As returning visitors know, our seminal essay, published since The West’s Darkest Hour was hosted by Blogger, is “The Red Giant” which collects comments from a blogger who used to comment under the pen name Conservative Swede (Eric).
In 2009, before discovering white nationalism, I used to argue with Eric on Gates of Vienna: a pro-Western, anti-jihadist forum. One of the things Eric said stuck with me. This “Nietzschean of the North”, as Larry Auster who also used to comment on Gates of Vienna called him, said that he would transvalue some of the values of the 21st-century West to the values of the 1950s; others, to the 19th century; but still others ought to be transvalued to the times of ancient Rome.
As we can see even now, sixteen years after my interactions with Eric, the American racial right only wants to transvalue the decadent values of our century back to the 1950s: these racialists are de facto conservatives. Eric realised that some other values should be reversed to before the 50s. For example, the interaction between men and women was infinitely healthier in the world of Jane Austen, before the first wave of feminism took hold of the Aryan collective unconscious. However, as Eric believed that the primary cause of white decline was Christian axiology (after all, over time that axiology would give rise to feminism), other values would have to be reversed to pre-Christian times, Nietzsche’s ideal.
All of this seemed very logical to me when I discussed it with Eric in July and August 2009. Now that I have discovered a great book about our prehistoric past, I would add something to it.
Since reading Danny Vendramini’s Them and Uschanged my worldview, as to re-evaluating some things back to the 1950s, others back to Austen’s time, and others back to the values of the Greco-Roman world, I would now add a final touch. In our interaction with the Other, it is not enough to behave like tough citizens of the Roman Empire. Let us remember that they committed the sin against the holy spirit of life: mixing their blood with mudbloods. We must re-evaluate much further back in time: to the values of prehistory, when our Cro-Magnon ancestors exterminated the ape-like Neanderthals.
This transvaluation of all values perfectly portrays the subtitle of this site: “National Socialism after 1945”, and contrasts dramatically with those who remain stuck on Mein Kampf as if it were similar to the Christian Bible. In reality, NS is a living philosophy that, over the years, has developed and rediscovered itself.
Eric would disagree with me that some aspects of our notion of good and evil need to be re-evaluated back to prehistoric times. Despite the nickname Auster gave him, “Nietzschean of the North”, he still subscribed somehow to Christian ethics, which forbids us from fantasising about genocide, let alone exterminationism, as if it were something good and noble.
Our Cro-Magnon ancestors would not agree with the Swede. Nor with Auster. Nor with white nationalists. Either our ancestors exterminated the evolved apes, or the genetic foundations for the Nordic race to flourish wouldn’t have been laid.
My good friend Alex [Linder], who has since gone to be with the ground, said that we should attack and mock—with our words—conservatives, because we are in direct competition with them, and not with Liberals, and Communists.
There are a lot of voices out there, like this nutcase, who wish to drag us back to a previous stage of the Christian Revolution. Fascism is different to Naziism. Fascism is a Christian phenomenon, whereas Nazism is esoterically antichristian. I was reading Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin, and it is clear from this dialogue that Hitler was antichristian, although he pretended otherwise. In Bolshevismus by Dietrick Eckhart, Hitler calls Christianity “the first communist cell”.
This form of Fascism—specifically, Christian authoritarianism as practiced by Salazar, Franco, Mussolini, and Dollfuss—is inherently Christian. Communism and Liberalism, so far from being anti-christian is simply what happens when Christianity, naturally, atheises. The Christian god, let us remember, does not exist, and so Christianity, if left to itself, will eventually atheize. Thus Revilo P. Oliver spoke of “The Marxian Reformation”.
Liberalism was dreamt up by the Christian theologian, John Locke.
Spinoza, who dreamt up the “dialectical” metaphysic of Communism was good friends with Quakers, who themselves were a more extreme sect of Communist Anabaptists like John Bunyan and Thomas Muentzer.
Thus, what our wingnut, Alex Hexagon, describes as political systems of decay: Communism, Liberalism and Christian Authoritarianism, are merely evolved states of Christianity.
