web analytics

Tag: Jesus Derangement Syndrome

Categories
Axiology Christendom Tom Holland

Secular Christianity

On Friday I posted a 13-minute segment of a video under the title ‘Transvaluing Cross’ about a recent interview with Tom Holland. Now I’d like to embed the full interview, which lasts more than an hour:

At minute 11 Holland says something that explains secular Christianity:

‘If you are hostile to Christianity in the West, almost certainly you will be hostile to Christianity because of deeply Christian reasons’ (my emphasis).

Now that I’ve watched the full interview, I’ve noticed something that Holland fails to notice. When he talks about Roman sexuality during the Roman Empire he says that it was ruthless compared to our morality. But like any normie, Holland doesn’t know he’s talking about the decadent Roman Empire, not Republican Rome. Anyone who wants to learn about Aryan customs and habits when it comes to marriage should read what Tacitus said about the ancient Germans, or what Eduardo Velasco wrote about Spartan marriage.

Quite apart from that flaw, the interview is excellent for understanding the POV of this site, The West’s Darkest Hour. Holland explains admirably how Christian ethics transmuted into the civil rights preached by Martin Luther King, and the sexual ‘liberation’ that reigns today including the ‘rights’ of transgender people.

Nevertheless, ‘although progressives are deeply Christian’ says Holland, ‘for the first time in American history they are not acknowledging that’.

Might is right, 9

All ye are brethren

Are all men really brethren?—Negro and Indian, Blackfellow, Kalmuck, and Coolie—the well-born, and the base-bred, beer-soaked loafer, and hero-hearted patriot, belted chieftain and ignoble mechanic-slave—pot of iron and pot of clay?

What proof is there that the brotherhood-of-man hypothesis is in accordance with nature? On what trustworthy biologic, historic or other evidence does it rest? If it is natural, then rivalry, competition, and strife are unnatural. And it is proposed to prove in this book that strife, competition, rivalry, and the wholesale destruction of feeble types of men, is not only natural, but highly necessary. [Emphasis by Editor!] Has ‘brotherhood’ ever been tried upon earth? Where, when and with what final result? Is not self-assertion nobler, grander and more truly heroic than self-denial? Is not self-abasement but another term for voluntary vassalage; voluntary burden-bearing?

Christ might well and truthfully have said unto his followers ‘Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden and I will bind you in unbreakable bonds, and load you down like an ass between two burdens.’

The ‘poor and ignorant’ were his first followers—the vagrants, the disinherited shiftless classes: and to this very day, the poorer and more ignorant men and women are, the more eager are they to follow his religious ideals, or the political millennialisms that are distilled out of his delusions.

‘If we only lived as Christ lived, what a beautiful world this would be,’ saith all thoughtless ones. If we lived as Christ lived, there would be none of us left to live. He begat no children; he laboured not for his bread; he possessed neither house nor home.[1] He merely talked.

Primitive Christianity cunningly appealed to the imagination of a world of superstitious slaves (eager for some mode of escape that meant not the giving and receiving of battle-strokes.) It organized them for the overthrow of Heroic Principles; and substituted, for a genuine nobility based on battle-selection, a crafty theocracy founded upon priest-craft, hell-craft, alms-giving, politicalisms, and all that is impure and subterranean. It is a doctrine at once disgraceful in its antecedents, its teachers, and in itself. Truly has it been called ‘the fatal dower of Constantine,’ for it has suffocated, or is suffocating the seeds of Heroism.

Both ancient and modern Christianism and all that has its root therein, is the negation of everything grand, noble, generous, heroic, and the glorification of everything feeble, atrocious, dishonourable, dastardly [e.g., the trans people that neochristians presently adore! —Editor]. The cross is now, and ever has been, an escutcheon of shame. It represents a gallows, and a Semite slave swinging thereon. For two thousand years it has absolutely overturned human reason, overthrown common sense, infected the world with madness, submissiveness, degeneracy.

Truly, there is a way which seemeth right unto a people, but the ends thereof are the ways of death.

Sound the loud timbrel, O’er lands and o’er waves; The Israelite triumphs! The nations are—graves!

_____________

[1] These terms are used in the strict Darwinian sense.

Categories
Film

UK riots

In this post, I would like to clarify why I haven’t talked much about the riots that have been taking place in the UK.

I’ve said it before: unlike other racialist sites, this blog doesn’t cover news.

