Nothing Is Written: Beyond Statistics

It wouldn’t be completely accurate to call Patrick Buchanan’s recent anti-white ravings in Chronicles a betrayal, because he never professed to be a white kinist. He consistently throughout his career condemned apartheid in South Africa and segregation in America. And when he ran for president on the Reform Party ticket, he ran with a black woman as his vice-president. He became the great white hope to some kinists because he refused, until the Chronicles' article, to demonize the white race. But Pat Buchanan was never more than a ‘lesser of two evils’ candidate to anyone who read his books and columns.

The only difference between Pat Buchanan and his liberal brethren is that Pat has a certain nostalgia for things European. He is not completely comfortable with the demise of the civilization of the evening lingerings, but his discomfort is only a wistful thought, not a deep yearning; it can be exorcised by frequent television appearances and good hard work on the ‘death of the West’ statistical books. So while differing in degree from his colleagues (Buchanan does not show the glee over the death of the West as most of the other liberals do), he still is firmly ensconced in the liberal, anti-European camp.

I must confess that I was a bit surprised by the Chronicles' article. I knew Buchanan was not a kinist, but I always thought he had more than just a little respect for the people of old Europe. But ultimately a man goes with his passion, and Buchanan’s whole life has been devoted to the rationalist, liberal-conservative cause. He knows the deep magic of the White Witch, but he does not know that there is a deeper magic still. I think it behooves us to look at the Witch’s deep magic, the magic of the white European intellectuals, and at the deeper magic still of the antique European.

The deep magic of the white European intellectuals is the rationalist tradition of the West. We don’t need to go through the whole litany. It begins with Aristotle and reaches its apotheosis with St. Thomas Aquinas. Everything after Aquinas is a footnote. Modern liberals who deplore Aquinas' faith still adhere to his schema. That schema says reason is the final arbiter of faith.

And what have the white rationalists decided about man and God? They have decided that there is no such thing as man and no such thing as God. There is an idea of man and an idea of God, but there is no concrete man of flesh and blood and no living God.

The philosophical tradition of the West is pure negation. It ends with non-being. The white power brokers in Europe, America, and the European satellites will continue to try to destroy everything European until the European ceases to exist. They must do this; it is their faith. But it is my contention that their faith is not the Faith. Their faith is the mad scientist’s faith; it is reason run amuck.

There is a deeper faith than the rationalist faith of the Athenian intellectuals of the Western world. And we needn’t go to the Orient, a culture that worships nothingness, to find that faith. It belongs to Europe alone, because only the European has ventured into the enchanted forest. He has faced the witch of the glen and the dragon in the cave. And he found, in the forest, a magic deeper than the deep magic of the philosophers. He discovered the humanity of God. God had a human face! And the European formed a bond with that God and sealed the bond in blood. From that moment on, he never saw life, or fought the battles of life, in quite the same way as the people of other cultures.

It was ever the task of the European to keep the vision of the enchanted forest alive. And it was ever the goal of Satan to obscure the European’s vision of the forest. Behind every rational schema, whether that schema mentions Christ or not, is Satan. If he can convince the European that there is no magic deeper than the deep magic, that man need not venture into the enchanted forest to find God, then he wins.

The enemies of the European, those who would deny that there is a chasm between Christian European culture and all others, point to the philosophical link between Europe and the multitudinous barbarian and pagan cultures. They point out the similarities between Boethius and the Greek and Roman sages. And they note the parallels between Buddha and Aquinas. I concede the similarities and the parallels, but the great haters of Europe fail to account for the completely dissimilar and unparallel poetic visions of the Christian European and the barbarian and pagan cultures. The European poets chronicle the soul, and in their chronicles we see visions that cannot be seen by the Athenians of Christian Europe, the pagans of antiquity, or the non-European. What the European visionaries reveal is what He revealed to them when He took flesh and dwelt among us. Every decent impulse in man became intensified and elevated to a higher plane when those impulses were fused with His blood. Affection became love and kindness became charity.

No poet of antiquity or heathendom could have penned these words:

But earthly spirit could not toll
The heart of them that loved so well.
True love’s the gift which God has given
To man alone beneath the heaven;
It is not fantasy’s hot fire
Whose wishes, soon as granted fly;
It liveth not in fierce desire,
With dead desire it doth not die;
It is the secret sympathy,
The silver link, the silken tie,
Which heart to heart, and mind to mind,
In body and in soul can bind.

--from The Lay of the Last Minstrel by Walter Scott

Or these immortal lines:

The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown;
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty,
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;
But mercy is above this sceptred sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest God's
When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,
Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
That, in the course of justice, none of us
Should see salvation: we do pray for mercy;
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy.

--from The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare

One thinks of the scene from Miracle on 34th Street. “Two letters are hardly proof,” the lawyer for the prosecution says. “I can produce more,” the lawyer for the defense replies. And I reply to the skeptic’s statement, “Two isolated quotes from two poets are hardly proof,” that both Scott and Shakespeare were popular authors. The Europeans who read Scott’s books and attended Shakespeare’s plays did so because they saw their deepest intuitions about existence expressed in those books and plays. Scott’s and Shakespeare’s works are accurate chronicles of grace working in the souls of the European people.

