If indeed they can mix the blood of the heroes of Manassas with this vile stream from the fens of Africa, then they will never again have occasion to tremble before the righteous resistance of Virginian freemen; but will have a race supple and vile enough to fill that position of political subjection, which they desire to fix on the South. – R. L. Dabney in A Defense of Virginia and the South
The lesbian Mayor of Houston, Texas recently threatened to subpoena the sermons of Christian pastors to see if any of the pastors were condemning homosexuality. This aggressive move by the perverted mayor was not surprising—it would be more surprising to find a pastor who had condemned homosexuality—but it was significant. Such blatant, uncamouflaged acts of aggressive liberalism are becoming more and more commonplace. This indicates that the liberals no longer fear any white resistance to liberalism. They don’t have to take great pains to cover up the extermination of white people under the blanket of “civil rights”; they no longer need to explain away the slaughter of the innocents by citing “hard cases”; and they no longer think they have to hide homosexuality. The acceptance of pedophilia, incest, and bestiality will soon follow the acceptance of homosexuality. And why not? Can a man be morally superior to his god? Where the negro is god, there is no such thing as morality. There is only one sin in negrophile Liberaldom: The refusal to worship the negro.
The conservatives of the 20th century, who were not conservative enough, all predicted the demise of liberalism. Even some of the liberals, such as Lionel Trilling, predicted liberalism’s demise, but the demise did not come. Instead we saw, in the latter half of the 20th century, the complete demise of conservatism, which was devoured by liberalism as a smaller fish is eaten by a larger fish. Why was this? It was because of the passion factor. The conservatives intellectually supported God, family, and nation while running away from any passionate defense of Christ and His people. A telling example: Why, in a book that is supposed to tell us of conservatives, The Conservative Mind, does Russell Kirk leave out Robert L. Dabney, George Fitzhugh, and Thomas Nelson Page? The reason has become painfully obvious as we look at the ruins of the European people. Such conservatives were left out of the conservative tent because, as Burnham asserts in his book The Suicide of the West, they were “racists” and therefore outside the ken of civilization. But it was precisely that personal attachment to their own, which Kirk and Burnham would call racism, that gave the Europeans of the 19th century and all the Christian centuries prior to the 20th century the spiritual backbone to love and defend their people and their God against the attacks of liberals and colored barbarians. When white “racism” died so did Christian Europe. When the Kirk/Burnham conservatives treated conservatism as something that could be abstracted, bottled, and passed from one people to the next, they broke the bloodlines of the European people and left the liberals, who were ripe for the taking, masters of the battlefield, because they had no opponents.
Eliot, Kirk, Burnham, Tate, and the rest of the 20th century conservative thinkers were right in principle. We should defend God, family, and nation. But our passions are not ignited by an abstract God, an ‘idea’ of the family, or a generic nation. We need our one God, the Suffering Servant, and we need our kith and kin. Thomas Nelson Page, one of the castaway conservatives, described genuine conservatism, the conservatism of the heart and hearth:
On the instant stood revealed, as though he had blown down the ages, a pure Goth, unchanged in any essential since his fathers had left their forests and through all obstacles, even through ranks of Roman legionaries, sword in hand had hewn their way straight to the goal of their desires. He was a Goth in all his appetites and habits, a Goth unchanged, unfettered. True to his instincts, true to his traditions, fearing nothing, loving only his own, loving and hating, with all his heart – a Goth.
There is a great difference between an intellectual affirmation of an idea of God and a heartfelt attachment to God. It is the difference between St. Paul and St. Thomas Aquinas. Likewise with our people, a man can defend his race, as Anthony Jacob does, or he can defend an abstract idea of a nation as Burnham and Kirk do. The liberals survived because they revitalized their troops by adding the negro god, which gave liberalism a personal, passionate component that rational, common-sense conservatism lacked.
Though negrophile liberalism is now at the top of the world, it is ripe for a fall, because the passion for the negro is waning in the ranks of the younger liberals. A few Christian Goths could mount a charge that would shake the foundations of Liberaldom, but that which is necessary for such a charge, a passionate love for our race and a passionate love for the God of our ascending race, must be present before a European counterrevolution can occur. It’s like Dickens’ Christmas Carol in which he tells us that it must be “distinctly understood” that Marley was dead “or nothing wonderful can come of the story.” It must be distinctly understood in our hearts that our racial home is our spiritual backbone before anything as wonderful as a Christian Goth can be seen cleansing the European nations of the barbarian hordes.