In fact, in times past I have been wrong to talk about things I thought would happen soon, such as the collapse of the dollar. I even erred when, for a while, I thought COVID was going to be as deadly as the Spanish Flu; or when more recently I thought the Israeli or Ukrainian wars were going to get much hotter than what is happening.

Had I known, I wouldn’t have even mentioned those wars! When NATO missiles hit radars on Russian territory, or when Bibi’s rabbis harangued the government to nuke the Palestinians, I thought we might already be in Kalki’s time. But we are not there yet. So I regret posting those entries. Those are or were crises that the System has managed to assimilate without major consequences.

The riots in the UK are not the subject of this site for one simple reason. As I have been saying for a long time, the only way to save whites is to go from ‘happy mode’ to ‘killing mode’. And for that, there are two intermediate stages to cross: ‘angry mode’ (what the English are just beginning to feel) and ‘combat mode’ (something like arming yourself to protect your family inside your house from possible chimps out).

But the killing mode is already a revolutionary stage, and we could visualise it with that famous scene in the film Civil War, released this year, in which a blond American says to a mestizo ‘What kind of American are you?’ before and after killing a couple of Gooks.

Until thousands of white men reach that mental stage during a racial revolution à la The Turner Diaries, there is no point in commenting on the petty news these days. I repeat: I regret talking about the collapse of the dollar (when will it happen?), COVID and even the wars in Palestine and Ukraine because they are not apocalyptic—yet. I might even die of old age in the future and the Revolution hasn’t started! (nor is it clear that it will happen, like that scene in Civil War).

The aim of The West’s Darkest Hour is not to comment on the news but to understand why whites are committing ethnic suicide. And why seems clear to me: Christians and atheists alike have let the New Testament morality of loving every human infect their hearts.

Yesterday, for example, on a pirated DVD I bought for a mere 15 pesos (0.79 dollars), I watched Horizon: a film released this June, directed and produced by Kevin Costner. This filmmaker can’t resist idealising Indians not only with good-looking semi-Indian actors (i.e. actors who already have some white blood in them). His message is something like if some Indians were cruel and exterminators of white villages, there were also heartless whites who attacked good Indians.

Like millions of other Americans, Costner faithfully fulfils the command to love thy neighbour as thyself. In a recent interview, Costner himself confessed: ‘I grew up a Baptist, and church has always been a part of my life, my grandmother, the whole thing, so I don’t mind it bleeding into a movie’.

So I will continue to write about the cause of the darkest hour for the white race, ignoring the news unless they become truly apocalyptic.

Categories
'Hitler' (book by Brendan Simms)

Hitler, 41

Portrait of Adolf Hitler by unknown artist based on a photograph by Hanke.

Throughout the spring and summer of 1923, Hitler steadily became more aggressive. In early March 1923 there was a meeting of paramilitary formations in Munich at which Hermann Esser suggested that if the French advanced across the Rhine, the Entente should be informed that all Jews would be interned and shot if they did not withdraw. It is not clear whether this thought originally came from Hitler, but if it did it would be the first example of his subsequent strategy of using the Jews as hostages for the good behaviour of the western powers.

This brief passage deserves a pause to reiterate what we have been saying so much on this site.

If we take as a paradigm the extreme idealisation of Jewry in the United States of America, it is impossible not to compare it with the pre-Christian world when the Greco-Romans didn’t give a damn about the holocaust of Jews perpetrated in Rome’s wars against Judea, wars that involved several emperors.

In those times it would have been inconceivable that Rome would have used the Jews under its power as a currency for moral blackmail of a rival nation! That enemy-loving crap only began with the introduction of Christian ethics that was exacerbated ad infinitum by the egalitarian ideals of the French Revolution, and the creation of the American nation based on Christian principles camouflaged in secular garb. (New visitors to this site should read what Tom Holland wrote about the US in his book Dominion.)

Categories
Catholic Church

Heydrich, 7

Let’s be honest: Should they come to power, could you imagine American white nationalists casually talking about mass genocides, as these German hierarchs did after the buffet (in the film, from this point on)? And if they will be unable to do so, don’t you think such scruples have to do with worshipping the Jew on the cross, and regarding the Aryan Pilate who had him crucified as a wicked man?