I will fight Buchanan and ten million more of his ilk on this theme of Europe. Everything depends on it. God reveals himself through humanity. If the people that took Christ into their hearts are held up to the bar of judgment and found guilty, found to be spiritually inferior to the benevolent, the merciful people of color, then Christ be not risen and we are of all men most miserable.

“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” If you seek the bubble reputation in the heart of liberaldom, you will end up believing as liberals do. Buchanan has come to believe a lie because he sees the antique Europe with the eye of the liberal utopians and not through the eye of an integral man of Europe. And when you see European history that way, you will always be metaphysically wrong even when you’re statistically correct. We don’t need Mr. Buchanan to tell us that whites will soon be minorities in formerly white countries. That is obvious. We need Mr. Buchanan, like we need every white man, to stop aiding the enemy and to join the resistance.

The plight of the European is only hopeless if we allow ourselves to be mesmerized by statisticians like Patrick Buchanan. Statisically we are dead. But what has really changed? Haven’t Europeans always been a minority? “Not in their own countries,” is the obvious reply. Yes, that is something new. But the whole notion of country, of nation, is a European thing. The barbarians don’t live in a country; they occupy a land mass. They will never form a country. If they destroy our national boundaries, and what was once Britain or the United States become mere geographical regions, we will form new countries within those geographical regions. No matter how small the territory, where Europeans dwell, there is our nation. And if, like Alexander Smollet, we refuse to strike our colors, the barbarians eventually will fall. They can destroy the outward symbols of a civilization, but they can’t create one themselves. The ability and the duty to create a civilization belongs to only one race. The white man doesn’t believe in statistics. He believes that a civilization connected to His spirit and blood shall never, while he lives, perish.

“You Bid Me Seek Redemption from the Devil”

I have before me an article by one of those old-fashioned conservatives who is against the demonizing of the white race. He writes that America has Hispanic history months, Asian history months, and black history months (it seems like every month is black history month). The main theme of all the history months is the evil of white people. The author of the article deplores this and suggests that we, the white people, “should seek – via letters to editors, school board members, and other elected officials – to assert not only the truth about America, but also the value of their own identity.”

Granting that the author of the article has his heart in the right place does not his advice strike us as a bit ludicrous? Are editors of newspapers, school board members, and other elected officials going to respond to letters from white people asking them to resist the Asian, the black, and the Mexican invasion? Of course they’re not. Well, let me rephrase that. They will respond. If you are foolish enough to put your name on the letter, they will respond to your letter with some sort of bureaucratic intimidation. You will be either audited, fired from your job, or fined.

The well-meaning conservative is asking us to seek redemption from the devil. Are liberal bureaucrats who make their living exposing the evils of “Euro-centrism” and the virtues of multiculturalism going to respond favorably to a letter extolling the virtues of European culture and the evils of multiculturalism?

Our well-meaning conservative is laboring under a false assumption when he suggests we defeat the devil with a letter writing campaign. The false assumption is that the mark of the white man is an abiding respect for the rule of law. This is not so. There is ingrained in the European a respect for laws that stem from the Christian tradition. But there is also ingrained in the European a disrespect for law when it is not grounded in Christianity. Thomas Nelson page wrote eloquently on this subject when he addressed the Negro question in the post-Civil War South of the 1890’s.

It is charged that the written law is not always fully and freely observed in the South in matters relating to the exercise of the elective franchise. The defence is not so much a denial of the charge as it is a confession and avoidance. To the accusation it is replied that the written law, when subverted at all, is so subverted only in obedience to a higher law founded on the instinct of self-protection and self-preservation.

If it be admitted that this is true, is it nothing to us that a condition exists which necessitates the subversion of any law? Is it not an injury to our people that the occasion exists which places them in conflict with the law, and compels them to assert the existence of a higher duty?

Page’s apologia still stands today. If the law tells us that we must self-destruct as a people then we will defy that law in the name of a higher law.

It has appeared to some that the South has not done its full duty by the negro. Perfection is, without doubt, a standard above humanity; but, at least, we of the South can say that we have done much for him; if we have not admitted him to social equality, it has been under an instinct stronger than reason, and in obedience to a law higher than is on the statute books: the law of self-preservation. Slavery, whatever its demerits, was not in its time the unmitigated evil it is fancied to have been. Its time has passed. No power could compel the South to have it back. But to the negro it was salvation. It found him a savage and a cannibal and in two hundred years gave seven millions of his race a civilization, the only civilization it has had since the dawn of history.

We have educated him; we have aided him; we have sustained him in all right directions. We are ready to continue our aid; but we will not be dominated by him. When we shall be, it is our settled conviction that we shall deserve the degradation into which we shall have sunk.

