But down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. The detective in this kind of story must be such a man. He is the hero, he is everything. He must be a complete man and a common man and yet an unusual man. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor — by instinct, by inevitability, without thought of it, and certainly without saying it. – Raymond Chandler
“Shane stopped about three quarters of the way forward, about five yards from Wilson. He cocked his head for one quick sidewise glance again at the balcony and then he was looking at Wilson. He did not like the setup. Wilson had the front wall and he was left in the open of the room. He understood the fact, assessed it, accepted it.”
Of course we know the rest: Shane kills Wilson, the hired gun, and he also kills the back-shooting Fletcher who hired Wilson, thus making the valley a place that was safe for women and their men folk to raise children that could grow up “strong and straight.” The basic elemental lesson of Shane, that it takes a heroic, virtuous male to stop evil predatory males, has been forgotten by the people of Europe. (1) Unless they once again grasp hold of and act on that moral absolute, they will perish as a people. No utopian gimmick or fantasy can replace the reality depicted in Shane – the hero must be able to see evil clearly and he must have the moral courage to fight the men who are doing evil. Men like Wilson and Fletcher cannot be wished away by a democratic stratagem. We are not disembodied spirits. We inhabit bodies. That is a non-utopian fact of life. And evil must be confronted when it is embodied in men. You cannot fight evil in the abstract; you must make war on the men who do evil. That is an eternal truth of existence. You can spout Gnostic jeremiads against it from now to doomsday, but you won’t be able to change that essential truth.
Let’s use the rape of the women of Cologne as our starting point. One female journalist, who I’m sure was voicing the feelings of a large number of European women, asked “Where were the German men?” Of course a condemnation of the men of Cologne was implicit in that question. But I don’t think the blame for the rapes can be left at the doorsteps of the men of Cologne. Let’s go back to the 19th century in order to see what is wrong with the 21st century white males. Let us suppose that a band of ruffians (we must suppose they are white ruffians, because the Victorians didn’t allow their nation to be flooded with Moslems and negroes) are seen accosting a Victorian lady on a London street or, if you prefer, on a street in Cologne, Germany. In either case what do you think happens? The English or German gentlemen who witness the assault immediately draw their rapiers or possibly their pistols and either kill or wound the ruffians. Most probably the woman being assaulted is a lady, because it is the 19th century when men were men and women were women, but let us suppose the woman being assaulted was a prostitute. Would the men still defend the prostitute? Yes, they would have. Maybe without the same enthusiasm with which they would have defended the matron or the maid, but the code of chivalry would have made the white males feel themselves obliged to defend any member of the female sex that was being assaulted. (2)
Now let us return to debauched 21st century Europe and go back to New Year’s’ Eve in Cologne and look at the difference between the modern European males and the 19th century white males. The great difference is that of breeding. The 19th century white male was thoroughly versed in the code of chivalry. Women were considered the life bearers and the life nurturers; they were the “gentle sex” who nursed the sick, raised the children, and made the 19th century dwellings seem like homes rather than pigsties. Such women must be defended because…well, because they are women, any fool can see that. Yes, any “fool” from the 19th century could see that. But what about the modern European male? He has not been brought up by the chivalric code of the antique Europeans. He has been brought up according to the liberals’ catechism. In that catechism, we read on page 3, fourth paragraph, the following definition of chivalry: “An ancient code of the white Christians, has to do with knight errantry and what was later called gentlemanly behavior. The code was in reality used to perpetuate sexual stereotypes that kept women out of male-dominated professions.”
In our modern, enlightened times, the young males are told that anything a male can do a female can do better. Cop chicks on television regularly destroy whole gangs of white thugs (it’s always white thugs, there is no such thing as black, Moslem, or Mexican thugs) with a few karate blows. And the idea of fair maidens has been demolished as well. No white male thinks of fair maidens; he has been taught to regard women as sexually promiscuous creatures who have a right to sleep with anyone and everyone without being labeled as sluts or whores. Indeed there are no longer sluts and whores; there are only modern, sexually assertive women and working women who are often deprived, so we are told, of proper health and medical benefits because of hypocritical males who enjoy the service they provide, but are unwilling to publicly acknowledge it. So when such women are attacked, what does a white male, who has been properly trained, think? He thinks that women are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, because the feminists have told him that from kindergarten to adulthood.