American anti-Christians did realise this. Remember that passage in The Turner Diaries where racist revolutionaries let a Jewish community live and it caused so much trouble that those altruist revolutionaries had to be eliminated by transvalued revolutionaries?

When in the future the cold war against the Aryan man turns into a hot one, it will become clear that there is no way to save the race unless one repudiates Judeo-Christian morality. This is so true that, as we see in the film when they enjoy the buffet Heydrich offered them, it came out that the Vatican began to complain about such executions, and those present scoffed openly and uninhibitedly, laughing at Christian compassion.

Above, Cesare Orsenigo with Hitler and von Ribbentrop. In November 1943, nuncio Orsenigo spoke to the Führer on behalf of Pope Pius XII. In his conversation with Hitler, he talked about the status of persecuted peoples in the Third Reich, apparently referring to Jews. Over large parts of the conversation the Führer simply ignored the nuncio; he went to the window and didn’t listen.

Categories
Liberalism

Normie historian

It shouldn’t be thought that only neo-Nietzscheans like us, or historians like Tom Holland, believe that today’s secular liberalism is Christian-inspired. On 27 February 2012 I started to write some notes on a series still watchable on YouTube, The Western Tradition by the normie historian Eugen Weber. Those notes, which I wrote a dozen years ago in a notebook that I reread after midnight, mention some white nationalist personalities with whom I had not yet distanced myself. Here is my translation to English of those 2012 notes:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Absolutely fascinating is Eugen Weber’s programme #43 for understanding our century. Although it deals with the 21st century it sheds enormous light, especially what he said almost halfway through the programme: that in 1848 they emancipated the slaves and that the emancipation of women would still take a long time—which means that Weber moves in the liberal framework of the 20th century.

Fascinating, I say, because now that I’ve posted an entry on The West’s Darkest Hour about the debate in The Occidental Observer about the holocaust, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the monocausalists [those who believe that only the Jews have caused the Aryan decline] are wrong.

How clear. Conservative Swede is right. All that evil started in the French Revolution. Hunter Wallace discovered the same thing with his analysis of the United States. Mark Weber, too, in his quotable quote about the American Constitution, saw the ‘rights of man’ as the virus that infected, and in our century exploded in full force, the West.

The infection comes from whites.

The French Revolution is like Christianity 1,600 years ago: cultural suicides.

Pride. Megalomania. Hubris.

Remember that in programme #43 of Eugen Weber’s series, the historian mentions Rousseau and Shelley, who by the way killed their children [cf. Paul Johnson’s The Intellectuals]. He also recalls that Weber also mentioned the novel Ivanhoe where ‘the heroine is a Jewess’ amid the century of the emancipation of the Judas [a derogatory term in Spanish for Jews]. And remember that Weber said that the common man was more influenced by the novel than by Marx’s texts.

How clear, isn’t it?

Romanticism so understood was another suicidal Christianity. What happened in the 20th century was the culmination of that infection (with Jewish help, of course; but, as Wallace says, white society had already gone down that road).

Actually, despite everything I read in The Occidental Observer, I increasingly blame whites for their own misfortune. If Linder were right, Norwegians wouldn’t be so infected with suicidal liberalism [when I wrote that I had in mind that there were very few Jews in that country].

In episode #44 Weber says: ‘And this point of view which combines empathy, charity and guilt (emphasis in his voice) is very much with us today’.

How clear!

Weber refers to the social projects of the 19th century after the hell that Doré and Dostoyevsky saw in London. Therein lies the root of what was to become ‘deranged altruism’. How clear and transparent!

In this episode #44 Weber speaks for the first time about the white race, and says that with their ideologies whites caused the overpopulation of non-whites in the colonies. He even uses the word ‘stupidity’ and mentions the missionaries!

That only the Judas are the usual suspects is pure bullshit. The virus was already in place before that. Besides, it was at the end of the 19th century that the ‘mass culture’ with its fucking sports and empty heads started. Now it is infinitely worse!

At the end of the penultimate programme of his series, Weber spoke well of the contraceptive pill: as the greatest advance for women, even more than women’s suffrage. Neither he nor other liberals saw the demographic consequences: white suicide!

It is clear that all this axiology/memeplex came not only from the Judas but from the me, me, me generation! In the previous programme, by the way, Weber said that after WWII Europe’s self-confidence had collapsed. Remember what Kenneth Clark said in Civilisation: the loss or gain of confidence is pivotal for a civilisation to flourish…

Categories
Catholic Church

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.