The great majority of white people have decided they prefer the reign of Satan to that of Christ. Satan’s values are more in keeping with their values. And the colored tribes have always preferred Satan. Those groups of people do not concern me. It is the remnant, Europeans like the conservative columnist who want us to write letters, with whom I am concerned. The white remnant has been beguiled by the democratic serpent. They think that so long as they are allowed to vote, even though there are no truly white candidates to vote for, and so long as they are allowed to write letters to the editor, that there is no need for extraordinary measures against the New World Order. But it is the survival of our race and our faith that we are talking about. The colored hordes and their temporary allies, the white-hating technocrats, have made it clear by what they say they are going to do and what they have already done, that they mean to destroy the white race.

And the white haters have not had to suffer one iota for their anti-white ideology or their anti-white actions. Far from it, they have been rewarded. What would happen if they faced an enemy that took a “whatever means necessary” attitude whenever their race or their faith was endangered? (1) An enemy that does not regard democratic protocol as something sacred? I think the New World Order would start, slowly at first but then quickly, to crumble.

The remnant white man is not deficient in courage. If his home were attacked directly, he would fight. What he lacks is vision. He can no longer see things clearly because he is only looking at life through a rationalist-tinted window. This is the window Satan wants the European to look through, because as long as he sees life through that window he will never act until all is lost. He won’t fight those who would destroy his home until they are at his door because his mind can’t comprehend the evil nature of his enemies. The rationalist always thinks men do evil when they think irrationally. Therefore he thinks that if he appeals to their reason they can be converted to the path of virtue. But reason is the servant of our passions. If our passions are evil, our reason will serve those evil passions. The desire to destroy the white race is the passion of the colored hordes and the technocratic whites. An appeal to their reason will not deter them. Their passion to destroy must be met by a greater passion, a passion to defend what we hold sacred, our race and our faith.

The pro-life movement, in which I spent many years, is a perfect example of the insufficiency of rational argument against satanic forces. Year after year the pro-life people show pictures of the baby in the womb and present a rationally irrefutable case for the humanity of the child in the womb. But the abortion mills keep grinding and no one seriously contemplates a reversal of Roe v. Wade. The only men who seem to understand the abortion issue are those men who are killing abortion doctors.

Since reason only serves the passions of our heart, the appeal for the preservation of the white man must be made to the hearts of the anti-white liberals. And that appeal has been made and it has been rejected. When two factions are fundamentally opposed, where the sacred heritage of one faction is the hated evil of the other, then those two factions are at war. Up to now it has been only the liberals and their barbarian allies who have been fighting. They fine, they imprison, and they kill when they are threatened. We cannot fine, we cannot imprison, we don’t the legal power, but we can kill. That, as Nathan Bedford Forrest said so succinctly, is what war means. It is all well and good to talk about a cultural war, but it is just that, talk, if we don’t realize what a cultural war entails. When the Islamic cultures and the European cultures clashed in the medieval ages, they fought a whole series of wars. I believe they were called crusades. When cultures clash there is war, unless one side simply surrenders.

I believe our un-Civil War was tragic because the cultural divide between the North and the South was not so great that it could not have been bridged. But the tragic element in the current cultural war is that the European remnant does not see that no bridge can be built across the chasm that separates him from the white liberal and the barbarians. We are back to the failure of vision. If he could see those things that are not dreamt of in our philosophies -- a God who loves with a love that passeth all understanding and the limitless potential of a faith grounded in His love -- the European would take the “to the knife” vow and would eventually triumph over the liberal and the barbarian.

War certainly means killing, but it doesn’t mean the indiscriminate killing indulged in by Timothy McVeigh and the IRA. A Christian rejects 'collateral damage' warfare. Nor does the realization that we are at war mean we should go out and kill the first liberal or barbarian we meet. If we see with blinding sight what we must do to prepare for the war, it quite probably will come to that -- killing liberals and barbarians. (2) But first we must take the vow in the cave like the Spanish did in 770, we must also use a Samizidat press like the Russian dissenters did, and we must form counterrevolutionary cabals like the revolutionary Marxists did. Above all is the vow in the cave. So long as one faithful white man is alive the war goes on. “To the knife.” (3)

__________________________
(1) I don’t think civil disobedience is an option for the white man. The reason being that civil disobedience only works if the existing regime agrees with the civil dissenters. The British wanted to get out of India as badly as Gandhi and company wanted them out. Our federal government wanted a multi-racial society just as much as Martin Luther King Jr. wanted it.

The abortion protesters are a stark contrast. The government wants abortion so those protestors are thrown in jail. It always, or so it seems to me, comes down to the ‘seeking redemption from the devil’ problem. If you are protesting a demonic policy, such as race-mixing or legalized abortion, your appeal will be heard if, and only if, your government is not satanic. If it is satanic, any person or group of persons who appeal to said government in the name of Him will suffer the same fate that He suffered.

(2) It never ceases to amaze me when liberals are allowed to get away with the assertion that they are non-violent. The liberals kill directly in their abortuaries and they kill by proxy in the streets of our cities when they incite (and then excuse) the murder of whites by colored barbarians.

