web analytics

Tag: United Kingdom

Categories
Correspondence Neanderthalism

Hellish island

by Thomas 2

Children of men by anti-white Alfonso Cuarón was filmed in the UK.

Yes, it is terrible, being here. I deliberately walk around the quieter end of the village, and even then now and again, I encounter a non-white, usually in uniform (the port security employs many, ludicrously, plus all the new local takeaway outlets, plus all their Just Eat drivers: which historical nation until now trusted their direct ancestral enemies to prepare and deliver them their food? But we are this lazy!). Either that or a burqa-clad mother, with pushchair and accursed brat on her arm—always a very disconcerting sight to me. I notice they at least usually stick to the urban side of the village; these creatures have no natural interest in the wilds. I have never seen them among the trees, mercifully.

One Englishman cares (not that I always did enough—I’m not innocent either). Unfortunately, it seems I am alone here, adrift along the edges of horrible shores. Sometimes I wake up and step outside my front door, a scant metre past the flimsy mantle that is our house, staring at the sickly yellow sky, with a murky winter’s sun, a weird, suppurating light suitable for a lost seaside backwater (a locale where people disappear like albatrosses into a liminal fog), thinking about it all: ‘this place… this f**king place…’

Britain is lost everywhere; some foreign rock. I can only really shrug (knowing that snapping and flinging myself into the System headlong is off limits, so I shouldn’t go there – won’t ever) and then dig in, with my provisions around me for as long as I need them, perhaps cynically, or perhaps just in harsh, disappointed acceptance, and wait for their idiotic ‘remigration’ plans to fail and their ‘full proof’ shiny new election-friendly leaders to falter and prove useless at their word, and all orthodox political ‘resistance’ to crumble… and to re-evaluate the citizens then, (perhaps from far away, if I am fortunate), when we know every last inch of their bullshit and excuse-making capability has been stripped away from them, when they can (and as they are scum, it will take brute force!) no longer countenance contriving these lofty phantom escape-hatches for themselves: that endless imaginary ‘resource’ of easily-bought others doing their dirty work for them (and by the book); when reality is whipping them back, finally, when their oldest stance and possession – their cowardice – is denied them under pain of death (it shouldn’t have to take this long). I am aimed to hate my people. They have hurt my pride – my pride in my own race!

I hope the ‘Orcs’ will be driven from here, and from everywhere, with such brutality and with such steel hate. But in this meantime I’ve had to give up on the citizens of the UK. They’ve done their best so far (and it isn’t anywhere near good enough). Later most can die. I’m glad I have my garden and the (little) wilds I talk of and enjoy, and then all the expanse of woods and hills and fields as far down as Manningtree and beyond. That’s my pleasure in this country (and I’m so glad it doesn’t interest them – ‘friend’ or enemy nigh-on alike).

Maybe later I can find a sense of love for my own people again. For the moment I’m just indifferent. They’re not quite enemies, but they are just worthless. I keep this to myself most days—but I think a lifetime of dealing with the perennially irresponsible retinue the defines the scope of my interactions, from [***] and [***] to [***] (though I struggle to always include the later, as the best friend here I’ve got, damage notwithstanding)… of dealing with all these f**king fools, has encouraged me to see Aryan life—much as it’s the most vital of idealistic futures to preserve it (and so I know there are good people I cannot see here even now)—as temporarily expendable, and already somehow corpses prone on the soil of England. They should get up again all by themselves, if they do! Should I try to forgive them? I can’t think why! Still, darkly, I’d find it worthwhile to address them with a few of those planned podcasts, provided my/our timing is satisfactory for that.

I don’t really think I’m much better as a person. But I do care what happens here, to the conclusion of that line of thinking, in a big, grumbling sea of people who don’t. I’m like Mark Collett once remarked on (albeit disapprovingly): I’ve scowled so much at them I’ve altered my face.

Maybe that’s why—just for me—my woodland experiences exist. As something to fall back on that always lasts, even when the people are gone. It will always be a pleasure in itself, as I like nature. It will do I think, for now. It’s beautiful, and stark, and then more rounded as summer comes on. I’m glad you too have good scenery and intriguing animals. I fear for nature perhaps more than I fear for the citizens here though. I wish I did have just one other person here on my wavelength… so I didn’t give up on the island’s race. Already they feel a little cloudy to me—too many months of stifled misery analysing them. Only the muddy wilds feel real. I used to find Savitri’s ‘wingless bipeds’ expression a little risible in its ridiculousness. The ridiculous element isn’t funny though. Now, I share her abyssal contempt, and understand the sentiment emotionally.

