Ganelon’s Treachery Returns

And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not. (For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness.)

And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. And there was there a herd of many swine feeding on the mountain: and they besought him that he would suffer them to enter into them. And he suffered them. Then went the devils out of the man, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the lake, and were choked. – Luke 8: 27-33


My mother’s father gave her a set of storybooks when she was little, and she in turn gave them to me. The stories in the various books are stories of the European people. They tell the story of The Bruce, of William Tell, of the Red Cross Knight, and many, many more tales about the great heroes of the white race. Among those many more is the story of Roland, the bravest of Charlemagne’s knights. He was betrayed by his father-in-law Ganelon to the Muslims and died, fighting nobly with a few companions against hordes of Muslims:

Scarcely had Roland breathed his last when Charlemagne arrived to find of all his twenty thousand no one left. Mournfully he called his peers by name. Not one there was to answer – not a single one.  And on the height, his face toward Spain, they found the hero Roland. Great was the grief of all. Great was the grief of Charlemagne. His host pursued the Saracens, and by the river E’bro the Moors paid to the full the penalty of their treachery. Then bearing the bodies of Roland and Oliver, Charlemagne returned to France. Laden with chains and tied to a stake like a wild beast Ganelon was led before his judges for trial. By his dark deed lay twenty thousand dead. He was condemned and suffered a shameful death. But in the hearts of Charlemagne and all the people of France remained undying love for Roland, for he took his stand, and held it, never yielding unto death.

In Dante’s Inferno only the Devil himself is placed lower in hell than Ganelon. But now Europe is governed by a whole host of Ganelons. In the name of compassion we are told by church and state that the European people in America and Europe proper must take in thousands upon thousands of Syrian Muslims. Sanctuary? It is not sanctuary, it is an invasion. And the Ganelons of modern Europe should be tied to a stake like their infamous predecessor and tried for their crimes. Instead they luxuriate in fits of self-righteous indignation when any nation, as Hungary tried to do, makes an effort to protect her people from the Muslim hordes. The European Ganelons always pick out some fresh-faced Muslim woman with a cute infant in her arms – “How can you deny them access to your nation?” It should be easy. We should deny all such invaders access to our nation, because we love our own sweet-faced women and children. We don’t hate yours, but you have a nation to go to – go there!

The liberals’ incredible double-dealing is obvious. On the one hand we are told that we must abort all babies born in the European nations, because there are too many babies being born. And then on the other hand we are told we must allow an unlimited amount of Muslims into European nations. Why must we do this? Because we are commanded to go over the cliff with the swinish liberals who are possessed by the devil.

The liberals’ hatred of their own and their love of the stranger can only be understood in the context of demonic possession. Why else would they welcome people into their nation with values diametrically opposed to their own values? Islam is certainly opposed to Christianity, but it is also opposed to liberalism, and yet, only a few liberals, such as Geert Wilders and Jared Taylor, have pointed out the incompatibility of liberalism and Islam. There will be no gay marriages in a Muslim Europe, there will be no feminism, there will be no negro worship, and there will be no toleration of Jews. Why then would the liberals welcome them into their nations? It goes back to the demons in that Gospel story in St. Luke. The liberals have one fear that overrides all other fears: the fear of the God of Mercy, Jesus Christ. And even though the European people have ceased, as a collective body, to be Christian, the liberals fear and hate them, because they were once Christian. It’s the same way with the Muslims. When the Ayatollah Khomeini was performing Muslim hijinks in Iran, he referred to the West as the Christian West, his ancient enemy. The liberals of the West tried to tell him that the West was not Christian, but to no avail. For him the West was Richard, Raymond, and Godfrey. Would that it were true! The enemies of Christ, be they liberal or Muslim, will always hate the white race, because of what the white race once was, the Christ-bearing race. Muslims are not exclusively anti-white, they also hate Christians of other races — witness their execution of the Coptic Christians – but white people will always be the primary enemy of Muslims, because of their past devotion, as an entire race, to the God of mercy.