(3) Patrick Buchanan in a recent Chronicles article states that the white man is finished and that he can only hope that the Asians and the other non-European cultures treat us better than we treated them. I don’t think that is possible, Mr. Buchanan, because only in an utopian world could a ruling people possibly treat other cultures and other people better than the Christian Europeans did. There were no Haitis when Europeans ruled. There were no Fu Manchu-type dynasties when the Europeans ruled. When you’re through spitting on your ancestors, Mr. Buchanan, try to look through the eye of your own people instead of with the eye of a statistician. I regret every good thing I ever wrote about Patrick Buchanan.

Worse than Death

“Such a horrible idea has come into my head, Su.”
“What’s that?”
“Wouldn’t it be dreadful if some day in our own world, at home, men started going wild inside, like the animals here, and still looked like men, so that you’d never know which were which?”

-- Prince Caspian

I have always thought the notion that animals are outside of God’s grace and do not inherit eternal life was false. And I believe this notion to be false because I do not believe that God will permit anything human to perish. I have seen sparks of humanity in pets of my own and in the pets of others. There are too many Greyfriars’ Bobby stories not to conclude that animals are worthy of eternal life.

As a general rule, I don’t like nature specials. How many times can you look at a lion killing a wildebeest or crocodiles chomping on a baby hippo? But I recently saw some footage taken by an amateur photographer in South Africa called the “Battle at Kruger” that was actually uplifting. It’s one of YouTube’s most popular videos right now and is really quite extraordinary. It demonstrates, at least to me, that animals, though given less grace to work with than humans, can achieve a higher level of humanity than humans, such as the post-Christian whites of the Western world, who have turned away from God’s grace.

For those who haven’t seen the video, let me give a brief description. Two adult Cape Buffalo and a baby buffalo come near a lion’s pride, which is hiding by a water hole, waiting, no doubt, for something good to eat to come along. They get their wish. The Cape Buffalo run when they see the lions, but it is too late for the baby buffalo. The lions catch up to the baby at the water’s edge and accidentally knock it into the water. As they try to pull the baby out of the water to chomp on it, a pair of crocodiles come along and try to pull the baby back into the water. You can imagine what the baby buffalo must have been thinking: “If not for the honor of the thing, I’d just as soon not be the main prize in this tug of war!” The lions get the baby away from the crocodiles and start to do what lions do with their prey. But then the extraordinary thing occurs. The Cape Buffalo are back! And they have come back en masse. The rather large pride of lions find themselves facing an even larger herd of angry Cape Buffalo. The buffalo disperse the lions in no uncertain fashion, throwing one lion into the air, and rescue the baby buffalo, who is miraculously able to trundle on home with his victorious kinsmen. I’ve been told that this extraordinary sense of solicitude for their own is very typical of Cape Buffalo. Whenever the herd is threatened, they form a perimeter with the babies in the center, the females in the next circle around the babies, and the males in the outer circle around the babies and the females. What does this tell us? Well, it tells me that Cape Buffalo are decidedly more Christian and thus more worthy of salvation than the modern, white post-Christians.

Let us change the social structure of the Cape Buffalo to that of the post-Christian white people and see the results: The Cape Buffalo are living and thriving. They form their protective perimeters when threatened, and in between times, they earn their daily bread and enjoy God’s bounty. But one day two buffalo leave the herd and go off to college. At first the other buffalo are proud: “A Cape Buffalo has never gone to college before.” But the parents of the two collegiate buffalo are not pleased when Mabel Buffalo and Robert Buffalo come home on their Christmas break. They have some strange ideas. Robert, who is a divinity student, tells his parents and anyone else in the herd who will listen, that good, clean buffalo do not form perimeters when the tribe is threatened. They should let lions, hyenas, and jackals prey on the females and the children of the herd. They should do this, Mabel and Robert maintain, because love of the stranger, the outsider, is the first law of Christianity. Robert then proceeds to explain why narrow-minded Cape Buffalo exclusivity is the one sin God will never forgive. When Robert finishes his oration, Mabel sings a new hymn she learned at college. The hymn extols the beauties of the lion, the nobility of the hyenas, and deplores the evils of the Cape Buffalo.

Now at first, the Cape Buffalo laugh at Robert and Mabel. “There wouldn’t be any Cape Buffalo anymore if you had your way,” says old Silas Buffalo.

“Good,” Robert replies, “the world would be better off if there weren’t any Cape Buffalo.”

“But you’re a Cape Buffalo yourself,” sobs Robert’s mother.

“I don’t consider myself a Cape Buffalo anymore. I’m simply a reasoning, thinking animal. I belong to the universe and to the God of the universe, not to some specific tribe or herd.”

The Cape Buffalo, particularly Mabel and Robert’s parents, are relieved when Mabel and Robert go back to school. “Maybe they’ll grow out of it,” they say.

But of course Mabel and Robert don’t “grow out of it.” And Mabel and Robert’s ideas about the sin of exclusivity and the beauty and wonders of the stranger begin to spread throughout the herd. It becomes very hip among the younger Cape Buffalo to wear T-shirts with slogans like, “Have you hugged a lion today?” and “Stop the hate, Marry a jackal.”