Categories
Israel / Palestine

The new subordinationists

This 13th-century fresco in a church in Perugia, Italy, depicts the Trinity
as a being with three faces representing Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

 
One of the apparent mysteries of the anti-white religion today is Subordinationism.

Influenced by Stoic philosophy, the subordinationists held a Trinitarian doctrine according to which the Son, and sometimes also the Holy Spirit, were subordinate to the Father not only in submission and role but with actual ontological subordination in varying degrees. Many early Christian theologians postulated a hierarchical classification of the persons of the Trinity, although their position was later considered heretic at the Second Council of Constantinople.

Years before I discovered white nationalism, something funny happened to me with a beautiful, fully Aryan woman with whom I had a coffee in Mexico City together with her brother, a chess-playing friend. I told them that I had just seen a film shot in one of the Muslim countries, which ends with a pubescent girl being deflowered by her elderly husband. I intended to defend the girl.

The liberal woman jumped up in anger. She railed against the film and the message of the director of the Muslim country. I didn’t understand why, if she was more or less a feminist and I was defending a pubescent girl, this liberal woman was so furious. Once I discovered the white nationalist forums, I found the answer.

The point is that, for the new subordinationists, there is a hierarchy in their new Trinity: equality of race, gender and sexual identity. So if two persons of the trinity come into conflict (Muslims are sandniggers and at the same time they live under a patriarchy), the second or third persons of the trinity are subordinates to the father god, i.e. race (liberals see Muslims living in Europe as a noble race just because they aren’t white).

Unlike the Council of Constantinople which declared subordinationism heretical, the new religion of the West is subordinationist: first and foremost is the non-white race (God the Father) and gender equality and sexual identity are subordinated to this Father. This explains my confussion with that liberal woman many years ago. (Incidentally, her brother, a certain Demetrio, who sided with his sister during our argument, later committed suicide.)

With this in mind, let us now think of the grotesque phenomenon of the elites supporting Israel to such an extent that they are even beating and jailing non-whites who dare to support Palestine in some European cities! Why do they do that? Didn’t race—non-whites in Europe—take priority, and even more so if some Israelis are phenotypically whiter than Palestinians? True, but the fact is that, in the new subordinationist theology, there is hierarchy even among non-whites.

The anti-white religion that was created after the Second World War is an exact reverse of Hitlerism. So if Hitler and the Third Reich considered the Jews a subversive tribe, in the new religion they have literally become the chosen people. But the most sinister thing of all is that it is the Aryans themselves who have chosen kikes as the chosen ones, so much so that not even the brown migrants who support a people subjugated for decades by Israelis are now tolerated.

For these new heretics the slogan seems to be: Subordinationist hierarchy above all! In the new Aryan Trinity, the Jew has become the sacrificial Lamb whom we are all supposed to love including his new state, Israel. In his comment today, Gaedhal wrote:

I would rather not write about politics on this thread. There are much more profitable and productive things to write about, like programming. However, yet again, the world—thanks to the US and Israel—stands on the brink of another conflagration.

Megyn Kelly should have an entry in the Encyclopedia of American Loons. She is willing to waste America’s blood and treasure, defending Israel, of all places. She speaks about Israel’s right to exist. What about Irish Catholics’ right to exist? Do Jews and Israelis concede to us ethnically Irish people the exclusive right to the Island of Ireland, something clearly spelt out in the 1916 proclamation? Of course, Irish Protestants have the right to their own state, north of the border. I tend to lean Unionist, these days. Does Megyn Kelly’s Jewish friends concede this right to us?

Charity begins at home. If bad guys need to be killed, then there are plenty of bad guys to be killed on the North American continent. There are plenty of things that lethal martial force could accomplish on the North American Continent that would actually be in the interest of US citizens. I recently saw a video where an Army Vet encouraged white men not to join the US Army because, of course, none of these wars prosecuted by the US government and military is actually in our interest.

[Zionists] go so far as even wanting a war with Iran if that keeps Israel safe. How in the name of a metaphorical God is any of this in America’s interest? America has been at war, almost non-stop since Pearl Harbour. Is the world any safer, any more prosperous, any more secure from 80 years of war? Why is America full of insane pundits like Megyn Kelly?

