The Third Path

Posted on June 30, 2012 by cwny

O Lord arise, help us, and deliver us, for thy name’s sake.

– The Book of Common Prayer

__________

I recall an old western movie in which the main character asked his partner, after he saw Mr. Money Bags leave their ranch with his thugs: “Did you crawl?” His partner responded, “I wasn’t asked to.” The hero was ready to disown his partner if he had crawled upon compulsion. What would he have thought of a man who crawls without being compelled to crawl?

Such were my thoughts when I heard Rich Lowry of National Review joining in with the black witch doctor, Al Sharpton, to condemn George Zimmerman, before any of the evidence was in, for the murder of the saintly and blessed man-child called Trayvon Martin. Sadly, Lowry’s rush to throw himself at the feet of Al Sharpton did not surprise me. National Review magazine was only marginally conservative at its inception, and it has been going steadily down the left bank of the hill for the past three decades.

What Lowry revealed, in his cowardly attempt to appease his liberal cousins and the black barbarians, was the essential unity of the liberal and the conservative. Spiritually they are joined at the hip. What is the doctrine that binds them to each other, often in hate? It is democratic egalitarianism. Democracy as a magical, mystical system, as an end in and of itself, not as a means to an end, is the faith of the modern liberal and the conservative.

Faith in an all encompassing system to which all people must adhere because the system encompasses God is a very old Faith; it is pagan. The reason that Christianity could not be absorbed into the Roman system was because the Christian could only render to Caesar that which belonged to Caesar; in those matters touching his conscience and his faith he had to render to God alone. The modern Christian circumvents his obligations to God by simply declaring democracy and Christianity as one and the same. Therefore anything undemocratic is unchristian; there is no problem of conscience. So long as the “Christian” practices the civic religion of democratic negro worship he will feel that he is right with God. Our current system of democratic egalitarianism in which some are more equal than others does not seem even remotely compatible with the Christian faith. But the fear of being in a state of non-conformity to the powers that be can make a man convince himself of just about anything, no matter how absurd. And our satanic modern democratic system, which makes demands that run counter to the will of the living God and counter to the nobler instincts in the human heart, feeds on the blood of all those who are not loyal to the system. Just as the French Jacobins maintained their reign of terror with blood, so do our modern Jacobins, the liberals, maintain their regime with blood.

They must abuse their engine because fear, losing its effect through habit, needs example to keep it alive; the negro monarch or the pacha who would keep the fear alive by which he rules, must be stimulated every day; he must slaughter too many to be sure of slaughtering enough; he must slaughter constantly, in heaps, indiscriminately, haphazard, no matter for what offence, on the slightest suspicion, the innocent along with the guilty. He and his are lost the moment they cease to obey this rule. Every Jacobin, like every African monarch or pacha, must observe it that he may be and remain at the head of his band.—For this reason, the chiefs of the sect, its natural leaders designated beforehand, consist of theorists able to grasp it’s principles, and logicians about to arrive at its conclusions, narrow-minded enough not to see that their undertaking exceeds their powers and all human powers, shrewd enough to see that brutal force is their only instrumentality, inhuman enough to apply it unscrupulously and without reserve, and perverted enough to murder on all sides that they may stamp an impression of lasting terror.

    – The French Revolution by Hippolyte Taine

It was Metternich who warned us that, “Whenever I hear the word ‘democracy’ I know a bloodbath is coming.” Wasn’t that the case in France? In South Africa? And isn’t it the case in the streets of every city of European origin? Yes, it was and is. The barbarians of color kill at the behest of the liberals, who invoke democracy to justify the extermination of the white race: “Just growing pains” and “You really can’t blame them after years of …” And yet, after all the violence against white people, instigated by adherents of democracy, no white men, not even professed white nationalists, ever propose to fight white genocide by any means other than democratic means. Such men do not understand the religious nature of democracy. It is not a system of laws; far from it. Martin Luther King, Jr. violated the law, but he was adhering to the religious tenets of egalitarian democracy by moving the nation toward racial egalitarianism. When the Black Panthers murdered white policemen in the 1960’s they were applauded and made into saints because they too were serving the democratic system. The system is all. All of a man’s loyalty and devotion is supposed to be to the system. Outside the system is the night.

The Christian European will not accept the democratic system as his god. His conscience and his honor cannot be overwhelmed and superseded by a sovereign state directly opposed to the living God. If we render our souls to Caesar, which is precisely the demand of the Caesars of democratic egalitarianism, we will become men of straw easily gathered and burnt by Satan and his minions.

In order to survive, a democratic, egalitarian government must pander to the lowest instincts in mankind. But the keepers of the democratic flame do not say, “We are pandering to the lowest instincts in mankind.” Instead they call fair foul and foul fair. The worship of black barbarians becomes “civil rights.” The celebration of unbridled lust becomes “overcoming repression.” The murder of infants becomes a “woman’s right to choose,” and on it goes into the Babylonian night.

We are told by the liberals that the new theocracy of democratic egalitarianism came about because it was the will of the people. I don’t agree. Revolutions do not succeed because an overwhelming majority support the revolutionaries. They come about when a passionate few believe in the revolution and an overwhelming majority are uncertain about and indifferent to the status quo. Christian Europe was replaced by democratic Babylon, because Europeans were in doubt about the distinctiveness of the European people. And they doubted their distinctiveness as a people because they doubted the distinctiveness of Jesus Christ from all other gods. The scientific revolt against the incarnational civilization of Christian Europe ushered in a new world with the negro as the sacred god of the new world. Now that the revolution has been institutionalized there is an overwhelming majority of people who support it, but the overwhelming majority of people have never known any other faith than democratic egalitarianism and have never been exposed to Christianity as preached and practiced by Europeans in the Christian era of Europe. Can the liberals say with certainty that if the true Christianity, the European Christianity of a bygone era, was championed by a passionate white minority, that they, the liberals, might not be overwhelmed by a newly aroused majority of white people who had become indifferent and bored with democratic Babylon? No, they cannot say that with absolute certainty, so they keep a close watch for outbursts of Christian European resistance to democratic Babylon, in order to crush it as they would crush a loathsome insect.

I know neither the day nor the hour of Liberaldom’s demise, but I do know what will bring it down. Passion will bring it down. A passion like unto Burke’s, who fought with might and main against the regicide French. A passion like Shakespeare’s, who saw past the outer form of things to the spirit within. All true, transcendent passion stems from His passion. It is a passion that overwhelms all that stands against it. When a few Europeans recover that passion, the end of Liberaldom is nigh.

The wheel is come full circle. The reason that a man like Rich Lowry of National Review is a spiritual coward is because his soul has been overmanned by the democratic, negro-worshipping heresy of modern Liberaldom. In the absence of a passionate faith in Jesus Christ and the European culture that was the incarnation of that faith, Lowry became a fearful, cringing caricature of a man lying flat on his face in front of the sacred black man. Negro worship is the inevitable outcome of the democratic system, because in the ‘some- are-more-equal-than-others’ democracy of the devil, the lowest common denominator, the negro, must be exalted. So long as democracy is a god word in the European nations, white men will bow down to the negro. What fills an antique European with disgust, the sight of white men bowing down to their negro gods, makes the modern white men feel holy and uplifted. Just as the antique Europeans felt no shame in bending their knees to Christ, the modern white men feel no shame in effacing themselves before their negro gods.

Even if democratic egalitarianism meant what it said, that we are all to be treated equally, it would be wrong, because Holy Scriptures and the reality of life tell us that human beings are inherently unequal. But democratic egalitarianism does not mean what it says. Sometime in the early 1970’s the Pittsburgh Pirates baseball team fielded an all black team. Every year on the anniversary of that sacred day the members of the predominantly white news media oooh and aah about the magnificence of the day. They never explain why the day deserves to be so exalted. It is just a given that a day in which a baseball team fielded an all black team is a day that white people should celebrate. But why, if we truly are a democratic egalitarian society that celebrates diversity, should we celebrate an entirely black baseball team? Isn’t such a non-diverse team something we should deplore? Shouldn’t a team have some white players, as well as some red, yellow, and brown players, if it is a truly diverse, democratic egalitarian team worthy of honor and homage? Of course it should if we simply go by the dictionary meaning of democratic and egalitarian, but we know the true meaning of democratic egalitarianism. It is a pagan, religious system in which all honor and homage is due to the black gods.

Robert Frost wrote of two divergent paths in the woods. He claims he took the path less traveled on. I have my doubts about that. But even if we countenance Frost’s claim, we must see that Frost’s less traveled path, the path of the democratic egalitarian conservative, ultimately merges with that other path, the path of the democratic egalitarian liberal. And that path leads the conservative and the liberal to the altar of the negro gods.

There is a third path. It can’t be seen by the naked eye, at least not at first, because it has not been trodden on for almost a century. It is completely covered by thorns and briars. But if a European, possessed of that passionate faith that moves mountains, would start hewing a path for himself, despite the thorns and briars, he will eventually come to a clearing in the woods. And there upon the altar of his European ancestors he will find the antithesis of the black gods of Liberaldom. He will find Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living god, who was wounded for our offenses and smitten for our wickedness. +

Posted in Antique Christianity, Christ the Hero, Democracy, Liberalism, Older posts (pre-April 2019) | Tagged | Comments Off on The Third Path

The Dear Land of Storybooks

Posted on June 23, 2012 by cwny

Yet as I saw it, I see it again
The kirk and the palace, the ships and the men,
And as long as I live and where’er I may be
I’ll always remember my town by the sea

–Robert Louis Stevenson

__________

Let us begin with Hippolyte Taine:

In every doctrine which wins men over to it, the sophistry it contains is less potent than the promises it makes; its power over them is greater through their sensibility than through their intelligence; for, if the heart is often the dupe of the head, the latter is much more frequently the dupe of the former. We do not accept a system because we deem it a true one, but because the truth we find in it suits us. Political or religious fanaticism, any theological or philosophical channel in which truth flows, always has its source in some ardent longing, some secret passion, some accumulation of intense, painful desire to which a theory affords an outlet;…

Taine, the poet, has shown us Liberaldom from within the liberals’ twisted souls. Their hearts have become corrupted with a sick, illicit passion. And they use their reason to defend the passion of their hearts, not to examine their hearts in order to see if what they feel inside can stand up to the test of reality. In fact, quite the opposite is true; the liberals must constantly deny reality so they can maintain their liberalism. No appeal to reason has any effect on the liberals, because the liberals’ evil hearts govern their brains. It is impossible to have a “dialogue” with a liberal, because the liberals have denounced all their humanity for an inhuman, satanic faith.

The liberals’ passion for abstraction stems from their illicit desire for a multiracial, Eden-like Babylon, presided over by a benevolent negro god. They must abstract such a utopian kingdom because it has no basis in reality. Babylon is hell, not paradise, and the negro is a cruel barbarian despot, not a benevolent ruler. Only in the abstract world of the liberals’ brains is there a multiracial paradise. And because the liberals’ paradise has no basis in reality, the dream of a liberal paradise must be maintained by murder. “In fixing his mind on abstract formulas, he is no longer able to see men as they are; through self-admiration he finally comes to viewing his adversaries, and even his rivals, as miscreants deserving of death.”

Deserving of death? Does that only describe the Jacobins’ feelings about the French aristocrats? I hope there are no Europeans, who still feel themselves to be Europeans, that think “the Jacobins were just a French phenomenon back then” and are not present today throughout all of Europe. If you think that then you are morally blind. Liberalism is the expansion of the Jacobin Reign of Terror. Only now it is not confined to French aristocrats; it has been extended to all white people. And just as Robespierre thought his special ‘elect’ status would save him from the bloody terror he instituted, so do the liberals think their special elect status as the founding fathers of the Babylonian Terror will keep them from the bloody deaths they plan for the rest of the white race.