I’m not certain there are any Christian Goths left within the ranks of the European people. I hope there are. What I am certain of is that liberalism is entering a new era, the era of the mailed fist. The colored hordes the liberals have unleashed will have no restraints placed upon them, and there will be more and more liberals such as the lesbian mayor who will not care one iota for the rights of white Europeans. Polite debates will not stop the liberals and the colored barbarians from destroying the European people. Only the fighting spirit that comes from the depths of a heart that truly loves can defeat the liberals and their colored barbarian allies. Would a father who loved his children let ravaging wolves into his home in the hope that the wolves will not harm his children? Of course he wouldn’t. But the love that once was there has left the European conservatives. They want to conserve their systems, not their people. In fact, they are quite willing to let their people be devoured by the wolves of color if it means their system triumphs over their white opponents’ system. James II set the standard for the betrayal of one’s race in the name of a higher loyalty to a religious system that all subsequent “conservative Christians” have followed.
The sincerity of those converts who change their faith at a moment, when favour and power can be obtained by the exchange, must always be doubtful, and no character inspires more contempt than that of an apostate who deserts his religion for love of gain. Not, however, listening to these obvious considerations, the King seemed to press on the conversion of his subjects to the Roman Catholic faith, without observing that each proselyte, by the fact of becoming so, was rendered generally contemptible, and lost any influence he might have formerly possessed. Indeed the King’s rage for making converts was driven to such a height by his obsequious ministers, that an ignorant negro, the servant or slave of one Reid, a mountebank, was publicly baptized after the Catholic ritual upon a stage in the High Street of Edinburgh, and christened James in honour, it was said, of the Lord Chancellor James Earl of Perth, King James himself, and the Apostle James.
There’s a lack of depth in managerial men like James II who never ask themselves why the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Without the Europeans, the Word has no place to dwell. “We must be multicultural,” the liberals insist. On the contrary, we must not be multicultural, we must not let Ebola-carrying negroes, Moslem jihadists, and colored monstrosities from every corner of the globe into the white nations so that the white race will be exterminated and the Son of Man shall have no place to lay His head.
I love the H. V. Morton books on England, Scotland, Wales, and so on. In the Morton books we get poetical vignettes of old Europe from a man who seems to truly love the European people. And yet in his book on South Africa, a country he eventually made his home, Morton praises the white South Africans’ achievements but never takes a stand in favor of his people against the black barbarians. If you love a civilization and its people, then shouldn’t you want to defend those people and their civilization against those who would destroy them? The liberals hate old Europe and the God who dwelt among the European people, but what can we say about the conservatives who praise antique Europe but will not lift a finger to protect and defend the European people? They, the great betrayers, respond to accusations of treachery with the ‘replacement’ theory. The Africans, the Orientals, and the Indians will embrace the religion and culture of old Europe, and they will bring forth a better Europe, a “more vital, earthier, sexier Europe.” Is that what multicultural Europe has become? A bastion of orthodoxy that is more vital, etc., than old Europe? Nothing good comes from a white man’s betrayal of his people. The Europeans are the Christ-bearers. If the vast majority won’t bear that burden because they no longer see beauty on a cross, then the Christian hero must bear the burden alone until the rest of the Europeans see the vision again. It’s worse than foolish, it is satanic to turn to the colored races under the guise of keeping the faith. Satan’s minions serve Satan, not Christ, and their negro gods are their conduits to Satan. This is why the formerly Christian churches are doing the work of Satan. The negro has become their lode star, replacing the Son of God.
When the Moslem jihadists killed defenseless Canadians this week, the Canadian grazers, like the grazers throughout the European world, asked, why? The answer is simple. The liberals and the barbarians of color hate white people while the grazers’ love for their own people is too lukewarm; it doesn’t inspire them to protect and defend their people. You can say you are broadminded, peace-loving, democratic, and give a thousand other evasions, but the reality is that a true European, a Goth, loves his people and hates those who would destroy them. It is not a civilized advance to love the stranger and hate your own. It is a return to barbarism and cannibalism in an intellectualized form. The liberals watch with a voyeur’s pleasure as the colored barbarians cannibalize the white race: “Europe must be multicultural.” No, we shall not be multicultural, we shall be true to our house, our race, and our God. +