Maybe it’s just the way it is that I never will have that though; maybe it’s best for me, to keep me on edge, or radical. I can’t imagine how hard your own life-time (!) of genuine solitude has been on you, and I hope I don’t patronise you saying that. At least I have—well…—some closely-placed bodies around me long-term, even if they don’t see me and I’m drained and irritated seeing them. I think it’s how you’ve come to your wisdom though, through all that pain and harrowing opportunity for self-reflection, as Solzhenitsyn reflects on regarding prisoners. I’m certainly glad I have you as a friend, long distance. It provides my life with a sense of an heroic mission, however much it’s as if ‘mission: impossible’ currently (and could just be tragedy)!

I’ll have to end this soon. I get so weary as I think of this country—I do best on a sort of grim autopilot. It’s something too… awful, to really be delved into cognitively for any length. I genuinely don’t like writing about it; it sends my head foggy.

Alas for your country indeed, in that ugly mud-pool of troll faces, too many by far (much as one would be too many also). Alas for ours… where the people are biologically pure and clean, on the whole, and yet so far empty; surrounded and subdued, quite happy on their knees.

Death to the traitors on the right who have eased the burden of their complacency over this! Death to the idiot left, for their petty roadblocks, and pampered favours and perversions! Something will happen here, I’m sure of it, or I wouldn’t waste these words.

As I shared to you briefly on WDH some while back (I think it disappeared), I am glad for the Orcs being here as only I can be, despite never having had a choice. Bring them, and more to these dead age killing grounds, and eviscerate them! Their hubris, their mistake! Torch their piled bodies from the whitest cliffs, as a small measure of our welcome to these alien beasts, these unsound f**king remains. That is our duty, no matter how distant or unrealistic it may seem. And it shall be a pleasure then, for as long as the enemy lasts to despise.

The situation, I gather, is naturally more complicated than my daydreams can accommodate for. But I hope to at least see carnage, in my own lifetime.

I will mourn not being here, if anything, which I think is understandable, and I will never get over the disappointment of that. However, I am realistic I think. As long as others do this and this happens, so what? I take your recent shared words of Adolf Hitler to heart here on the importance of the collective only.

That’s my thoughts reflecting on what is sacred in these lands, and on what will be again.

Categories
Liberalism Newspeak Nick Fuentes

Glitch in the Matrix

A Spanish speaker posted the following on X, which I will now translate:

Piers Morgan (pure Boomer) vs. Nick Fuentes (radical Zoomer): the interview is a surgical X-ray of the generation gap. These guys speak completely incomprehensible languages and are driven by entirely opposing ideas.

One grew up in the era when the labels “Nazi,” “anti-Semitic,” “homophobic,” or “racist” functioned as an instant social guillotine: simply uttering them was enough to make the accused kneel, beg for forgiveness, and disappear off the face of the earth.

The other grew up in the era when those same words became badges of honour, war trophies, visible proof that you don’t kneel before the official religion of globalist progressivism. The Boomer tries to use them as a method of control; the Zoomer wipes his ass with them.

The Boomer tries, time and again, to activate the old control mechanism: he raises an eyebrow, raises his voice, launches the sacred accusation, expecting automatic submission.

The Zoomer smiles, shrugs, and basically replies, “Yeah, so what? Is that all you’ve got?” “Yes, I’m a Nazi, think what you want.”

There’s no shame, no withdrawal, no fear. Only defiance and mockery. The slightest conventionality has been eradicated from the dialogue.

And that, exactly that, is what drives the old-school boomers crazy: discovering that their moral nuclear weapon, which they wielded for decades, is now a wet firecracker. That they, who were the servile lapdogs of Zionism, can’t leave their ideological sperm in the next generation, and that, at best, they’ll receive a: “Take your cheap ideology and die with it, leave us alone, boomer.”

The average person hasn’t processed it yet, but the message has been sent: the spell is broken. The fracture will be total and extremely painful.

The words “nazi” and “racist” are equivalent to “pagan” in the Early Middle Ages or “witch” in the Late Middle Ages. Compared to the old Greco-Roman world, these Christian words—the Newspeak of the time—only had power when the Church had its secular arm that destroyed the dissenter. What Europeans don’t seem to realize is that in the land of the First Amendment, a 27-year-old can say these things and get away with it because there isn’t a secular arm to remove the infected sheep so he doesn’t infect the flock, to use the language of the inquisitors of old (always remember that two former commenters on this site are serving sentences of eight and seven years in the UK for “thought crimes”!).

It must have been around 2010 that Greg Johnson said in his fledgling webzine that a heretical statement from a notable figure could cause “a glitch in the Matrix”. Nick Fuentes’ ignorance regarding the Hellstorm Holocaust (what Stalin’s Asian hordes did in Germany) may disgust me big time, but despite his ignorance the glitch has occurred.

Now, new voices must emerge online, more mature than Nick’s, to continue this tactic of accepting labels (which in the Middle Ages led to the stake and today to European prisons) as badges of honour.

Categories
Quotable quotes

Revolution

“The peoples of the UK have a right to overthrow the government and the crown by force of arms and install a nationalist, fascist even, dictatorship… Posterity will applaud, celebrate them”. —Daniel H.