During the height of the Reign of Terror no one within France dared to speak out against the Terror. To do so was death. And very few men outside of France –Burke was the exception – spoke out against the Terror because they wanted to have dealings with the new government. The modern European whose heart is with old Europe is in a similar situation vis-à-vis his government, as the throne and altar Frenchman was vis-à-vis his government during the Reign of Terror. He dare not speak out, but whether he speaks out or not he is marked to die. In modern Liberaldom, there are no nations outside of Liberaldom from which a Burke can launch an attack, because all of what was once Christendom is now part of Liberaldom.

Liberaldom is maintained by lying abstractions, so every lying abstraction feeds the liberal leviathan. This is why ‘getting out the vote’ tactics and ‘dialoging’ with liberals is beneficial to liberals and very self-defeating for antique Europeans. The democratic process in Liberaldom consists of a competition between rival sects of negro-worshipping Jacobins. They often hate each other like Robespierre hated Danton, but they are all striving for the same goal: a democratic, multiracial state devoid of white people. And how can there be a dialogue with a group of people who have made an a priori assumption that you, and your people, need to be eradicated so Babylon can survive and thrive?

“The pity of men is that they forget.” Only the great soldiers of the spirit see with blinding sight, while the rest of mankind see only momentary flashes of light and then forget what it was they saw. Burke saw that the Jacobin ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity meant death to Christian Europe. Time has proven Burke right. Jacobinism has spread throughout Christendom and is now the ruling ideology of Liberaldom. Once the Ancient Mariner’s shipmates gave their consent to the murder of the albatross, they also inherited the curse:

Nor dim nor red, like God’s own head,    
The glorious Sun uprist:
Then all averr’d, I had kill’d the bird
That brought the fog and mist.
‘Twas right, said they, such birds to slay,
That bring the fog and mist.

One by one the European nations gave their consent to the murder of old Europe. They justified their murders with god words such as ‘democracy,’ ‘racial equality,’ ‘evolving beyond,’ and ‘truth and justice,’ but the high-sounding words were only used to cloak a cowardly betrayal of His Europe in order to return to the Egyptian night of the colored races.

We are in the midst of a Reign of Terror. The slightest opposition to black atrocities, by word or deed, will be severely punished by the liberal Jacobins. For the white man, all seems cheerless, dark, and deadly. Like the Ancient Mariner, he is alone on a wide, wide sea. But he is only alone because he refuses to remember that he is the Christ-bearer. If he would remember, he would realize what it means to have a people and a God:

Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.
A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee. Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see the reward of the wicked. Because thou hast made the Lord, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling. For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone. Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet. Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name. – Psalm 91:5-14

In the midst of the Reign of Terror, our people and our God are with us.

The war for the extermination of the white race is a stage, quite possibly the final stage, in a war that began in the Garden of Eden. Sinful man wanted to impose his Satan-inspired, abstracted vision of existence on God. The issue has always been one of boundaries. The man connected to the heart of God looks on boundaries of race, sex, nation, and hearth as part of God’s benevolent ordering of the world; God’s boundaries are sacred boundaries meant to help men know the living God. But the man, the liberal, whose heart is a knot of vipers, looks on God’s boundaries as prison walls. He will not be confined by them. He belongs to a universal race, a universal nation, a universal sex, and a universal family. And as a consequence of his universalism, he belongs to a nondescript, impersonal, cosmic god who is no God at all.

Speaking only for myself (but I suspect others who have made the long trek back to bardic Europe might have similar feelings) I feel as one with the Ancient Mariner. I grew up in Babylon and accepted the premises of Babylon until I saw the beauty of the European Albatross that was slain. Now I stoppeth whomever I can and tell them the tale of the European Albatross, the bird of good omen that leads us to the Christ. We must believe that every heartfelt defense of the antique European people puts a spiritual dent in the liberals’ ideological wall of satanic abstractions. The old English proverb is apropos: “Brag is a good dog, but Hold-fast is better.” If we hold fast to the hearth and people of old Europe we will see, at the last trump, in the twinkling of the eye, the demise of Liberaldom.

It will be as it is in the fairy tales: when the sword of the hero plunges deep into the heart of the sorcerer or sorceress, the kingdom built upon the evil heart perishes as well. I love the scene in Walt Disney’s Sleeping Beauty, when Prince Phillip hurls the sword of truth into Maleficent’s heart (she has assumed the form of a dragon). All that remains is the sword of truth. Christian Europe is truth, Liberaldom is falsehood. Ultimately only the sword of Europe will be left when Liberaldom is ashes.

One of the most remarkable works of literature ever penned was Robert Louis Stevenson’s A Child’s Garden of Verses. The verses, taken in their entirety, give us a uniquely European view of existence. We see in Stevenson’s verses the romance of the European hearth fire. The European home is of the spirit. All love, all charity, all things rich and rare center around the European hearth fire. That is the vision of Stevenson, and it is the vision of all Europeans prior to the coming of the defilers of all things European. But that sacred world invoked by Stevenson, of our European hearth fire, where we learned to love God and man through the little things, still exists in the racial memory of the European people. We must recover our memories of our European childhood, because without that childhood we are lost souls doomed to wander alone and sightless through the darkness of Liberaldom.

It seems like an easy thing to remember our European childhood, much easier than forming a think-tank or electing a politician to office, but it is very difficult to maintain a memory of a sacred childhood when all the machinery of church and state have banned together to eradicate the memory of our sacred past. They want us to believe that our European childhood was a sickness from which we need to recover. The honor, the love, the faith, and the charity that existed in the story book land of Europe must be eviscerated so that Liberaldom can survive. But Liberaldom won’t survive; our refusal to leave our childhood memories of Europe in the dustbins of history will ensure the death of Liberaldom.

Home I return across the sea,
And go to bed with backward looks
At my dear Land of Story-books. +

Posted in Defense of the White Race, Negro worship, Older posts (pre-April 2019) | Tagged | Comments Off on The Dear Land of Storybooks

Fairy Tale Europe vs. Jacobin Liberaldom

Posted on June 16, 2012 by cwny

With the Jacobin, on the contrary, the first precept is not moral, but political; it is not his duties which he exaggerates but his rights, while his doctrine, instead of being a prick to his conscience, flatters his pride. Vast and insatiate as human pride may be, it is satisfied this time, for never before has it had so much to feed upon. 

– The French Revolution by Hippolyte Taine

__________

If you spend one hour a week viewing a news source independent of the mainstream media, or even if you just watch the mainstream media’s attempts to cover up black atrocities, it soon becomes obvious there is a one-sided war going on. The liberals and the colored barbarians are in the process of exterminating the white race. 

In every war that ever was, there was first a pamphleteering phase, a period of time in which those who desired war made their case for war. The current war, the war fought for the extermination of the white race, had its roots in the type of ‘noble savage’ literature written by men like Rousseau and Addison, and in the ‘liberty, equality, fraternity’ literature of the French Jacobins and men such as Joseph Priestly and Thomas Paine. What all the anti-white egalitarians and negro worshippers had in common was a hatred for white Christian Europeans and an exalted opinion of the greatness of their own intellects. And it was their exalted egotism that made them believe they could work for the destruction of the white race without any damage to themselves. The liberal ego-maniacs believed that they would rule over a kingdom of grateful noble savages who would allow great white intellectuals like themselves to be the power behind the throne and altar dedicated to the new, noble savage. That is how the mind of the utopian white works. The colored barbarian views life quite differently. He is at war with the white man because he is a barbarian who always plunders and murders those whom he perceives are weaker than himself. He doesn’t read books about the noble savage or pamphlets by Joseph Priestly; all he knows is that the existing white power structure will allow him to kill whites with impunity. And he does just that. 

It was inevitable, once white-hating liberals took control of the Christian churches, the schools, the government, and the major news outlets, that the constant stream of anti-European verbiage would start a war of extermination. And, also true to form, the propaganda war is continuing now that the real fighting has started, because it is always necessary to keep your troops in ideological fighting-trim. Whenever, which is seldom, a white man fights back, the propaganda wheels are set in motion in order to provide the ideological undergirding for whatever measures are taken against the offending white rebel. 

The great tragedy is that the white European cannot say, as the old Scottish clansman said, “All that can be done has been done, and all’s been done in vain.” Quite the opposite is the case with the European. All that can be done has not been done. In fact, nothing has been done. The Europeans surrendered before the enemy fired a shot. What Anthony Jacob wrote in 1965 remains true today:

As matters stand at present the white man is on the run. It is not the black man or the brown man who is on the march (they are not going anywhere, even if they think they are), it is the white man who is on the run.

Why is the white man on the run? He is on the run because he does not believe that his skin color is part of his soul. He thinks that his identity as a white perishes with the flesh, and all that perishes is of no consequence in the spiritual world. But did not our Lord bid His fearful and doubting disciples to see and feel that His flesh was part of His essential identity as the Son of Man?

Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

– Luke 24: 38-39

The God of love who was fully divine and fully human knew that mortal man needs a local habitation and a name in order to know the Divine Love. Europeans of old Europe knew this; the modern, European, ornamental Christians do not.

The human heart is the conduit for God’s grace. Conservative and liberal Christians have determined that God does not impart to human hearts the blessings of His heaven. They believe God reveals himself through abstract thought. Such a belief places the conservative and the liberal outside of the European Christian tradition. The seemingly sudden emergence of the “race issue” in every branch of the modern propositional churches is the sign of the death of Christianity in those churches. The true faith can only be passed on through the little human things that cosmic philosophers ignore. We learn to love in small units: family, race, community, nation, and then mankind. If you deprive a person of those vital units of love, then you deprive him of his soul, because without those vital human vessels of grace he cannot be connected to anything but an intellectual concept of God, which is meaningless. Satan wants an endless debate between two groups of Gnostics, the conservatives and the liberals. –CWNY

The great white flight from the unbearable burden of race is an attempt to escape from the Cross. If our body is an illusion, not to be considered part of our essential soul, then Christ’s suffering on the Cross is also an illusion; He placed His soul somewhere else while His body suffered. And we too, the liberals tell us, can avoid the Cross by imitating our Gnostic Lord and divorcing our bodies from our souls by making our minds part of the great universal mind of all mankind and worshipping the negro as the sign and symbol of the new universalism. Just as the French Jacobins made an actual flesh and blood prostitute the goddess of their new religion, so have the modern liberals made the negro the flesh and blood god of their new faithless faith. This new faith of the Europeans has made them into a faceless, soulless, dung heap devoid of humanity. 

The race war is a continuation of the French Revolution; it is an attack on God through His people. Taine’s descriptions of the French Jacobins describes our liberals and their negro henchmen:

They are joyous. They dance around each new corpse, and sing the carmagnole; they arouse the people of the quarter to amuse them, and that they may have their share of “the fine fete.” Benches are arranged for “gentlemen” and others for “ladies”; the latter, with greater curiosity, are additionally anxious to contemplate at their ease “the aristocrats” already slain; consequently, lights are required, and one is placed on the breast of each corpse.

It was the heirs of the apostles, the Europeans, who allowed us to handle and see the living God. It is the liberals of church and state who have taken Him away from us and bid us handle and see the living negro instead of the living God. By taking away our identity as a people, the liberals hope to forge a new world devoid of the old Christ and His people. 

If I say that the white nation will not ultimately succumb to multiracial liberalism, I can quite justly be accused of speaking from the heart, not the head. But the eyes of faith, which are in the heart, see much more than the eyes of the mind. There will be much suffering and travail, but in the end the few will fight the many and they will prevail, because they will have His image, which is embodied in His Europe, before their eyes. 

