fact—as we well know—is that Yahweh deposed Saul because he did allow some goyim to live. David was a man after Yahweh’s own heart, because he would always exterminate the goyim thoroughly. But no: we are fedora-wearing village atheists—according to Heiser’s thumbnail—if we insist on this. Fuck this guy—even if he did die of cancer. Biblical Genocide apologists are the scum of the earth. Heiser’s career translates into real human suffering in places like Gaza.

As Captain Cassidy might put it: if Christianity is an abusive and harmful scam then that makes Christian apologists abusive and harm-causing scam artists.

Technically, I don’t object to what Gaedhal says, but there is something I must clarify.

For a guy who was mistreated by his parents since his teenage years to such an extent that he was left unable to have a career, a good job or even a partner, and who as a defence mechanism decided (to use George R.R. Martin’s fiction) to go into a cave on the other side of the Wall to retrocognitively see the past—his and his parents’ past to understand the tragedy—and to do this until he was half a century old, and only in his fifty-first year to discover white nationalism, it should be obvious that his POV won’t resemble what can be seen on racialist (or non-racialist) forums.

The passion to see the past as it really happened and to let, over the decades, the branches of the Weirwood envelop you to understand not only one’s biographical past but the historical past of Westeros (a metaphor for the West) produces a kind of mutant.

That is why, although technically what Gaedhal tells us is true, I find a fundamental flaw. Gaedhal’s emails will never explain why Christians, or former Christians, have believed such things. Only when one writes one’s psychological autobiography in thousands of pages does one discover why.

I have said that as soon as I finish revising my last book (to which I’ve added a chapter about my mother’s death), I will begin to translate into English what is missing from that psychological autobiography that I have just finished. It is only when someone writes it over the decades that he realises, like the three-eyed raven (‘Bloodraven’), that our parents literally programmed our minds with Christian software.

If those on the racial right weren’t so programmed, but came of age and were made to choose a religion good for Aryan preservation, would the reader believe that these Jew-wise racialists would choose the religion whose holy scriptures were written by Jews for goyim consumption?

Just to ask this question is to answer it! But without a cave on the other side of the Wall, without that long and painful process of initiation into the art of retrocognition, where you virtually leave your humanity behind, without knowing yourself to know the universe and the true Gods, there can be no true wisdom; only mere Gaedhal-like common sense.

In other words, only by knowing ourselves as deeply as this imaginary Bloodraven could one apostatise from the demented religion of our parents. Otherwise, all we have are the semi-apostasies or pseudo-apostasies of liberals (and even Woke folk!) that lead nowhere because they fail to get to the heart of the matter: the structure of the inner Self.

Categories
Axiology Liberalism

Who’s neo-Christian?

He is the unwary pseudo-apostate, deist or even atheist, who hasn’t realised that by rejecting the ‘all are equal in the eyes of God’ of his Christian parents, and transmuting that doctrine to ‘all are equal before the law’, he is axiologically still a Christian.—C.T.

Categories
'Hitler' (book by Brendan Simms) French Revolution Racial right

Hitler, 5

The normie biographer Simms writes:

The ‘Gemlich’ letter, which is the first surviving longer political text by Hitler, defined the Jewish ‘problem’ partly as a medical issue. Hitler dubbed the Jews the ‘racial tuberculosis of the peoples’. Partly, the ‘problem’ was defined in political terms, with the Jews cast as the ‘driving forces of the revolution’, which had laid Germany low. Here he was referring not to the events of 1917 in Petrograd but to the workers’ and soldiers’ councils of 1918 in Germany.

The above quote seems to suggest that this young Hitler’s view of the Jews is identical to that of contemporary white nationalism. Since my approach is different, what can I reply? Let’s summarise my view.

Christianity fried the Aryan’s brains with the doctrine that ‘all are equal in the eyes of God’ (the New Testament message of the rabbis who wrote it for us Gentiles). Yesterday, when talking about some films and the subject of the French Revolution came up (and I suggest you watch Danton instead of the crap that Ridley Scott filmed), it reminded me that the secularisation of that Christian doctrine aggravated the matter. I mean that after the French Revolution, the psyche of the Aryan went from all are equal in the eyes of God to all are equal before the law (for new visitors, see what Tom Holland says in this featured PDF to understand the process of how it went from ‘in the eyes of God’ to ‘before the law’).

Following this secularised principle originally inspired by Christianity, France was the first European country to grant civil equality to Jews. Indeed, the legal position of Jews in France was widely envied by Jews in other countries. As a result of the so-called Jewish emancipation, and because of the high IQ of the Jew compared to the common Gentile, the first thing Jewry did, courtesy of Napoleon, was to take over the media in the 19th century. Otto Glagau, who led a journal, Der Kulturkämpfer, complained: ‘No longer can we suffer to see the Jews push themselves everywhere to the front, everywhere seize leadership and dominate public opinion’.

An 1806 French print of Napoleon empowering the Jews.