Then one day we see the consequences of the new ‘love the stranger, hate your own’ philosophy. Two females and a baby buffalo stroll up to the water hole for a drink. A pride of lions are also near the water hole. The females, who see the lions, are slightly apprehensive. “Should we run?” asks one female.

“No,” says the other, “That would be an indication that we are bigoted, reactionary Cape Buffalo who do not love and trust the stranger.”

So the two females approach the water hole. The baby, who takes his cue from the adults, happily starts to drink from the water hole. The lions attack. The two female buffalo escape, but the baby is left in the clutches of the lions.

When the two females get back to the herd, the one who was slightly apprehensive (she still has some remnants of maternity in her bosom) says, “Please, won’t somebody help me rescue Oscar?”

The male Cape Buffalo – and there are hundreds of them – just yawn. “Don’t be a prejudiced, exclusivity-oriented Cape Buffalo,” they say. “The lions are not dangerous.”

“But they’ll eat Oscar.”

“What nonsense! They’ll just jostle him a little and let him go. You’re overreacting.”

“Besides, even if they do eat him, you must remember it is part of their culture.”

“Yes, that’s quite right; you can’t blame them for practicing their culture. Besides, when you consider all the terrible things Cape Buffalo have done to lions over the years, you can’t fault the lions for being angry.”

And on it goes. But one Cape Buffalo -- his name is Leonidas – steps out from the herd.

“I intend to rescue Oscar or die in the attempt.”

“You can’t do that! No one will follow you,” says a limp-hoofed Cape Buffalo named Irving.

“I will fight whether others follow or not.”

And Leonidas goes off to fight. Two other Cape Buffalo, whose names have been lost to posterity, go with him. Leonidas and the noble two attack the lion pride and free Oscar. But in the battle with the lions, the other Cape Buffalo, the liberal, ‘enlightened’ buffalo, stab Leonidas and his two companions in the back while they are fighting a rearguard defense against the lions. The baby runs back to his mother, the apprehensive female, while Leonidas and his brave lieutenants become food for the lions.

The mother of Oscar had an internal conversion that day. She becomes once again a full-fledged Cape Buffalo. She takes Oscar away from the herd into the mountains. And there she teaches Oscar what it means to be a Cape Buffalo. She tells him of the bravery of Leonidas and his two friends. She tells him of the days when Cape Buffalo, every single one, defended their women and their babies and took pride in their heritage.

“Someday, Oscar, when I am dead and gone, you must return to the herd and reclaim them. Lead them back to the ways of the older Cape Buffalo such as Leonidas. And never trust the so-called learned buffalo who tell you the mind-forged lie that there is no such thing as evil and that there is no such thing as a Cape Buffalo.”

When his mother dies, Oscar returns to the herd. But the herd is almost extinct now. Oscar expected to have to fight his way through a whole horde of liberal Cape Buffalo before gaining the ascendancy of the herd, but there is no resistance, just a few feeble Cape Buffalo mumbling in the pasture, “Cape Buffalo exclusivity is bad, the stranger is good, it’s only natural after all…”

Oscar takes a wife for himself, picks out a few young females and young males, and then takes his small herd away from the liberal remnant.

“Now, it begins. In this new land, we will live and die as Cape Buffalo. This I swear before God and on the sacred horn of Leonidas.”

The old adage that charity begins at home is correct. We learn to love at the hearth fire. If we don’t love there, we will not then love the stranger. Love of the stranger comes only when we love kith and kin. And then it comes only when our kith and kin are secure from the slings and arrows of the stranger. The Southern plantation owner could extend ‘cradle to grave’ health care to his darkies only when he was secure in the knowledge that they wouldn’t rape his daughters and murder his sons.

Before the Europeans took Christ to their bosoms, their love for their own kith and kin produced enough fire to heat their hearths. After their acceptance of Christ, their love for each other was so intensified that the fire produced at their hearths was great enough to heat the hearths of the stranger. The liberal, inspired by Satan, wants to put out the hearth fires of the European in order, he claims, to fulfill his Christian duty to the stranger. But is the stranger served by being deprived of the heat of the European fire? No, of course not. Who then is being served? Well, above all, Satan is being served. The liberal, in his vainglory, imagines that he can use the devil for his own ends. But he will suffer the same end that all of his Athenian progenitors have suffered. When your theology is written in hell, you must either renounce that theology or be prepared to go to hell with your theology. The liberals have made their decision. They stand with Satan. We can’t convert them by dialoging with them. We can only counter their infidelity to His civilization with our fidelity. And if any of them have just a tiny remnant of grace left in their hearts, they will respond to our fidelity with baby steps toward the light. But we can’t convert anyone if we’re not strong in our belief that our European heritage is sacred. If we treat our heritage as something shameful and hideous, to be shunned, we will deserve to share the fate of the post-Christian liberals. And that fate is much worse than death.

“I Know Not Seems”

There is an old, kind of folksy story that tells of a city slicker driving up to a farm and asking the farmer, “How do I get to Centerville from here?” The farmer replies, “Well, if I was going to Centerville, I wouldn’t start from here.” Of course, the point is that one must always start from here; our modern civilization is not a good starting point for a counterrevolution, but we are here.