The end for Liberaldom will come when a remnant band of Europeans throws off the oppressive ideology of progressive intelligence. I use those words rather than ‘evolution,’ because evolution tends to be narrowly associated with Darwin, and I am talking about an ideology that encompasses Darwinian evolution, but is infinitely broader than Darwinian evolution. I define progressive intelligence as the modern notion that we have advanced beyond… Beyond what? Well, beyond everything. In the Church we have advanced beyond a simplistic concept of a personal savior who came to free us from sin and give us eternal life in His kingdom. And in church and state we have advanced beyond our “prejudices”; we no longer see black and white (unless we are discriminating against whites); we just see one universal people. I remember reading, a few months back, a liberal’s apologia for a multiracial world. The enlightened liberal informed his readers that the Greeks and the Romans, whom we all know were the most intelligent of people, were unconcerned about race. It was only those Germanic, Christian Europeans who became obsessed about race. The message of his heavy-handed editorial was quite clear. Intelligent people are not racist, only Europeans during the Christian European era were racist, because they believed in a stupid fairy tale God invented by a very stupid people. “Do you want to be stupid?,”  the progressive intelligence apologist asks us. And we are supposed to cry out, “Hell no! I’m not stupid, I’m not racist, I’m not Christian as they were. I’m a new age universalist Christian. Please, Mr. Liberal, don’t call me a racist; find me a black man and I’ll worship him!”  I wish I could remember the title of a book I once read to my children when they were young. (1) In the book a country boy (for some reason which I’ve also forgotten) goes to spend some time at the court of Queen Elizabeth. When the lad is asked to sing for the entertainment of the court, the boy sings a country ditty he learned at his mother’s knee. Despite the laughter and sneers of the men and women at court, the country boy finishes his song. One of the members of the court, who is world-weary and jaded, but not yet emptied of all humanity, applauds the boy and tells him, ‘Never be ashamed of the things you love.’ 

Our faith and the culture built around that faith is a fairy tale. The European people are currently imprisoned by evil enchanters called liberals. They keep their kingdom in order by the use of magic words such as ‘stupid’ and ‘racist.’ So long as those magic words keep Europeans from loving their people and their ancient bardic faith, the kingdom of the loathsome liberals will continue. But when a third dumb brother ventures forth because he loves old Europe for its own sake and not for anything he can get from it, the kingdom of the liberals will come crashing down. 

Fairy tale logic seems illogical, but His ways are different from the ways of the men of logic. What was Christ compared to Pilate? A mere nothing, a troublesome prisoner. But who prevailed? If history remembers Leonid Brezhnev, it will be only because he was the premier of Russia when Alexander Solzhenitsyn lived there. The European, if he is to be true to his God and his race, must always champion the spirit above the dust.  Throw all the statistical analyses about the death of the European away and view the movie, made before the demise of the story movies, The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm. George Pal, the producer, was, like Walt Disney, the real director of all his films. He loved to make fairy tale pictures like Tom Thumb and The Naked Jungle (in which Charlton Heston battles a multitude of supposedly invincible ants). In The Brothers Grimm, one brother, Jacob, labors to write scholarly works on mathematics, logic, and Greek, while the other brother, Wilhelm, goes about the country collecting and recording fairy tales that have been part of the oral tradition of his nation for centuries. Toward the end of the picture, the scholarly brother goes to Berlin to receive a reward for his scholarly work. He is accompanied by Wilhelm, who writes the “silly fairy stories.” The final judgment on the worth of the “silly stories” is given by the children of Berlin, who greet the brothers as they get off the train. Completely ignoring Jacob, the children rush to Wilhelm and implore him to, “Tell us a story, Mr. Grimm! Please tell us a story!” The antique Europeans told me a story and I wept. They are my people and I love them with a love that cannot be adequately put into words. Burke is right; if you truly love your people, you will hate those who want to destroy them. The battle is joined; the war shall no longer be a one-sided war. And, praise be God, let us never yield to Liberaldom and never lose sight of Fairy Tale Europe. + 

____________________________  

(1) I believe the book was Master Skylark by John Bennett

Posted in Christian counter-attack, Europeans and Christ, Fairy tale mode of understanding, Older posts (pre-April 2019) | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Fairy Tale Europe vs. Jacobin Liberaldom

Thy People

Posted on June 9, 2012 by cwny

To come to the point at once, I beg to say that I have not the least belief in the Noble Savage.  –Charles Dickens

__________

Shows like House Hunters are enormously popular with women, which makes sense: women have a natural born homing instinct. In House Hunters, which my wife watches unless the couple looking for a house is too offensive (an interracial or homosexual couple), the viewer follows a couple in search of a house. The realtor shows them three different houses, and we are left to guess which house the ‘house hunters’ are going to pick. The house hunters are all much wealthier than I am – they can afford quite expensive houses, but I have yet to be envious of the house hunters because in the shows I’ve seen no house hunter has bought my dream house. Have you ever seen the movie called The Uninvited (1944), starring Ray Milland and Gail Russell? That house, minus the ghosts, is my dream house, a Victorian-styled home, overlooking the ocean, in a small English village. What more could an antique European ask for? Of course, since it is my dream house, the inhabitants of the village are all white people. No house, no matter how beautiful, could be a dream house if it was in an integrated neighborhood, which is why I’ve never had any desire to live or vacation in the tropics. I prefer to be around white people for the simple reason that I am white, “good my countryman.” 

Which brings me, in a very roundabout way, to the subject of this essay. One House Hunter show recently featured a white couple seeking a home on a tropical island. They found it. And as they were walking about the island, the white female declared, “I love the natives here. They are so authentic.” There is a whole world in that statement, and it is not a good world. It took over 200 years for the hate-filled anti-European meanderings of Jean Jacques Rousseau to become the faith of the European people, but his faith is now their faith. 

The liberals’ worship of the ‘Noble Black Savage’ comes from their dissatisfaction with the European civilization. They thought the older, now defunct, European civilization was moribund because of being sexist, racist, and sexually repressive. The new order will have “authentic” non-white, godded people who will restore all people to their true natural state of innocence. It sounds very, very silly when it is stated flat-out, but there is no denying the reality, or the intensity, of the liberals’ religious faith; they believe in the ‘Noble Black Savage.’ 

The European people could not have shifted from a Christ-worshipping people to a negro-worshipping people without the support, or at least the acquiescence, of organized Christianity. So we need to ask how ostensibly Christian organizations could accept the deification of the ‘Noble Black Savage,’ when their stated belief in original sin and Jesus Christ would seem to dictate that they should reject the deification of the negro.  I think, when you look at the capitulation of organized Christianity to negro worship, it becomes apparent that the church men fell victim to the Caiaphas syndrome. Caiaphas thought it expedient that Christ should die so that his organization and his generic people connected to that organization should live. The modern Christian church men thought it expedient that faith in Christ Crucified and Christ Risen, which was embodied in the culture of the antique Europeans, should die so that their church organizations and their generic people can live. 

In my younger days I was shocked when I read an article by a seemingly devout Thomist who proclaimed the new Catholicism would be “sexier and more earthy” because of the blacks that would fill up the church pews. But that was years ago. I am no longer shocked by such blasphemies from the mouths of ornamental Christians, because such blasphemies have become the religious orthodoxy of organized Christianity. And it was inevitable that ornamental Christianity would become tied to liberalism; the ornamental Christian knows only the exterior trappings of religious worship. He does not know of the spirit within a European man that passeth outward show and seeks communion with the living God. 

The Sadducees were atheists; they didn’t believe in a God who could bring the dead to life. And the Pharisees were hypocrites; they professed to believe in a God who could raise the dead, but when their faith was put to the test they sided with Caiaphas, the Sadducee, and demanded that Christ be crucified for the good of organized Jewry. Isn’t the same process occurring today? The ornamental Christians who celebrate Christmas and Easter have joined with the liberal Sadducees in an effort to kill Christ by destroying His image in His people. For if there is no longer a European people, past or present, from whence comes a vision of the true God, who can only be known through His people? 

Let me dwell for a moment longer on the Pharisaical branch of Liberaldom, the ornamental Christians. They play a game of false humility. By ascribing all virtues to the emerging “sexy and earthy” black “Christians” while denigrating the antique, racist Europeans, the ornamental Christians cozy up to the liberal Sadducees while simultaneously making themselves out to be saints who have overcome their prejudices. Need I quote Burke again?  (1) Our prejudices are our touchstones of reality. It is sinful not to be prejudiced in favor of the older European civilization over and against the colored heathens’ anti-civilizations. If you really prefer the “authentic” ‘Noble Black Savage’ civilization to Walter Scott’s Europe, you are a debauched, inhuman monstrosity that no true European can tolerate. This brave, wonderful paradise that the Sadducees and Pharisees of Liberaldom are preparing for us is a world devoid of those three antiquated virtues – antiquated in the opinion of the liberals, that is – faith, hope, and charity. The liberals tell us that in their brave new world we need only to have faith in the negro, to have hope in science, to show kindness toward the negro and charity toward none. 

In the 1950’s we were living on Christian fumes, and by the late 1960’s there were no Christian fumes left. There was only a very lethal gas, the gas of liberalism. I’ve lived long enough to see the end of charity. What was only an “if these shadows are not altered” scenario in the early 20th century has become part of the fabric of our daily lives. The colored tribes, be they black, red, yellow, or brown, have never had Christian charity, and white liberals, who are legion, have hardened their hearts against their own people, who are being murdered and tortured at an astonishing rate by colored barbarians. And the liberals have hardened their hearts against children of all colors, who are being murdered in their mothers’ wombs. What kind of madmen are liberals who call this new world that has not charity a ‘paradise’ and condemn the Christian civilization which preceded this monstrous new world? They are the spawn of Satan. 

God touched the hearts of the Europeans through His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ. The Europeans who responded to God’s divine Son were imbued with a divine charity, which became a benevolent flame of charity that had never been seen on earth before. The magic talisman culture of the colored tribes, in which earthly power and might were the penultimate, was replaced by the burning flame of charity of the Europeans, whose heroes and heroines were those who imitated, on a deep level, Christ’s divine charity. So much mud has been thrown on the antique European culture during the liberals’ satanic reign that people have lost sight of the one stunning, glaring truth staring us in the face: There was no true charity on earth until the coming of Christ, and the flame of charity was not embodied in a people until the Europeans welcomed Christ into their hearts and their homes. When the realization of what was lost by the liberals’ replacing faith, hope, and above all charity, with science and negro worship comes to the confused European, who has not yet fully turned his soul over to Liberaldom, he will set his face against the world and he will strike home: “Between us the battle is joined henceforward.” 

In the upcoming Presidential election in this country, the rights of all sorts of colored people will be discussed ad nauseum. But one people whose rights will not be discussed are the people who have no rights: the white people. Such will always be the case in Babylon. The only race that could reestablish a link between this world and His world shall not be allowed to establish a foothold in Babylon. I liken the plight of the white race to that of a boxer who has been knocked down in the ring. The referee, who hates the downed fighter, does not send the opposing fighter to a neutral corner but instead allows the opposing fighter to stand over his opponent and knock him down every time he tries to get up. There is only one rule in Liberaldom: the white race must die. How could it be otherwise? In a world that has not charity, there is no room for the Christ-bearing people. 