Categories
London Miscegenation William Shakespeare

Shakespeare

William Shakespeare was also a ‘man of his time’, in that his plays were performed at the London Globe. Compare this with the wretched lives of the ‘men against their time’: so ignored that, in their isolation, they usually suffer psychic annihilation (as would happen to Nietzsche).

On a mainstream television channel last century I caught glimpses of what appeared to be a series of Shakespeare’s complete works. Each drama, comedy or tragedy was performed by native actors—naturally all ethnically pure English—and I was so impressed by the more than beautiful euphony and musicality of Shakespearean English that I immediately fell in love and understood why his poetry represents one of the pinnacles of European art.

Alas, in this century, the last time I visited London, I went to Shakespeare’s Globe to see a performance of Antony and Cleopatra and… I received a horrifying shock: unlike the beautiful images I had seen on television in the previous century, now not only was the casting of the Shakespearean tragedy at the Globe itself replete with blacks, but an Arab was fondling his English girlfriend in the audience!

It is events of this kind that make one abandon the classics and devote oneself to Hitler with the utmost fanaticism! While I can recognise the very high culture represented by the English poet’s theatre, what is the point of being immersed in his dramas if what prevails in England today is the ethnosuicidal tragedy of astronomic self-hatred of the English themselves? I was a tourist in London when this happened, and it should be no surprise that Tyrone Joseph Walsh, mentioned in my previous article, vehemently refused to accompany me to the Globe.

Now Tyrone is rotting in jail for rebelling against his country’s vehement ethnosuicide. Only now do I fully understand why one loses all interest in one’s country’s greatest literary figure when things like what happened to me at the Globe happen.

So, sharing the disinterest of the friend who is now unable to communicate with us, I shall confine myself in this entry to re-posting what I have written in previous years about Shakespeare’s best-known tragedy:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Of my list of fifty, this was the first film that, as I recount in my autobiography, really made an impression on me when I saw it on television in 1975, with my dad by my side. Precisely in trying to understand how a defect or fault in my father’s character corrupted the whole family dynamics, years later I would ponder much in the words that, in Laurence Olivier’s voice, we listen at the beginning of Hamlet (1948 film):

So oft it chances in particular men
That for some vicious mole of nature in them,
By the o’ergrowth of some complexion,
Oft breaking down the pales and forts of reason,
Or by some habit grown too much; that these men–
Carrying, I say, the stamp of one defect,
Their virtues else — be they as pure as grace,
Shall in the general censure take corruption
From that particular fault.

As a teenager watching it at home, I was most impressed by Hamlet’s inward-spiralling soliloquies in one of the early scenes, when he is left alone in the hall and the court guests leave. If instead of the forty-year-old actor Olivier, the director had cast a teenage actor of my age—as he appears in Shakespeare’s tragedy!—I would have connected much more with the character. But even so, his soliloquies near the beginning of the film made a big impression on me because that is what I used to do as a teenager, and precisely because of a family tragedy that no one but me seemed to have any introspection about.

However, it is impossible to critique the film without critiquing not only Shakespeare, but the Christian era of which both Shakespeare and I are a part.

As Alice Miller observed in one of her books, the Judeo-Christian commandment to honour the parent has been fatal to the mental health of Christians (and I would add, of atheistic neochristians alike). Although Christians destroyed the vast majority of the classical world’s plays, tragedies and comedies, in the little that remains it can be seen that in both Iphigenia and Electra it’s clear that there is maddening mistreatment of their children by their parents. But not in Hamlet where an uncle is the bad guy. Nevertheless, for the Elizabethan period Hamlet was a breakthrough in the right direction, although millennia earlier the Greeks had already reached the marrow of the human soul. In sum, for the time Hamlet definitely represented a leap forward to a more self-conscious self.

Another thing that, now grown up, struck me when I rewatched the film was the character of Ophelia when Hamlet wants to grab her: the personification of the eternal feminine that I’ve been talking about on this site, which also appears in Shakespeare when we listen: ‘In her excellent white bosom, these…’ Hamlet’s scenes with Ophelia in the castle should be paradigmatic of how women will be in the future ethnostate, and are worth seeing. But back to what I said above.

Whites won’t mature as long as they are trapped by Judeo-Christian commandments. Even in areas as distinct from racial preservation as mental disorders (in Shakespearean tragedy we read that the teenage Hamlet was said to be deranged), we can never understand each other unless we transvalue our values to the values of the times of the Greek tragedies. Back then, before the commandment to honour our parents, it was easy to see that Clytemnestra’s mistreatment had affected the mental health of her daughter Electra; or that Iphigenia’s sacrifice by Agamemnon had affected Clytemnestra terribly, and so on. Even the tough Spartans wept at these open-air tragedies when they visited Athens because they reflected what was happening in the real world.