The Europeans were the only race of people that had a “bred in the bone” Christianity. Other races adapted Christianity at certain points in their history and then abandoned it, like a used coat, when it became expedient to abandon it. And the ones that didn’t abandon Christianity officially, such as the Mexicans, simply blended it with their native barbaric religion. The point is that Christianity never reached the blood of the non-Europeans. So when a non-European people stops professing Christianity it doesn’t affect their essential being, as individuals, or as a culture. It is different with the European. If he denies Christianity, he denies his blood. The result of such a denial is racial suicide.

The modern European is currently in the position of Jonah. He desperately wants to escape from his God. He doesn’t want the white man’s burden. But God is in his blood. How do you escape from your blood? You escape by creating a world where the living God, the God of spirit and blood, cannot enter. You create a world of pure mind. In that world, God is whoever you say he is, and his (or her) attributes are whatever attributes you assign to your mind-forged deity. Since the mind-forged deity of the post-Christian was created so that the post-Christian could escape from the living God, every vestige of European culture must be eradicated – in the name of god, of course. This is why race-mixing is encouraged and lauded throughout the Western world. The more the races mix, the further removed mankind gets from the blood of the white man and the living God. The modern clergy will never cease their efforts to mongrelize the world because in their church, the mind-forged church of Satan, race mixing represents the triumph of their god.

If they do not dilute the blood of the white man, there is always the chance that they will have to answer the call of the blood. They will be called upon to do what their ancestors did: to die to self everyday and to take up their cross and follow Him.

It would not be completely accurate to place the white liberal’s hatred of everything white under the “death wish” umbrella. It is a death wish, but it is not a personal death wish. The white post-Christian wishes for the death of European culture, for the death of “racist” white people, and for the death of the very idea of race. But he, the man of the mind, the walking, talking example of a man untainted by ties of blood, wishes abundant life for himself.

One cannot prophesy anything with the certainty of the prophets of the Old Testament. They had a special link to God. But one can prophesy in the Dostoevskian sense. Dostoevsky stated, after being among them but not of them, that the revolutionary element of the Russian Bolsheviks would kill millions upon millions of people, in the name of humanity, if they ever came to power. He also expressed, in the Brothers Karamazov, his fervent belief that the Russian people would not accept an atheist government. So he was not a prophet in the old Hebrew sense of the word in that he knew what the future would be. He was a prophet in the “If these shadows are not altered” vein. He knew what the Bolsheviks would do if they got to power.

In that sense, if these shadows be not altered, it is not difficult to prophesy the future. If the anti-white Athenians have their way and the white race disappears as a distinct race, Christianity will also disappear. “When the Son of Man returns, will he find faith on earth?” will be answered with a definitive ‘no’. We need merely to look at actual history, as distinct from liberal utopian theory, to see what will happen. We know that Christianity only penetrated deeply into the culture of one particular people. We know that the other races, with of course some individual exceptions, only adhered to the externals of Christianity because it appeared to be a magic talisman of the Europeans. But in the secret recesses of their souls, the non-Europeans remained loyal to their heathen deities. So if there are no longer any white men of faith in the world, there will be no Christianity. The heathen will return to unadulterated heathenism and the remaining white hating whites, who had hoped to live forever in an anti-white utopia, will be exterminated. Before the final cleansing takes place, all the governments in the Western world will mandate mixed marriages and outlaw marriages between two whites. (White homosexuals will be excused from the proscription against white marriage.) Let me amend that: in America, it probably won’t be necessary to make mixed marriages mandatory, Americans have already started complying voluntarily. They get the message: the white race must cease to exist.

I think we, the remnant, can all agree that we are talking about a counter-revolution and not a conservative movement or a new political party that needs to be formed. Every successful revolution – and the post-Christian whites have engineered a successful revolution – starts by undermining the spiritual foundations of the existing regime. The spiritual foundation of Christian Europe was the incarnate God. The supporting pillars of that foundation were the bonds forged by kinship, race and culture. When those bonds were severed the spiritual foundation was destroyed. And the bonds were severed when white Christians began to believe the propaganda of the Christian philosophers. “Maybe Christ did intend one multi-colored, universalist world church.” This is the Roman temptation. “Become part of the Roman system, and merge with the great universal.”

The Roman system dehumanizes; one’s personality is absorbed by the system. And race-mixing dehumanizes; it forces a man to sever his connections to his own kith and kin, which are essential to his identity, and to dissolve himself in the cauldron of the stranger. So a mind-forged system of philosophy and race-mixing go hand in hand. Christian Europe is always the loser when those two satanic forces coalesce.