The seemingly invincible coalition of forces arrayed against the antique European will disappear when the European rejects the magic talisman culture of science with its accompanying worship of the negro, and returns to the real world, the fairy tale world of old Europe. Modern heroes such as Superman, Doc Savage, and Adolph Hitler all look to a future, devoid of Christ, for the salvation of their people. But in the European fairy tale, the hero eschews magic talismans and the worship of heathen deities. Armed only with those three virtues of the Red Cross Knight – faith, hope, and charity – the European fights and defeats the multitudinous armies of darkness arrayed against him. I know fairy tale Christianity with its quests and dragon-slaying is sneered at by the liberals, but that is the first step in the return of the European hero. Can he overcome his fear of being sneered at and labeled an imbecile or worse, in modern terms, a racist? Perfect love casteth out fear. The European hero sees that his European ancestors are being denigrated and that his people yet living are in danger of being exterminated. A sword pierces his heart, a sword of charity, and he sets his face against a world of liberals and colored barbarians. Certainly we should all use what intelligence we have to further His Kingdom Come, but ultimately it is hearts of fire connected to His Sacred Heart that will bring Babylon down. + 

_______________________________________________ 

(1) “I am bold enough to confess, that we are generally men of untaught feelings; that instead of casting away all our old prejudices, we cherish them to a very considerable degree, and, to take more shame to ourselves, we cherish them because they are prejudices; and the longer they have lasted, and the more generally they have prevailed, the more we cherish them.” -Edmund Burke in Reflections on the Revolution in France

Posted in Antique Christianity, Fairy tale mode of understanding, Negro worship, Older posts (pre-April 2019) | Tagged , | Comments Off on Thy People

We Few

Posted on June 2, 2012 by cwny

No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord. – Isaiah 54: 17

__________

I saw O’Reilly’s interview with Bernie Goldberg in which Goldberg speaks of the media’s refusal to cover the beatings by “black Youths” of a white male reporter and a white female reporter. I believe the beatings took place in Virginia, but the location isn’t important since the same type of crimes are commonplace throughout the United States and Europe. Two things struck me in Goldberg’s comments. First, there has been a thirty-year blackout on the reporting of black atrocities. And crimes far worse than the beatings in Virginia are taking place on a daily basis, so why was this particular atrocity singled out for attention? It was probably because the female victim “made a fuss” and because of the fact that the white victims were reporters, which aroused the sympathy of the reporter who appeared on O’Reilly’s show. 

Second, I noted that O’Reilly and Goldberg criticized black thuggery using language that followed the strict anti-racist rules of the liberal-conservatives. Goldberg deplored the lack of outrage over the beatings, and he deplored the lack of media coverage, but he also “understood” why the liberals did not want to publicize black atrocity stories. They don’t want to publicize such stories, Goldberg said, because bigots would use the stories to further bigotry. Both O’Reilly and Goldberg tsked tsked at the mention of bigots, and both men emphasized their complete and unconditional hatred of bigotry. Who are the bigots that make the liberals’ cover up black atrocities and make O’Reilly, the Irish Catholic, and Goldberg, the Jew, speak of “bigots” as if they were the great bogeymen of the Western world? The bigots are me and thee; non-propositional white men who do not look on their racial identity as grist for the great universalist melting pot. Such white men are the only ones who care that white people are beaten, raped, and murdered by black barbarians on a daily basis throughout the formerly European countries. 

A liberal-conservative such as O’Reilly will never draw the proper conclusion from, or advocate the proper response to, black atrocities, because O’Reilly is committed to a universalist, democratic vision of God and man. O’Reilly’s generic God created a generic mankind and then turned the earth and all its inhabitants over to intelligent men like O’Reilly, to rule over a propositional mankind with democratic fairness and balance. The O’Reilly/Goldberg mention of a black atrocity is the equivalent of a Christmas card from a father you haven’t seen for twenty years. It’s better than nothing, but it’s hardly something to base your hopes on. 

Every time, which is seldom, a black atrocity story makes it to a major news outlet, I hear a chorus of “maybe this will wake white people up” from white people who would prefer not to be exterminated. But there have been enough atrocity stories reported to wake up those who were capable of being awakened. And why were white people asleep in the first place?

No, my fair cousin.
If we are mark’d to die, we are enow.
To do our country loss; and if to live,…

Report all the atrocity stories you can, but do not look for one man more. The liberals know and approve of the black atrocities. They take their orders from him who is without mercy. They are just as devoid of humanity as their black henchmen, “When our grace we have forgot.”  If we as white people do not believe we are a distinct people, created as a distinct people by a personal God, then we may as well join the universalists and tiptoe quietly through Babylon in the hope of avoiding the general slaughter of whites. But if we believe we are a people, ordained by God to carry His banner, we should respond to the liberals and their colored henchmen with fire and sword. 

Our Lord tells us, through his prophet Isaiah, that “… even to your old age I am he; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even will I carry, and will deliver you.” The Europeans’ Christian history has shown that God looks after His people. As a tiny minority amongst the world’s colored hordes, whites always have managed to rule in their own nations and in the colored nations they saw fit to colonize. But now the whites have given their colonial possessions back to the colored barbarians while simultaneously giving their own countries to the colored hordes. 

The whites’ insane, maniacal zeal to liquidate the white race can only be understood in a religious context. Off this stage we have shown that the whites’ denial of Christ has led to their affirmation of the negro and his supporting cast of colored deities. All the rituals and ceremonies that were used to support the Christ story are now used to support and propagate the story of the negro god. The church men tell us of his birth in Africa, his tragic plight as a suffering servant at the hands of the evil white people, and then his triumphant resurrection from a life in slavery to a life eternal as the god of the Western world.

There is a recurring type of maniac who appears again and again throughout the literature of the European, and he is the pharisaical Christian who justifies his anti-Christian cruelty by citing his own cruel man-made image of God. Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter and François Mauriac’s The Woman of the Pharisees are works that offer us two of the best depictions of the religious fanatic who presents his anti-Christian cruelty as the true faith. The Christian authors who condemn, through their works, the Christian Pharisees, perform a great service because they help us to keep our faith pure and undefiled by Phariseeism. How ironic then that the modern Pharisees, the liberals and their halfway-house Christian allies, have instituted a cruel Pharisaical religion that makes all the Torquemadas and witch-burning Puritans look like mild peace-loving lambs. For what could be crueler than a god who demands the extermination of an entire race of people in order to satisfy his bloodlust? If this negro god, whom the liberals have substituted for Christ, is allowed to continue in his position as the god of the Europeans, surely goodness and mercy will disappear from the face of the earth. And let’s be blunt: goodness and mercy have disappeared where the black god reigns. The Kansas City, Missouri incident, in which “black youths” set a 13 year-old white boy on fire as they screamed, “This is what you deserve, white boy!,” is a typical religious ritual of the modern Babylonian state. Only a heretic, a blasphemer, would question the black man’s right to kill the white infidels. Are there any whites left who are willing to dissent from liberal orthodoxy and be called heretics? We shall see. My hope is that God will raise up a few who will eventually defeat the many. He has done so in the past, so I have faith that He will do so in the present. 

I once, while traveling through Britain in my early twenties, was given a ride by an Englishman who had fought in the Battle of Britain as an R.A.F. pilot. If you recall your English history, you’ll remember that those British pilots were the men of whom Churchill spoke when he said, “Never in the course of human events was so much owed by so many to so few.” In the course of a ride of approximately one hour and a subsequent two-hour stop at a local pub, I got to talk quite extensively with that former R.A.F. pilot. I particularly remember his response to my question, “How did you feel before the battle?” He told me that he was quite naturally afraid of dying, but that was not his main fear. He was mainly afraid of “letting down his people.” Ah, to have a people. Everything we are, and everything we do of value, comes from our consciousness of being connected to a particular people. Men who believe in universals will fight, but they will fight ignobly against their own people. It is only the man who has a genuine people of his own race and his own God that will fight nobly against impossible odds. Kipling said it best: “The people, Lord, thy people are good enough for me!” 

The racial consciousness by which a man comes to terms with his own humanity and through which the white man comes to know God has been carefully bred out of the European by a system of rewards and punishments fit for dogs, not men. Whenever a white man behaves in a manner that suggests he thinks there is a distinct group of people called Europeans, who are worth preserving as a distinct people, separate from the colored savages, that white man is punished. Whenever a white man supports the extermination of the white race, that white man is rewarded, in the short term of course; in the long run the trained white spaniel will also be eliminated, but he doesn’t see the long run, having been reduced to a groveling, inhuman creature, devoid of vision and humanity. 

In Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice, which is no longer allowed to be read in our schools, Shakespeare lays bare the soul of the Jew. Shylock hates Antonio for two reasons: because Antonio is a professed Christian, and because Antonio practices Christianity.

I hate him for he is a Christian.
But more for that in low simplicity
He lends out money gratis, and brings down
The rate of usance here with us in Venice.
If I can catch him once upon the hip,
I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him.

And of course Shylock gets his chance for revenge. Wouldn’t a Christian do the same thing if he had the Jew on the hip?

If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will
resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian,
what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian
wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by
Christian example? Why, revenge. The villany you
teach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but I
will better the instruction.

But there is a difference between the Christian and the Jew. Would that the modern Christians who are Christians on the outside and Jews on the inside still knew of that difference. What does the Duke of Venice do when he has Shylock on the hip? Does he want his pound of flesh? No, he forgives as only a European who has the true faith, the faith bred in the bone, can forgive.

That thou shalt see the difference of our spirit,
I pardon thee thy life before thou ask it.

We shall be governed either by the spirit that governed the Duke of Venice or by the spirit that governed Shylock. We are currently being governed by the satanic spirit that motivated Shylock, because Christians have turned Jewish. The European liberal has a Jewish heart; he hates Christianity and those who seek to practice Christianity. This is why an antique European cannot just focus on the external Jews, some of whom are more Christian in ethos than the European liberals; he must direct his attack against all those who have Jewish hearts, be they Jew or European.

In the latter half of the 20th century, Satan fused the hate-filled faith of the faithless Jew with the worship of the negro. Now Satan has the antique European on the hip. Will he extend mercy? Of course not. He is our ancient foe. 

The Jews, the Jewish-hearted liberals, and the colored barbarian hordes are all arrayed against the antique Europeans, who are numerically insignificant compared to Satan’s legions. Should we tremble before such odds? No, we should not. And we shall not. It matters not at all whether we are 12 percent of the world’s population, 6 percent of the world’s population, or ½ of a percent of the world’s population. If we are Europeans, true to our blood and to our God, we are enough to destroy the liberals and their colored gods. The Christ-centered European is unconquerable; so it always has been and so it always shall be. We are the people of the Word, who have seen the risen Lord, and so long as we are faithful to Him, no force on earth shall prevail against us. +

Posted in Christian counter-attack, Negro worship, Older posts (pre-April 2019), Restoration of European civilization | Tagged | Comments Off on We Few

In the Sight of God

Posted on May 26, 2012 by cwny

So may the outward shows be least themselves; The world is still deceiv’d with ornament. – Merchant of Venice

__________

All European revolutions and counter-revolutions are started and sustained by people who think that all of their actions on behalf of the cause are done in the sight of God. For good or ill there would be no revolutions or counter-revolutions without the participants’ belief that whether they failed or succeeded their God saw and approved of their efforts. Implicit in the British soldier’s heroic defense of Rorke’s drift was the belief that in fighting for Britain and against the Zulus he was fighting for Christian civilization in the sight of his God. Likewise the communist: he fights for the future reign of the people, and he believes that those people of the future will see what he has done and approve of it. And finally we have the modern liberal with his triune God: The Father–The Intellect Detached from the Heart, The Son–The Negro, The Unholy Ghost–Science. The liberal wants his fellow detached intellects to see his efforts on behalf of the Negro, and he wants to be applauded for his efforts. And he wants the divine Son of the divinely detached intellect, the negro, to see his efforts on behalf of the negro and to give his blessing to the devotee. Then comes the last part of the unholy satanic sideshow: the liberals seek a comforter, someone or something that can sustain them in their battle against the recalcitrant Europeans. Call it Science Descending, it envelops the liberal in an anesthetizing gas which renders him incapable of any heartfelt feeling about any aspect of existence. Through the unholy ghost called science, the liberal achieves oblivion; he is sans feeling, sans thinking, sans everything but a desire to serve his triune god. 