So much do Christian ethics permeate the secular world that even in his Dictionnaire philosophique Voltaire says that ‘It is natural for children to honour their parents’, and the so-called mental health professionals of our times feel the same way. In our century, the Judeo-Christian injunction to honour the parent, now secularised, moves writers to shift the villain of the story, for example from father to uncle as in Harry Potter (and Hamlet!) and only through such a shift is audio-visual drama permitted.

To transvalue all values is to recognise that the tragedies of the classical world were more profound and direct than the indirect tragedies of our Christian era. And even though Shakespeare, like Montaigne, set religion aside in their writings, they still moved on the axiological scale of our age, where the mandate to honour the parent is so profound that there is a whole fraudulent profession, psychiatry, which tries to keep the parental figure out in the cases of traumatised children and adolescents at home (cf. my books in Spanish).

 
Hamlet revisited

Though fictional, Hamlet is a character who, asking himself a thousand questions as he wanders the vast halls of the Danish castle, he also struggles with mental illness. In my article ‘Hamlet’ last year [reposted above], I implied that the Greek tragedians knew the human soul better than the great writers of Christendom for the simple reason that the latter have lived under the sky of the fourth commandment, honour our parents, and that this prevented them from seeing that some parents drive their children mad. This is so true that I commented in that article that even Voltaire hadn’t broken with that Christian commandment (it was not until the 20th and 21st centuries that a Swiss writer, Alice Miller, repudiated such a toxic commandment).

But in this entry I didn’t want to talk about the trauma model of mental disorders. I want to put Shakespeare on par with Goethe in the sense that their most famous works, Faust and Hamlet, contain strong Christian residues. Like Goethe, Shakespeare needs to be contextualised.

What could a continental freethinker do in the mid-16th century during the wars between Catholics and Protestants? Become a recluse. A sceptic of Christianity, Montaigne, did exactly that: something that evokes that many contemporary racialists are now recluses because of social ostracism if they dare to come down from their towers. Montaigne impresses me because he was the true representative of the intellectual side of the Renaissance, in sharp contrast to Erasmus who still lived in the thickest medieval darkness (cf. what I wrote about Erasmus in Daybreak).

England was then freer than Montaigne’s France, and that is the background to understanding William Shakespeare. We know that Shakespeare read Florio’s translations of Montaigne and that he was very impressed by him. Kenneth Clark said that Shakespeare was the first great poet of Christendom without religious beliefs.

Hamlet by William Morris Hunt.

However, like Goethe with his Faust, this is not entirely accurate. Shakespeare’s Hamlet has to be placed within the matrix of Elizabethan England: a time when Christian doctrine was still taken very seriously, both in its Anglican and Papist versions. Hamlet suffered a schizogenic struggle. He struggled internally with the command of his father’s ghost, from purgatory, to avenge him; but Hamlet couldn’t condemn himself, should he commit the mortal sin of murdering his uncle if he was, after all, innocent: a dilemma with which he struggles internally throughout the play.

So despite being influenced by the free-thinking ideas of his time, like Goethe Shakespeare was playing with Christian post-mortem doctrine. Nonetheless, from the viewpoint of my trilogy, which tries to fulfil Delphi’s mandate, Hamlet certainly represents a breakthrough in insight: it is the first foray into what we may call the true self (as opposed to the false self: the internal struggles we read in Augustine’s Confessions).

What gives Hamlet such evocative power is that the tragedy doesn’t take place on stage but within Hamlet’s soul. The whole play is a soliloquy, and since I have finished my trilogy these days with a postscript to my own tragedy with my father, I would like to quote a few words from Hamlet’s second scene:

Would I had met my dearest foe in heaven
Or ever I had seen that day, Horatio!
My father!—methinks I see my father.

A couple of minutes of the 1948 film interpretation from this point onwards portrays Hamlet’s inward-spiralling soliloquies very well. Incidentally, when I saw that film with my father in 1975 he had already mistreated me.

Categories
Miscegenation Racial studies

London lies

A 24 November 2015 article by Arthur Kemp

New claims by the Museum of London—replicated throughout the controlled media—that London has always been as “ethnically diverse” as it is now are easily disprovable lies being used to justify the ethnic cleansing of the city of white people.

The AFP newswire coverage of the story is a case in point:

A DNA analysis of four ancient Roman skeletons found in London shows the first inhabitants of the city were a multi-ethnic mix similar to contemporary Londoners, the Museum of London said on Monday.

Firstly, they are deliberately confusing ethnicity and race.

Ethnicity is a cultural term, such as ‘German,’ ‘English,’ ‘Polish,’ or ‘Irish.’ Ethnicity is most often expressed in linguistic boundaries.

Race, however is a genetic term, and all Europeans have genetic commonality. The Museum of London is deliberately mixing up these two meanings to try and create the impression that London has always been racially diverse—when in fact all the evidence shows that it has always been racially homogenous until the advent of present-day Third World immigration.

All Europeans are comprised of a number of genetic strains which came together in three distinct waves, dating from the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Indo-European eras, which stretched over 40,000 years in total.

