I will not be afraid of ten thousands of people, that have set themselves against me round about. Arise, O Lord; save me, O my God: for thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone; thou hast broken the teeth of the ungodly. Salvation belongeth unto the Lord: thy blessing is upon thy people. Selah. Psalms 3: 6 –8
In the year 1665 the Great Plague struck London, killing over one hundred thousand people. The following year, 1666, two thirds of the city was destroyed by the Great Fire of London. Sir Christopher Wren, the great architect, built a new St. Paul’s Cathedral after the fire. It is said that in his old age Wren often asked to be carried to a place beneath the dome so that he could look at the magnificent church which was the result of his vision and creativity. Wren must have loved much, his God and his people, to have built that labor of love. But could Wren’s new St. Paul’s ever replace, in the heart of one who loved the old church, the old St. Paul’s? Of course not. In Ainsworth’s novel, Old Saint Paul’s, he describes the feelings of a devotee of the old church:
He lived to see the new cathedral completed by Sir Christopher Wren, and often visited it with feelings of admiration, but never with the same sentiments of veneration and awe that he had experienced, when, in times long gone by, he had repaired to Old Saint Paul’s.
So something wonderful went out of the heart of London when old St. Paul’s was burnt to the ground even though Wren’s cathedral was worthy of its predecessor. But with the building of the new St. Paul’s, the tragic destruction of the old St. Paul’s was somewhat mitigated. There was hope that over time the New St. Paul’s could become as venerated as the old St. Paul’s. Can the same be said of the European people, who are the result of God’s creativity and His vision – can they, once destroyed, be rebuilt as old St. Paul’s Cathedral was rebuilt? No, they cannot be rebuilt because they are human beings created in the image of God, and the ongoing attempt to destroy the European people in the name of Babylon is an affront to God.
There seems to be some confusion about who is the creator and who is the creature in the minds of the secular and religious utopian theorists. If God is the creator, then His creatures should live their lives as God, not liberal utopians, ordained. If He created people of separate races, then shouldn’t we, as God’s creatures, try to maintain that separation? Is the Tower of Babel a myth or is it an actual event in our salvation history that we should regard as a warning from God? All concern about Babel and racial segregation goes out the window if we regard man as the creator of God. If God becomes a theory of the Utopians, who cast Him as a civil rights advocate, the final point of an evolutionary process, a watchmaker, a symbol of the best that we can be, or a forerunner of the sacred negro, then the traditional God of the Christians ceases to exist. And of course this is what the modern utopians of church and state desire. They desire the death of the traditional God of the European people, because if He dies the European people die, which allows the liberals to build their brave new multi-racial world over the corpses of white Europeans. “Christians” who side with the purveyors of racial diversity are not Christian, because the Christian God is not an abstract God; He is a God who lives. We cannot know Him through a diversified mass of nondescript people; we can only know Him through our non-diverse relationships with our own people. And of course if there was one ounce of Christianity in the modern Christian churchmen, they would see all the marks of Satan in the modern movement toward “diversity.” Even if the stated purpose of diversity, “the equality of the races,” was really the true purpose of diversity, it would be wrong, because the races are inherently unequal. To impose a false equality on them would be hell. But diversity has nothing to do with equality. A few white liberals of advanced years might hold on to such views of diversity, but the vast majority of mad-dog liberals and conservative liberals know what diversity means. It means the destruction of the white race by outright murder and by miscegenation. The first method is preferred in African countries where blacks are in the majority, and the second method is preferred in countries where blacks still constitute a minority. There is no doubt, because we have seen what happened in Haiti, in the Reconstruction Era South, and post-white South Africa, that the ‘death by miscegenation’ societies will become ‘death by murder’ societies once the blacks are in the majority in the once white nations. It is only the white grazers who don’t know about the ongoing war against white people. The liberals certainly know, and they rejoice every time a vestige of old Europe is destroyed. The English people of Christopher Wren’s time wanted St. Paul’s Cathedral restored because it was a symbol of their faith. So too do the liberals want the European Parliament building in Strasbourg preserved because it is designed to look like the Tower of Babel, the sign and symbol of the modern Europeans’ faith.
In Walter Scott’s novel Quentin Durward the title character urges a gypsy, a man of indeterminate race and no faith, to think about Christ before the executioners put him to death. But the gypsy is obdurate:
“What canst thou expect, dying in such opinions, and impenitent?”
“To be resolved into the elements,” said the hardened atheist, pressing his fettered arms against his bosom; “my hope, trust, and expectation is that the mysterious frame of humanity shall melt into the general mass of nature, to be recompounded in the other forms with which she daily supplies those which daily disappear, and return under different forms—the watery particles to streams and showers, the earthy parts to enrich their mother earth, the airy portions to wanton in the breeze, and those of fire to supply the blaze of Aldebaran and his brethren.—In this faith have I lived, and I will die in it!—Hence! begone!—disturb me no farther!