It’s been said of liberals that they are politically correct even in restrooms.  When Big Brother is not watching them they still censor themselves; no racist comments ever slip from their lips. That is because they always have the image of their god before their eyes. Wherever they are, they feel they are in the sight of their god. 

Theologians have written volumes about the distinctions between the visible church and the mystical church. In my view the visible church consists of those outward ceremonies and professions of faith that can be seen by the naked eye and heard by the ear. For instance, I can see John Doe walking to church, and I can hear him reciting the creed in church; those are visible signs that John Doe is a member of that particular church. The mystical church is something different. It consists of those silken threads of sympathy and love by which we are bound to our God, but which are not visible to the naked eye. 

Membership in the two churches is not mutually exclusive nor is it necessarily mutually inclusive. A man can profess belief in Jesus Christ while maintaining a mystical faith in the negro, and a man might eschew the outward ceremonies of religious worship and yet maintain a mystical connection to the living God. Charity demands that we assume a man believes what he professes, until he proves, by revealing where his treasure lies, that his true faith is other than his professed faith. 

It is my contention that the members of visible, organized Christianity (with a few exceptions, which is always the case) have severed their mystical ties with Christ and become members of the mystical church of the liberals. This is painfully evident when we see where their treasure, and therefore their heart, lies. Their hearts lie with the unrepentant Jews, the unsexed women called feminists, and above all else, with the negroes. The liberals who are not members of the visible Christian church nor the mystical Christian church are easier to detect than the professed Christians who are mystical liberals. But the antique European, who still has a mystical connection to his God, must not be deceived by the outward professions of faith of the halfway-house Christians. They are our enemies. It’s very unpleasant to think that no one has our backs – on the contrary, those who profess Christ will stab us in the back in the name of Christ — but that is the reality, and our Lord told us it would be so:

They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God good service.

And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

Those words should resonate with us. Don’t the halfway house Christians seek to kill the old “racist” Christianity and the people who still adhere to it? And haven’t the halfway-house Christians severed their mystical ties to Christ by cutting themselves off from their own people, past and present? The mystical ties of honor and blood that bind us to our kith and kin also bind us to God. When we have only the outward visible signs of faith but lack the inner, invisible current of faith, we have not faith. 

The antique European, in my judgment, is the hero of the modern drama. And the hero must be willing to fight for the good. That goes without saying. But the hero must also be able to see the good and discern evil. That is much more difficult than the actual fighting. In Tennyson’s Idylls of the King, Arthur watches his knights defeat the heathen knights while violating every law of chivalry. Only Arthur, who can discern good from evil, sees the victory as a Pyrrhic victory:

So all the ways were safe from shore to shore,
But in the heart of Arthur pain was lord.

What enables a man to see past the ornaments of life to that which is within? The Roman Catholic traditionalists forsook their ancient people for a formulaic replica of the past, and the Biblical Christians, “with sober brow,” made a whited sepulcher of their new found interpretation of Scripture that allows them to be outwardly Christian while inwardly Jewish. Such a falling off comes when Europeans break with their past by seeing only the dry parchments and church rituals of the past as worth preserving. Those ornaments are only symbols of the spirit and blood faith of the antique Europeans. 

The mystical church, which is the animating spirit of Europe, is to be found in the people of old Europe. Look at their spiritual history as told by the chroniclers, the poets. In Shakespeare, the archetypal European, we see a world where outward forms count for nothing. It is the inner life that matters.

So may the outward shows be least themselves:
The world is still deceived with ornament.
In law, what plea so tainted and corrupt,
But, being seasoned with a gracious voice,
Obscures the show of evil? In religion,
What damned error, but some sober brow
Will bless it and approve it with a text,
Hiding the grossness with fair ornament?
There is no vice so simple but assumes
Some mark of virtue on his outward parts:

— The Merchant of Venice

Le Fanu adds his voice to Shakespeare’s:

This world is a parable – the habitation of symbols – the phantoms of spiritual things immortal shown in material shape.

That essential wisdom of the European people, which was the fruit of centuries of spiritual struggle, that the material world is but a symbol of the spiritual world, has been pushed aside in modern Europe. The liberals and the ornamental Christians side with the people of color because they share the same “this world only” religion. They are united in a celebration of outward forms without spiritual substance. 

Self-styled, hardheaded “realists” get very angry when you talk about the things of the spirit. They feel talking about such things leads to a “pie in the sky” attitude that ensures defeat because those who see God in the heavens are defeatists who look for victory in the next world while surrendering to the enemy in this world. But if such was the case why did the antique Europeans, the members of the mystical Christian church, conquer the world? It is a paradox, but it is reality; those Europeans who worshipped the God who was not of this world, conquered the world in His name.  

In every introductory course in philosophy we are told that arguments from history are not valid arguments, because such arguments are subjective; a man can foist his own personal prejudices on the argument from history. It is only by using the objective method, the Socratic dialogue, the philosophers tell us, eschewing all prejudices acquired from messy, anecdotal histories, that a man can arrive at the truth. I’d like to say that with all due respect I differ with the philosophers. But I can’t say that, because I don’t have any respect for the philosophers. Just as literary critics have no understanding of existence because they approach a work of literature with the detached minds of scientists intent on finding the truth by dissection, so the philosophers destroy thought by detaching it from the human heart. And because of that fateful divorce the philosophers, the men who make their living as thinkers, are always wrong about everything. The Badger and Mole know that Toad will return, because they argue from History, not Philosophy.

“They argued from history,” continued the Rat. “They said that no criminal laws had ever been known to prevail against cheek and plausibility such as yours, combined with the power of a long purse. So they arranged to move their things into Toad Hall, and sleep there, and keep it aired, and have it all ready for you when you turned up.”


What do we know of anything if we don’t argue from history? Do we even know if we exist at all if we don’t know our family history? How did the people whose God entered history come to the conclusion that all arguments from history were invalid? I do argue from history. All we know of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, comes from the history of the European people. Without that history we are lost souls, sitting in a sterile classroom, trying to make sense out of an a priori assumption about the meaninglessness of existence. Or we might be sitting in a church seminar trying to make sense of church documents or Holy Scriptures, but without a blood connection to our European ancestors the church documents and the Holy Scriptures are as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. 

The European alone possesses the moral vision to reject gaudy gold and pale silver in preference for the meager leaden casket, whose plainness cloaks its magnificence. The leaden casket is for those who belong to the mystical church. That Church will endure till the end of time, because it is eternally linked to the European and to Him. +

Posted in Christianity: Neither a Theory Nor a Philosophy, Europeans and Christ, Faithful hearts, Older posts (pre-April 2019), Poets vs philosophers, Scientism | Tagged , | Comments Off on In the Sight of God

The Last Rally

Posted on May 19, 2012 by cwny

Their bosom is a rock of granite, on which falsehood has long since built her strong hold. Poor truth has had a hard work of it with her pickaxe. Nothing but gunpowder will do.  – Edmund Burke

__________

In the 1970’s and through the 1980’s and 1990’s you heard the term “institutionalized racism” on a regular basis. Some white liberals had evolved beyond racism as individuals, but all our institutions were racist. So we were told. Now we still hear the cries of ‘racist,’ but we don’t hear as much about institutional racism because all our institutions are permeated by blacks. And the institutions that do not have blacks are desperately seeking blacks because no one wants to be accused of perpetuating institutional racism.  Such an aberration from the norms of civilized behavior would be unconscionable. 

Of course there was no institutional racism against blacks during the period that the term became fashionable. The whites should have institutionalized racism, but unfortunately they did not. Instead they institutionalized the worship of the negro. Now white people are divided into two camps: whites who maniacally push for the annihilation of white people because they feel driven by a satanic urge to destroy the Christ-bearing race, and those white people, the grazers, who automatically do whatever hurts the white race because they have been trained from birth to hate the white race. The latter are the real victims of institutionalized racism. 

Let’s take John McCain as an exemplar of the satanic, white-hating white. He recently crawled out of his subterranean dwelling, which is connected to hell, in order to encourage the United States to bomb Syria into oblivion. But lest you think that John McCain is not a humanitarian, I should point out that he is also working tirelessly to ban the mixed martial arts fighting that has become so popular. McCain claims such fighting is much too brutal. Hmm. The sport is quite brutal, but it is not as brutal, in terms of life-threatening concussions, as boxing or football. And it is not nearly as brutal, or as final, as dropping a bomb on someone’s head. So judging from McCain’s track record as a staunch supporter of mass executions and the all-American sports of boxing and football, I don’t think we can believe in his humanitarian concern about the excessive violence and brutality found in the sport of mixed martial arts. I would suggest another reason for McCain’s fake humanitarianism. The fighters in the sport of mixed martial arts are predominantly white, while the participants in boxing and football are predominantly black. McCain would never think of trying to ban football or boxing because of the violent nature of those sports, for the reason that he would be accused of trying to keep poor black boys from making a living. But who will complain if he tries to prevent poor white boys from fighting their way out of poverty? Is the young white male supposed to give up everything that makes him feel like a man? (1)

Obviously, the McCains of Liberaldom are legion. They might even be the sons and daughters of satanic angels who mixed their blood with mortal women, but more likely they are the end result of years of liberal rule in the lands that used to be called Christendom. 

The second type of white is the white who supports every white-hating movement but does not even realize he is anti-white. This type of individual has had the spiritual equivalent of a blood transfusion and a bone marrow transplant. The faith of antique Europe that was bred in the blood and bone of his ancestors has been replaced by a new white-hating faith that is bred in the blood and bone of every modern European. 

The late Ronald Reagan can serve as a perfect example of the white man who aids and abets the demonically possessed white-hating liberals, such as John McCain, without even considering himself a white hater. He was raised on the universalist heresy of one race, one culture, and he would be more likely to question his parentage than the universalist doctrine that he absorbed into his blood. When Reagan became President he signed a liberal “amnesty” bill, continued the anti-white immigration policies of his predecessors, and despite his professed opposition to abortion did nothing to reverse the abortion tide. Reagan was a decent sort; he was not a John McCain. But in the absence of a road-to-Damascus conversion from bred-in-the-bone liberalism to bred-in-the-bone European Christianity, the “decent” conservative will always go the way of the liberals. Under better direction his innate decency would have pointed him in another direction and toward another star, but because he does not receive better direction he is guided in all things by the worst, who are full of passionate intensity. 

The mad-dog liberal such as John McCain is a state executioner who loves his job. He takes special pleasure in destroying all enemies of the state, foreign or domestic. The conservative-liberal such as Ronald Reagan is not motivated by hate when he works to destroy the white race. He is a soldier defending his state against its enemies, and all those who oppose multiracialism and multiculturalism are enemies of the state. In the end, whether the antique European is killed by the mad-dog liberal who enjoys executing white people, or whether he is killed by the Reagan-type conservative who will kill without any deep animosity toward white people, the antique European is still dead. 

