Ethnic Cleansing and Satan Worship
I recently, while trying to clear my desk of the ever-mounting pile of papers, came across a transcript of a C-Span broadcast from 1999. The broadcast featured a meeting of the Council of Conservative Citizens on the subject of immigration. The speakers varied on their solutions to the problem, but all recognized that America’s immigration policy was really an ethnic cleansing policy. “If these shadows are not altered, the white race will disappear” was the consensus of the men present at the forum.
The late Samuel Francis’s talk was particularly insightful. He told the story of a group of businessmen in Richmond, Virginia, who decided to put some murals of famous people up on a new canal walk downtown in order to attract tourists to the city. One mural was of the Negro, Gabriel Prosser, who had led a bloody, anti-white slave revolt in Charleston, and another was of the Indian chief who had wanted to kill Captain John Smith. There was also a mural of Robert E. Lee.
This, Samuel Francis said, is what businessmen call “multiculturalism.” But it is not what the Negroes call multiculturalism. Multiculturalism for the Negro means black power. Enter on the scene City Councilman Sa’ad El-Amin. (I hope I don’t have to tell you what color he is.) El-Amin demanded that the mural of Robert E. Lee be taken down. The businessmen complied, of course. And of course the mural of the bloodthirsty Indian savage and the bloodthirsty Negro barbarian were not taken down. That, Mr. Samuel Francis said, is the reality of the racial war we face today. What whites think is multiculturalism is what the blacks know to be an outright war. “Who will be master?” is all they care about.
I remember there were Catholics at the C of CC meeting who pointed out, with sadness and shame, that Karol Wojtyla was in favor of open borders. But that was completely consistent with his liberal policies on capital punishment and war. We are not supposed to defend our society against murderous thugs (he routinely begged clemency for child molesters), nor are we to defend our race against those who seek to eradicate it.
I checked the C of CC web site after the meeting. The emails from many black folk were not denials of their evil intent but were instead gloating affirmations of their intent to destroy the white race.
It’s been almost seven years since that C of CC meeting. How do we stand now? We stand even closer to the abyss. The Catholic and Protestant churches are just as anti-white as they were seven years ago. Furthermore, there is a maniacally anti-white, Robiespierre-type personality in the White House. But ultimately the leaders of the Christian churches must bear the blame for the death of the white Christian peoples. ‘Why not the Jews?’ is a question I’m frequently asked. “Aren’t they manically anti-European?”[1] Yes, the Jews are behind most of the anti-European movements, but organized Jewry is not something new. It has been with us ever since that little child of Bethlehem became the centerpiece of Western civilization. The Jews were not, of themselves, capable of destroying Western civilization; they needed professed Christians willing to denounce Christ. And that is the something new that has emerged in the 20th century, coming to fruition in the 21st century. There’ve always been the Illuminati – and I mean no specific cult when I use that term – who loved knowledge and the power they thought it could bring them more than they loved the Man of Sorrows. But in the 20th century the Illuminati have become legion. Of course this didn’t happen overnight, but it is now a reality. The Christ who is worshipped in the modern churches is not the same Christ to whom the Europeans, prior to the 20th century, bent their knees. To see this is true, one need only refer to the principal historians of every age, the true chroniclers of history: the poets or the bards. The Christianity depicted in the novels of Walter Scott, La Fanu, Ian Maclaren, and so on, is diametrically opposed to the Christianity presented in the modern Christian churches. The older Christianity spoke to the hearts of men who were destined to die but who hoped they were not born to die. The old hymn expressed it well: “The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.”
One’s own death is a very personal thing, and only a personal God, a God who loves in the particular, not in the generic, would bother about the death of one such individual. There was no denial in the older Christianity of the universal nature of Christ’s personal concern for individual human beings. But the great insight of old Europe was that the universal nature of God’s love could only be known through the particular, the personal (which includes the racial), and the parochial. And how did the European gain this insight about God? The same way that Edgar knew about the miseries of his father: “By nursing them.” The first man of Europe had to decide whether to open for the old beggar knocking at his door. At first, he let him in and gave Him a meal and a seat by the fire because his heart was stirred by pity, but as the evening wore on he was conscious of a burning fire, not in the hearth, but in his heart. And behold, the beggar man was Christ the King!
