Cambria Will Not Yield

Thursday, December 31, 2009

The Silent Harp

“If a golden harp lacks a human hand to play its strings, can there be any music?” – CWNY

As every Dickens aficionado knows, the one great passion of young Pip’s life was Estella Havisham:
You are part of my existence, part of myself. You have been in every line I have ever read, since I first came here, the rough common boy whose poor heart you wounded even then. You have been in every prospect I have ever seen since—on the river, on the sails of the ships, on the marshes, in the clouds, in the light, in the darkness, in the wind, in the woods, in the sea, in the streets. You have been the embodiment of every graceful fancy that my mind has ever become acquainted with. The stones of which the strongest London buildings are made are not more real, or more impossible to be displaced by your hands, than your presence and influence have been to me, there and everywhere, and will be.
The liberal also has an abiding passion that is essential to his existence. Separate the liberal from that passion and he has nothing to live for. What is the liberal’s passion? His hatred of the white European culture. Everything the modern liberal does and everything the older liberals did, is and was because of their hated of the white European.

The liberal’s hatred of the white European permeates his entire being. The hatred is beyond reason. Instinctively, without thought, the liberal responds to every aspect of existence in conformity to his deep-seated hatred of everything connected to the older, traditional European culture. The older Europeans segregated the races, so the liberal wants integration. The older Europeans thought abortion was murder, so the liberals call it a sacred right. The older Europeans believed Christ was the Son of God, so the liberals deny that He is the Son of God. On and on the eternal hatred of the liberals goes. And their hatred shall continue until the Lord returns. But in the meantime, since we know neither the hour nor the day, must Christian Europeans cede everything to the liberals? Yes, they must, we are told, not just by the mad-dog liberals, but also by professed Christians who live in the half-way house between liberalism and Christianity, a kind of a preparatory school for recalcitrant liberals. Once the half-way house Christian ceases to complain about legalized abortion and homosexual marriage, he is welcomed into the big liberal house, a few blocks away from the half-way house. If you ever get a chance you should visit the half-way house, as I did a few months ago, and take one of the guided tours through the house.

My guide was a genial Franciscan monk, who showed me the John Paul II Memorial Room -- “One of our most illustrious half-way house Christians” -- the Billy Graham Room, and a new room that had just been vacated in time for the arrival of a representative from Bob Jones University. “Was that Franky Schaeffer who just left the house?” I asked my guide. “Yes, he is heading for the big liberal house up the street. It’s always sad to see them go, but after all, that’s what this half-way house is here for, to help Christians become good liberals.”

“Is that Doug Wilson and Thomas Fleming in the lounge studying the works of Martin Luther King Jr.?”

“Yes, it is. I’ve been told that both men are about to leave us for the liberal house. It’s sad to lose good friends, but I’m happy for them.”

Because reason is a whore for whatever passion that takes control of a man’s heart (contra Thomas Aquinas) the stated reason for the abandonment, by half-way house Christians, of Christian Europe is different from the actual reason.

The stated reason has been articulated thousands of times, but the following articulation will serve as a representative sample:

As a history of the world, the empirical history after Christ is qualitatively not different from the history before Christ if judged from either a strictly empirical or a strictly Christian viewpoint. History is, through all the ages, a story of action and suffering, of power and pride, of sin and death. In its profane appearance it is a continuous repetition of painful miscarriages and costly achievements which end in ordinary failures—from Hannibal to Napoleon and the contemporary leaders.

--Karl Löwith in Meaning in History
Because European Christians made wars, committed adultery and every other sin that their pagan progenitors committed, the empiricist and the half-way house Christian conclude that there was never such a thing as Christian Europe. “There is no evidence for it,” they tell us. But isn’t this a case of the jury having decided the case before they even saw the evidence? I think it is. If the evidence is examined carefully -- and it is not difficult to come by, just pick up a few novels by Walter Scott or Fyodor Dostoevsky -- we see that there is a tremendous difference between the Christian European man and the pre-Christian European. We cannot, as the half-way house Christians tell us, abandon the European race without abandoning the Christian faith.