I once read a memoir of an English liberal who fought with the communists during the Spanish civil war. What he saw in Spain turned him into an ardent anti-communist. In subsequent years he became a Christian pastor.  In reading the memoir I was struck by the fact that the former liberal’s belief in the divinity of Christ was preceded by his new-found belief in original sin acquired while witnessing the events of the Spanish Civil War. It is often the case that, when a man comes to a belief in one of the doctrines that stems from the Christian faith, he then precedes to a belief in the Christian faith in its entirety. And the reverse is also the case. When once a man starts to disbelieve in one of the major tenets of the Christian faith, he is on the road to a rejection of all the tenets of the Christian faith. 

Before the European liberal rejected the divinity of Christ, he rejected the doctrine of original sin, aided by theologians such as Pelagius and Semipelagians like Thomas Aquinas. If the notion of original sin is absurd, then the notion of a God-Man who comes to redeem us from sin becomes absurd. But if there is such a thing as original sin, and if there really was a Redeemer, then the liberal’s denials cannot change the reality of original sin and the reality of the Man of Sorrows. The liberal will still have a need to assuage his feelings of guilt and to find some object of worship. Enter the negro, stage left. The liberals’ guilt is taken away by their service to the negro, and their need to worship is fulfilled by their adoration of the negro. But negro-worshipping Liberaldom can only survive by maintaining a wall of superficiality around the kingdom. For once a man looks behind the curtain of Liberaldom, he sees a fat, bloated negro being sustained by a legion of emaciated white scientists and academics. What can such a coalition give white people? They can give them the negro to worship and science to anesthetize them. And they need to be anesthetized because neither the negro or the scientist can raise the dead. The paths of glory lead but to the grave, but if those earthly paths of glory follow His sacred paths, they will lead a man to salvation beyond the grave. Where do the paths of liberal superficiality lead? To the grave and damnation. 

It seems, looking at the heavily guarded and heavily fortified walls of superficiality that surround Liberaldom, that there is nothing the antique European can do to defeat liberalism. The liberal will fight to the death to protect his god, and the grazers will fight alongside the liberal, completely oblivious to the fact that they once, before their spiritual blood transfusion and bone marrow transplant, had a faith bred in the blood and the bone. 

Then again we are the people who know not seems. I once went through a military history museum in which there were numerous suits of armor displayed that had been worn by Christian knights many centuries ago. My first thought was that the suits of armor seemed much too small. The diminutive size of the combatants, as indicated by the size of their armor, did not seem to fit with the deeds depicted in the chronicles of that era. But then on second thought I realized that the poets who depicted the heroes of yore as giants were right. They were giants of the spirit. And when we compare those giants on a spiritual scale with the modern European, we can see what pygmies of spirit the modern Europeans are in relation to the antique Europeans. The walls guarding the kingdom of liberal superficiality would be as nothing to the giants of old Europe. “It would be the work of one day to storm the castle, rout the liberals, and burn all of Liberaldom to ashes.” That is the voice of our ancestors. For us, the faithful few, the work will be more than the work of a day, because we are not yet the men they were. But it is something – no, it is more than something, it is everything – to know that we have a people to love and a hearth fire to defend. That will make all the difference when going into battle against the liberals. A deep and abiding love for one’s own people and their God will always prevail over a superficial faith in a false god. The intellect divorced from the heart is the father in the liberal trinity; the negro is the son; and science is the unholy ghost. In our hearts, in the depths, we know their day is ending, and His day, which is ancient and yet so new, is dawning. 

The distinction must be made between a society of pagan idolaters and, to use a phrase of Richard Hooker, “God’s own ancient elect people.” We are not of these modern Babylonians. We belong to Christian Europe, and we are strong to the extent that we hold to our distinctive faith in our own ancient elect people and their God. + 

___________ 

(1) Mixed martial arts is not a sport that edifies. You would not say of it what was said of the type of sport depicted in Tom Brown’s Schooldays: “The Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton.” But still I don’t like to see poor, non-technocratic whites deprived of a chance to become providers by “the work of their hands,” because a satanic liberal like John McCain wants to see every single white male driven from the face of the earth.

Posted in Bred in the Bone, Liberalism, Older posts (pre-April 2019), White Genocide | Comments Off on The Last Rally

Be Ye Steadfast and Unmovable

Posted on May 12, 2012 by cwny

“I can live no longer by thinking.”

– Orlando, As You Like It

_____

“Let us leave the liberals and the neo-pagans at the stream of unreality and look at the reality. The white man’s racial anemia has one source: his lack of faith in Jesus Christ. Any white Christian who thinks that he can cure white racial anemia through alliances with pragmatic, ‘Let’s leave religion out of the picture’ conservatives, or openly ‘hostile to Christianity’ neo-pagans is deluded. The only cure for a disease that stems from a lack of faith is faith. But of course neither I nor any other Christian European can make the modern European believe, as his ancestors once believed, in the God-Man, Jesus Christ. The Christian faith is not a suit of armor that can be used for the utilitarian purpose of fending off the barbarians and then discarded when the barbarian threat is gone. It is all or nothing. Either we believe in the white Christ and fight for His Europe, or we perish.” – CWNY

___________

Much has been written about the horrors of the 20th century phenomenon of total war, war on a scale that prior to the 20th century had only been depicted in nightmarish works of science fiction. And much has been written about the gulags and concentration camps of the 20th century, but there has been very little written about the revolt of the white intelligentsia against their own people. There has been very little written about that revolt because the intelligentsia are the people who do the writing about wars, concentration camps, and revolts. Why should they blow the whistle on themselves? They never do. 

When I speak of the intelligentsia I do not necessarily refer to people with intelligence. I refer to writers, clergy, university professors, and journalists, men who make their living, or aspire to make their living, by the use of their intellects. This highly influential group of individuals have, for the past 60 years at least, been consistently hostile to the people of the white race. Whatever is good for the white race has been opposed by the white intelligentsia, and whatever is bad for the white race has been supported by the white intelligentsia. 

We do not observe this strange phenomenon within the intelligentsia of the various colored tribes. The intellectuals of the colored tribes all support the aspirations of their own people. And of course it is liberalism that has made the white intelligentsia turn against the white race. But from whence comes liberalism? And why is it a whites-only ideology? Liberalism stems from bastardized Christianity, and only the white race, with surprisingly few exceptions, has a history of adherence to the major tenets of the Christian faith. It’s ironic that a people who once espoused a belief in the God-Man should end up believing that the black man is god. 

There is no white Christian opposition to the white intelligentsia’s belief that the extermination of the white race, through miscegenation and tribal murder, is mandated by the nebulous evolutionary god of the liberals. All true Christians, as defined by the white intelligentsia, desire the extermination of the white race. This is the unquestioned doctrine of the white elite, be they professed liberals or professed Christians. The only segment of the white intelligentsia that does not believe that the white race should be exterminated is the numerically small group of men called the neo-pagans. It’s tempting, if one is a white Christian who does not believe that Christ mandated the extermination of the white race, to hitch one’s wagon to the neo-pagans’ cart. But they represent a more dangerous enemy than the liberals because their heretical beliefs are closer to the truth, and therefore harder to detect, than the liberals’ beliefs. 

The liberal thinks the white man, prior to the 20th century, was guilty of forcing a false Christianity on mankind. “Christ was not the Son of God; he was a precursor of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., who lived and died to make all men into wine-and-cheese-party liberals; and the pre-20th century Europeans had perverted Christ’s teachings and made Him into a hideous god who supported racism and sexism.” Such is the credo of the liberals. The neo-pagan agrees with the liberal on the issue of the pre-20th century Europeans. “Yes, they did create a false Christianity. Christ really was just who the liberals say he was; a regular human being, not a god, who was a forerunner of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.” But then the liberal and the neo-pagan diverge. The neo-pagan admires the creativity of the older Europeans. He likes the “racist” Christianity of the older Europeans, albeit he thinks they were rather stupid to believe in the Christian fairy-tale. The older neo-pagans, most of whom have left this world, talk about “our Greco-Roman, Saxon, Celtic, Christian heritage” so as not to offend some older Christians who might join with the neo-pagans against the Jewish cabal and the colored hordes, but at bottom the neo-pagan creed is a Nietzschean creed of despair. “Christ be not Risen; look to the coming of the white Übermensch.” 

Obviously, the new breed neo-pagans are not Nietzscheans – most haven’t even heard of him. But they are like him in that they look to the future, to the technological white-man with a superior intellect who sees life outside the old perimeters of good and evil. And because they, like the liberal, look to a future where the older European Christianity is of no consequence the neo-pagan has become, over the last thirty years, more and more conciliatory toward the liberals. In fact the criticism of liberals has virtually stopped in the pagan-nationalist publications. They criticize the Jews, but not the liberals. The worst they ever do is reprimand the liberals for not seeing that “we really don’t hate blacks; we are really non-violent, and we really and truly respect all cultures and all people.” 

It is liberalism not Judaism that has destroyed the white man. The neo-pagans don’t seem to realize that the Europeans, when they were believing Christians, took measures to protect themselves from the Jews. Now, having lost their faith, the Europeans are at the mercy of the Jews. But the neo-pagans cannot supply the European people with the only weapon, faith in Christ, that has proven effective against the Jews. Great passions determine the course of history; without the passion supplied by Christ’s passion the European can never resist Judaism or multicultural liberalism. 

I’ve noticed in some thirty years of reading the nationalist publications that despite their great differences with the liberals on a host of issues, they are in agreement with them on the one essential issue. Both groups think that the findings of modern science necessitate a revision of the Christ story. The liberal makes Him a superior human being, a forerunner of their modern heroes, and the neo-pagan makes Him a creation of the European’s mind. On the great issue of the 20th and 21st century, faith vs. science, both the liberal and the neo-pagan have sided with science. But the liberal has been infinitely more successful than the neo-pagan. Why? Because men need an object to worship; science alone is an insufficient god for the great mass of humanity. The liberal has given his adherents the negro to worship while the neo-pagan can only offer his sterile condemnation of unfair and unjust discrimination against white people. But the liberal will not listen to such condemnations. How can mere mortals criticize gods? And why should a people who have rejected Christ for the negro concern themselves with fairness and justice? While the liberal looks to a future of science and the negro, the neo-pagan looks only to a future of science and his white genes. The liberal will always win that contest. 

What is needed, if someone could be found who believed it to be true, is a defense of the white man that takes into account man’s spiritual nature as well as his physical nature. We have seen enough of I.Q. tests and standardized intelligence tests cited to prove the superior intelligence (and by doing so demonstrating his right to live) of the white man. What we do not see cited is the European’s witness to the truth. He was the poet laureate who took the airy nothing of the Greek philosophers and scientists and gave it a local habitation and a name: Jesus of Nazareth. 

The European Christ-bearer has become a Pontius Pilate, looking Christ right in the face and asking Him, “What is truth?” Is truth to be found in the collective face of the black race? Is it to be found in our white genes? Faith in a man who purported to be both man and God is difficult, but doesn’t the history of our own people point to the truth of the Christ story? The modern church men have retained the name Christian, but they have not retained the Christian faith. When they severed their ties to their people and their people’s God, in the name of a purified, intellectual Christianity, they turned from the living God of charity and mercy to an abstract generic black god of merciless cruelty. 

Throughout the history of organized European Christianity it has always been the clergy, the intellectual elite, who initiated the great heresies. And the European people, thinking with their hearts, always served as a counterpoise to the intellectuals. I have often wondered if the Europeans’ instinct to preserve their faith when it was attacked by the intellectuals was an instinct bred in the blood and bone of the Europeans long before the coming of Christ. Could it be that from the beginning of time God was preparing them to be the Christ-bearers? Why were they so intensely monogamous even in their pagan days? And why did the Europeans never practice cannibalism as the colored tribes did and still do? The Europeans were always the poetic race. The things of the spirit were first with them. When they heard the word of God they wept and believed because they had an instinct for the true God. And through the Christian centuries of Europe, it has always been the European people, not the scholarly elites, who have kept the faith, because the scholarly elites want to create an inhuman abstract god while the European people want a God that they can worship in spirit and in truth. 