The secularisation of the Christian principle was catastrophic. Kevin MacDonald makes a point in the second book of his trilogy on Jewry when he says that Christendom defended itself against Jewish subversion based on the Christian myth. But that went into crisis, as the new God of the French Revolution still rules the scale of values in the West today. While it is true, as American southern nationalist Hunter Wallace has seen, that modernity uncovered Pandora’s box, neither Wallace nor MacDonald has the meta-perspective of Tom Holland (cf. the PDF linked above).

The Christian Question (CQ) is not to be underestimated. Before modernity, when the Inquisition ruled and 16th-century Spain was wiser about the Jewish Question (JQ) than 19th-century Europe, Iberian whites committed ethno-suicide in the Americas by intermarrying with Amerinds. This historical fact is nothing less than a ‘checkmate’ to the Judeo-reductionism of the typical white nationalist. And even forgetting the miscegenation perpetrated by the Spanish and Portuguese and focusing on the history of Austria and Germany, it’s clear that Christianity is responsible for the empowerment of Jewry.

For example, many pan-Germanists were imprisoned in the late 1880s and early 1890s, and the League Against Anti-Semitism was founded in 1891 by a pacifist who was eventually awarded the Nobel Prize, Bertha von Suttner.

This wanker attracted a wide membership, mostly members of the educated and Gentile bourgeoisie and even aristocrats who were so scandalised by pan-Germanism that they denounced it as ‘the narrow beer-hall politics of the unshaven’. Quite a few Protestant clergymen and Catholic intellectuals subscribed to the League Against Anti-Semitism. As devout Christians, Bertha von Suttner and her husband Arthur founded the League in response to the growing ‘anti-Semitism’ across Europe (cf. Otto Glagau’s quote above). So this cancellation of the healthy mind represented by 19th-century pan-Germanism also came from Christians and their Christian principles of equality. That’s why, addressing today’s nationalists, Robert Morgan recently said: ‘These ignorant imbeciles complain endlessly about Jews, but who let the Jews into white society?’

In the next entry we will see that even this very young Hitler, before he became aware of the CQ, was much more mature than the white nationalists of today in that he saw that the JQ was interwoven with the most bestial of Anglo-American capitalism.

Categories
New Testament Racial right Richard Carrier

Medieval racists

This interview uploaded yesterday is fascinating, and the very fact that none of the mainstream forums of the racial right touch on the subject of textual criticism of the New Testament is symptomatic of a wilful ignorance that is deeply rooted in the movement.

Richard Miller makes a point that is obvious to me. Serious New Testament scholarship is divided into two camps: (1) those who believe that most of the NT narrative is fictional but that there is a residue that could be historical, and (2) those who maintain that it was all literary fiction from the beginning. Miller belongs to the first group and another Richard, Richard Carrier, to the second group. But the dialogue between these two camps is quite cordial, academic and respectful.

On the other hand, there are the pseudo-scholars, the fundamentalist Christians who study the NT but begin their ‘research’ with pre-established conclusions (Jesus was resurrected from the dead, etc.). Their scholarship reminds me of the medieval university in Paris where philosophy was allowed to exist but only as a handmaiden of theology. Miller has said that serious NT scholars no longer pay attention to this apologetic posturing.

The racial right, I said, as well as fundamentalists ignore serious NT scholarship: scholarship that doesn’t start from the catechism we were taught as children but uses the methodologies of contemporary historiography to evaluate New Testament texts. This became clear the last time Kevin MacDonald published an article by a fundamentalist Christian in The Occidental Observer, as I told the author himself.

Taking into account that, concerning the NT, white nationalism is still medieval and that we must ignore not only the scholarly authors (such as the apologist in MacDonald’s webzine) but the Christian commentariat of that webzine and other racialist webzines, it is more interesting to ponder who, of the two Richards, is right: the mythicist or the historicist.

It seems to me that Miller, although I have infinite respect for his work, still suffers from what in a 2012 post on this site we called the ‘Platonic fallacy’.

And incidentally, I see these two camps, represented by the two Richards, from a very different angle to their point of view: the Delphic Oracle maxim. Given that deep autobiography is my forte, and that in my life I have gone through all three stages—from traditional Christian (1960s-1980s) to secular historicist (1990s-2018), and from secular historicist to mythicist (2018 to date)—I venture to conjecture that Miller’s stance, as well as the stance of his interviewer, represent a residue of parental introjects (see my post ‘Slaves of parental introjects’).

It is so disturbing to our egos to conceive of the whole Jesus story as mere literary fiction from the pen of Jews for Aryan consumption that even accomplished rationalists like Miller, and his young interviewer, are unable to take the final step.

But as I said, the issue of which of the two Richards is right isn’t so important. What is important is that Christians on the racial right are, as far as textual criticism of the NT is concerned, in the Middle Ages. And there is little point in trying to rescue them. That’s as fool errand as wanting American evangelicals, the source of the power of the American Jewish lobby, to read Kevin MacDonald’s webzine and stop supporting Israel in the current Palestinian conflict!