Why did the half-way house Christians jettison the Europeans? We have seen that their stated reason, that there was no such thing as Christian Europe, is a lie. So what is their real reason, the reason that they are not telling us, or, in most cases, the reason they are not even aware of? It is the original sin, intellectual pride. If they follow the faith of their ancestors they must concede that their ancestors were equal to or superior to them. This they cannot abide. “Far better,” the half-way house traitors reason, “to call the ancient Europeans racist and un-Christian and declare ourselves the new, improved, superior Christians.”

Because the halfway house Christian is a house divided against himself, he will always be half-coward, half-man when he disagrees with the liberal on such issues as abortion and homosexual marriage. He will disagree like a man, but then, having voiced his disagreement democratically, he will acquiesce to the liberals’ agenda like a good little coward.

When the half-way house Christians dialogue, it is always with the liberal. With the antique European there can be no dialogue, because he is the enemy of the half-way house Christians. He challenges their assumption of intellectual superiority. And the half-way house Christians only act decisively when they are allied with the liberals against the racist Europeans. What does our Lord say? “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” The antique European treasures the faith of the ancient Europeans while the half-way house Christian treasures his vision of a new Christian millennium in which he gains intellectual ascendancy over his liberal brethren while aiding them in their efforts to exterminate the white “racist” remnant. (1)

The antique European has one heart and that heart was given once and for all to Christ’s Europe. The fight for Christian Europe will be to the knife and to the last man. We will not go gently into the dark night of liberaldom. +
1) The half-way house traitor called Huckabee is a perfect example of how the half-way house Christians make war on white Europeans. They kill them by proxy; Huckabee killed the four white policemen by freeing a black murderer. He cloaked his demonic action in Christian rhetoric, which is the modus operandi of the half-way house jackals. Written on the stone tablets of liberaldom is the vow: “White people must die so that liberalism can live.”

Postscript: Conversation between a First Year Devil and a Veteran Devil

First Year Devil: It’s no fun being a devil these days; you guys did the real work, you destroyed the Europeans. All we get to do now is sit around and watch the same old boring heathen rites.

Veteran Devil: You’re supposed to be keeping an eye out for European resistance movements.
FYD: There aren’t any. The Europeans are finished, and I’m bored.

VD: You little pipsqueak, that type of complacency won’t do. You weren’t around when Europe had a heart. It wasn’t pleasant. Everywhere we were on the run. The Europeans were like demi-gods. They seemed to have special powers because they were connected to...

FYD: Why didn’t you finish the sentence?

VD: You know why. Old Scratch doesn’t like His name mentioned down here.

FYD: That’s rather silly.

VD: Never mind what’s silly and what’s not silly, you just keep your mind focused on the Europeans.

FYD: You truly amaze me. You’re still afraid of them, aren’t you?

VD: A little fear wouldn’t do you any harm. Yes, I am afraid of them. I’m afraid that there are some European hearts that have not forgotten. And I’m afraid of the turmoil those faithful hearts will cause, because unlike you I don’t want another great battle.

FYD: Why not? Surely you don’t think we will lose?

VD: Our hope is in Babylon, and our destruction lies in the return of the European to his God.

FYD: Nothing can ever prevail against the gates of hell.

VD: I wouldn’t be so sure about that if I were you. Keep your eyes on mangers and Europeans. The combination of the two bodes ill for devils.

Labels: ,

Thursday, December 24, 2009

The King of Europe

So God imparts to human hearts
The blessings of His heaven.