Hexagon equates Liberalism with The Cult of Ugliness. Christianity was the original cult of ugliness. They whitewashed the frescoes, threw sculptures into the see, defaced sculptures with crosses, destroyed beautiful architecture such as the Serapeum. Christians did in the first centuries of the Common Era exactly what “Liberals” do today: and a hatred of good architecture is shared between yesterday’s Christians and today’s liberals.
Isaiah assures us that the central character in the Christian mythos, Jesus Christ, has no beauty in him. Early Christianity was a literal cult of ugliness.
The answer to a revolution is not to overthrow it with an earlier stage of that revolution, but to overthrow the revolution, completely, ad radicem, at root.
Christianity, as Revilo P. Oliver points out, was a mob revolution against Aristocratic Epicureanism. If you want to overthrow the revolution, then return to Epicureanism, i.e. the observance of causal reality. In Epicureanism, there most certainly is a difference between Jew and Gentile, between male and female. In Aristocratic Epicureanism, the first are always first and the last are always last. In Aristocratic Epicureanism, the Xenos is not someone to be welcomed, but an enemy invader to be countered. Aristocratic Epicureanism is basically an opposite ethic to that of the sermon on the mount. If you want Europe to return to its former greatness, then re-embrace what Revilo P. Oliver calls the true white western philosophy: Aristocratic Epicureanism.
There are plenty of hucksters out there selling Christianity as a cure-all for all that ails us, whereas, in my estimation, it is the thing that slowly poisoned us to begin with. A philosophy totally at odds with reality: the last shall be first, will eventually doom our civilization.
Starting with the Reformation, Europeans began to take the ethic of the New Testament seriously. Illiterate peasants, prior to the Reformation, probably had no idea what the Sermon on the Mount even was, and, therefore, opperated according to the previous pagan-ethic. The Roman Catholic Church, certainly, did not want to follow the suicidal ethic of the New Testament. However, as Nietzsche points out: when Luther “restored the gospel”, the poisonous suicidal ethic of the New Testament was let loose upon Europe unto its own destruction. The Roman Catholic Church would itself embrace this suicidal ethic at Vatican 2.
If there is one phrase that captures my spirit, which is practically identical to Kalki’s spirit if we draw inspiration from the most revealing passages of Savitri Devi, it is to exterminate the obsolete versions of Homo sapiens.
Only those whom these Neanderthals have martyred in a truly bestial manner, and who have managed to survive—like Benjamin and me (for Ben’s autobiography see here; mine, here)—have reached level 10 on Mauricio’s scale. Those who have not been martyred by the System and survived won’t understand our passion for exterminating the primitive version of humans which for decades I have called, in my soliloquies, “Neanderthals”.
But oh surprise! That expression of mine from so long ago may have an equivalent in the Aryan collective unconscious. According to Jung, even very ancient events could be unconsciously contained within our psyches, and Danny Vendramini’s book, Them and Us: How Neanderthal predation created modern humans serves me wonderfully to explain myself.
Darwinian scholar Danny Vendramini.
It doesn’t matter if only thirty per cent of what Vendramini says has a genuine scientific basis and the rest is mere conjecture. The fact is that since the Jew Franz Boas, anthropology has become an anti-white ideology; and every time I watch videos on YouTube about prehistory I get extremely upset because this ideology permeates our view of our distant past to such an extent that not only does it portray the first Homo sapiens as Negroes, but these YouTubers have dared to depict cities of historical blondes, such as Sparta, with figures of mulattos among Caucasians and a few blondies: as if historical Greece were ethnically a replica of a modern-day American metropolis! (see, e.g., the first comment in the comments section).
In the prologue to his book, Vendramini tells us:
When I applied Teem theory to what had transformed humans from stone-age African hominids into fully modern humans, why we look and act the way we do, and even why we’re obsessed with sex and violence and good and evil, it proposed a single simple explanation that was both extraordinary and unexpected.
The result is a unified theory of human origins called Neanderthal Predation theory (or NP theory) which is based on a fundamental reassessment of Neanderthal behavioural ecology. Exciting new evidence reveals Neanderthals weren’t docile omnivores, but savage, cannibalistic carnivores—top flight predators who hunted, killed and cannibalised our archaic ancestors in the Middle East for 50,000 years. What’s more, Neanderthals were also sexual predators, who raided human camps to rape, and abduct young females, leaving a trail of half-cast ‘inbreds’.