The answer is simple. The country was founded by Christian fanatics who had to perceive themselves as the new Israelis to establish a city upon a hill. The American project has now become a self-fulfilling prophecy, and Kelly is just an aberration among millions of philo-Semitic Zionists: the basis of Jewish power. (Remember the POV of this site: the Jews didn’t take over the West by force: the Aryan traitors handed it over to the Jew, their new ‘God the Father’ after WW2. That’s why we focus on the CQ instead of the JQ.)

Categories
Final solution

TRS v. CC

It seems that the beheaded babies story, despite Biden’s regurgitation of it, is fake news. But I wanted to add something to what I said yesterday about Greg Johnson. In his latest article, he responds to The Right Stuff’s (TRS) criticism of Johnson for his lukewarm stance on Israel. This is taken from the comments section of Counter-Currents:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Teutonic Path said:

In this article [i.e., Johnson’s article] you said the exterminationist position is indefensible, yet unless I am mistaken everything after that did not say why. It would seem to me that if an ethnos dies out then the challenge of getting it into a single state also goes away. Are you saying it’s indefensible because it’s practically unworkable (potentially leading to bigger problems), or is it for a theoretical reason (e.g. ethics) that you don’t mention here?

 
Greg Johnson responded:

Mass murder is ethically indefensible.

 
Sherman McCoy said:

Perhaps the existence of my people matters more than your ethics.

 
Greg Johnson responded:

Good luck defending your people as a genocidal maniac.

 
Sherman McCoy said:

I’m sure the people in South Africa being butchered by feral negroids egged on by Yiddish Communists have the consolation, as they breathe their final pained and blood-soaked breaths, that at least they didn’t do anything unethical. Because the truly important thing for the future of white people is to make sure that we appear nice. Remember, fellow white nationalists: we’re working for a future where all the races join hands to sing Kumbaya together, presumably with Rabbi Shekelberg acting as conductor.

 
Greg Johnson responded:

If you think morality is just a matter of appearing nice, you might be a sociopath.

 
Max said:

A huge number of Jews and their shabbos goyim are openly exterminationists about Palestinians, at least in Gaza. And more than a few of them are exterminationists about Europeans and their diasporas. So I’m not quite sure why it’s “immoral” for us to advocate such a policy towards Jews. Perhaps it’s optically unwise to do so openly but you seem to be taking an absurd moralfagging position here, Greg. Perhaps a Kumbaya future where Jews renounce their supremacist ideology en masse and forever is possible, but that seems like an unlikely bet, knowing what we do about their history and their present behavior.

 
Greg Johnson responded:

Two wrongs don’t make a right. It is idiotic to use words like “moralfagging” unironically.

 
Sej said:

Agreed. Notice that people cheerleading mass murder of Israelis are the same that defend Russians’ mass murder of Ukrainians in Donbas and Crimea.

 
Norm said:

Jews do not share your anti-exterminationist sentiment, Greg. Go on Twitter and look at all the Jews gloating about the firebombing of Dresden. What Jews are doing to Gaza is what they’d do to Europe, and what they have done to Europe. Do you think you can co-exist with a people like that? Jews follow an ideology that commands them to wipe out all European people. You cannot defeat hate with reason.

 
Greg Johnson responded:

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Maybe you’d be more comfortable commenting at Jesse Dunstan’s site.

 
My two cents for this site:

It’s quite refreshing to listen in The Right Stuff podcast that they call Johnson a ‘traitor’.

This said, the problem with TRS is that, at least the guy who speaks after minute 15, is a Judeo-reductionist. He believes that from that little piece in the desert Israel controls the West: typical monocausal paranoia that ignores that it is whites who have been empowering Jewry because of their Judeo-Christian values. For example, when in 1:26 another TRS member said ‘fuck them’ to the exterminationists, he himself is unknowingly subscribing to Judeo-Christian standards of morality (exactly what Johnson does).

I don’t recognise well the voices but I think it was Mike who said, a few seconds after the hour, what I believe about the conflicts in both Ukraine and Palestine: Mike welcomes them because they create chaos. Just contrasts it with Johnson’s stance, who, as a good neochristian, simply wants peace and happiness for every party involved, including Jews (as Linder once said, Johnson is a de facto conservative).

Categories
Axiology Democracy Exterminationism Racial right

Perfect paradigm

Yesterday I was shocked when Greg Johnson, the admin of Counter-Currents, banned a commenter for daring to propose a final solution to the JP. We can just imagine an Israeli nationalist these days banning from his online forum another Jew who proposed a final solution to the Palestinian problem!

