Now that society is satanic, Satan is a conservative. – CWNY (2012)
And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off: And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.
And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.
And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine?
There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger.
And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.
In the 1959 Disney movie Sleeping Beauty, Prince Phillip must face “all the forces of hell” when he faces Maleficent, who throws off her human façade in order to assume her true identity — a reptilian, satanic fiend. That is what is so striking about the liberals in this new phase of their onslaught against God – all attacks on God must proceed through His people – they no longer feel the need to hide their satanic essence behind a human mask. They have ‘come out’ in all their satanic fury. They tell us quite openly that they would rather see millions of people die of the virus than see Trump reelected. They openly sanction gay pride marches, women’s marches, and Islamic worship services while suppressing white businesses and all gatherings of whites – “where two or three are gathered together.” But will the liberals’ unmasking do them any harm? The old adage is apropos – ‘If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one there, does it make a sound?’ If there are no Christian Europeans left in the European nations, will anyone notice that the liberals are satanic?
Unfortunately the liberals’ unmasking will not awaken the white grazers to the satanic nature of the liberals. Many of them are angry at the Demoncrats, but they are angry without a sustaining faith. Their anger will dissipate when the plague dissipates. What is needful will still be missing – a people who see that the liberals, and the democratic governments they have created, are satanic. It is not possible to live according to the liberals’ laws and God’s laws. There is a huge difference between an imperfect government grounded in a faith in the God-Man, Jesus Christ, such as the French monarchy prior to the French Revolution, and a Jacobin-democratic government grounded in atheism, regicide, and a faith in the man-god, the noble savage. The Christian seeks to mitigate the imperfections of the former government from within, he does not seek to destroy the moral essence of that government through revolution. But the latter type of government, a government grounded in atheism, regicide, and a faith in the man-gods of nature, must be destroyed, it cannot be reformed. That is why Burke remained passionately opposed to the revolutionary French Jacobins even after Robespierre’s death. The evil Jacobin entity, disguised as democracy, still remained at the heart of the French government. When liberals hold the reins of power, the conservative has to become a counter-revolutionary, otherwise his conservatism is merely liberalism in disguise. Robert Lewis Dabney made the same observation as Burke in his criticism of the conservatives of the North. Having destroyed the Christian South they proceeded on their merry way to utopia by staying just slightly behind the liberals who were busy destroying all the channels of God’s grace.
It may be inferred again that the present movement for women’s rights will certainly prevail from the history of its only opponent: Northern conservatism. This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. . . . Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always when about to enter a protest very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its “bark is worse than its bite,” and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent role of resistance: The only practical purpose which it now serves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it “in wind,” and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy, from having nothing to whip. No doubt, after a few years, when women’s suffrage shall have become an accomplished fact, conservatism will tacitly admit it into its creed, and thenceforward plume itself upon its wise firmness in opposing with similar weapons the extreme of baby suffrage; and when that too shall have been won, it will be heard declaring that the integrity of the American Constitution requires at least the refusal of suffrage to asses. There it will assume, with great dignity, its final position. –Robert Lewis Dabney
Have we reached the final position in this, the 21st century? I think we have ‘progressed’ beyond Dabney’s final position. We have extended suffrage to Demoncrats who are infinitely inferior to, and more dangerous than, asses. “Fit to govern? No, not fit to live,” should be our response to the Demoncrats. Yet when the coronavirus fades away, the conservatives will go back to defending Demoncracy. They will continue to place their hopes in elections to determine who shall reign in hell.
Liberalism is grounded in a faith in the man-god that emanates from the mind of the liberal. Whether that god is the noble savage or the Übermensch, it is still the same god, it is the mind of man. There has been no conservative reaction to the liberals’ mind-forged religion of the man-god because the conservatives in the church reacted to the deification of the man-god by demonizing man. They championed a God without humanity, without a human heart, in order to oppose the man-god of the liberals. But does our faith depend on a false either-or? Is it a choice between God and man? No, it is not. The liberals and the ‘conservative’ theologians are one, in that they both deny the divinity within man, the grace of God, in order to place their faith in the God without, which is human reason. That great champion of Pauline, Christ-in-man Christianity, Pastor Grundtvig of Denmark, fought the good fight when he championed the “living wellsprings” of the human heart that bind us to the living God. Those “living wellsprings” are the only weapons we have to combat the Demoncrats of Demoncracy. Without those wellsprings we are naked to our enemies, our conservatism will not help us because it is grounded in the preservation of liberalism.
Chesterton lauded St. Thomas Aquinas for engineering the only successful revolution in the Church. Aquinas placed God out there, in man’s abstract reason, and left St. Paul’s injunction to “search the Scriptures with your heart,” back in the days of unreason and superstition. After that revolution, clerical conservatism became the defense of scholasticism rather than the defense of a heartfelt faith in Jesus Christ; the religious conservatives and the secular liberal became one in their defense of abstract reason and their condemnation of the divinity, the God-given divinity, within man.