It must have been like this. The everlasting glory of the European is that he and he alone saw that “Mercy was an attribute to God himself.” To have seen that, to have placed the God of Mercy at the heart of his civilization instead of the warrior gods of his ancestors and the bush and voodoo gods of the colored peoples, was the greatest achievement in human history.
Racial identity was different for the old European than it was for the colored people.[2] The European looked on miscegenation with horror because he was the Christ-bearer. Who would stand up for the God of mercy if he didn’t? And when the whites mixed with the non-whites, as the Spanish did in Mexico, it was a sin against the faith. A true European Christian knows, with a certainty that is bred in the bone, that if he is to remain Christian, and if the church is to remain Christian instead of Babylonian, he must remain true to his Christ-bearing ancestors and remain white.
I recently read the magnificent Drumtochty novels of Ian Maclaren to my children. To leave that Christian world, which one must do when done reading, and to enter the modern world is exactly like leaving Narnia for that hideous modern school, as the children in C. S. Lewis’s The Silver Chair must do. I’m not a conspiracy-theorist, but I think there is one conspiracy that has been overlooked: Satan, so lacking in vision and the poetic sense, has an advertiser’s skill in imitation. If he sees something that is successful he apes it. And I think he has very successfully managed, within the Christian churches, to get Satanism accepted as Christianity. The figure of Christ presented in the churches today is really Satan. Certainly no one can be happy who has consciously and completely given themselves to Satan, so I don’t mean to suggest that our modern churchmen and those who follow them have made a conscious pact with the devil.[3] They retain certain aspects of the old Christian faith – love of their own family (though not of their own race) and a respect for Christmas – which distinguished the Christians of old. But their vision of Christ is not the vision that the older Christian Europeans had. The new Satanic Christians see Christ as one who illuminates, not as one who saves. He is a God of the academy, not of the hearth. He is a God of the intellect, not of the heart. He is a God of a multiracial Babylon, not of segregated Christian communities. In short, the new Christ is not Christ, he is Satan.
All societal problems of any weight are at bottom religious ones. When Europe and her satellites were Christian, they were white. And when they ceased to be Christian, they ceased to be white. The black problem and the immigration problem are problems of faith. Europeans must love Him enough to banish the apeish clown who is using His name to perpetuate his filthy, dirty ideas throughout the world. I don’t see how it is humanly possible to force Satan, now that he is so comfortably entrenched in the very bowels of Western civilization, into exile. But then I don’t see how it was humanly possible to have built a civilization based on mercy rather than sacrifice, to have written King Lear, or to have composed The Messiah. To the Christ-bearers, everything is possible.
___________________________________________________
[1] Because of his place at the head of the most visible and organized of the Christian churches, the Roman Catholic pope is in a position to do greater harm to Christianity than the Jews are. And I would suggest that if every evil act ever perpetuated against Christians and the Christian church by the Jews was put together, they could not equal, nay, could not even touch the evil that was wrought by John Paul II with his anti-European ethnic cleansing policies. It is so painfully ironic. A utopian mind like that of the late John Paul II’s could only have come from a culture that had raised men high enough above the purely animal level to allow them to dream utopian dreams. And yet utopian schemers like Wojtyla dream for the destruction of the civilization that allowed them to dream. Move out of your ivory towers, ye churchmen of the West, expose yourselves to feel what wretches feel -- the Christian laymen, who are devoid of support from churchmen who should, but do not, set up borders to keep heathen philosophies out of the church and who are devoid of support from governments that have mandated the ethnic cleansing of white European Christians.
[2] The colored is proud of his race because it is his. And sometimes he loves his own. The antique, white European loved his own because they were his own, but he was proud of his race because of who his race carried on their shoulders.