As a result, any investigation of European genetics will find shared DNA, and consequently that European national boundaries are the product of language rather than race.

The existence of common DNA strings in any given European nation does not mean that that nation is ‘ethnically diverse,’ merely that they share a common origin founding population which created Europe.

The claims by the Museum of London that the Roman-founded city’s population was “similar to contemporary Londoners,” does not stand up to the test of history, DNA, or even the ‘new’ analysis of the skeletons now being boasted about in the controlled media.

The new “multi-ethnic” claim is based on DNA-analysis of just four skeletons—hardly a scientifically accepted sample size, bearing in mind that at its height, Roman London had a population of at least 60,000.

Furthermore, of the four skeletons, only one is claimed to have DNA originating outside of Europe—and even that claim is highly dubious.

According to the BBC’s coverage of the “multi-ethnic London” story, the first skeleton, called the “Lant Street teenager,” showed that she “grew up in North Africa” but that her female DNA (mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA) is common in southern and Eastern Europe. She had blue eyes, the study said.

Then, in a ridiculously unscientific manner, the BBC article claims that there ‘were things about her skeleton that suggested she had some Sub-Saharan African ancestry’—in other words, the claim to what they incorrectly call multi-ethnicity is based upon some unspecified ‘thing’ about the skeleton—while at the same time they say that all the DNA evidence shows that she was European.

In reality, racial skeletal differences are vast and easily discernable to the naked eye, and any expert would have no trouble at all in definitively asserting racial origins based on a study of such a complete skeleton. No ‘suggesting’ would have to be done.

The second skeleton analyzed, known as the “Mansell Street man,” showed that he had dark brown hair and brown eyes. According to the BBC, his “mitochondrial DNA line was from North Africa and his remains show African traits as well.”

The Mansell Street man could well have non-European origins. It is well known that the Roman legions employed mercenaries from all over their empire, and there are recorded instances of some troops stationed along the Hadrian Wall being of non-European, or Middle Eastern, extraction. Their numbers were however tiny, especially when compared to the overall size of the population of Britain.

But, even more importantly, the Museum of London and the controlled media are either being incredibly ignorant, or willfully deceptive by insinuating that the present-day population of North Africa resembled that of 2,000 years ago.

In ancient times, North Africa had a huge original white European presence, known as the ‘old Europeans.’ It was these people who played a major role in creating the Carthaginian civilization, based in present-day Tunisia.

The Carthaginians were early Rome’s greatest enemy, and the famous Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage raged from 264 BC to 146 BC. That was the era of the famous Hannibal of Carthage, who came close to conquering Rome. He was a Carthaginian hero, and coins were issued in his time showing his face—and his European-origin race is clear from these depictions.

A quarter shekel of Carthage, perhaps minted in Spain. The obverse may depict Hannibal with the traits of a young Melqart. The reverse features one of his famous war elephants.

The face of Hannibal, Carthage’s greatest warrior, from a silver coin struck at that city around 220 BC.
The Roman province of Africa consisted of a large piece of North African territory, and a vast network of European cities were built up, many of which can be seen to the present day.

Egypt, for its part, after its final collapse into multiracial backwardness around 800 BC, was occupied by the white Macedonians under Alexander the Great in 323 BC.

For the next 275 years, the white Macedonians ruled Egypt in a dynasty known as the Ptolemaic Kingdom. Their last ruler was the most famous queen of all, Cleopatra (actually the seventh queen of that name).

Despite propaganda to the contrary, Cleopatra and the Ptolemaic ruling elite were not African, but European Macedonian. After the fall of Cleopatra, Egypt also came under Roman rule.”

From this understanding of North African history, it is clear that the Roman-era population of North Africa contained a large residual European element. Given the ancient history, it is therefore highly likely that genes found in Europe can also be found among the present day North Africa population.

This does not however mean that a Roman-era skeleton found in London is multiracial—all it means is that some other Romans left similar genes among the gene pool of present-day North Africans.

The third skeleton used as “evidence” by the Museum of London to “prove” London’s “multi-ethnicity” is known as the “Gladiator.” According to the BBC, his mother’s ancestral line “is common in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.”

Once again, this is perfectly normal for European mtDNA, which, as the genetic research website Eupedia correctly pointsout, is not as accurate in measuring ethnic ancestry as Y-DNA, or male ancestry is.

In fact, Eupedia even specifically says that in ‘Europe, mtDNA haplogroups are quite evenly spread over the continent, and therefore cannot be associated easily with ancient ethnicities.’

A distribution map of European mtDNA,indicating the continent wide diversity of Europe;s founding maternal population. For the Museum of London to claim that this shows the “ethnic diversity” of Roman London, is laughably ignorant, if not a malicious lie.

Furthermore, the ‘youngest’ mtDNA in Europe which is claimed to have originated in the Middle East, the K1 haplogroup, dates from 12,000 years ago, further casting doubt over any claim of ‘multi-ethnicity, as this gene would have been part of present-day Europe’s founding population.