We structure our lives around our faith. The European intelligentsia of church and state have become the devotees of nature and nature’s god. As we all are to melt into that general mass of nature at our deaths, so must our lives, the liberals tell us, be structured so that we are blended into one diverse mass of inhumanity here on earth. We must be diversified into non-existence. Our connections to our kith and kin must be obliterated so we can be in contact with the mass of nature personified by the negro. The European Christian will always refuse to become part of a diversified inhuman mass of nature. There is no genuine love in such a mass, because the inhuman mass lacks that which makes us humane – the love of our own people and the love of the living God who took flesh and dwelt among us.
The Christian Londoners, with Wren leading the way, rebuilt St. Paul’s Cathedral, an important symbol of their faith. Would those same Christians have consented to the destruction of something infinitely more valuable than St. Paul’s Cathedral? Would they have willingly consented to hand their wives, their children, and their city over to a heathen army of blacks and apostate white men? No, they would not. They would have fought to the last man to prevent such a horror. Why then do Europeans of the present day do what was unthinkable to the Europeans of the 1600’s? It’s a question of faith. When the Europeans allowed their faith in Christ to be “sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought” they lost their way and stumbled blindly toward a death in life existence in the kingdom of the negro worshipping liberals.
It is not a case, as the pagan white nationalists tell us, of getting the information out to white people. The information is there. From billboards in Duluth to Mexican Pride Day in Texas the message is loud and clear: White people are evil. The white grazers do not want to dispute that fact; they simply want to be allowed to make the words, “evil whites,” part of the past. “We were evil, we were racist and sexist, but now we have changed. We can become part of Babylon if we are allowed another chance. Please, Mr. Liberal, please, Mr. Negro, won’t you allow me to crawl at your feet in the new Babylon?”
“For a time,” say the Babylonians; and under their breaths, “But when the time is right we will kill you.”
The white grazer has been betrayed by the white intelligentsia, who have foisted their ignorance on him. “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart.” That’s what universal suffrage and democracy has brought upon us. The peasant is just as blind as the intellectual because he too has blinders on his heart. A man is not a man until he can love in spite of doom, in spite of the scorn and hatred of the world. Hamlet finally became Hamlet the Dane when he leaped into Ophelia’s grave declaring his love for her: “This is I, Hamlet the Dane!.. I lov’d Ophelia.”
And so did Christ love us. He was and is the inspiration for all true heroism. He faced scorn and derision for His loved ones and He continues to love them in spite of doom. A passion united to His passion cannot be defeated. But such a passion cannot be feigned. It must come from a heart that truly loves. That is what separates the modern European from the antique European. The antique European was a man who loved much. He didn’t love an abstract, generic people of an indeterminate race. He loved his own people. And he didn’t love an abstract God — he loved the Man of Sorrows. The Scriptures speak of a God whose love passeth all understanding. The modern theologians disagree. They worship a God of limited powers with a limited capacity for love. He bids us, according to the liberals, save our small quota of love for strangers outside our own race. To them all our love is due. Why? Because, we are told, “They alone are natural, they alone are holy: in the name of the abstracted intellect, the sacred negro, and the ghostly looking man in the white lab coat, amen.” The bargain which the liberals offer the white man is this: “If you renounce your race and your God, we will permit you to live a kind of gypsy existence on the fringes of Liberaldom. But you must renounce your race and your faith.”
Even if the white man accepted such a bargain, the liberal and the colored barbarians would not hold to their part of the bargain, because neither the liberal nor the colored barbarian can ever sup full of horrors. Their regime is built on lies, so it must be artificially maintained by terror and blood. The mere existence of the white man, even if he complies with all the dictates of Liberaldom, is a sign of contradiction to the liberals. Whiteness reminds the liberal of a people and a God that he wants no part of: “Remind me not of my end,” the liberal says in the blindness of his heart. Is it possible to destroy every reminder of Him by destroying His people? That is the liberal’s desire. But it is not my desire, nor is it the desire of any European who is still a European. I don’t believe that ten million liberals and an infinity of colored barbarians are ultimately a match for European hearts that truly love. It might seem unrealistic, the notion that a few who love much can defeat many, but isn’t the unadulterated Christian faith based on such an unrealistic and “absurd” premise? Christ was not even many; He was one. And the history of the European people, during the Christian era, is full of examples of a faithful few conquering a multitude of Satan’s minions: King Alfred vs. the Danes, Charles Martel vs. the Moslems, Havelock vs. the Indian hordes, the British at Rorke’s Drift vs. the Zulus, and Christian Europeans against the world. “By the Cross We Conquer,” is true for us as individuals in our war with the devil, and it is true for us as a people. When “By the Cross We Conquer,” is written in our hearts, we are an invincible people. Fairy tale Europe, where the undiverse few conquer the diversified many, is sacred Europe, and we few will champion that Europe against all the world. +