This multi-faceted predation eventually drove our ancestors to the brink of extinction. Genetic evidence reveals that at one stage our entire ancestral population was reduced to as few as 50 people.
The only humans to survive the predation were those born with mutations for ‘survivalist adaptations’—modern human traits like language capacity, Machiavellian intelligence, coalition building, creativity, risk-taking and aggression. These traits effectively transformed them from a prey species to a virulent new hunter species—Homo sapiens.
Armed with these new attributes, the first modern humans systematically exterminated their former predators, firstly in the Middle East and then in a blitzkrieg invasion of Europe. They then spread out to colonise the world. Guided by an innate sense of them and us, hyper-aggressive men killed anyone who looked or behaved even remotely like a Neanderthal, including hybrids and other humans [emphasis added]. It was this lethal process of artificial selection that gradually unified human physiology and behaviour.
It’s a fairly radical theory, but its strength lies in its predictions and ability to explain aspects of human evolution, physiology and behaviour that have frustrated philosophers, biologists and anthropologists for centuries.
The book has been written for a general readership which has an interest in how we got here. I’ve included ‘boxes’ to explain peripheral subjects and there’s a glossary of ancillary terms at the end. But to help academics evaluate the theory, I’ve also included my references—all 800 of them.
Because the evolutionary events I am investigating happened so long ago, some aspects of the scenario I propose are speculative. For instance, I speculate on the psychological impact that Neanderthal predation had on our ancestors, how the menfolk felt seeing their women abducted and raped. I do this because the psychology of ancestral humans had a direct bearing on our evolution and needs to be considered as part of a holistic theory.
For some scholars, though, the use of speculation and the imagination are anathema—but historically there has always been a legitimate place for the imagination in science. A scientific model can be subjected to rational debate and analysis only once it exists in a tangible form. The day before Einstein conceived his theory of relativity, there was nothing to think about. It existed in a netherworld beyond deductive reasoning, and required an act of imagination to bring it into existence.
Einstein is famously quoted as saying, “Imagination is more important than knowledge” and he explains, “For while knowledge defines all we currently know and understand, imagination points to all we might yet discover and create.”
For radical, big-idea science, imagination isn’t just ancillary to the scientific process, it is an indispensable ingredient.
With human evolution, it could be argued that the reluctance of academics to imagine alternative evolutionary scenarios, or to encourage lateral thinking beyond the narrow pathways of orthodoxy, has hampered progress in this field.
While imagination played a role in the formulation of the NP theory, the resulting evolutionary scenario has, of course, been subjective to an exhaustive six-year process of scientific scrutiny and verification which involved sifting through 3000 scientific papers and other pieces of evidence. Ultimately, the theory’s credibility rests on the rigour of this process.
But let’s not fool ourselves. Although, unlike academics who study prehistory Vendramini uses his vivid imagination, this writer is a normie as revealed in the following passage of the first chapter:
Until we understand the evolutionary imperatives that subliminally drive universal human behaviours, xenophobia, superstition, sexism, war, racism [my emphasis], homicide, ecological vandalism, genocide and the nuclear arms race will continue to hold sway over humanity.
This reminds me of what I have said about Tom Holland’s Dominion: we can perfectly appropriate Holland’s conclusions, but at the same time revalue his Christian-sympathetic values.
Only an academy of the future, in an Aryan state whose academic fields are linked to archaeology, palaeontology and prehistorical geology, will evaluate the Neanderthal Predation theory and clarify the matter. But by then, the extermination of the Neanderthals—and here, unlike prehistory, I am using my historical metaphor (cf. Mauricio’s scale)—will already be underway, if not already complete.
What is valid about Vendramini and others’ NP theory is that prehistoric Orcs were exterminated by us in the real world, and that this process could potentially be repeated with those I call Neanderthals—although that would imply a complete reversal of Christian values to the values of our distant ancestors: the prehistoric exterminators.
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
Update of August 24: Finally, he replied—in the comments section of this site, here.
At the time of posting this entry, the heated discussion thread on the Holocaust on Counter-Currentsalready has 267 comments. I tried to post six comments, only half of which were approved. Regarding what I said a couple of days ago—:
I tried to leave a comment on Counter-Currents linking to this article, but it seems—not sure yet; still waiting for Greg Johnson to reply to my email—that Greg sent it straight to the spam filter.