The West’s Darkest Hour is not for white nationalists. It is for people honest enough to assimilate the splendid work of Miller, or Carrier. As I said, the distinction between secular historicists and mythicists is not as serious as it is when we encounter the fundamentalists, who abound on the so-called racial right, and still believe that a Jew isn’t only risen but is our Saviour.

Categories
Heinrich Himmler

Himmler on Christianity

A visitor of this site brought my attention to this document by Heinrich Himmler on the occasion of Reinhard Heydrich’s funeral:

We will have to deal with Christianity in a tougher way than hitherto. We must settle accounts with this Christianity, this greatest of plagues that could have happened to us in our history, which has weakened us in every conflict. If our generation does not do it then it will, I think, drag on for a long time. We must overcome it within ourselves.

Today at Heydrich’s funeral I intentionally expressed in my oration from my deepest conviction a belief in God, a belief in fate, in the ancient one as I called him—that is the old Germanic word: Wralda.

We shall once again have to find a new scale of values for our people: the scale of the macrocosm and the microcosm, the starry sky above us and the world in us, the world that we see in the microscope.

The essence of these megalomaniacs, these Christians who talk of men ruling this world, must stop and be put back in its proper proportion. Man is nothing special at all. He is an insignificant part of this earth. If a big thunderstorm comes, he can do nothing about it. He cannot even predict it. He has no idea how a fly is constructed—however unpleasant, it is a miracle—or how a blossom is constructed. He must once again look with deep reverence into this world. Then he will acquire the right sense of proportion about what is above us, about how we are woven into this cycle.

Then, on a different plane, something else must happen: we must once again be rooted in our ancestors and grandchildren, in this eternal chain and eternal sequence. […] By rooting our people in a deep ideological awareness of ancestors and grandchildren we must once more persuade them that they must have sons. We can do a very great deal. But everything that we do must be justifiable vis-à-vis the clan, our ancestors.

If we do not secure this moral foundation which is the deepest and best because the most natural, we will not be able to overcome Christianity on this plane and create the Germanic Reich which will be a blessing for the earth. That is our mission as a nation on this earth. For thousands of years, it has been the mission of this blond race to rule the earth and again and again to bring it happiness and culture.

The quote above is only part of the document of Heydrich’s funeral. As the visitor says in his article, these Germans fantasised about a ‘final solution of the church question’ (just compare it with the BS we read these days in white nationalist forums!).

Categories
Axiology Catholic Church Deranged altruism

Catechetical lunacy

by Gaedhal

According to Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), paragraph 1935:

The equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it: ‘Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God’s design.’

The above statement is as woke and as DIE [Diversity Equity and Inclusion] as one can get. Absent the talk concerning a mythical Jewish god, the above statement could easily be stated by Joe Biden, Alexandria Occasio Cortez, Michelle Obama or Kamala Harris.

The above statement does not merely seek to ‘eradicate’ inequalities in opportunity, but also inequalities in outcome. If we all had identical ‘social conditions’ then that is ‘equity’. If we all had identical ‘social conditions’ then that is ‘equality of outcome’.

In my view, depopulation and eugenics are a path, eventually, to all humans having prosperous and peaceful social conditions.

It is Christian axiology that renders so much of Western Society so crime-ridden and so needlessly miserable. Christianity is a sect of ‘the least of these’, and so it is anti-eugenic i.e. dysgenic in its foundations. As Saul puts it: Christianity is a sect of the foolish—i.e. those of low IQ—and not of the wise. Christianity is a sect of ‘the off-scourings of this earth’. As the parable says: the rich, and the well-educated did not want to attend Jesus’ wedding feast, so he brought in all the tramps and misfits from ‘the highways and byways’ instead. In its foundation, Christianity is a sect for the mob; for the rout; and not for the aristocrat, the gentleman, the man who is refined in his bearing. As Richard Carrier puts it: Saul does not want you to read Euclid’s Elements lest you deconvert from Saul’s utterly foolish cult.

An absolute equality in social conditions? That is madness. That is Bolshevism. And the funny thing is that the above statement, which anticipates the DIE of modern times, was written in 1992 by the ‘conservatives’ Ratzinger—later Benedict XVI—Schönborn and Saint John Paul II. One of the reasons why I converted to traditionalist Catholicism is because I quickly found out that there was really no such thing as conservative post-conciliar Catholicism. They were all sell-outs and lunatics.

In my view, belief in human ontological equality is a superstition inherited from Christianity. If the Christian god does not exist, then there is no god up there magically making us all equal.

The virus with shoes that is destroying the planet, and swiftly rendering it uninhabitable is of ‘infinite value’ according to the Catechism. And it is not just humanity in sum that has infinite value, but each individual also! You can’t get depopulation done with beliefs like that! In my view, Christian axiology—which carries over into many forms of atheism—is the number one existential threat that humanity faces. Humanity is a petard that can hoist itself through overpopulation, the carbonisation of our atmospheres and our seas, and other threats. If Humanity is a pest, then viewing each specimen of such a pest as ‘infinitely valuable’—as the Catholic Church does—is a harmful delusion.