In the great hand of God I stand, and thence
Against the undivulg’d pretence I fight
Of treasonous malice.
The ongoing war being waged by the colored races against the white race, which is being aided and abetted by the liberals, has become a real life horror film. Grisly torture murders of whites and heinous sexual assaults against whites have become so familiar to us that we risk becoming as insensitive to them as Macbeth became to his barbaric acts:
I have supp’d full with horrors;
Direness, familiar to my slaughterous thoughts.
Cannot once start me.
The liberals have gone further down the slippery slope than Macbeth. (1) He at least acknowledged that his barbarities stemmed from his illicit desire for the crown, whereas the liberals see nothing illicit in their desire to have the white race exterminated. In fact the liberals have given religious sanction to the extermination of the white race. It falls upon them to defend their gods, not to debate. Every time a new colored atrocity occurs the liberals bare their fangs and attack any white who shows the slightest inclination to criticize the colored demons or to strike back at the colored demons. Asking the liberals to do something about the colored atrocities is like asking Nero to protect the Christians from the lions. You can’t seek redemption from the devil.
I frequently hear conservatives, secular and clerical, say that whites should remain civilized and not respond to colored atrocities with violence. Is it really the mark of a civilized man that he does not respond to violence with violence? It certainly was not the mark of the heroes of our precious European civilization. The mark of a civilized man, a European, was that he did not allow colored barbarians to assault his people without striking back at them. This Buddhistic, Thomistic quietism in the face of colored atrocities against whites is a new ethos totally opposed to the ethos of the antique Europeans. It is an ethos from hell, and it will not be voted away, nor will the liberals be persuaded to allow white people who adhere to the ethos of old Europe to live. White people, because of their cultural dominance in the past, cannot be allowed any breathing room in the New World Order:
But a great state is too much envied, too much dreaded, to find safety in humiliation. To be secure, it must be respected. Power, and eminence, and consideration, are things not to be begged. They must be commanded: and they who supplicate for mercy from others can never hope for justice thro’ themselves. What justice they are to obtain, as the alms of an enemy depends upon his character, and they ought well to know before they implicitly confide. – Burke
We should know the character of liberals by now. They have held the reins of power in the West for nearly a century. Has any good ever come from appealing to their mercy? They are completely devoid of charity and mercy. Their techno—barbarianism gives the barbarians of color the type of iron-clad support necessary for the wholesale liquidation of the white race. And when the clergy back the liberals, the jihad is complete. The white race becomes the pariah race that can be despised, vilified, and subsequently exterminated with the religious sanction of the liberals.
A young white soldier is killed in South Carolina by five negro savages who simply wanted to “kill a cracker.” In 2013, over 1,000 Swedish women, 300 of them under age fifteen, were raped by Moslems. Are these isolated, random acts? No matter what the liberals say to the contrary, we know they are not isolated, random acts. They are acts of war. And they are acts of war committed by an enemy that knows nothing of chivalry. There will be no quarter given and no honorable terms of surrender coming from the liberals or the colored barbarians. White people are trapped in Lucknow, in desperate need of men like Havelock, men who know how to respond when colored barbarians attack their people.
When your daily life is spent in the “underworld,” which is now the case with white people because liberals have institutionalized hell, you lose sight of the fact that there is another “overworld” which is the real world. There once was a world where sex was connected to love, where charity and mercy were seen as attributes of God, and where men and women of faith shunned the devil and all his works because they believed in the Son of God. That world is lost to the modern Europeans. And because they have lost that overworld they have accepted their assigned place in the underworld, the victim’s place. The life of the European is a life of dread, hoping against hope that he will be sacrificed at the altars of the liberals’ gods at a later date than his neighbor, or that a sudden pang of mercy will come upon the people who know no mercy. The young Europeans growing up today have no idea there once were white people who did not permit colored barbarians, at the behest of the creatures called liberals, to murder, rape, and plunder at will where white people dwelt.
“What is a white person?” the liberal catechist asks.
“A white person is an evil creature that must be sacrificed at the altars of the colored gods,” replies the young European catechumen.
“Until his final sacrifice, what is the duty of the white person?” the catechist asks.
“To love the negro and the colored auxiliary gods with my whole mind, heart, and soul,” the catechumen replies.
“Very good,” says the aged catechist.
And that is the only way a European can be called good: when he accepts his place in the underworld of liberalism.
After Woodstock in the 1960s, the hippies sang of a return to nature:
We are stardust
We are golden
And we’ve got to get ourselves
Back to the Garden.