Why the breakdown in the 20th century? Why did the Europeans become a non-people? It was because Satan extended the franchise. Intellectual stupidity became democratized. “You are all intellectuals now,” Satan declared, “You are all too smart to believe in a fairy tale. Look to science, look to the negro – there is your true home and your true god.” 

I’ve always considered Herman Melville’s character Bulkington, who appears briefly in Moby Dick, as the true European:

When on that shivering winter’s night, the Pequod thrust her vindictive bows into the cold malicious waves, who should I see standing at her helm but Bulkington! I looked with sympathetic awe and fearfulness upon the man, who in mid-winter just landed from a four years’ dangerous voyage, could so unrestingly push off again for still another tempestuous term. The land seemed scorching to his feet. Wonderfullest things are ever the unmentionable; deep memories yield no epitaphs; this six-inch chapter is the stoneless grave of Bulkington. Let me only say that it fared with him as with the storm-tossed ship, that miserably drives along the leeward land. The port would fain give succor; the port is pitiful; in the port is safety, comfort, hearthstone, supper, warm blankets, friends, all that’s kind to our mortalities. But in that gale, the port, the land, is that ship’s direst jeopardy; she must fly all hospitality; one touch of land, though it but graze the keel, would make her shudder through and through. With all her might she crowds all sail off shore; in so doing, fights ‘gainst the very winds that fain would blow her homeward; seeks all the lashed sea’s landlessness again; for refuge’s sake forlornly rushing into peril; her only friend her bitterest foe!…

But as in landlessness alone resides highest truth, shoreless, indefinite as God–so, better is it to perish in that howling infinite, than be ingloriously dashed upon the lee, even if that were safety! For worm-like, then, oh! who would craven crawl to land! Terrors of the terrible! is all this agony so vain? Take heart, take heart, O Bulkington! Bear thee grimly, demigod! Up from the spray of thy ocean-perishing–straight up, leaps thy apotheosis!

The material world that the European Bulkington refused to have anything to do with has so encroached on the spiritual world that the Europeans have ceased to be European. It was and is their task to champion the things of the spirit and to hold Christ’s banner aloft as a sign of contradiction to the colored people wallowing in the slime pits of heathenism. If the European will not do what he was born to do, champion Christ, no one will. The colored tribesmen will not pick up the European banner; they will simply go on being heathens while absorbing the white man into their formless, inanimate mass of diversity. The coward always defends the wall of the fort where the enemy is certain not to attack, and he runs from the wall where the battle rageth. The modern halfway-house Christians who never talk about defending the white race, unless they talk about the immorality of defending the white race, are not Christians. They are in the transition stage from Christian to liberal. Soon they will get their pilot’s license and fly with the liberals into diversity land. 

The rationalist solutions to life seem, on the surface, to be the best solutions: “All races are the same…. Skin color is just pigmentation… We know God through the rational computations of our brains…” But what if the current of our life does not fit into rational channels? What if our life is an ocean of passions and visions? When Theseus, the rational Athenian, comes upon the young lovers in the enchanted woods he expresses his distrust of their irrational path to the truth:

I never may believe
These antick fables nor these fairy toys.
Lovers and madmen have such seething brains,
Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend
More than cool reason ever comprehends.

The passion that comprehends more than cool reason can lead a man over a cliff or it can bring him to the gates of heaven. But passion cannot be taken out of the mortal’s life, because a man’s passion is his life. Without it he can never understand Christ’s passion. Note Hippolyta’s rejoinder to Theseus:

But all the story of the night told over,
And all their minds transfigured so together,
More witnesseth than fancy’s images,
And grows to something of great constancy;
But, howsoever, strange and admirable.

Yes, the Europeans’ story told over is the story of their night in the enchanted woods with Christ, the King of Fairyland. The European believed in the “antick fable” of Christ the Lord, and that passionate, heartfelt belief set him apart from the colored races. Wherever a passion for the antick fable endures there is Europe. Kipling expressed the sentiment so well: “So long as the blood endures.” That is all that matters. Numbers are of no significance. So long as a few Europeans stay true to their blood, His Europe will endure. +

Posted in Antique Christianity, Europe as the Christ-Bearer, Older posts (pre-April 2019) | Tagged , | Comments Off on Be Ye Steadfast and Unmovable

The Distinctive Faith of the Europeans

Posted on May 5, 2012 by cwny

Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified. And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. – Acts 19: 13-29

__________

I first read Alfred Lilienthal’s book What Price Israel (1953) when I was an undergraduate. My Jewish philosophy professor, who believed in none of the tenets of the Jewish faith, but was a passionate supporter of Israel, kept talking about Lilienthal as if he were the devil himself. Since I didn’t particularly like my philosophy professor, I was interested in the man he hated. 

Lilienthal’s book hardly seemed that controversial to me. But at that time I was completely naïve about the Zionist hatred for any man, Christian or Jew, who insisted that Israel did not have the right to claim the allegiance of any citizen other than her own. No American Jew, Lilienthal insisted, owed Israel any loyalty whatsoever. Lilienthal was also very critical of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which was a blatant betrayal of the Palestine people in favor of the militant Zionists. I found it strange that my militant atheist professor was so concerned about Israel, while Lilienthal, a believing Jew, wanted nothing to do with Israel. I now realize that atheist Jews are much more likely than Orthodox Jews to become militant Zionists. Having lost their faith they make a new god out of the state of Israel. Not that most believing Jews support Lilienthal’s position – far from it, the majority are rabid supporters of Israel – but the few dissenters in the Jewish ranks are generally of Lilienthal’s persuasion. 

Nothing has changed in the Jewish community since Lilienthal’s book. The Jews, secular and religious, still demand that the Jews of all nations, and the gentiles of all European nations, should support the nation state of Israel. And they still demand that the native Palestinians should be exterminated like vermin. 

What has changed since 1953 is the attitude toward Israel in the white Christian community, or, to be more accurate, in the white, halfway-house Christian community. Those “Christians” were always supportive of Israel from its very inception, but as Christianity became less and less of a religion and more of a feel-good philosophy the halfway-house Christians began to look on support for the nation state of Israel as one of the major tenets, after negro worship, of the Christian faith. It takes centuries for a people to divest themselves of an old faith and act in complete conformity to their new faith, which is why halfway-house Christians still invoke Christ even after they have ceased to believe in Him. But implicit in the halfway-house Christians’ zealous, fanatical support for the nation state of Israel, despite the Israelis’ anti-Christian behavior toward the rest of the world, is the belief that Christ be not risen. Because if He be not risen, the Jews are right; we must continue to wait for another. Is it the black man? Yes, for now, but once the European has forsaken Christ there is no telling where he will go a-whoring next or for how long.

Of course it is only the post-Christian white who supports Israel with fanatical intensity. The people of color have no particular love for Israel. Why is this? Surely it has become obvious. A man needs to belong to a particular race of people; God made him that way, so he could learn to love God through His people. You can’t change a man’s need by denying it exists. We cannot love or belong to an idea of a family or an idea of a community or an idea of a nation. We must belong to an actual family, an actual community, and an actual nation. Going backward in time, I vividly remember a conversation with a female acquaintance who, judging from her attention to her religious duties, seemed to be a devout Roman Catholic. One day she casually remarked to me that she was planning to become a Jew. When I asked her why, she replied, “I like their sense of community. They really stick together, and they believe in God just like we do.” That woman was not an isolated case. Though most of the halfway-house Christians do not make a formal conversion to Judaism, they do, by their commitment to the state of Israel, reveal to us that their hearts are tied to the synagogue and not to the Christian hearth. Such a betrayal is indeed reprehensible, but it was predictable. For over a century the white Christian clergy have been preaching that love can only be intellectual and universal. We must love all equally, because we are all God’s children… you know the refrain. That kind of insipid, tepid love for a generic mankind and for a generic God is no love at all. And where there is no love, there is no knowledge of God, because the source of wisdom, the heart, has been rendered null and void. 

Denied true community with the people of their own race, the modern halfway house Christians are desperately trying to become Jewish. “O Hamlet, what a falling off was there!” The modern fusionist Christians who worship the negro and look to the Jews for a sense of community are in the position of the dwarfs in C. S. Lewis’s book The Last Battle:

Tirian had never dreamed that one of the results of an Ape’s setting up a false Aslan would be to stop people from believing in the real one. He had felt quite sure that the Dwarfs would rally to his side the moment he showed them how they had been deceived. And then next night he would have led them to Stable Hill and shown Puzzle to all the creatures and everyone would have turned against the Ape and, perhaps after a scuffle with the Calormenes, the whole thing would have been over. But now, it seemed, he could count on nothing. How many other Narnians might turn the same way as the Dwarfs?

In the modern churches the universal and the generic have triumphed over the particular and the personal. The new Christians profess to love everyone, but in reality they are incapable of loving anyone. And they worship the generic black man, of whom they have no personal knowledge. The rot in the churches is widespread and deeply imbedded. If it is not rooted out of the churches, does that mean we must accept the new universalist, anti-Christian version of Christianity? Our answer to that question will be determined by how we define the Church of God. If you define The Church as an organization with a mandate from God to preach the Gospel to all mankind, then you will adhere to the organized church of your choice despite the fact that your organized church fuses Judaism and Christianity and supports the worship of negroes. But if you regard the Church as a people, not an organization, who are connected to the living God, then you will not be deterred from serving your God because organized Jewry and their adjuncts, the Christian churches, say you nay. I think the huge mistake was made in the medieval ages when the scholastics attempted to define the Christian Church in non-poetic, rational terms. The Church cannot be defined rationally. Any attempt to do so is a bastardization of the truth. I know that Christ’s Church exists. I’ve seen it in the collective face of the European people, but I’d be completely at a loss to define what constitutes the Church in rational terms. But there is a continuity, a continuity of spirit and blood, in the religious history of the European people. When they looked on themselves as a people, distinct from other people, they kept the Faith. When they became non-distinct universal people, they lost the Faith. Perhaps, contrary to the modern churchmen, knowledge of the living God comes to us through the blood and not the mind. 

The desire to fuse Judaism with Christianity stems from a failure on the part of the European people to see the distinctiveness of Christ. When He becomes a junior executive in an organization called The Church, it is easy to merge the Christian organization with the Jewish one. And with their loss of faith came the Europeans’ identity crisis. The Europeans were distinct from all other races because they were the Christ-bearers. But if Christ is not distinct from all other gods, if He can be blended with Judaism or the negro or Muhammad, then what is so distinct about the European people? “Nothing,” the European replies as he prepares to blend with all mankind and lose his identity in a stinking multi-racial, multi-cultural dung heap. 

It’s impossible to exaggerate the extent to which the halfway-house Christian community has embraced Israel. They passionately desire to slaughter millions of innocent people, whom they perceive to be the enemies of Israel, and they justify their murderous, anti-Christian advocacy with the Christian Bible! This is a result of an intellectual faith devoid of spirit and blood. The weak-minded, weak-spirited Christian fusionists can be easily manipulated by Satan and his liberal henchmen. “Let’s all gather at the River,” has become, “Let’s all fall down and worship the negro right before we bomb all of Israel’s enemies.” 

