He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. – Isaiah 53: 3
When I was five I had my tonsils removed, because in the 1950s doctors had decided that tonsils were unnecessary. And my parents were not ones to oppose the doctors, who were the good guys, the men of science. I remember the metallic device used to anesthetize patients coming down over my face, and I remember struggling to get off the operating table, but I have no memory of the operation. Of course that is the purpose of an anesthetic – we are not supposed to be conscious during a major operation. If the patient was conscious, the pain would be too great and he would kick up a fuss, which would make the operation difficult, at the very least, and quite possibly cause it to completely fail without the anesthetic.
As with my tonsils, so it was with the faith of the European people. Before removing the faith of the European people, it was necessary to give them a moral anesthetic so that the pain of the operation would not make them resist and cling tenaciously to their faith. Without the moral anesthetic, the liberals would have found themselves in the same position vis-à-vis the people as Socrates. He upheld the ‘dialectic’ against the gods of Greece, and as a result he was ordered to drink that Hemlock cocktail.
I was brought up to believe that Socrates was the good guy and the Greeks who sentenced him to death were the bad guys, but Socrates was guilty as charged. He was undermining the people’s faith in their gods, by placing abstract reason above the gods. He was, as Richard Weaver points out in his book Visions of Order, “attacking an ultimate source of cohesion in the interest of a doctrine which can issue only in nullity.”
Socrates thought he served the highest truth – abstract reason. Was he correct? Was his, “I am brilliant because I know that I know nothing,” pose really superior to the Greeks’ racial memory of a personal God? If you are committed to a purely biological view of existence, you will never credit any of the pagan Europeans, be they Greek or Nordic, with a dim recollection of the one true God, but if you read the pagan poets you see, in such poets as Aeschylus and Sophocles, that they did not reject the pagan gods because they were incarnate gods and therefore ridiculous, they rejected the pagan gods because they were insufficiently humane. The poets looked to a personal God above the gods, who was divine and human. Abstract reason can never fulfill man’s need for a personal God. The Romans made abstractions of the Greek gods, and the people turned to the mystery religions, which featured personal gods of sex and blood. When Christ entered history, the Europeans embraced Christ, while the non-Europeans stayed with the religions of sex and blood, which were and always shall be at war with Christ and the Christ-bearing people.
In his Confessions, St. Augustine reveals that the biggest obstacle he faced on his journey from paganism to Christianity was the Socratic obstacle. He thought the pagan philosophers were smarter than the Christians. If we read Augustine’s City of God, in which he denies the possibility of a Christian civilization, we can see that Augustine never fully overcame the rationalist taint. What happens when that taint, through the medium of St. Thomas Aquinas, becomes the Church of Christ? Then abstract reason rules and the European people are left alone in the day of battle. They no longer see reason as a sword to be used in the defense of their heart’s passion, they see abstract reason as an end in and of itself. And with that vision – or better to say, with the absence of vision – they are sans hope, sans faith, sans honor and all that makes life worth living.
Abstract reason cannot stand alone; it must have the support of the heart. Robespierre became aware of this, which is why he modified his original atheism and tried to have new religious festivals based on the new-old nature religions. Kevin Strom of neo-pagan fame, also became aware of the insufficiency of abstract reason, so he recommended that white people invent a new religion. “Oh, what fools these mortals be.” Is it really so crystal clear that Christ be not risen? Why is it so clear? Because abstract reason tells us that the dead do not rise? Unamuno’s assertion is apropos: “Reason is a liar and a whore.” So why should we accept the word of a liar and a whore?
In the modern age, the post-French Revolution age, there are two types of Jacobins. There are the Jacobins who realize you must morally anesthetize the people before you can get them to let go of their Christian past and embrace a new religion, and there are the Jacobins who think that abstract reason alone can be the people’s guiding light. The first type, the religious Jacobins, have won the day. They have made negro worship and the brave new world that goes with that new religion the moral anesthetic that has killed white people’s will to survive as a people. Indeed, why would you want to survive as a people when the Jacobin churchmen and the elite men and women of Liberaldom tell you that sin and damnation are white, while heavenly beatitude is black.