That wonderful movie Brigadoon starts with two weary travelers who have lost their way, “somewhere in the Highlands of Scotland.” If I go back to a time when I was twenty-two, I can remember wandering through the Highlands of Scotland myself and coming across a gathering of antique Europeans of Scottish descent in a small town pub. While drinking a beer in the pub's main room, I heard some men in another room reciting poetry and singing Jacobite songs. I asked the bartender what was going on in the next room. He took me by the arm and led me over to the jolly revelers. “This is a friend of mine from America. He’d like to join you.” With the same hospitality of the bartender, who had known me for all of five minutes, the poetic revelers welcomed me to their gathering. Between choruses of "Will Ye No Come Back Again?" and "Bonnie Dundee " the men told me that they were a group of Scots who met once a month to drink good whiskey and beer and celebrate the great Celtic poets.

When asked (not that those poetic gentlemen would have treated a Saxon unkindly) whether I was of Celtic descent, I told them I was Welsh. If I had been in Bavaria, I would have emphasized my Saxon heritage. When in Rome... The Welsh heritage delighted them, eliciting such comments as, “The Welsh are Celts, too,” and “Wallace was Welsh, you know.” The evening went on with one ode to the Celts after another. If that had been the sum of the evening, a celebration of the poetic Celts, I would have gone to bed feeling I had had a wonderful evening with a fine group of provincial and chauvinistic Celtic poets. But something happened in the course of the revels that changed my view of the poetic Highlanders from one of bemused respect to that of profound reverence. After singing the thousandth Scottish ballad and praising those “poetic Celts” for the umpteenth time, the leader of the merry minstrels stood up and offered a toast: “It’s good to remember and celebrate the Celt, but let us never forget the king of poets is a Saxon. Let’s raise our glasses to the Bard of Avon.” And they all cheered and drank deep for the gentle bard.

So, in the end they were poets first and Celts second. And their poetic truthfulness, in that they recognized poetic greatness no matter that its origin was Saxon, ultimately stemmed from the fact that they were Christian.

All things rich and wonderful that this world has ever known stem from the fact that Christ walked this earth. And Europe is sacred ground because European men and women made Christ their kinsman and their liege Lord. The pagan poet, like the pagan warrior, ultimately disgusts us because he lacks the spirit that elevates a man to a higher realm of existence, to the poetic realm. In celebrating the poetic element in their fellow Celts, and in recognizing the poetic supremacy of the gentle bard, those Scottish cavaliers were celebrating and honoring incarnate Europe, the Europe of Christ, the only Europe for men and women with hearts of fire. Long live eternal Europe, long live Christmas, and forever may He Reign over both! +


Sages, leave your contemplations,
Brighter visions beam afar;
Seek the great desire of nations,
Ye have seen His natal star;
Come and worship,
Come and worship,
Worship Christ, the newborn King!


Saturday, December 19, 2009

A Christmas Reflection on Post-Christian Europe

Thou know’st the marksman – I, and I alone.
Now are our homesteads free, and innocence
From thee is safe: thou’lt be our curse no more.

-- William Tell

The torture-rape of a fifteen-year old white girl by Mexicans and blacks at a San Francisco high school was certainly heinous, but it was not an unusual occurrence. Such violent crimes are the norm now that America has become a multi-racial land mass rather than a white nation. There is no reason to believe that the colored hatred of whites will ever abate until they have killed every last white. The liberals’ exultation at every new atrocity against whites is the folly of a people who have declared themselves an evolved species of being who no longer regard themselves as white people. “It is those other white people who must die. And good riddance to them!” is the cry of the liberal.

The liberal’s maniacal hatred of white people stems from his fear that Christianity might be true. The liberal fears judgment. And like a child who has done something wrong and fears punishment, the liberal wants to eradicate the evidence of his wrongdoing. “If there is no evidence, there is no crime,” the liberal reasons. So what is the evidence that Christ the Savior once visited this earth? The answer is the white European culture. And if the white European culture and white Europeans are destroyed, the liberal will not be haunted by fears of God’s judgment.