—Johnson has neither approved my comment nor responded to my last four emails. While Johnson approved three of my comments, the other three disappeared because now even the message “your comment is being moderated” no longer appears.
I am surprised that Johnson is capable of banning someone like me from his webzine because I was always respectful in all of his discussions threads, even when I used to comment on Counter-Currents under the pen name of “Chechar” or in the three “vaporised” comments of the ongoing discussion. Furthermore, like Johnson I am also a critic of revisionists because I am an “Holocaust affirmer”.
But here’s the thing: unlike the revisionists, I do not condemn exterminationism. So Johnson can ban me while allowing rude comments against him in that same discussion thread—as long as they come from Holocaust deniers who subscribe to Christian ethics, where the life of every Negro, Gook or Jew is invaluable.
My very recent banning on Counter-Currents is symptomatic of the fact that, even when speaking in a very cordial tone on their forums, it is impossible to argue with those who haven’t re-evaluated their values. They simply shun me. They’ve been using the “death by silence” tactic on me for years. So The West’s Darkest Hour will continue to be practically a ghost town…
Revisionist Scott Smith recently wrote the following in the vigorous discussion about the Holocaust now taking place on Counter-Currents:
I conceded a long time ago that [Raul] Hilberg’s 5.1 Jewish million mortality figure could be true.
Wow! I think it’s very healthy that the issue is being aired on Counter-Currents. I very rarely comment on that webzine, but this time I did so given the importance of breaking the taboo that exists in certain quarters of the racial right, and the only way to achieve consensus is to start talking to each other.
In my opinion, even if the official figure of six million Jews killed in the Holocaust is true (which I highly doubt), that shouldn’t weaken our faith. As a Swede commented quite a few years ago on the previous incarnation of this site:
What is certain is that the Holocaust would not have produced any debilitating psychological effect on non-Christian whites. (By Christianity I mean ‘Christian morality.’ Most atheists in the West are still Christian, even if they don’t believe in God or Jesus.) Being emotionally affected by the Holocaust presupposes that you think: (1) Victims and losers have intrinsically more moral value than conquerors and winners, (2) Killing is the most horrendous thing a human can do, (3) Killing children and women is even more horrendous and (4) Every human life has the same value.
None of these statements ring true to a man who has rejected Christian morality. Even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathise with them. If you told the Vikings that they needed to accept Jews on their lands or give them gold coins because six million of them were exterminated in an obscure war, they would have laughed at you.
This passage was included on page 83 of my anthology On Exterminationism. I believe that the commenters on Counter-Currents, whether Holocaust deniers or Holocaust affirmers, have not reached the level of the Swede because of their Christian programming.
As an holocaust affirmer, I agree with Greg Johnson in his article yesterday about the so-called Holocaust. But I am referring only to historical facts, not to a putative ethical assessment. For example, in the comment thread holocaust denier Scott said that zero Jews had been gassed: something that contradicts what, over time, revisionist Mark Weber acknowledged about Treblinka.
As far as an ethical assessment is concerned, my position is peculiar.
I would disagree with Hitler if the German chancellor’s mindset is accurately portrayed in Johnson’s article, in that I don’t believe that Jews alone caused the fatidic WW2. Now I blame the Anglo-Saxons more, especially the US, after having assimilated not only Brendan Simms’ biography of Hitler (quotes from its first chapters here), but also John Mearsheimer’s realism.
On the other hand, for reasons of transvaluation of values I like Mauricio’s words, “We need more Holocaust Affirmers”: something that is still not noticeable in healthy quantities in discussion threads on racialist forums such as Counter-Currents, or even on the ghost town that my website has become—precisely because I have shifted paradigms! (JQ => CQ).
Physical distortion and mental malformation are the direct result of two thousand years of bad-breeding: that is to say, of mongrelism, of democracy, of equality… Christian-ism, originating in the despairful and fallacious philosophy of a crucified wanderer (suffering from acute morbus sacer) is now developed into an organised and world-wide conspiracy of clericals, politicals and decadents directed en masse, with Jesuitic cunning against all the primitive and heroic virtues.