Such a sentiment can only be expressed by a people who believe there was no fall of man. A Christian European would never seek to return to Eden, because that is where he fell from grace. He looks to his racial hearth fire where the God of mercy, the God who is more than nature, dwells. A return to nature is not a happy return, it is a return to barbarism, to a wretched existence where there is no charity, no mercy, no love, only cruelty and savagery. This is the only world the coloreds have ever known. But the white man? Why should he, having once known a better world, want to return to the world of the ignoble savages? The answer lies in the mystery of iniquity. The liberal wants nothing to do with the overworld, he wants to live like a creature of nature in the underworld with his savage gods. They will tear him to pieces, but the liberal will still follow his new gods, because the God he left behind requires mercy and not sacrifice, and the liberal wants nothing to do with the burden of mercy.
I saw an old movie recently in which an American missionary who had spent fifty years in China was asked if he had made much progress preaching the Gospel in China. The old missionary sighed and said he hadn’t. Then he told a story which illustrated his failure. He told how he had once spoken to a large gathering of Chinese about Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. The audience seemed very interested, listening intently as he described the crucifixion, and the missionary had high hopes, thinking they had been touched by the story. But later the attentive Chinese went out, waylaid a caravan of travelers, and crucified the members of the caravan. The Christ story never reached their hearts. So it remains today.
The Christ story did reach the antique Europeans’ hearts, which makes the betrayal of those people and their God, by the modern liberals, seem like a second fall of man. The liberals have once again, under the advisement of Satan, sought to find a power in dumb nature that can make them co-equal with God. When a man becomes one with biological nature, the type of nature that can be seen and studied under a microscope, then there is no need for and no belief in the God who is above nature. What is natural becomes bestial, and what is unnatural becomes the religion of a Savior who is over and above biological nature. What was natural to Edmund Burke — his sympathy for the royal family of France — was quite different from what was natural to Dr. Price — his hatred for the royal family of France. Two epochs were clashing. What was natural for Burke was what was Christian. What was natural for Dr. Price was what was bestial and savage. Which is why the liberal successors of Dr. Price worship the black and hate the white. Whatever is closest to the primitive, merciless forces of dumb nature is deemed to be good, and whatever stinks of a spiritual realm beyond nature is deemed to be bad.
Once we see that “nature” is the wall that keeps Christ away from the liberals, we can see why they never resist and even encourage murder, rape, and pillage by the colored barbarians. If the liberals were to face the fact that the noble savages were not noble, they would have to give up their faith in nature, which is their one great defense against a God who places ethical demands on them. He requires that they go and learn the difference between mercy and sacrifice. And after they have learned the difference, He expects them to act according to the dictates of mercy. This is intolerable to the liberals because it requires work, deep down in the trenches of the soul. For this reason the liberals will never take down their ideological wall of nature. Which means they will always be at the ideological center of the colored barbarians’ war against the white race. Nothing is sacred to the liberal but the barbarians of color, so there are no limits to what he will tolerate when it comes to atrocities against the white race. Everything is permitted except mercy.
Macbeth pursues his bloody course in full knowledge of what he is doing. He feels driven by his wife’s ambition and his own, so he destroys the unbought grace of his life:
All is but toys; renown and grace is dead;
The wine of life is drawn, and the mere lees
Is left this vault to brag of.
Like Macbeth the liberals have chosen their bloody course, but unlike Macbeth they still have the capacity to stifle any “compunctious visitings of nature,” because they do not believe man’s nature includes a soul. They would never lament as Macbeth does, that they have lost their “eternal jewel,” for the reason that they have eliminated the soul from their religion. There is only nature, devoid of an animating spirit, in the liberals’ soulless, heartless ideology. But if there is a personal, animating Spirit behind nature, the liberals’ denial of that Spirit cannot change the reality of His existence. Yet the supposed opposition to liberalism never invokes that Spirit. We must invoke that Spirit. In full consciousness of what we are fighting against and who sustains us in our fight, we must say to the bloody, multi-headed liberal hydra, each viciously fanged head representing a different barbarian tribe of color, what Macduff said to Macbeth, “Turn, hell-hound, turn!” And then, like Macduff, we must make our sword arms match our words. +
(1) Macbeth still had “compunctious visiting of nature” because he had not put on the armor of liberalism. Had he done so he could have slept like a babe after he murdered his king and kinsman. Even popes such as Pope Francis, who outwardly profess the Christian faith, can surpass the Macbeth family in the evil that they do. Such is the power of an ideology in which nature and nature’s god, the negro, is the ultimate arbiter of men’s consciences.