It is important that the European Christian not get drawn into the neo-pagans’ orbit, whose concern for the white man is only skin deep. They have no love for the white man’s heritage which stems from his Christian faith. And the leadership of the neo-pagans cannot envision any solution to the problem of anti-white violence that is not a democratic solution. It is quite alarming when leaders in the neo-pagan movement proclaim their steadfast belief in non-violent protests and democratic discourse. Is it possible for anyone to believe that the colored tide of violence against white people can be halted by democratic means? Will the type of barbarians who tortured and raped the white high school girl stop raping and murdering whites because they are afraid white people will vote against them in the next election? And will the liberals, who have forsaken the religion of charity and now have not charity, the same liberals who glory in the annual murder of a few million babies in the womb, have compassion on the victims of black atrocities and seek out the guilty parties? That is not what I see happening. Every time white people speak out against black and Mexican violence, the government moves against the whites who protest against the atrocities. Implicit in the neo-pagan pleas for non-violent protests of black atrocities is the assumption that once we have evolved to the higher level of democracy it is not necessary to actually fight evil, we need only vote against it.
I recently saw an article by one of the right-wing leaders in which he warned against the dangers of assassinating Barack Obama. I completely agree with the author on that issue – it would not aid white people if Obama were assassinated. Tyrannicide is not outside the ken of the white European tradition, but Obama is not a tyrant whose death would bring great benefits to the white race. He is a small, little cog in the great liberal machine. Killing him would be harmful to whites.

However the author in question goes on to condemn all violence under any circumstances. That type of thinking goes against our European Christian heritage. There are things so hideous, such as the murder of a baby in his mother’s womb, the rape of our women, the torture-murder of innocent young people like Channon Christian and Christopher Newsome, that they cry out to heaven for redress. You cannot claim to respect the white European heritage and then tell white people to dogmatically renounce all violence. That type of advice is irresponsible at a time when our “laws,” passed by white technocrats, have left white people almost defenseless against the barbarians in our midst. I recall a scene in Walter Scott’s novel The Black Dwarf in which some border raiders have abducted a Scottish lady and taken her across the border. An old man advises the young men not to break the law and be violent. A member of the rescue party replies angrily to him: “Don’t talk to us about our heroic ancestors and then tell us to do nothing.” – “The Faith and the Race Are One” (Oct. 2008)
That British martial song “Heart of Oak” is considered quite comical now to Britons reared on Monty Python and punk rock, but it really expresses what should always be the European response to barbarism:
They swear they’ll invade us, these terrible foes,
They frighten our women, our children, and beaus;
But should their flat bottoms, in darkness get o’er,
Still Britons they’ll find to receive them on shore.

Heart of oak are our ships, heart of oak are our men;
We always are ready, steady, boys, steady!
We’ll fight and we’ll conquer again and again.
The European civilization was the God-Incarnate civilization. When a European issued his call to battle, it was not for vainglory or bloodlust, it was in defense of the Christmas things: hearth, mother, child, and faith. Are not those same things precious to the heathen as well as the Christian European? No, they are not, at least not to the same degree or with the same depth of passion as they are to the European. When the European joined his civilization to Christ's sacred heart, the European’s heart became more fully human. And burned into the heart of the Christian European is the knowledge that the Herods of the world will always usher in Christmas with the blood of the innocents.
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem and all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under... – Matt 2: 16
We are all called to imitate Tell and defend the innocents. The European hearth -- the Christmas hearth -- was made possible because Christian Europeans fought the barbarians and the Herods who sought to desecrate the Christian faith and murder the innocents. “God Rest Ye, Merry Gentlemen, Let nothing ye dismay” is a fine song for the Christmas season. But let’s add an equally fine Christian vow to the song: “They shall not prevail!” +

Labels: ,

Saturday, December 12, 2009

The Heroism of White Men

Andries Wilhelmus Jacobus Pretorius (b. November 27, 1798 – d. July 23, 1853)