[3] Though not embracing Satan fully, consciously, and completely, I think the modern churchman has very definitely rejected Christ. How else can we explain his refusal to acknowledge the obvious? When European civilization was white it was Christian. Now that it is multiracial, it is not Christian. The result has not been good for white or black.
The late Samuel Francis’s talk was particularly insightful. He told the story of a group of businessmen in Richmond, Virginia, who decided to put some murals of famous people up on a new canal walk downtown in order to attract tourists to the city. One mural was of the Negro, Gabriel Prosser, who had led a bloody, anti-white slave revolt in Charleston, and another was of the Indian chief who had wanted to kill Captain John Smith. There was also a mural of Robert E. Lee.
This, Samuel Francis said, is what businessmen call “multiculturalism.” But it is not what the Negroes call multiculturalism. Multiculturalism for the Negro means black power. Enter on the scene City Councilman Sa’ad El-Amin. (I hope I don’t have to tell you what color he is.) El-Amin demanded that the mural of Robert E. Lee be taken down. The businessmen complied, of course. And of course the mural of the bloodthirsty Indian savage and the bloodthirsty Negro barbarian were not taken down. That, Mr. Samuel Francis said, is the reality of the racial war we face today. What whites think is multiculturalism is what the blacks know to be an outright war. “Who will be master?” is all they care about.
I remember there were Catholics at the C of CC meeting who pointed out, with sadness and shame, that Karol Wojtyla was in favor of open borders. But that was completely consistent with his liberal policies on capital punishment and war. We are not supposed to defend our society against murderous thugs (he routinely begged clemency for child molesters), nor are we to defend our race against those who seek to eradicate it.
I checked the C of CC web site after the meeting. The emails from many black folk were not denials of their evil intent but were instead gloating affirmations of their intent to destroy the white race.
It’s been almost seven years since that C of CC meeting. How do we stand now? We stand even closer to the abyss. The Catholic and Protestant churches are just as anti-white as they were seven years ago. Furthermore, there is a maniacally anti-white, Robiespierre-type personality in the White House. But ultimately the leaders of the Christian churches must bear the blame for the death of the white Christian peoples. ‘Why not the Jews?’ is a question I’m frequently asked. “Aren’t they manically anti-European?”[1] Yes, the Jews are behind most of the anti-European movements, but organized Jewry is not something new. It has been with us ever since that little child of Bethlehem became the centerpiece of Western civilization. The Jews were not, of themselves, capable of destroying Western civilization; they needed professed Christians willing to denounce Christ. And that is the something new that has emerged in the 20th century, coming to fruition in the 21st century. There’ve always been the Illuminati – and I mean no specific cult when I use that term – who loved knowledge and the power they thought it could bring them more than they loved the Man of Sorrows. But in the 20th century the Illuminati have become legion. Of course this didn’t happen overnight, but it is now a reality. The Christ who is worshipped in the modern churches is not the same Christ to whom the Europeans, prior to the 20th century, bent their knees. To see this is true, one need only refer to the principal historians of every age, the true chroniclers of history: the poets or the bards. The Christianity depicted in the novels of Walter Scott, La Fanu, Ian Maclaren, and so on, is diametrically opposed to the Christianity presented in the modern Christian churches. The older Christianity spoke to the hearts of men who were destined to die but who hoped they were not born to die. The old hymn expressed it well: “The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.”
One’s own death is a very personal thing, and only a personal God, a God who loves in the particular, not in the generic, would bother about the death of one such individual. There was no denial in the older Christianity of the universal nature of Christ’s personal concern for individual human beings. But the great insight of old Europe was that the universal nature of God’s love could only be known through the particular, the personal (which includes the racial), and the parochial. And how did the European gain this insight about God? The same way that Edgar knew about the miseries of his father: “By nursing them.” The first man of Europe had to decide whether to open for the old beggar knocking at his door. At first, he let him in and gave Him a meal and a seat by the fire because his heart was stirred by pity, but as the evening wore on he was conscious of a burning fire, not in the hearth, but in his heart. And behold, the beggar man was Christ the King!
