O Lord arise, help us, and deliver us, for thy nameâs sake.
â The Book of Common Prayer
__________
I recall an old western movie in which the main character asked his partner, after he saw Mr. Money Bags leave their ranch with his thugs: âDid you crawl?â His partner responded, âI wasnât asked to.â The hero was ready to disown his partner if he had crawled upon compulsion. What would he have thought of a man who crawls without being compelled to crawl?
Such were my thoughts when I heard Rich Lowry of National Review joining in with the black witch doctor, Al Sharpton, to condemn George Zimmerman, before any of the evidence was in, for the murder of the saintly and blessed man-child called Trayvon Martin. Sadly, Lowryâs rush to throw himself at the feet of Al Sharpton did not surprise me. National Review magazine was only marginally conservative at its inception, and it has been going steadily down the left bank of the hill for the past three decades.
What Lowry revealed, in his cowardly attempt to appease his liberal cousins and the black barbarians, was the essential unity of the liberal and the conservative. Spiritually they are joined at the hip. What is the doctrine that binds them to each other, often in hate? It is democratic egalitarianism. Democracy as a magical, mystical system, as an end in and of itself, not as a means to an end, is the faith of the modern liberal and the conservative.
Faith in an all encompassing system to which all people must adhere because the system encompasses God is a very old Faith; it is pagan. The reason that Christianity could not be absorbed into the Roman system was because the Christian could only render to Caesar that which belonged to Caesar; in those matters touching his conscience and his faith he had to render to God alone. The modern Christian circumvents his obligations to God by simply declaring democracy and Christianity as one and the same. Therefore anything undemocratic is unchristian; there is no problem of conscience. So long as the âChristianâ practices the civic religion of democratic negro worship he will feel that he is right with God. Our current system of democratic egalitarianism in which some are more equal than others does not seem even remotely compatible with the Christian faith. But the fear of being in a state of non-conformity to the powers that be can make a man convince himself of just about anything, no matter how absurd. And our satanic modern democratic system, which makes demands that run counter to the will of the living God and counter to the nobler instincts in the human heart, feeds on the blood of all those who are not loyal to the system. Just as the French Jacobins maintained their reign of terror with blood, so do our modern Jacobins, the liberals, maintain their regime with blood.
They must abuse their engine because fear, losing its effect through habit, needs example to keep it alive; the negro monarch or the pacha who would keep the fear alive by which he rules, must be stimulated every day; he must slaughter too many to be sure of slaughtering enough; he must slaughter constantly, in heaps, indiscriminately, haphazard, no matter for what offence, on the slightest suspicion, the innocent along with the guilty. He and his are lost the moment they cease to obey this rule. Every Jacobin, like every African monarch or pacha, must observe it that he may be and remain at the head of his band.âFor this reason, the chiefs of the sect, its natural leaders designated beforehand, consist of theorists able to grasp itâs principles, and logicians about to arrive at its conclusions, narrow-minded enough not to see that their undertaking exceeds their powers and all human powers, shrewd enough to see that brutal force is their only instrumentality, inhuman enough to apply it unscrupulously and without reserve, and perverted enough to murder on all sides that they may stamp an impression of lasting terror.
   – The French Revolution by Hippolyte Taine
It was Metternich who warned us that, âWhenever I hear the word âdemocracyâ I know a bloodbath is coming.â Wasnât that the case in France? In South Africa? And isnât it the case in the streets of every city of European origin? Yes, it was and is. The barbarians of color kill at the behest of the liberals, who invoke democracy to justify the extermination of the white race: âJust growing painsâ and âYou really canât blame them after years of âŚâ And yet, after all the violence against white people, instigated by adherents of democracy, no white men, not even professed white nationalists, ever propose to fight white genocide by any means other than democratic means. Such men do not understand the religious nature of democracy. It is not a system of laws; far from it. Martin Luther King, Jr. violated the law, but he was adhering to the religious tenets of egalitarian democracy by moving the nation toward racial egalitarianism. When the Black Panthers murdered white policemen in the 1960âs they were applauded and made into saints because they too were serving the democratic system. The system is all. All of a manâs loyalty and devotion is supposed to be to the system. Outside the system is the night.
The Christian European will not accept the democratic system as his god. His conscience and his honor cannot be overwhelmed and superseded by a sovereign state directly opposed to the living God. If we render our souls to Caesar, which is precisely the demand of the Caesars of democratic egalitarianism, we will become men of straw easily gathered and burnt by Satan and his minions.