The story of South Africa is that of two fine European peoples, as alike as two races can be, who have established their civilisation at great cost and with courage upon the tip of Africa. In spite of their unhappy schism they have managed to exert their sway over, and to accept responsibility for, a greater number of servants than any nation has been blessed or cursed with since the slave empires of antiquity. – In Search of South Africa by H. V. Morton

A new movie about Nelson Mandela, the murdering black thug who became a liberal saint, is coming out just in time for Christmas. All good white people will see the movie with their two quality children, or, if unmarried, with their significant other. Such movies are the life blood of the white liberal. Nothing delights them more than to further defile the corpse of Christian Europe. The movie will emphasize the goodness of the black South Africans and the evil of the white South Africans, thus completely distorting the reality of South Africa’s history.

The white South Africans can justly claim that no race of people, with the possible exception of the pre-Civil War southern whites of North America, has ever done more for another race of people than the white South African has done for the black South African. What took place in South Africa prior to black rule was a miracle of God’s grace, and the white Europeans were the conduits. It would be an unconscionable oversight if the story of South Africa was told without properly applauding the achievements of the white South Africans. But of course the story is told without lauding the white South Africans. They are not just ignored – that would be bad enough – they are made out to be the villains in the story. And this is what we should expect since Satan is the guiding light of white liberals. The South African story is now told from Satan’s perspective.

As late as the 1960’s, writers such as Anthony Jacob were praising South Africa for holding the line against American democratic egalitarianism and Russian Communism. But by 1994 the white South Africans had succumbed. Why? It was not because they were defeated in battle, and it was not because of any trade embargo by the democracies of the West. They were simply tired of being excluded from Western sporting events and being told they were the ‘bad guys.’ But they had been the bad guys for many years prior to 1994, and they didn’t capitulate. Then what was different in 1994? The difference was Faith. The white South Africans suffered from the same malaise as their fellow Europeans: they no longer believed, with sufficient fervor, in the Christian faith. Having lost their faith, they lost two essential qualities that are necessary to maintain a minority government against a hostile majority.

1) The fortitude to stand against the world and be unpopular. The Christian expects, because His God told him it would always be so, to be hated by the world. But his faith in Christ sustains him when the jackals of the world attack him for his fidelity to the cross. When the South Africans felt themselves to be fighting for a Christian civilization in the darkest region of the earth, they were strong, and no force or earth could defeat them. When they lost that faith they crumbled.

2) The ability to see reality. A Christian can see reality, but a liberal cannot. When the white South Africans were Christian, they could see that they were the only force that could prevent South Africa from descending into a hellish black nation dedicated to murder, torture, and demonism. But when they ceased to look at existence with the eyes of Christians, they saw reality as the Western liberals do. “Why can’t we have a Babylonian, mixed race paradise right here in South Africa? All that stands in our way is apartheid.”

If a European is not a Christian, he will be susceptible to utopian thinking – Communism, racial egalitarianism, neo-paganism, whatever ideology that looks to a future without God and without real human beings of flesh and blood.

The weakness of a white man without faith was brought home to me recently when I saw the neo-pagan Nick Griffith try to debate a group of anti-white British liberals. He tried to conciliate them and use the democratic jargon with which they were familiar, but it was to no avail. They believed in their godless faith more than Nick Griffith believed in his ‘equal rights for whites’ advocacy, and they had no interest in conciliating Nick Griffith.

We can’t ignore the one great similarity between the neo-pagan, the democratic egalitarian, and the communist-socialist. All three look to a Godless future where the traditional faith of the European is held in contempt. And we should not ignore the striking contrast between the successes of white Christian South Africans, in dealing with barbarians, and the lack of success of the Nick Griffiths and the post 1994 white South Africans. What is missing? The real Christianity.