It must have been like this. The everlasting glory of the European is that he and he alone saw that “Mercy was an attribute to God himself.” To have seen that, to have placed the God of Mercy at the heart of his civilization instead of the warrior gods of his ancestors and the bush and voodoo gods of the colored peoples, was the greatest achievement in human history.
Racial identity was different for the old European than it was for the colored people.[2] The European looked on miscegenation with horror because he was the Christ-bearer. Who would stand up for the God of mercy if he didn’t? And when the whites mixed with the non-whites, as the Spanish did in Mexico, it was a sin against the faith. A true European Christian knows, with a certainty that is bred in the bone, that if he is to remain Christian, and if the church is to remain Christian instead of Babylonian, he must remain true to his Christ-bearing ancestors and remain white.
I recently read the magnificent Drumtochty novels of Ian Maclaren to my children. To leave that Christian world, which one must do when done reading, and to enter the modern world is exactly like leaving Narnia for that hideous modern school, as the children in C. S. Lewis’s The Silver Chair must do. I’m not a conspiracy-theorist, but I think there is one conspiracy that has been overlooked: Satan, so lacking in vision and the poetic sense, has an advertiser’s skill in imitation. If he sees something that is successful he apes it. And I think he has very successfully managed, within the Christian churches, to get Satanism accepted as Christianity. The figure of Christ presented in the churches today is really Satan. Certainly no one can be happy who has consciously and completely given themselves to Satan, so I don’t mean to suggest that our modern churchmen and those who follow them have made a conscious pact with the devil.[3] They retain certain aspects of the old Christian faith – love of their own family (though not of their own race) and a respect for Christmas – which distinguished the Christians of old. But their vision of Christ is not the vision that the older Christian Europeans had. The new Satanic Christians see Christ as one who illuminates, not as one who saves. He is a God of the academy, not of the hearth. He is a God of the intellect, not of the heart. He is a God of a multiracial Babylon, not of segregated Christian communities. In short, the new Christ is not Christ, he is Satan.
All societal problems of any weight are at bottom religious ones. When Europe and her satellites were Christian, they were white. And when they ceased to be Christian, they ceased to be white. The black problem and the immigration problem are problems of faith. Europeans must love Him enough to banish the apeish clown who is using His name to perpetuate his filthy, dirty ideas throughout the world. I don’t see how it is humanly possible to force Satan, now that he is so comfortably entrenched in the very bowels of Western civilization, into exile. But then I don’t see how it was humanly possible to have built a civilization based on mercy rather than sacrifice, to have written King Lear, or to have composed The Messiah. To the Christ-bearers, everything is possible.
___________________________________________________
[1] Because of his place at the head of the most visible and organized of the Christian churches, the Roman Catholic pope is in a position to do greater harm to Christianity than the Jews are. And I would suggest that if every evil act ever perpetuated against Christians and the Christian church by the Jews was put together, they could not equal, nay, could not even touch the evil that was wrought by John Paul II with his anti-European ethnic cleansing policies. It is so painfully ironic. A utopian mind like that of the late John Paul II’s could only have come from a culture that had raised men high enough above the purely animal level to allow them to dream utopian dreams. And yet utopian schemers like Wojtyla dream for the destruction of the civilization that allowed them to dream. Move out of your ivory towers, ye churchmen of the West, expose yourselves to feel what wretches feel -- the Christian laymen, who are devoid of support from churchmen who should, but do not, set up borders to keep heathen philosophies out of the church and who are devoid of support from governments that have mandated the ethnic cleansing of white European Christians.
[2] The colored is proud of his race because it is his. And sometimes he loves his own. The antique, white European loved his own because they were his own, but he was proud of his race because of who his race carried on their shoulders.
[3] Though not embracing Satan fully, consciously, and completely, I think the modern churchman has very definitely rejected Christ. How else can we explain his refusal to acknowledge the obvious? When European civilization was white it was Christian. Now that it is multiracial, it is not Christian. The result has not been good for white or black.
Labels: antique Christianity, C of CC, Europe as the Christ-bearer, Illuminati, Satan apeing Christ
posted by CWNY | 4:29 PM
<< Home