The Spanish experience in Mexico provides us with a cautionary tale about the dangers of abstract, philosophical Christianity and race-mixing. Cortez and his men were men of blood and spirit; they had the faith. And their successful attempt to destroy the satanic altars of the Aztecs was a magnificent achievement, but the Spanish were also members of a church that placed undue emphasis on the philosophical defense of the faith rather than on the faith itself. In the philosophical realm, incorporation into the system is more important than an internal spiritual conversion. So once the Aztecs expressed external consent to the Roman system, the door was open for mixed marriages and the nullification of all the good the Spanish did by their conquest. Let me hasten to add that I realize the temptations a young Spanish male faced, in the absence of white women; it is only natural to look for whatever women are available. Perhaps it would have been better then, if the Spanish conquistadors had taken our Lord’s injunction, “and lead us not into temptation,” seriously and stayed in Spain. For many years I’ve resisted the thought that the Spaniards should have stayed in Spain, but it is now my firm conviction that the Spanish conquistadors who listened to the call of adventure and went to Mexico were not as great as the Spanish men who stayed in Spain, fathered children by white Spanish women, and consecrated those children to God. (1) And I don’t say that for the liberal reason that “the bad Spanish were mean to the Indians.” The conquest was not bad for the Indians; it was bad for white people, just as slavery in our country was not bad because it harmed black people. It didn’t harm them; slavery was bad because it harmed white people.

There are those who claim the conquest was necessary because it brought Christianity to the New World. But is it necessary to sleep with native women in order to convert natives? I would think the reverse is true. When the Spaniards mixed their blood with the Aztecs, the end result was a religion that was neither fish nor fowl. It was Aztec at the core with some of the Christian Externals. And it will always be thus when the European mixes his blood with the colored races. He spawns a hybrid religion.

So we are here, facing an unholy alliance of white, Athenian intellectuals and the colored races. They seem like an invincible army. But the antique European “knows not seems.” The ties of kith and kin bind us to our Lord. Who shall separate us from Him? Certainly not the impious alliance which tells us we must deny our European blood in order to become part of the New World Order.

The true European refuses to be part of the New World Order. He knows that he must remain faithful to his blood because if he, the keeper of the flame that was lit in Bethlehem some 2,000 years ago, joins the new Christ-less Tower of Babel Church, the God who loves with a love “that passeth all understanding” will not be able to find a place to rest His head on this earth. I know the rejoinder: “Christ doesn’t need us; he will find a place for Himself.” But doesn’t that overlook the Incarnation? Didn’t He need a woman of faith to be His handmaiden? Didn’t He need a foster father? Many a parent has found strength they never knew they had when their child was threatened. Well, haven’t we, the Europeans, taken the Christ Child as our own? And is He not being threatened? When they, the satanic legions in the impious alliance, demand that we deny our blood, which is connected to His sacred heart, they threaten Him. If we don’t abandon Him, in the incarnate, dependent stage of His humanity, he will not leave us defenseless before our enemies even though they be legion. Such is my belief and such was the belief of the antique Europeans.
_____________________________
(1)A nation can only become that rare entity called a Christian commonwealth when the vast majority of the males in that nation find more romance in the practice of their craft or in the tilling of their fields than they do in battle. The Swiss had their pagan wars and their Catholic vs. Protestant wars just like every other European nation, but the Swiss, unlike every other European nation, had an intense desire to settle their differences and return to their farms and to their trades. They had managed to find romance in the homely virtues of shop, farm, and hearth. -- from "The Swiss"

To Whom Shall We Go?

“Man must & will have Some Religion: if he has not the Religion of Jesus he will have the Religion of Satan, & will erect the Synagogue of Satan, calling the Prince of this World ‘God,’ and destroying all who do not worship Satan under the Name of God.”

– William Blake

In the old detective movies, there is a basic scenario that must unfold if the movie is to proceed and not end in the first five minutes. There must be a murder, and the police must assume (wrongly) that it is an open-and-shut case. Then the private detective steps in and notices one little detail the police have overlooked. From that detail comes other details, and eventually, after being knocked on the head a few times and shot at, the private detective solves the case and proves that the police were wrong.

Let me cast my college professor, whom I mentioned in “Galahad,” in the role of the police and myself in the position of the private eye. Dr. ___ presented, in two semesters worth of lectures, the case against Christianity. He had once been a Lutheran pastor, but his studies in antique religions, which was the title of his course, made him realize that there was “nothing unique about Christianity, it was just one more manifestation of man’s attempt to deal with his ongoing cosmic complaint.”

But strange to say, I read all the books on the book list and attended all the lectures and came up with a conclusion diametrically opposed to my professor’s conclusion. It seemed to me that the evidence showed Christianity was uniquely true and not just a manifestation of man’s “cosmic complaint.” Before mentioning the detail which led to the other details and which my professor had missed, let me present the case against Christianity that was presented to me.

When I was growing up in the dark days before VCR and DVD players, the slide projector was used as an educational tool and a torture device (Uncle Harry: “Let me show you my slides of our trip to Coney Island”). So in the form of a slide show, let’s look at Dr. ____’s and the Western rationalist’s case against Christianity.

In the first set of slides, we see the ancient Greek religion start out as a ‘god of the bush, god of the stream’ religion and then develop into that marvelous pantheon of nature gods composed of Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, Hermes, etc. But before the first set of slides is over, we see the coming of the philosophers. They deride the gods of the Greek pantheon and attempt to replace them with philosophy and ethics. Their efforts are largely successful. The gods of Olympus remain, but they have been drastically altered. Now they are civic gods who symbolize the various virtues enunciated by the philosopher. No one reveres them any longer as vital, living gods.