H. V. Morton, in his book In Search of South Africa, tells of a typical Zulu massacre of whites.
Before the Boers realised what was happening, the Zulus had flung themselves upon them. Thomas Halstead cried, “We are finished!” “Treason!” “Help, O lord!” were other cries, as the seized men fought savagely with knives. Several Zulus were killed and others, maddened by knife-wounds, broke the command that no blood must be shed in the kraal as they clubbed some of the Boers to death on the spot. The rest, fighting and stabbing were over-powered and dragged away to the Hill of Execution. Above the screams, the howls, the chanting, and the rattle of spears against shields, was heard the great voice of Dingaan ordering the murder.

Just before this happened a Zulu knocked at the door of Owen’s mission station with a message from Dingaan. He bade Owen not to be frightened, but he was going to kill the Boers. Owen, who had been afraid for days, was wondering how he might risk death by warning the Boers, when someone in the room shouted, “They are killing the Boers now!”

“I turned my eyes and behold! an immense multitude on the hill,” he wrote in his Diary that evening. “About 9 or 10 Zulus to each Boer were dragging their helpless unarmed victim to the fatal spot, where those eyes which awaked this morning was to see the cheerful light of day for the last time, are now closed in death. I lay myself down on the ground. Mrs. and Miss Owen were not more thunderstruck than myself. We each comforted the other. Presently the deed of blood being accomplished the whole multitude returned to the town to meet their sovereign, and as they drew near to him set up a shout which reached the station and continued for some some time... At this crisis I called all my family in and read the 91st Psalm, so singularly and literally applicable to our present situation, that I could with difficulty proceed with it!”

The Boers died fighting hopelessly to the last. Retief was made to witness the death of his son and his followers. The young boys were killed with the others. The bodies were piled upon the hill of death, and over them were the bodies of the grooms and
attendants. The heart and liver of Retief were removed and taken to Dingaan so that he might look upon them. Over sixty Boers, one Englishman, and numerous attendants lay dead in the sunlight of that morning in February, and the vultures of Hlomo Amabuta came down from the sky.
And then he writes about the European response:
Under the leadership of a great Afrikaner, Andries Pretorious, who subsequently gave his name to the Transvaal capital, they formed a Commando of four hundred and sixty four men and set off to face an enemy who was numbered by tens of thousands. They took with them sixty-four ox-wagons. On the way they begged God to help them and vowed that if they were granted victory they would build a church and for ever keep the day of their triumph as a Holy Sabbath. Professor Uys tells me that while this vow was made, the laager was guarded by Englishmen.

The commando made contact with the enemy near the Zulu capital and formed a laager with a river at their back. In the morning the Zulus attacked and the Boers held their fire until the enemy was ten yards off, then a hail of elephant ball and buck-shot poured from the wagons. The battle lasted three hours and the Boer guns were smoking hot.

Then came the moment in the plan of a Boer battle which above all others rouses admiration. Bart Pretorious, the brother of the General, put himself at the head of a small body of horsemen and galloped out, the men levelling their hot gun-barrels and firing from the saddle. In the last of three charges the Boers managed to split the Zulu army. Seeing this, Andries Pretorious took command of three hundred horsemen and came galloping out of the laager. He rode straight into the gap between the Zulus, and then one section wheeled left, and the other right, and each began to press back and drive the now demoralised enemy in front of them. The rout became a headlong flight.

When the Boers rallied and assembled, and came back to the laager with their hot guns and their spent ponies, they saw that the river was red with Zulu blood; and its name on the map to-day is Blood River. If one sometimes suspects upon reading of these Homeric contests, that the casualties must have been estimated on a classical basis, there is at least firm authority for the statement that the Zulu dead at Blood River, which were carefully counted, numbered some three thousand.
H. V. Morton describes the battles as Homeric. But Homer in his wildest imagination could not have conceived of the heroism displayed by the Afrikaners, and the South South African English. And they kept their vow:
At Pietermaritzburg, which became the capital of the republic in Natal, they built a church; and to this day December 16, Dingaan’s Day, is a solem day of remembrance throughout the Union.
The reason the neo-pagans keep attempting to win whites over to neo-paganism is because they think they must have the strength of numbers in order to win battles. Since they don’t believe in the Christian God, they are unable to see that numbers do not ultimately determine the victor in battle. The great victories of Christian Europeans always came against a multitudinous majority. It is the singleness of purpose that comes from a common faith, and not numbers, that the Europeans need. They do not need “one man more” to fight their modern battle of Agincourt.