Johnson’s behaviour represents a perfect paradigm to illustrate the central tenet of The West’s Darkest Hour: Christian ethics are killing us (and have been killing us since Constantine—see some of the books in the featured post). It is not the Jews who force Johnson to think that way: it is the tail end of the Christian education he received that has him trapped in the ethics of positively valuing all human life. I could now use the neo-Christian term I have used in those books. But for new visitors to this site, I think it is better to start using Gaedhal’s term which means the same: hyper-Christian atheist. The most conspicuous feature of neo-Christianity—that is hyper-Christian atheism—is anthropocentrism (see Savitri Devi’s book in the featured post). In his email statement today, Gaedhal told us:

The anthropocentrism of mainstream leftist politics proves to me that mainstream leftist politics is simply a godless version of Hyperchristianity. This is why I say that myself and my compatriots on the radical right should be making political hay with this. The overpopulation of the planet—especially in places like Sub-Saharan Africa—is a menace to this planet’s environment.

In a serious state, nincompoops with non-solutions like Mary Lou McDonald would not be the leader of the biggest political party in Ireland. This is another criticism I have of democracy: become too intelligent and too refined, and the mob won’t vote for you. As we see with Trump, democracy becomes idiocracy. In a serious country, the government would not be doing what is popular, would not be doing what the unthinking mob wants, would not be doing what will get them elected, but, instead what needs to be done.

What needs to be done to solve the Irish Housing crisis is simply to pursue global depopulation—especially in the third world—and to nationalise all empty properties. I am not anthropocentric. I say that Irish wild animals do have a right to their habitat, and that this right is superior to anthropoids needing even more housing. In my view, the rights of Irish wildlife to their habitat beats the supposed rights of foreigners and migrants to housing.

In his comment today in this forum, Gaedhal added:

As Alex Linder points out: evolution proceeds through genocide. The earth is overpopulated. The earth needs to be depopulated. The earth eventually, if left to itself, will depopulate itself of billions of anthropoid vermin… Humanity is a virus with shoes. The only question is who is going to be depopulated? I want the white race to survive the depopulations of the next couple of centuries and hopefully possess the entire planet. As I wrote in that anthology on exterminationism [does he refer to this one?—Ed.]: only a global exterminationist white Imperium counts as victory. I envisage a Globalist White Empire comprising petty vassal national states. Global problems require global solutions. In a technological age, practically all problems are global in scope. Anything short of a Global Exterminationist White Imperium is ultimate failure.

Global problems require global solutions? This reminds me of another of my grandmother’s sayings: ‘Para grandes males grandes remedios’ (For great evils great remedies!). And really: in a world with billions of what I call Neanderthals, and Gaedhal calls anthropoid vermin it should be obvious for every transvalued Aryan how to act.

Yesterday I quoted the first comment from an article in the atheistic but axiologically hyper-Christian racialist webzine Counter-Currents. Now I would like to quote a sentence from the first comment of a post today on the racialist webzine Occidental Dissent:

Our interests are served by preserving our own territory so that animals like this [Palestinians] aren’t able to murder us [Whites]. These brown people will not reciprocate our support or commiseration. They only care about themselves. Why is it so difficult for Western dissidents to understand that this is NATURAL and we should be doing the same [what Netanyahu does]? Is this more of this pervasive Christian guilt?

If one takes note of the response of the Christian admin of that webzine, ‘Israel has long wielded total control over our government’, one sees the lack of insight of the American racial right. Compare Wallace’s words, which represent what most white nationalists believe by using the acronym ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government), with what an American closer to our POV said: ‘There is not such a thing as Jewish domination, there is only white submissiveness’.

The amount of comments I get here, compared to what both the hyper-Christian atheist webzine Counter-Currents and the Christian Occidental Dissent get, is minuscule. Significantly, the post where I put the above quote in big letters received no comments except my own.

Let there be no doubt: racialists who have transvalued their values to the extent of embracing pro-Aryan exterminationism can be counted on the fingers of one hand! Nonetheless, I will still keep blogging as I believe that The West’s Darkest Hour is the only authentically post-Christian site among the racialist forums. I don’t mind not having so many commenters: just one who can receive the mantle after Time is done with my body will be enough…