In order to survive, a democratic, egalitarian government must pander to the lowest instincts in mankind. But the keepers of the democratic flame do not say, âWe are pandering to the lowest instincts in mankind.â Instead they call fair foul and foul fair. The worship of black barbarians becomes âcivil rights.â The celebration of unbridled lust becomes âovercoming repression.â The murder of infants becomes a âwomanâs right to choose,â and on it goes into the Babylonian night.
We are told by the liberals that the new theocracy of democratic egalitarianism came about because it was the will of the people. I donât agree. Revolutions do not succeed because an overwhelming majority support the revolutionaries. They come about when a passionate few believe in the revolution and an overwhelming majority are uncertain about and indifferent to the status quo. Christian Europe was replaced by democratic Babylon, because Europeans were in doubt about the distinctiveness of the European people. And they doubted their distinctiveness as a people because they doubted the distinctiveness of Jesus Christ from all other gods. The scientific revolt against the incarnational civilization of Christian Europe ushered in a new world with the negro as the sacred god of the new world. Now that the revolution has been institutionalized there is an overwhelming majority of people who support it, but the overwhelming majority of people have never known any other faith than democratic egalitarianism and have never been exposed to Christianity as preached and practiced by Europeans in the Christian era of Europe. Can the liberals say with certainty that if the true Christianity, the European Christianity of a bygone era, was championed by a passionate white minority, that they, the liberals, might not be overwhelmed by a newly aroused majority of white people who had become indifferent and bored with democratic Babylon? No, they cannot say that with absolute certainty, so they keep a close watch for outbursts of Christian European resistance to democratic Babylon, in order to crush it as they would crush a loathsome insect.
I know neither the day nor the hour of Liberaldomâs demise, but I do know what will bring it down. Passion will bring it down. A passion like unto Burkeâs, who fought with might and main against the regicide French. A passion like Shakespeareâs, who saw past the outer form of things to the spirit within. All true, transcendent passion stems from His passion. It is a passion that overwhelms all that stands against it. When a few Europeans recover that passion, the end of Liberaldom is nigh.
The wheel is come full circle. The reason that a man like Rich Lowry of National Review is a spiritual coward is because his soul has been overmanned by the democratic, negro-worshipping heresy of modern Liberaldom. In the absence of a passionate faith in Jesus Christ and the European culture that was the incarnation of that faith, Lowry became a fearful, cringing caricature of a man lying flat on his face in front of the sacred black man. Negro worship is the inevitable outcome of the democratic system, because in the âsome- are-more-equal-than-othersâ democracy of the devil, the lowest common denominator, the negro, must be exalted. So long as democracy is a god word in the European nations, white men will bow down to the negro. What fills an antique European with disgust, the sight of white men bowing down to their negro gods, makes the modern white men feel holy and uplifted. Just as the antique Europeans felt no shame in bending their knees to Christ, the modern white men feel no shame in effacing themselves before their negro gods.
Even if democratic egalitarianism meant what it said, that we are all to be treated equally, it would be wrong, because Holy Scriptures and the reality of life tell us that human beings are inherently unequal. But democratic egalitarianism does not mean what it says. Sometime in the early 1970âs the Pittsburgh Pirates baseball team fielded an all black team. Every year on the anniversary of that sacred day the members of the predominantly white news media oooh and aah about the magnificence of the day. They never explain why the day deserves to be so exalted. It is just a given that a day in which a baseball team fielded an all black team is a day that white people should celebrate. But why, if we truly are a democratic egalitarian society that celebrates diversity, should we celebrate an entirely black baseball team? Isnât such a non-diverse team something we should deplore? Shouldnât a team have some white players, as well as some red, yellow, and brown players, if it is a truly diverse, democratic egalitarian team worthy of honor and homage? Of course it should if we simply go by the dictionary meaning of democratic and egalitarian, but we know the true meaning of democratic egalitarianism. It is a pagan, religious system in which all honor and homage is due to the black gods.
Robert Frost wrote of two divergent paths in the woods. He claims he took the path less traveled on. I have my doubts about that. But even if we countenance Frostâs claim, we must see that Frostâs less traveled path, the path of the democratic egalitarian conservative, ultimately merges with that other path, the path of the democratic egalitarian liberal. And that path leads the conservative and the liberal to the altar of the negro gods.
There is a third path. It canât be seen by the naked eye, at least not at first, because it has not been trodden on for almost a century. It is completely covered by thorns and briars. But if a European, possessed of that passionate faith that moves mountains, would start hewing a path for himself, despite the thorns and briars, he will eventually come to a clearing in the woods. And there upon the altar of his European ancestors he will find the antithesis of the black gods of Liberaldom. He will find Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living god, who was wounded for our offenses and smitten for our wickedness. +