What about the defense of a woman’s virtue? Again, the young European male has been taught to regard the respect for a woman’s virginity and chastity as a relic of the evil days of the white patriarchies. Why, in these modern times, would a male fight for something, namely a woman’s maidenly honor, that he has been taught to regard as a worthless commodity?
The young white male of the 19th century was not hindered by the demons of white guilt. He was not taught from birth that white males were evil oppressors of women, of the colored races, and of the non-Christian religions. So if the 19th century male saw the “lesser breeds without the law” attacking women he responded quickly and without fear of being locked up by his own government for sexist behavior toward women or discriminatory behavior toward the colored barbarians and heathens, who are now regarded as the superior breeds of people. And the 19th century male had the means to fight barbarians, because his government and society at large trusted him to act according to the code. The modern liberals, who regard the code of chivalry as evil, have forbidden the white males to carry arms into the combat zones of our major cities. And in the hinterlands of white nations, where it is legal to carry knives and firearms it is still illegal to use those knives and guns against the colored barbarians and the Moslem invaders. With the means to fight, with the will to fight, and with the support of society and their government young white males will fight. But unarmed and alone, who but the Major Lawson’s of the world will fight? (3)
A society such as Victorian England that is supportive of white males has a right to expect courageous action from its male citizens. But the nations of modern Europe who have demonized the white male have no right to expect anything from white males. In Russia, the only nationalist nation left in Europe, the men beat the Moslem hoodlums who tried to rape and pillage with the full approval of the police, who added some extra punishment when their fellow Russians were finished beating the hooligans. “This is not Cologne,” the Russians told the Moslems. No European nation should be like Cologne, but we are reaping the bitter harvest the liberals have planted.
Shane was able to face his enemies, because he saw them for what they were, pure evil. And he was able to defeat them because he saw what their advantage was, and he faced it squarely and adjusted to it. The Europeans must see that liberalism is pure evil. Then they will stop looking for help from their governments and they will take the necessary action. The Swedes have taken the first step. They attacked the Moslem murderers while wearing masks, and beat them. The masks are a sign that those Swedish youths realize that you can’t seek redemption from the devil. The demonic liberal governments want to eradicate the white race, so why would they aid white males who want to save their people form destruction? The late Jeff Cooper who wrote for Guns and Ammo magazine once told of an off-duty policeman who tried to prevent an armed robbery without any weapon. The police officer was shot and killed. Jeff Cooper gave the police officer a ten for courage and a zero for wisdom. I feel that way about so many of the European men who protest against their governments’ anti-European immigration policies. That retired officer of the French Foreign Legion is a perfect example. He led a protest march against the Islamic invasion of France, and the French government threw him in jail. (4) A ten for courage and a zero for wisdom. The liberals hate whites. They can only be dealt with as Shane dealt with Wilson and Fletcher. And since the liberals control the tanks and the guns, they must be dealt with in the night with masks and daggers. War is not a very pleasant thing. It would be nice if the liberals would stop being liberals, and then there would be no need for bloodshed. The Western governments could simply stop paying welfare benefits to the alien invaders and they would have to leave, but the liberals are committed to a New World based on a new religion, a religion in which everything satanic is celebrated and everything Christian is demonized. They will not stop being liberals because we ask them to stop being liberals. Better to fight and die than to simply sit back and wait for the black barbarians and the Moslems, who are the liberals’ executioners, to drop the axe on each and every European. (5)
The undergirding of liberalism is their utopian criticism of the past. From a utopian standard, every civilization is wrong; every civilization except the future civilization the liberals are building. They destroy everything of value in the past and justify that destruction under the blanket of, “We are moving onward to a perfect world.” The liberals’ perfect world is here, and it is hell. Christian Europe was not utopia, but there were white moments in old Europe when a man felt connected to the God of love, through the hearth fire channels of grace that the liberals’ make war on. I recently heard a “moderate” religious commentator make a critique of feminism, but this same commentator then made it clear she did not want a return to the bad old days of the Christian patriarchies. That is akin to a sick person saying that they don’t want to be sick, but they also do not want to return to full health. They would prefer to be half sick and half well. I do want a return to the past, not a return to outmoded forms, but a return to a timeless faith in the Suffering Servant, a faith that gave men the grace to be strong in defense of the weak, and women the grace to be the life-bearers and life nurturers. +
(1) There is more truth in one Gene Autry B-Western movie than all the liberal and quasi-conservative pacifist garbage that is being bandied about by the pro-Moslem West. The men in the white hats must be men! They must put ‘paid’ to the account of the bad guys. Johnny Western (he was born Johnny Westerlund) said it best in his “Ballad of Paladin”:
Have Gun Will Travel reads the card of a man.