Our clean-skinned ‘heathenish’ ancestors with all their vital forces unimpaired, were really the nobler type of animal. We on the other hand, with our corrupt, irresolute, civilised hearts, our trembling nerves, our fragile anaemic constitutions, are actually the lower, the viler type—notwithstanding the baseless optimism that courtly rhymers drivel into their ‘Heirs of all the ages’, etc.
No people can long retain hardihood and independence, whose minds become submissive to a false ideal.
Blessed are the strong for they shall possess the earth—Cursed are the weak for they shall inherit the yoke. Blessed are the powerful for they shall be reverenced among men—Cursed are the feeble for they shall be blotted out.
Blessed are the bold for they shall be masters of the world—Cursed are the humble for they shall be trodden under hoofs. Blessed are the victorious for victory is the basis of right—Cursed are the vanquished for they shall be vassals forever.
Blessed are the battle-blooded, Beauty shall smile upon them—Cursed are the poor-in-spirit, they shall be spat upon. Blessed are the audacious for they have imbibed true wisdom—Cursed are the obedient for they shall breed creeplings.
Blessed are the iron-handed, the unfit shall flee before them—Cursed are the haters of battle, subjugation is their portion. Blessed are the death-defiant, their days shall be long in the land—Cursed are the feeble-brained, for they shall perish amidst plenty.
Blessed are the destroyers of false-hope, they are true Messiahs—Cursed are the God-adorers, they shall be as shorn sheep. Blessed are the valiant for they shall obtain great treasure—Cursed are the believers in good and evil for they are frightened by shadows…
Blessed is the man who hath powerful enemies, they shall make him a hero—Cursed is he who ‘doeth good’ unto others, he shall be despised.
Blessed is the man whose foot is swift to serve a friend, he is a friend indeed—Cursed are the organisers of charities, they are propagators of plagues. Blessed are the wise and brave for in the struggle they shall win—Cursed are the unfit for they shall be righteously exterminated [emphasis by Ed.].
Blessed are the sires of noble maidens, they are the salt of the earth—Cursed are the mothers of strumous tenderlings for they shall be shamed. Blessed are the mighty-minded for they shall ride the whirl-winds—Cursed are they who teach lies for truth, and truth for lies, for they are abomination.
Blessed are the unmerciful, their posterity shall own the world—Cursed are the pitiful for they shall receive no pity. Blessed are the destroyers of idols, for tyrants shall fear them—Cursed are the famous wiselings, their seed shall perish off the earth. Thrice cursed are the vile for they shall serve and suffer.
Contrast this with an orthodox Sermonette—one that is repeated every seventh day, in thousands of sacred sanctuaries by consecrated black-robed clericals, who have been specially trained from boyhood to weepfully, unctuously rehearse the same with upturned eyes and skilful snuffle or in classic diction, sounding, sonorous, nay! Sublime—as suits the occasion.
I exaggerated last Saturday when I said that David Irving’s True Himmler was only about Heinrich’s childhood and adolescence. I have read on and it has a few sentences worth quoting. If the senior figures of the Third Reich were heroes or saints for the ‘dissident’ right it would still be possible to save the Aryan from inexorable extinction. But they are not: many of them still have legendary Jews as their heroes!
Yesterday, for example, I was shocked to find that both Alexander Mercouris, who vlogs in his English channel (here), and three well-known Spanish ‘dissidents’ in the YouTube subculture (here), talked about Good Friday as if my very Christian father were still alive and educating the teenager I was half a century ago!
Just as white nationalists in general ignore Carrier’s critique of the NT regarding Romulus—a critique that could very well be used to validate Kevin MacDonald’s approach to subversive Jewry—, the so-called dissidents haven’t emerged from the bubble they introjected from their ancestors.
So back to Himmler, for although Heini received a strict Catholic upbringing as a child, as an adult he was able to transvalue his values. I think that on this point Maurice is right in saying that we need more Holocaust affirmers in the movement: something that couldn’t contrast more with the heavy chains with which Christian ethics, in both its traditional and neochristian versions, undermines the Aryan collective unconscious.