The fourth and final skeleton used by the Museum of London’s “multi-ethnic” claim is known as the “Harper Road woman,” who had brown hair and brown eyes, but, as the BBC admits, was a native Briton.

This fourth skeleton was clearly one of the Old European R1B haplogroup-Britons, from whom nearly 70 percent of the present-day inhabitants of Britain originate, a figure which rises to 90 percent in Ireland.

In conclusion, it can be seen that of the four skeletons used by the Museum of London and the controlled media to allegedly ‘prove’ how ‘ethnically diverse’ Roman-era London was, only one is possibly of non-European origin.

This is very different to media claims that ‘DNA has confirmed that London was an ethnically diverse city from its very beginnings’ and similar such nonsense.

On the contrary, London, founded by the Romans, was a European city.

It is clear that the ‘multi-ethnic’ claim is being invented to try and justify the current Third World invasion of London which has turned it into a minority white city in just three decades.

To even suggest that Roman London was as “ethnically diverse” as present-day London, which has large numbers of Bangladeshis, Chinese, Ghanaians, Indians, Jamaicans, Nigerians, Pakistanis, and Turks, is an outright lie.

It is based on a politically-biased ‘interpretation’ given to just one skeleton’s dubious DNA, and is a deliberate deception, presented as fact to justify the ethnic cleansing of white European people from Britain’s capital city.

Britain’s capital city.

Categories
Philosophy of history

Heartland, 8

Editor’s note: I will not translate the entire book on Heartland that Eduardo Velasco published on the now defunct Evropa Soberana site in Spanish (here, here and here). I limit myself to translating only a few paragraphs from the final section:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s The Closed Commercial State (1800) is a tedious book, utopian and pedantic in its rationalism, but it is worth our attention. On the one hand, it had a certain influence on the development of what Spengler would call ‘Prussian socialism’ or ‘Prussianism’, and on the other, it defends the exact opposite thesis to that of globalisation, i.e. that a country should seek autarchy to extricate itself from the network of international trade, becoming, so to speak, an endorheic state of exclusively internal (commercial, economic) flow. Thinkers of all political persuasions have seen interesting things in Fichte’s work, liberals as well as socialists, communists, anarchists, fascists and Nazis[1] so it is not a work to be dismissed lightly.

We return, then, to Prussia, the land that before the Second World War was home, according to Mackinder, to ‘one of the most virile races of mankind’, a race that was to suffer between 1944 and 1946 an ethnic cleansing of extreme brutality. While England was ruled by a cosmopolitan aristocracy of shipping, trade, commerce and banking speculation, Prussia was ruled by a provincial, military, land and productivity aristocracy. Fichte sent a copy of The Closed Commercial State (ECC) to Frederick William III, supposedly to influence his economic policy.

Fichte was inspired by the peasant society of the Germanic world and the economic organisation of the old German cities. It is impossible not to see in his work affinities with Lycurgus, Plato and Thomas More. The German philosopher’s economic ideal was a completely self-sufficient state, with ‘nothing to demand from its neighbours and nothing to cede to them’. Fichte says that in such a state, ‘the government does not aim at acquiring commercial predominance, which is a dangerous tendency, but at making the nation completely independent and autonomous. If a single nation has achieved supremacy in commerce, its victims must use every possible means to attenuate this supremacy and restore the balance’: a clear reference to the power of Great Britain.

The danger of the commercial supremacy of a single nation was that the international trade handled by that nation took over all the goods of a rival state until that state had only one commodity left to sell: itself. In this way, ‘the state sells itself, sells its independence, collects a permanent subsidy thus becoming the province of another state and a means to any of its objectives’.

In this regard, it is worth remembering that, although autarchy is today surrounded by taboos, in classical Greece it was the ideal to which people aspired, even if it was not always completely attainable. Aristotle, in his Politics, considered autarchy to be the ideal situation for a state. Hesiod went further and proposed autarchy for each family household. Tellurian Sparta, the most respected state in classical Greece, was a closed, autarchic economy thanks to its conquest of fertile Messenia. Thalassic Athens, by contrast, was heavily urbanised and had to rely on grain markets such as Egypt and southern Ukraine.

Fichte divided society into three strata: producers, merchants and craftsmen. Then came the military, teachers and statesmen. Of all these castes, the most dangerous for Fichte was the merchants since, through their possession of commodities and especially money, they tended to escape the authority of the state and ended up imposing their own rules.

The philosopher thought that Europe had a great commercial advantage over the other continents, tending to take over their labour power and goods. He considered that this state of affairs could not be perpetuated forever and that one day, a large state would have to leave the ‘European commercial society’ to form its own closed productive circuit.