The halfway-house Christians worship the negro in order to be liked by liberals within and without their church, because liberals are in power and the halfway-house Christians want to appease the powerful. Such a stance via the powers that be is cowardly and reprehensible. But the halfway-house Christians’ motivation for supporting Israel is infinitely more reprehensible than their reason for supporting negro worship. Bored and indifferent to the Christ story, the story of how the Son of God redeemed us from sin and death, they have tasted the forbidden fruit and sought to know, nay, not just to know but to bring about by their own efforts, the end of the world. “Behold I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.” (Jer. 23:32) 

Our Lord did not tell us the day nor the hour, nor did He tell us that we could be good Christians by supporting an anti-Christian, anti-human nation state called Israel. If halfway-house Christians had not abandoned the wisdom of the heart, which comes from a connection to a particular people and a personal God, they would not now be instruments of Satan. They have deliberately darkened their hearts in order to indulge their fantasies of an apocalyptic end of the world that they, not God, have brought about. 

There are many, many writers, such as Scott, Shakespeare, and Edmund Burke, to whom I am forever in debt for making me feel less alone in the universe by expressing my own inmost thoughts. In the case of Burke, his Reflections on the Revolution in France and his Letters on a Regicide Peace  were works that spoke to my heart. One passage in particular from Letters on a Regicide Peace accurately represents my present stance vis-à-vis the modern world. In the Letters Burke states that he no longer has any official position in the government. He has only his opinion to offer. But it is his heartfelt opinion. From out of the depths, the depths of sorrow, he urges his people not to make peace with the regicide French. So it is with me. I’ve never had a position it the government, but I do speak from the depths: “Do not make peace with these regicide liberals and their allies in the Christian halfway houses. They want to kill God by destroying His image in His people. Look to the mountains. There is not one breath of pure air in this regicide world of modernity, but in the mountains, where He resides, where the true Europeans have always resided, there is honor, there is charity, and there is love. And it is from those European mountains that we will launch our attack on the regicide world of the liberals.” +

Posted in Blood faith, Older posts (pre-April 2019), Rationalism, Religion of Satan | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Distinctive Faith of the Europeans

The Return

Posted on April 28, 2012 by cwny

Home! That was what they meant, those caressing appeals, those soft touches wafted through the air…” — The Wind in the Willows

__________

Donald Davidson lived long enough to be condemned by his fellow Southerners and Northern liberals as a racist, outside the ken of humanity. At best he was treated to private sympathy and public condemnation. Once, when he attempted to elicit support for segregation from Allen Tate, Tate tried to mollify him by suggesting that maybe the negroes wouldn’t want to integrate. Then, having spewed immoral drivel on a friend seeking moral support, Tate went merrily on his academic way. And Tate’s cowardly response to the vital issue of white survival was the response of all post-1945 conservative intellectuals, with the exception of Anthony Jacob and Davidson himself. They were completely indifferent to the major issue of the 20th century: an emergence of a liberal oligarchy, with a stranglehold on the schools and the churches, who were determined to destroy the white race. 

The Jews have always hated the European people because the European people were the Christ-bearers. And the colored tribesmen have always hated the white man because they worship darkness and not the light. So why were the whites of the 20th century, and why are the whites of the 21st century, in greater danger than in any of the preceding centuries? What has changed? Well, the European-hating Jew we have always had with us, and the white-hating colored tribesmen we have always had with us, but a controlling liberal oligarchy determined to eradicate the white race? We have not always had that demonic oligarchy with us. There were always white-hating whites within Christendom, but it was only in the latter half of the 20th century that they gained complete control of the European nations. That is the difference between past and present. The white race is now at the mercy of the savage races of color, which are devoid of mercy, because white liberals have taken power after years and years of conservative indifference to the survival of their own people. 

I liken the conservative intellectual’s response to the white-hating liberal as that of a man with a wife and five children, who responds to a home invasion by armed thugs by ignoring the thugs as they butcher his wife and children. Instead of fighting against the thugs, our modern conservative intellectual father runs to his study and saves his soon-to-be-published manuscript on the theory of the family. “Thank God, I saved the manuscript!” the father says as he escapes out the window of his study, “The world would have been left bereft of families had I not saved my work on the theory of the family!” Do I exaggerate? Not one bit. I grew up reading the post-World War II conservatives, and as a young man I got to meet some of them. They were not a bad bunch, but I came to realize that they were not the men their 19th century counterparts were. They had begun the shift, ever so slightly, away from a blood faith grounded in the people of Europe, to an intellectual faith grounded in the ever-changing universalist world of abstract thought. As soon as a man starts down that slippery slope, his ultimate destiny is determined: he will become part of Liberaldom. And that is the key to understanding the post-1945 conservatives. They became ashamed of anything that could not be made into a theory. Writers such as Dabney, Fitzhugh, and Page spoke unabashedly about the necessity of the survival of the white race, but their 20th century conservative counterparts theorized about race and wrote vaguely about respecting traditions, on the one hand, while condemning the racism of their ancestors on the other hand. Some did this in order to be dispassionate and objective, and by doing so convince the liberals that they, the new conservatives, were really good fellows. Well, the liberals still didn’t regard the conservatives as good guys, and the unimpassioned “objectivity” of the conservatives turned out to be less truthful than the passionate advocacy of the 19th century conservatives. When we read the works of Dabney, Fitzhugh, and Page today, we feel that we are in the presence of prophets. They spoke from their hearts and they spoke the truth. What about their “conservative” descendants? We find nothing but intellectual drivel similar to the vacillating verbiage that Allen Tate dumped on Donald Davidson. 

It was inevitable that the post-World War II conservatives would be absorbed into Liberaldom and become just as hostile to the European people as the liberals. In order to understand why the absorption and betrayal was inevitable, you need only read Edmund Whittaker’s book called Space and Spirit (1948). Whittaker was a professor of mathematics at the University of Edinburgh. In his book he pointed out that modern science was a derivative of classical and medieval philosophy. Therefore, Whittaker argued, there was a direct connection between modern science, the Greek philosophical tradition, and medieval philosophy. I agree with Whittaker that those three schools of thought are united. But Whittaker thought the unity was a good thing. I think the Greek philosophical tradition in conjunction with the medieval philosophical tradition, and their child, modern science, is an unholy trinity that has destroyed the European people. Negroes murder whites with impunity, while the whites worship negroes in the same churches where they used to worship Christ, because of the impious union of Greek philosophy, medieval philosophy, and modern science. 

There is a line, not visible to the material eye, which separates the bardic culture from the scientific culture. At some point in the early part of the 20th century, the European people crossed over the bardic line and became a secondhand race of people. A secondhand race of people has no instinctual life. They have no direct link to their past because they do not believe in blood ties. And they have no connection to a living God, because they believe that a real God must conform to the philosophical and scientific specifications of their secondhand knowledge of existence. Where is the empirical proof for Christ’s resurrection from the dead? There is no proof in the modern scientific, philosophical world of the modern European. The proof of His resurrection lies in the blood of the European people prior to the time when they renounced their blood. The Christian fairy tale is true, but its truth can only be seen by people who believe in fairy tales more than mathematics. 

As Whittaker tells us, the scientific-philosophical heresy, which he does not label a heresy, has always been part of the Western tradition, but it was not the vital part of our tradition until the 20th century. Undergirding all the classical studies — before the 20th century — was the European spirit, which was completely opposed to the Greek and medieval classical tradition. Over and above the staid, dispassionate classicism of the philosophical-scientistic theology was the passion of the bardic European whose faith was described by Thomas Nelson Page:

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.

The pagan Europeans accepted Christ so readily because they had a strong racial memory of the time when they were connected to God, heart and soul. They knew God, not in the fullness of His divine humanity in the person of Christ, but they did know Him. Their shift from the Hero-Gods of Europe to the God-Man was more of a homecoming than a conversion. Their Hero-Gods were created from a dim recollection of the true God. The Christ story clarified their memories, and they returned home. 

The Europeans’ struggle has always been to keep the secondhand, abstract faith of the unholy trinity at bay while holding on to the essential bardic, bred-in-the-bone faith of the European people. So long as the Europeans kept to the “tilled field and hedgerow, linked to the ploughed furrow, the frequented pasture, the lane of evening lingering…” they were men. Once they rejected the lane of evening lingering for the philosophical-scientific heresy, they became second-hand men staring at themselves from outside themselves and wondering how they came to such a pass. Once we first begin to doubt that our knowledge of the true God is bred in the bone, we go down a slippery slope of doubts that lead to a second-hand intellectual faith, which in turn leads to the worship of the negro.

Wearied from doubt to doubt to flee,
We welcome fond credulity.

Yes, isn’t it the height of credulity to flee from the living God to an abstract faith in the noble black savage? 

We are all born into the heretical world of science. With our mother’s milk we imbibe a sick, soul-killing ideology. In order to cure our souls we must fight our way back to bardic Europe. C. S. Lewis, a man who had to fight his way back, gives us a marvelous image of the European’s return to bardic Europe through the wardrobe door. Old Europe was certainly a Narnian world in which we saw God and knew Him not only as our Lord but as our kinsman. In that world is charity, truth, beauty, honor, and faith; outside that world is the abstracted intellect, devoid of humanity, which is always the mark of Satan.

For this purpose Mephistopheles is, like Louis XI, endowed with an acute and depreciating spirit of caustic wit, which is employed incessantly in undervaluing and vilifying all actions, the consequences of which do not lead certainly and directly to self-gratification.

The material world is merely a symbol of the spiritual world; such was the collective wisdom of the European people who believed in Christ. The collective wisdom of the philosophical-scientistic Europeans is that the material world is the world: “Whatever we see with the naked eye is reality.” But ‘tis not so; we are such stuff as dreams are made on. The European once dreamt of dragons, giants, heroes, fair ladies, and a God whose love passeth all understanding. Were those dreams pure fiction, and is our nightmare world of science reality? That is the question. Modern Europeans, conservative and liberal, have taken their stand with the men in the white laboratory coats. The fairy tale world of antique Europe has been condemned because its people were guilty of crimes against humanity, the foremost of which was racism. But in my eyes the European Fairy Tale must have been true. If it wasn’t, then how did they, the antique Europeans, manage the spiritual equivalent of walking on water? Surely such a people had to be connected to the living God in order to have spawned William Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Handel, and Chartres Cathedral. The only people who ever displayed an understanding of 1 Corinthians 13 were the antique Europeans. Who, once they have been exposed to old Europe, would prefer the modern, racially diverse Europe that has not charity? The answer? The entire white establishment. And bereft is the word for the European people. Like Arthur after the demise of the Roundtable, they wonder if they ever really existed at all:

…on my heart hath fallen
Confusion, till I know not what I am,

If a man from this our modern Europe once takes a journey into bardic Europe, because he sees a kindly light emanating from that distant land, he will never again see life with the materialist eye. He will dream dreams and see the vision: dreams of old Europe and her people, and a vision of the risen Lord.  In my country we will soon be having a Presidential election, and I certainly will be voting against The Obama. But the far more important election took place at the beginning of the 20th century when the European people elected to institutionalize the unholy trinity of Greek philosophy, medieval philosophy, and science. From that liberal alliance came modern race-mixing, abortion, and atheist Europe. There is no hope in such a world. We need to go home. Home, for the European, will always be His Europe. He can’t abide with us until we decide to abide with Him by the hearth fire that He has kept burning through all the years of our wanderings in the deserts of modernity. My youngest daughter once remarked to me that she always felt she was reentering an alien, hostile world and leaving a wonderful, comfortable world when she finished a novel by Ian Maclaren, Walter Scott, or Charles Dickens. She has it right. Old Europe is our world, and we “don’t want any other.” +

Posted in Blood faith, Older posts (pre-April 2019), Poets vs philosophers, Propositional faith | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Return