On page 72 of True Himmler Irving informs us that Heini disliked beer (I dislike it too). Two pages later we read: ‘Easter will be very nice and cheerful’, Heini wrote to his mother. In another letter, dated May 1921, Heini wrote to his mother that he had visited Salzburg by bicycle, where he went to church. At the age of twenty-one Himmler still felt at home with his pious parents and among the Catholic architecture of St Michael’s, the largest Renaissance church in the Alps. He particularly loved the royal Hofkirche for its ornaments and Old Testament frescoes: the church of All Saints where his cousin sometimes celebrated mass. Heini was such a good boy that he went to the eight o’clock mass one Sunday morning and wrote to his mother about his experiences in that church.
On page 90 we learn that Heini’s first contact with incipient National Socialism wasn’t with Hitler, but with the homosexual Ernst Röhm, who invited him to join the movement. However, Heini was always repulsed by such behaviour and didn’t join the movement—yet.
Adolf Hitler was older than Himmler, and at that time he was already saying things like: ‘We need a dictator who is a genius if we are to arise again’. I wonder how many white nationalists know that democracy is shit and that only a tough dictator could save them? Speaking in Salzburg, Hitler was already demanding the extirpation of the ‘Jewish bacillus’ from Austria and Germany (pages 93-94). ‘For us, this is not a problem to which you can turn a blind eye, one to be solved by minor concessions… Don’t be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus’. And on the same page of Irving’s book we can read:
‘We must be fired with a remorseless determination to grasp this evil at its roots and exterminate it, root and branch’. A few weeks later he repeated, ‘We cannot skirt around the Jewish Question. It has got to be solved’.
In 1923 hyperinflation hit Germany and only the Jews got richer having bought houses, land and works of art: which motivated the people to listen to radical voices, like Uncle Adolf’s. We can imagine why I believe that now the American dollar is the one that has to hyperinflate!
Just as many on the racial right deny the Holocaust, others deny that Hitler and Himmler wanted to conquer the lands of the half-gooks for the Aryans. On page 119 Irving again quotes Hitler:
Germany’s future lay in the east. ‘The destruction of the Russian empire and the distribution of its land and property, which will be settled by Germans…’
And on page 122 he does it again:
‘A solution of the Jewish Question is bound to come. If it can be resolved with common sense [the Madagascar Plan], so much the better’. If not, he predicted, there were two or more possibilities — ‘either the Armenian, Levantine, way or bloody confrontation’. In 1915 the Turks had brutally expelled the Armenians…
A few words later Irving ends the ninth chapter of True Himmler.
My arrival in a raggedy town whose name I don’t even want to mention has made me question many things, and has affected the routine of entries I had on this site: not just Deschner’s books.
I have never before, for example, had the experience of not feeling the slightest physical attraction to a single woman I see on the streets—not one! This is due to the ethnic component of the people who live here: something that didn’t happen to me in the country’s capital where one or the other, although rare, was attractive. It is obvious that it was a gigantic mistake to come to this town and that I will return to my hometown as soon as the one-year contract I signed with the house’s owner is over (besides, moving my furniture is far more expensive than I imagined!).
If all goes well with my plans, I will see two of the commenters on this site this year. The three of us are depressed by the lack of joint action: it is impossible to keep our spirits up without seeing our comrades daily. Today, for example, I was watching scenes from the latest film version of The Wannsee Conference, and we could already imagine how impossible it would be to have a single minute of depression with such historic action! But before the dollar collapses my purchasing power to move freely is nil. Only an exponentially hyper-inflated dollar would lift me out of poverty. Thanks, Trump, for pricking the credit bubble! May your house of cards come crashing down quickly…!
I said in my previous post that I have suspended Deschner’s book series. As far as David Irving’s book on Himmler is concerned, I don’t know if I will resume the selected quotes. I suspect that Irving suffered a stroke because, since his family notified his fans of his collapse by email early last year, David hasn’t communicated again on his website (others are running his site).
True Himmler (excerpts here) is a book for the fan of the Reichsführer who wants to know about his childhood and adolescent life. But this first volume doesn’t mention what we all wanted to know: the role Himmler played in the so-called holocaust, written by a pen sympathetic to the German regime, Irving’s. Conveniently, David fell ill before he finished his second volume on Himmler, so we only have Irving’s DVD on the Reichsführer in which he does touch, briefly, on the subject of the so-called holocaust.