What Fichte was criticising in these reflections was the explosion of Europe, and he advocated an implosion: Europe could not be eternally dependent on overseas ‘backyards’ in the Third World and must one day be able to stand on its own feet. Moreover, a planned economy cannot be planned, nor can a country be like a self-balancing and autonomous microsystem, if it depends on foreign goods and production, the supply, processing and transport of which it does not control, and is thus at the mercy of the whims of the markets: price fluctuations, trade embargoes, competition with the domestic product, etc. Such economic phenomena will tend to turn the country that is subject to them into a mere province in the network of international trade, tending to specialise in one economic sector rather than hosting all of them.

In the 1930s, autarky seemed to be gaining the upper hand over international trade. Three distinctly autarkic geopolitical blocs emerged: the European Axis (Germany, Italy and allied nations), the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (the vast conquests of the Japanese Empire from Manchuria to Indochina) and the Soviet Union.

With Europe, Asia and the Heartland closed to the US export market (except, in the case of the USSR, the substantial military, economic and oil aid it received from the US and the UK), all that remained on the planet was the British Empire and the impoverished colonial Third World: a de facto and imposed US autarchy. In The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (1959), William Appleman argued that the US ruling oligarchy went to war against Germany and Japan to protect global export markets from the effects of autarky. The dynamics of the autarkic blocs were neutralised with the establishment of the Bretton Woods system (1944), with its three pillars: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the dollar as the reserve currency of international trade. The only bloc that was spared to some extent was the USSR, which formed the economic organisation COMECON, formed in 1949, the same year that NATO was founded.

The COMECON bloc, of which the Warsaw Pact was to be the military arm. Red: Member states. Yellow: observer states. Pink: belonged to the organisation but did not participate. (Editor's Note: Compare it with BRICS).

Fichte—who believed that ‘in the beginning was action’ and that property emanates from labour and productive activity, that is, that the earth belongs to whoever pours his blood and sweat upon it—did not recognise the value of money, but the value of the commodities that such money is capable of buying. For him, ‘The total mass of money represents and is worth as much as the total mass of commodities’. No matter how much money is in circulation or is created out of thin air in the form of credit, its purchasing power will always be limited by the actual goods and services that can be bought.

Wealth does not depend on how much money one has, but on how large a fraction of the total existing money one possesses. It is clear that when there is, as today, much more money in circulation (especially electronic money and interest-debt-money) than real commodities, the excess capital floating in ‘the markets’ is devoted to inflating bubbles, opening new artificial markets (for example, by turning the emotions of the individual and human nature itself into a business), manipulating needs and demand with aggressive advertising and speculating to justify its existence. Not to mention that every time the money supply is increased, the creators of money (or rather, counterfeiters of money) increase the proportion of capital they own out of the total money supply, using this capital as if it were a commodity in itself. But ‘In the simple expression “to realise something in money”, the whole falsity of the system is already contained. Nothing can be realised in money because money itself is nothing real. The commodity is the real reality.’

To bring about the closure of the commercial state, Fichte advocated the ‘abolition of the world currency’ which he identifies with gold and silver (Editors’ Note: after the collapse of the British Empire, nowadays the dollar is still the reserve currency of international trade) and the ‘introduction of a national currency’. It is difficult not to see here the influence of Sparta, which forbade the possession of gold and silver by creating a new currency which was not accepted outside the territory of the Lacedaemonian state: rough iron bars, so that they could not be manipulated or moulded, were dipped in vinegar while still red-hot; the idea was to armour against the fluctuating and shifting influence of foreign trade.

In this situation, there is no longer any exchange with foreign states, except for one-off trade pacts based on direct barter, without monetary intermediaries. This is what Germany was doing before World War II in Eastern Europe and South America: a barter trade that did not need to use international currencies in the hands of its enemies. In contrast, initiatives for a world currency have always come from globalist individuals or entities, for example, the Rothschild family. (In this video, Mr. Evelyn de Rothschild proposes an ‘international currency’ to avoid conflict. What he does not say is who will have the power to issue such a currency—presumably himself, for example.)

Another of Fichte’s contributions to geopolitics is his idea that states should not overstep their ‘natural frontiers’, understood as those within which a state can achieve self-sufficiency. Towards the end of his writing, Fichte leaves us with a very politically incorrect reflection:

It is evident that a nation so closed, whose members live only with themselves and very few with foreigners; a nation which preserves by those measures its particular way of life, its institutions and customs; a nation which deeply loves its Fatherland and everything national, very soon a high degree of national honour and a very peculiar national character will emerge. It will become another nation, a completely new nation. That introduction of the national currency is its true creation…

 

______ 卐 ______

 
The power of High Finance has decided to base itself in the United Kingdom, North America and to a lesser extent the rest of Western Europe because among other things there is an excellent quality manpower there.

The American troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan have a fabulous genetic heritage, perfectly comparable to the Indo-European hordes of antiquity. Even in the faces of many white American convicts, we can discern a potential crusader knight, Viking, sailor, soldier, hard-nosed farmer or hard-headed labourer. These are people gone astray, uprooted by crossing the Atlantic, without the moral and spiritual foundations that only deep Asia, along with inspiring European history—based on heroic examples, war, art, culture, work, beauty and love—can provide.