The second set of slides is the Roman era. The Romans take the Greek civic gods as their own and formalize the rituals concerning them to an extent that makes the Hebrew Pharisees look informal and casual about their laws. In essence Rome, the system, is now god. But that system was very permissive; so long as the Roman state was honored, one could seek out other gods in addition to the state gods. That permissiveness was necessary, because the Roman gods did not satisfy man’s longing for a personal god who guaranteed immortality.

Now we go to the third set of slides which reveals the mystery religions. They advanced from rather barbaric rituals to a more ethereal plane that rivaled the ethical systems of the Greek and Roman sages. And they had the added element of a personal God who insured the immortality of his or her adherents. And that closed the case as far as my professor was concerned. An ethical system presided over by a personal God, who guaranteed immortality, was the essence of Christianity, he argued, and that essence could be seen in the mystery religions of the ancient Roman empire.

The fact that the police have got it wrong starts out as an intuition: “I can’t put my finger on it, but something doesn’t feel right about this setup. Maybe it’s because I don’t want to believe my client, Mr. Christianity, is guilty, but still something seems wrong here.” Then one detail that tends to cast doubt on the police’s case against Mr. Christianity becomes clear to the detective. And while he is still pondering the first detail, another one comes to the surface, and then another, and soon the whole case against Mr. Christianity comes tumbling down.

The first important difference one notices between the mystery religions and Christianity is that the Christian God does His work of redemption within historical time. There is an actual empty tomb from which Christ emerges. The mystery gods are outside of historical time; they perform their feats of death and rebirth in cosmic time. Those ahistorical gods seem like fantastic dreams, not realities. But why does the fact that those fantasies of the devotees of the mystery religions have some resemblance to the Christ story make Christianity false? Could not we view those fantasies as one indication that God was preparing human hearts to accept the true fulfillment of the dreams and hopes of those who believed in the mysteries?

A second detail that emerges is the ethical one. Even though we can see a development in the mystery religions away from barbarism and toward mercy, they are still very much religions in which the devotee needs to propitiate the god through sacrifice rather than develop the virtues of faith, hope, and charity from within through a mystical connection with Christ. And then we must also note that Christ does not change from a cruel God to a more ethical, kind God; He is always the same: the God of mercy.

The third detail is the most decisive detail, but it is the detail that is not subject to empirical proof. Do you remember the murder trial in the Brothers Karamazov? Dmitri Karamazov is on trial for the murder of his father. All the “facts’ seem to indicate his guilt. Only his saintly brother Alyosha believes he is innocent, which of course he is. When the prosecutor asks Alyosha why, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he thinks Dmitri is innocent, Alyosha replies, “I looked at his face.” Yes, that is what it comes down to. There are solid rational reasons for belief in Christianity, and they should be stressed, but ultimately the case rests on what happens when we look at Christ.

Do our hearts burn within us when we listen to the story of Attis or Cybele? Do we look at the faith of the devotees of the mystery religions acting in their lives and say, “their faith must be the true faith”? I don’t, and I don’t think any European prior to the 20th century ever did. It was always Him, and no other. And the devotees of the mystery religions felt the same way. They forsook their gods for Christ. Only the Athenian intellectuals remained obdurate. The case is closed; Christianity is not guilty. It is the one, true faith.

There are many striking parallels, as the historians of religion have noted, between our modern democratic civilization and ancient pagan Rome. We have, like the Romans, a state religion (democracy) that has absorbed the old religion (Christianity), and made what was once a vital faith into a civic religion that serves the state. While our citizenry gives public obeisance to the state religion, they seek other gods, with the exception of those such as Chris Matthews who find the state religion sufficient, to satisfy their need for a vital faith. But there the parallel ends. The gods which modern man seeks are not up to the level of the mystery religions, at least not the higher level. There is no concept of immortality in the modern barbaric faiths. There is no rudimentary stirrings of mercy and compassion; there is only sex and blood. Which is why faith in the Negro trumps all the other faiths; it is the faith most devoid of a spiritual dimension.

Even if the Christian churches did start preaching genuine Christianity again, it is difficult to believe that the current breed of post-Christians would respond to it. But there is such a thing as grace, and European man does have Christianity in his blood. If we could establish some link again with the Europeans who had a vital spirit and blood faith… there are such possibilities.

My conviction that my Athenian professor was wrong came from my exposure, through the literary tradition of Europe, to the person of Christ. Every line Shakespeare wrote, every novel penned by Scott, pointed to Him. Which is why I believe that what is scornfully referred to by the rational apologists as the ‘cultural backdoor’ is the golden door to His Kingdom. But it is the European culture and only the European culture that holds the keys to the golden door. Spirit, blood, and faith are woven together in the European culture. There is no other culture like it. How can we live outside of it? As the disciple said to our Lord, “To whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.”