The same ‘conservative’ defense of liberalism that took place in the church has taken place in our secular Demoncracy. First the conservatives opposed the deification of Martin Luther King Jr. by pointing out that a whoremonger and a communist should not be set up as a national icon. But once he became part of the fabric of democracy, the conservatives lauded him just as much, if not more, than their liberal colleagues. So it was with the feminists. I recall a debate that William F. Buckley had in England with Germaine Greer. Buckley began the debate by surrendering. He stated he was not in England to dispute the equality of women, he was only there to question whether it was necessary to pass an equal rights amendment in order to reach that admirable goal of equality. Thus the desire to conserve Demoncracy doth make moral cowards of its adherents.
Bruce Catton, the Lincoln apologist who masqueraded as a historian of the Civil War, once wrote that American democracy, when implemented properly, namely with the full enfranchisement of negroes, represented “freedom from all fears.” Really? Do we no longer need to fear the pestilence that walketh in darkness and the arrows that flieth at noon day if we adhere to the principles of Demoncracy? Do we no longer need to fear death itself? With no due respect I disagree with Catton. If we believe in “We the People” democracy rather than His Europe, we become part of an incorporate union of demons committed to a flight from Christ, which can only have one end – over the cliff with the swine.
In the U.S. (the other European nations differ only in degree not in kind) over half our population, the Demoncrats, are completely satanic; they have left all things human behind. And the Republicans, the party that Dabney described as the “party which never conserves anything,” are committed to a more gradual implementation of the satanic principles of the Demoncrats. They do not have any heartfelt convictions that lead them to say, “Stop, this must not go on.” They have only a moderate, rational objection to change they think is too violent and sudden. That is not sufficient. We must be composed of sterner stuff. We must, we Europeans, say, “Stop, this must not go on!”
An acquaintance, who is an Olympian conservative, recently asked me why I have such sympathy for Trump since he has accomplished so little, when viewed from the Olympian heights of conservative theory. I told the Olympian I admire Trump because he is Prometheus. If you recall, Prometheus was a minor god in the Greek pantheon who stole fire from the major gods in order to give it to mortals, whom he took pity on. Prometheus was punished for his concern for insignificant mortals; he was bound to a rock while vultures pecked at his liver. Trump, as a billionaire, was a minor god in Liberaldom. He could have remained materially happy and comfortable, keeping his friendships with the Hollywood celebrities and enjoying his later years by jetting around the world spending his money on luxuries. Instead, he stole electoral fire from the gods of Liberaldom and sought to give that power to white people. He failed to defeat the liberals and save white people, because you can’t defeat the demons of Liberaldom from within the confines of Demoncracy. Now Trump can only endure while the Coulters, the Drudges, and the rest of the liberal vultures peck out his entrails. The original Prometheus was saved by the God-Man, Hercules. Trump needs, like all of us, the real God-Man, who Aeschylus saw through a glass darkly; he needs Christ the Lord to come and release him from the Promethean rock. Our Jesus comes to us through the Christ-imbued hero. We must attack the Demoncrats in His name, not in the name of Demoncracy.
Democracy is Demoncracy because there is no place for the Christian hero within the democratic system. (1) We are told we must dialogue with inhuman fiends rather than deal with them in the only way possible to deal with demons, the way Prince Philip dealt with Maleficent. If we take that spirit into battle, the spirit of the Christian warrior who fights in defense of His realm of charity, we will truly have a solid ground from which to launch a counter-revolution. We will be moving away from Yeats’s rough beast, the demonic man-god of Liberaldom, who is a composite of Nietzsche’s Übermensch and Rousseau’s Noble Savage, back to that stable in Bethlehem where all counter-revolutions against Demoncracy begin.
The Demoncrats’ selective shutdowns of white business and their passionate hatred of the use of any drug that helps stem the coronavirus-related deaths has given us a rare glimpse of liberalism unmasked. We will remain in the liberals’ merciless clutches if we treat their satanic power over us as something that is written, something akin to fate. If we remain pagans, if we deny that we are the Christ-bearing people, then we will be fated to serve the liberals on this earth and serve Satan in the next world. Far better to adhere to the foolishness of the cross, to the God who transcends fate and bids us follow Him. That is the exact opposite of the Demoncrats who command us go over the cliff with the swine. Jesus came and stood in the midst of His disciples after His resurrection from the dead and told them, “As the Father has sent me, even so send I you.” We are called to fight the devil and all his works just as our Lord did. We are called to advance His reign of charity, not to conserve Satan’s kingdom of hell on earth. +
(1) Democracy never works because truth is always diluted in a democracy. You must compromise with evil in order to form a majority coalition. By doing so you become like unto the Nicolaitanes condemned by our Lord in the Book of Revelations: you have elevated the blending of Christ and paganism into a doctrine.
Christ is truth, paganism is falsehood, and never the twain shall meet. We have left Christian monarchies behind. Let us pray for a good dictator, a man who rules in His name.