So if I want to dig deeper, I have no choice but to consult normie treatises, even Jewish ones like Raul Hilberg’s seminal treatise, which I have been reading in a Spanish hardback translation.
In my library I have other books that Jews and Gentiles have written about the holocaust, such as those by Laurence Rees, Ron Rosenbaum and even Daniel Goldhagen. Although I have read them, they are all propaganda of the purest Manichaeism incapable of mentioning a syllable about the Hellstorm Holocaust that the Allies perpetrated on the German people, women and children included. But as far as I have read, Hilberg’s treatise has impressed me: unlike the others he makes no value judgements; he just uses tons of references and bibliographical notes, over 1455 pages, to support the facts he discusses. His treatise seems to be purely descriptive.
One of the reasons I bought this expensive book is because I am interested in the mentality of the exterminationist (it’s like mine…). This is true even though Hilberg knew nothing of the Jewish problem; for example, what Eduardo Velasco recounts in his essay on Judea and Rome, especially the suspicion that many Christians were subversive Semites who hated the Greco-Roman civilisation.
Real history is much more complex, nuanced and disturbing than the Manichean views we see both in normie authors such as the aforementioned Hitler haters, and in some racialist quarters where all the research in books such as Hilberg’s is simply dismissed as one hundred per cent mythical.
A more mature way to approach treatises like Hilberg’s is to see it from the perspective of one who has transvalued his values, like those who sat around the table at the Wannsee Conference. With this attitude you only inquire into the veracity of the bare facts, and if genocides of men, women and children occurred, you accept the historical facts without condemning Hitler’s willing executioners.
That has been the traditional attitude of contemporary Muslims in dealing with Islam’s incredibly bloody conquest of India, and also the attitude of present-day Mongols who continue to honour the memory of Genghis Khan (it is also the attitude of Jews regarding the genocide of the Palestinians). If we recall what I said in my essay on Augustine and tutti quanti about the ‘ogre of the superego’ that the Aryan of the Christian Era suffers, we will see that in the collective unconscious it would have to be balanced with its counterpart, the Id, if whites are to be saved from self-destruction.
I read the Confessions almost a quarter of a century ago during a two-week voyage on a cargo ship bound for Europe. It was a time when I wanted to find an Englishwoman to marry. It is worth noting what I wrote then in the Atlantic Ocean:
2 October 1991
I’ve been dreading staying goof off: finishing the two books I have halfway through the trip.
I need to reconcile myself with Augustine and New Spain (Paz’s book). That would be, indirectly, a reconciliation with dad, since he is both.
BOOK VII: He begins to read the epistles of St Paul
Augustine begins this chapter by saying that he no longer conceived of the deity in the form of a human body, and then goes on to say something which again shows that all this talk of his later conversion is false, since he was already, in his youthful way, a good Christian:
My heart adhered firmly to the faith in your Christ… My soul was not willing to abandon it; rather every day it was more and more steeped in it.
And four pages ahead:
My faith believed also in Christ, our Son and Lord… These beliefs were already intact and firmly rooted in my soul.
It is not surprising that at this point Augustine’s extreme theological rationalisations had already begun. First he dispatches the problem of evil, and then he reconciles the irreconcilable: the Torah with Paul.
It was with great eagerness that I picked up the venerable Scriptures inspired by your Spirit, particularly those of your apostle Paul.
As I said in the first entry, Augustine was a man of his time. He followed, to its ultimate consequences, the misguided steps of the Caucasoid Christians of his time: something that speaks volumes about imperial Rome in the 4th century.
The next chapter is the most famous of his Confessions. The whole book shows how dead the Aryan soul was then, as it is dead now. If it hadn’t been dead it would have prevented the Judeo-Christian flourishing. Already in this chapter Augustine uses so many metaphors taken from the Bible that a reader unfamiliar with it would find himself without understanding much.
To understand the next chapter we have to imagine Augustine in a terrible struggle with himself à la Gollum in The Lord of the Rings: a titanic struggle in which the maternal introjects won out (remember Nietzsche’s aphorism: ‘Christianity gave Eros poison to drink. He didn’t die but degenerated into a vice’).