A knight without armor in a savage land.
His fast gun for hire heeds the calling wind.
A soldier of fortune is the man called Paladin.
Where do you roam?
Far, far from home.
He travels on to where ever he must
A chess knight of silver is his badge of trust
There are campfire legends that the plainsmen spin
Of the man with the gun
Of the man called Paladin
Where do you roam?
Far, far from home.
Far, far from home.
Far, far from home.
(2) The reason Jack the Ripper caused such a stir in Victorian England was because he attacked defenseless women. His crimes were seen as horrendous crimes even though the women were prostitutes. Such violence against women is commonplace in today’s world and does not even warrant a murmur of protest when Moslems and blacks are the perpetrators of the violence.
(3) A sign of contradiction:
“In Katanga, the province bordering on the Copperbelt, the long tale of panic and horror was relieved by the exploits of Major Lawson, D.S.O., of the British Army. There had been a massacre of Europeans in Kongolo, in northern Katanga, but there were believed to be some survivors still in hiding there. Consequently an appeal for help was made to the United Nations. But the United Nations, in an admission approved by U Thant, declared itself powerless to do anything about it. Notwithstanding the fact that there were 19,000 United Nations troops in the Congo, and that the United Nations had been able to concentrate within a short space of time an air force and 9,000 men for an attack upon the anti-Communist Katanga town of Elizabethville, it declared itself unable to rescue the Whites in Kongolo. In Katanga itself at this time there were many Swedish and Irish troops – all fraternizing with the Natives and thoroughly indoctrinated with anti-colonialism – and apparently they too were unable to assist. Major Lawson thereupon decided to do something about it on his own. Alone and unarmed, except for his swagger-stick, he went in, defying several hundreds of astonished Congolese soldiers, and succeeded in finding and bringing to safety a missionary priest. He then went in a second time, accompanied by one of his junior Nigerian officers, and on this occasion traced and rescued several priests and nuns. In the process both he and the Nigerian officer were badly beaten up; but he refused to abandon his rescue operations until he was satisfied there were no more Europeans remaining in the district. Thus this one British officer succeeded in doing what the entire United Nations Organisation had confessed itself powerless to do! His action alone proved that the United Nations Organisation is too rotten to last; but that the British people – the best of them at least – are not the write-offs they are thought to be.” – White Man, Think Again!
(4) The mayor who ordered the arrest and the French policemen who beat the retired Legionnaire, causing him to have a seizure, should be killed, their throats slit some dark night. If the European people are going to survive they must stop putting their trust in the princes and princesses of democracy, who hate whites with a satanic passion. Like a horrific vampire, they feed on the blood of white people. Just because the vampires pass laws that permit the extermination of white people does not mean we have to submit to those laws. Laws based on His divine law of charity and mercy are inviolate; laws based on Satan’s hatred of the Christ-bearing race should be defied.
(5) Institutionalized liberalism is synonymous with the slaughter of white Europeans. It has always been thus. From the time of the French Revolution till now, wherever liberals reign, white Europeans are marginalized and then exterminated.