Some neopagans and right-wing Christians have expressed a preferment for Muslims over the liberals. “Let them come, at least they are not liberals,” is their sentiment. But should a Christian let Muslims determine who should live and who should die? A Muslim state would be just as evil as a liberal state. The important thing is to fight both liberalism and Islam. The Christian European doesn’t oppose Islam because its tenets run contrary to the liberal tenets of the Western democracies, he opposes Islam because its tenets are diametrically opposed to European Christianity, the faith of our ascending race. There is no room for Muslims or liberals in Europe, but since the latter are homegrown we must deal with them on a case by case basis and gradually purge them from our ranks. But the Muslims are foreign invaders; there is no reason why we have to suffer one single Muslim on European soil. Let them practice what they feel is the true faith in the Islamic countries and let Christian Europe alone. But of course the Muslims will not let Europe alone. The liberal Ganelons have let them in. Only European Christians can stop the Muslims at the gates of Vienna. Are there any left? There are certainly none in the organized churches, but the true faith runs through human hearts. Will there be enough European hearts of flesh to stop the blood-red tide? I don’t know; I only know that I love my people and I hate Muslim invaders. Are there no other European people left who love and hate with all their heart?

I once had a student who asked me why I was so hostile to Islam since the Muslims were against the liberals. I answered him with the “pushing an old lady” example. A man could be pushing an old lady into traffic or out of traffic. The two acts of pushing the old lady are the same physical acts, but spiritually they are quite different. The one act saves the old lady, while the other kills her. A Christian opposes feminism, because feminism destroys femininity, which is a source of grace. The Christian does not, as the Muslim does, despise femininity itself. So it goes with all the issues that a more conservative Christian might seem, on the surface, to be of a like mind with the Muslims. But there is absolutely no agreement between a nature religion that is a fusion of Judaism and paganism and a religion of spirit and truth forged from a relationship between the incarnate God of charity and mercy and His people who have circumcised their hearts in order to receive Him still. I find it hard to believe, as Burke found it hard to believe that the French courtiers would not defend their Queen, that any non-liberal European could accept the existence of Islam in Europe. But we know of the grazers; they are wedded to their local atheist clergy and a false idea of universalism, but it is only universalism for the white race; they must love the stranger and hate themselves while the Muslim stranger and the colored stranger need only take care of their own while they destroy the infidel, who is always the white man and those who accept the white man’s religion.

The liberal, the Jew, and the Muslim are at odds on so many issues, but they are one at the core of their hatred: They hate the incarnate God. Can there be a unity based only on hatred? I don’t think so. The Christian European will always be opposed by liberals, Jews, and Muslims, but beyond that they will always be at war with each other. It’s not our mission to side with one over the other, or to try and blend them all into one big ecumenical stew. It’s our mission to hold onto the vision of the incarnate Lord bequeathed to us at our racial hearth fire by our European ancestors.

The whites’ surrender to the Muslims, the liberals, the blacks, and the Jews stems from their lack of faith in Christ as the Lord of History. Christian atheists have tried to justify their betrayal of the European people by claiming that they are just being more Christian; they are perfecting their Christian faith by jettisoning the antique Europeans and their culture. But that is precisely the point. If you deny what even the antique Europeans’ Muslim enemies conceded – that the Europeans’ culture was Christian in all its essentials — then you deny the incarnation of our Lord. If He was not incarnate in Christian Europe then how is He to be known? Is He to be known in the future, as the Jews believe; is He only a minor prophet, as the Muslims believe; is He a social worker, as the liberals believe; or is He a weak and ineffectual pagan deity, as the blacks believe?

Ganelon was tried and killed, because the Europeans of that era believed Christ was incarnate in the European people. To betray them was to betray Him. The modern liberals also believe that Christ was incarnate in the antique European people. That is why they want the West to replace their heirs with Muslims. They want to show there is no going back. Once white people are no more, the Son of Man will have no place to lay His head. It is one of the great ironies of history, but an irony that makes sense from a Christian perspective, that when white people thought they were weaklings who needed Christ the Lord, they conquered the world with their creativity and their unconquerable spirit. Now that they think they are strong and independent, without any need for the incarnate Lord, they are jabbering idiots too weak to resist an invasion of ants, let alone an invasion of warlike heathens. When a mine caved in in Wales and a miner was trapped below, the miner’s friends would say “Who is for Edmund Gwynn?” — or whoever was trapped below. And the man’s friends would say, “I am for Edmund Gwynn,” and they would go down into the mine to see if they could rescue their friend. “Who is for the antique Europeans and the Incarnate Lord?” If we bring them out of the mine that the liberals have exploded on top of them, they will rescue us. +

This entry was posted in Christian counter-attack, Europeans and Christ, Muscular Christianity, Older posts (pre-April 2019). Bookmark the permalink.