What is currently being exported from Hollywood and MTV is not American culture, as the saying goes. ‘American culture’ is the love of family and country, the right to defend them with arms, civic sovereignty, religion, liberty and independence: the values of a people whose land was not given to them by a feudal lord, but won by blood and sweat. Neither Thomas Jefferson nor George Washington has anything to do with the toxic rubbish propagated from the meccas of the Yankee subculture, and the sphere of influence of the Pentagon and Wall Street is not an ‘American empire’ any more than the Vatican is the Roman Empire and the City of London is the British Empire.

We know—because we are not deluded or cultural Judeo-Christians, nor do we believe in globalisation or the religion of political correctness—what happens in countries that forget the fundamental laws of reproduction and race improvement: they become vulgarised, corrupt, unserious, undisciplined, disorganised, weakened and Third Worldised. The darkening of the race goes hand in hand with the darkening of the mind and spirit. Parasitic weeds take over the garden and eventually choke out the noblest and most productive trees and plants…

Deliberate and systematic ignorance of human reproduction, of the importance of race and genetics in geopolitics will only have the effect that the ‘myth of blood’ will resurface with greater force and violence. Globalisation pretends to make us believe that we are all equal while at the same time homogenising us racially, a clear proof that it does not consider us all equal. Genetic and anthropological-physical studies, i.e. recognising the difference between people, are therefore an anti-globalisation vector.
 
____________

[1] Dr. Carl Schmidt, associated with the power groups of Deutsche Bank, IG Farben and Siemens, defended the idea of a Closed Commercial State in Europe led by Germany.

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
Psychiatry

Thoughtpolice

Update September 11, 2024:

I have grayed out what I wrote a couple of months ago because I just found out what really happened, thanks to the thick autobiographical book that Benjamin was kind enough to send me from the UK. I am referring specifically to pages 691-692 which honestly describe why he was committed to a psychiatric ward. When I wrote what now appears in grey (and my comments in the comments section) I was unaware of what had actually happened.

 

______ 卐 ______

 

British commenter of this site, Benjamin, has been committed to a psychiatric ward in the UK. Power asked his wife to send to me this message:

I am a legitimate enemy of the state now in extrajudicial forced detention under methodical daily psychiatric torture. Railroaded by authoritarians beyond all due process. Their ignorance will kill me without laying a finger on me. It is impossible not to wonder if unconsciously, unspoken, and never acknowledged, some small part of them desires or requires that, from much higher level than here, not just to save their jobs and guilty profession, much as this discrete latter conclusion is more obvious, on direct empirical observation of their terrible, terrorizing, ganged-up responses.

Those who are not familiar with my critique of psychiatry should now read what I have written about this pseudoscience which, from its origins, has imprisoned dissidents. Cf. my books Day of Wrath (pages 21-30) and Daybreak (pages 27-41; 105-127).

Update of 1:58 p.m. Benjamin’s wife says:

Hi César, they are basically moving him onto a section 3 because it is their view that he needs medication to prevent any further psychotic episodes and he is refusing to take it and that way they can force it on him without his consent.

They are putting him on an injection medication that he has been on before which gave him terrible side effects and did nothing to stop the episodes from occurring.

One of my articles linked above (in Daybreak) is titled ‘From the Great confinement to Chemical Gulag’.

Categories
Correspondence Kali Yuga

Island of slaves

In his most recent e-mail, Benjamin said:

There is no one—no one, not a soul!—left in this country whom I can legitimately converse with in a sensible manner. I know of absolutely no one. This island of slaves [the UK] is a gulag of pain. What are their books if they cannot be read, ringed ornaments for their coffee tables; stepping stones for the muddy road to their work?

Remember that I have renamed the category “West’s Darkest Hour” to “Kali Yuga”, which means the same thing, but I did it in honour of Savitri Devi.

Categories
Racial right

Against my time

Speaking of this site and the comparatively little traffic I get, Tyrone, who I spoke of last month when referring to his imprisonment in the UK for thoughtcrime, once said that Jared Taylor was a man ‘of his time’, and I, a man ‘against his time’ (Taylor gets a lot of visitors as can be seen from the amount of commenters on American Renaissance).

You have to read the early chapters of Savitri’s book to understand the concept of a man against his time. It was also Tyrone who drew my attention to the apocalypse with which the West will be punished in Savitri’s philosophy, and indeed I began to read her because of him.

When I met Tyrone in London, we didn’t take a picture. We might as well have taken it when we went with Chris, his friend also imprisoned for thoughtcrime. In this post, I could now show the photo of Tyrone, Chris and me when we went to the pub with BNP protesters. But we didn’t take one (out of caution before the State, it is not very common for European racialists to take photos of themselves).