The rationalist Jacobins who have stuck to abstract reason alone, the neo-pagans and the white nationalists, have not fared as well as the religious Jacobins. As Kevin Strom realized, rationalism alone cannot supply the Promethean fire to defeat the satanically possessed. But you cannot create a religion for utilitarian reasons; a religious faith comes from the vision in a man’s heart. If his heart is empty, that man is at the mercy of those who have something in their hearts. We are reminded again of the words of William Butler Yeats: “The worst are full of passionate intensity, While the best lack all conviction.”
The religious Jacobins hate Christ and his people with passionate intensity. How can the rationalist Jacobins combat that hatred? What or whom do they love enough to fight to the knife for? The answer is nothing and no-one. They cannot love whom they should love, the Son of God and the antique Europeans, so they do not have the passionate hatred that is necessary to defeat the religious Jacobins and their temporary allies, the legions of colored barbarians.
The various conservative nationalist groups, which are not really conservative because they don’t want to conserve Christian Europe, keep trying to tell white people what should be obvious to them. The liberal elite wants their blood, and they plan on getting it through the noble black savage. Why can’t white people see the obvious? Because people see what they want to see. The conservative nationalists, such as the late Samuel Francis and John Tyndall, offer the white grazers a non-religious Jacobinism. They offer them abstract reason without faith, which is the equivalent of performing a major operation without anesthetizing the patient. In contrast, the religious Jacobins offer the white grazers the moral anesthetic of negro worship and its attendant utopian benefits of sporting events, church services, and the approval of the powers-that-be. The white grazer will never give up that religion, despite the fact it is a false religion that will lead to his death in this world and his perdition in the next, because he needs a religion and has no other religion to turn to. The non-religious Jacobins of the alternative right can beat the drums of white nationalism until their hands bleed and their ears turn deaf, but they will never, by virtue of abstract reasoning, convince the white grazer to give up his faith in the new Christless Christianity, which is negro worship, any more than they can convince a man to have heart surgery without being anesthetized first.
The negro cannot reason – he has only a certain animal cunning – and the Oriental does not have years of Christianity in his blood that compel him to use his reason for something else besides his own selfish ends. But the European is different – he cannot chose not to reason; he has the capacity. But he cannot – he is constitutionally incapable of it – use his reason only for selfish ends. I’m not talking about the lowest common denominators of our race – there are always exceptions – but I am talking about the white everyman. The white man must have a religion that is not solely centered on self. It must appear altruistic. If you say that the white man is proud of his altruism, I would agree with you, but nevertheless we must see that the need to be altruistic is part of the white man and we must deal with it. Abstract reason is a poison that kills if it is not put at the service of a passionate heart devoted to Christ. You cannot isolate reason from the heart in order to avoid the evil passions of the heart as the scholastics did, nor can you isolate reason from the heart and make reason a god, as the alternative right does. And finally, you cannot kill the life-sustaining Christian instincts in the European heart and replace those instincts with the love of all that is base and ignoble, which is what the religious Jacobins have done.
It’s all quite biblical and quite tragic. Despite the fact that the liberals have made it clear that they intend to exterminate the white race, the white grazers are too spiritually blind to see the truth. And the rationalists on the conservative side of Jacobinism have no way of stirring the hearts of white people. They can’t inspire white people to rise and ride, because they themselves have no faith.
It must be all or nothing. Either we leave the worship of the negro and the worship of our own intellects behind and embrace Christ, who is the morning star of Europe, or we perish. Our Lord, speaking through the prophet Isaiah, told His people, when they had “removed their heart far from me,” that He would do “A marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.” Christ is not to be found among the wise and prudent, He is to be found in the passionate heart of that poet of charity, St. Paul. And He is to be found in the hearts of the European people who made St. Paul’s vision their own, while rejecting the counsel of the wise and prudent who worshipped nature and reason.
Nothing has changed: we still struggle with the same forces of darkness that St. Paul struggled with. The cruelty of the nature religions and rationality without faith have been fused together in liberalism. When the Europeans reject negro worship and rationalism, they will once again know what it means to be the Christ-bearing race. Until that time the dark shadows of death and decay will spread over all of Europe. But nothing is written. The European people do not have to worship the negro and reason themselves into oblivion. Who compels us to take the moral anesthetic? The church men? The liberals? Yes, they do compel us to take the gas. But we were born of His blood and of His heart; we don’t need their moral anesthetic, because “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.” +