BOOK VIII: ‘Conversion’ in the garden of his house
I will now tell how you freed me from the bonds of my carnal desires.
Augustine recounts how an African named Ponticianus saw Paul’s epistles on Augustine’s desk and began to speak about Antony, the Egyptian monk. Remember the passage in Deschner’s book about this monk:
Athanasius did not just adorn his Vita Antonii (St Anthony or Antony was a monk who played an important role in the conversion of Augustine; was the archetype of the lives of Greek and Latin saints, and for centuries inspired the monastic life of the East and the West) with increasingly crazy miracles, but he also falsified documents in the worst of styles.
When Ponticianus left, Augustine rationalised this visit of the African as follows: ‘You brought me once more face to face with myself, forcing me to look myself in the eye so that I might see my iniquity and abhor it’. He was already thirty-two years old and, comparing his erotic conduct with that of the Egyptian monk, he confessed:
In my inner house a great strife was being waged… I turned to Alypius saying loudly: ‘We, on the other hand, wallow in flesh and blood’.
He, stunned, stared at me in silence…
The house where we were staying had a small garden. So I withdrew to the garden and Alypius followed in my footsteps.
Augustine realised that ‘there are, therefore, two wills in us’. In psychoanalytic language, we could say that it was a struggle between the super-ego instilled by his mother (Thou shalt not fornicate, etc.) and his natural call to Eros, which in the pagan world wasn’t that sinful. ‘As I was deliberating whether to consecrate myself to the service of the Lord…’ That is, feeling the call to follow in the footsteps of a monk would mean no marriage, a life condemned to celibacy.
And from this moment it would no longer be licit for me to do this or that? What was it, my God, that I was suggesting with those words ‘this and that’? What sordid things! What indecencies!
But Augustine doesn’t get graphic. He fails to confess what exactly it was. Let us remember that he had already said: ‘To love and be loved was the sweetest thing for me, especially if I got to enjoy the beloved´s body…’ Gollum continues:
Do you intend to live without these things?… ‘Shut your ears to the filthy whisperings of your members, and you will be mortified. They speak to you of delights, but not according to the law of the Lord your God’.
This struggle within my heart was nothing other than the struggle of myself against myself. Alypius was still beside me, silently awaiting the outcome of this new agitation in me.
I got up and he stood stunned in the place where we were sitting. I threw myself, as best I could, under a fig tree and gave free rein to the tears, which flowed like two rivers from my eyes, an acceptable sacrifice to you, Lord.
The Conversion of St Augustine by Fra Angelico.
I hurriedly retraced my steps to the place where Alypius was sitting, for I had left the book of the Epistles of St Paul when I got up from there. I picked it up, opened it, and silently read the first passage that fell before my eyes. It said: No gluttony and drunkenness; no lust and wantonness; no rivalry and envy. Rather put on the Lord Jesus Christ and do not concern yourself with the flesh to gratify its lusts.
I didn’t want to read any more, nor was it necessary. In an instant—no sooner had I finished reading the sentence—all the darkness of my doubts vanished, as if a light of assurance had taken possession of my heart.
Then we went to see my mother.
We told her everything, with great joy on her part. And as we told her the story of what had happened, she, jubilant and leaping for joy, blessed and glorified you… For she saw that you had granted her much more than she used to ask of you with her tearful and pitiful moans. In such a way you converted me to you that I no longer desired a wife nor harboured any hope in this world. I was firm in that rule of faith which many years before you had shown her that I would embrace. It was thus that you turned her weeping into joy [Ps 30:11], far more fulfilled than she had wished. A sweeter and more chaste joy than she had expected to find in the grandchildren born of my flesh.
In Augustine’s mind, the inversion of Greco-Roman values was now complete.
Since reading Danny Vendramini’s Them and Us changed my worldview, as to re-evaluating some things back to the 1950s, others back to Austen’s time, and others back to the values of the Greco-Roman world, I would now add a final touch. In our interaction with the Other, it is not enough to behave like tough citizens of the Roman Empire. Let us remember that they committed the sin against the holy spirit of life: mixing their blood with mudbloods. We must re-evaluate much further back in time: to the values of prehistory, when our Cro-Magnon ancestors exterminated the ape-like Neanderthals.