I know in my own life the only times I’ve ever approached the heroic mode was when I invoked my God. And if we look at the incredible history of the European people, we see that it was their God, the Christ, who inspired them to a level of heroism that the post-Christian man has never and will never come close to reaching.

The liberals have buried the cross of Christ fathoms deep in the ocean. They now sleep quite content in the knowledge that no European is capable of, or willing to, resurrect that cross. But the God who made the deaf hear and the blind see can also make heroes of ordinary men who still seek Him in their hearts. The faithful European will plunge the depths and bring His Cross to the surface again. And then? The European Phoenix will rise from the ashes of neo-pagan despair and suicidal liberalism and bear witness to the world that it is only through His Cross that a people can overcome the world. +

Labels: ,

Saturday, December 05, 2009

Interview with the Young Drummer

No dream of the future, my spirit can cheer;

Interviewer: I’m afraid I’ve become the type of person who only gets in touch when I am depressed.

Young Drummer: Well, at least you keep in touch.

INT: I received a blast from the past recently in the form of a letter from an old friend in the pro-life movement. As he prattled on about new legislation and voting ‘pro-life’ I remembered why I parted company with the pro-lifers. It was not because I became indifferent to the evil of legalized abortion; it was because I saw that the pro-lifers held something more sacred than life in the womb.

YD: And what was that?

INT: Democracy.

YD: Yes, it is rather ridiculous to think mass murder can be halted with a few outraged telephone calls to your congressman and few neighborhood petitions.

INT: Some babies have been saved by pro-lifers, so I can’t say the pro-life movement has been for naught, but if we look at the goal of the pro-lifers, to make abortion illegal, we must call the pro-life movement a colossal failure. And I find it truly amazing and unconscionable that the pro-lifers are unwilling to look at their movement and ask themselves why they failed.

YD: The pro-life movement failed because the pro-lifers violated the first commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

INT: And the great god ‘Democracy’ is a jealous God.

YD: Yes, he is. The pro-lifers were never willing to go outside of the democratic box. There was something more precious to them than protecting babies in their mothers’ wombs, and that precious something was egalitarian democracy.

INT: I knew the pro-life movement was finished when one of the leaders of the movement offered a reward for information leading to the arrest and prosecution of anyone harming an abortion doctor.

YD: Yes, it was a sorry spectacle.

INT: Would it be wrong to say that the pro-life movement failed because the men and women in the movement were half-way house Christians, in that they were genuinely appalled by the ugliest manifestation of modernity, legalized abortion, but they were unwilling to attack such pillars of democracy as racial egalitarianism and feminism?

YD: You’re correct. In fact, I’d take it a step further and say that there can be no anti-abortion movement unless there is a white Christian movement which opposes, with fire and sword, racial egalitarianism and feminism. The Catholic bishops talked about the seamless garment of capital punishment, nuclear disarmament, and abortion. But that was not the seamless garment with which they should have been concerned. It was God’s seamless garment of different races fulfilling different functions within His divine plan. When racial distinctions are blurred, so is every other aspect of human life.

INT: In other words, racial Babylon is the breeding ground for legalized abortion.

YD: Yes.

INT: I don’t see any chance, at the moment, of a resurgence of white European solidarity. The white pagan nationalists hate Christian Europeans and the halfway house Christians all scream for egalitarian democracy and the worship of the black man.

YD: Start with one European and go from there. And never forget that the path to His kingdom goes through old Europe.

INT: This past week seemed to be my week for unpleasant visitors from the past. An old acquaintance brought up the Mel Gibson movie again.

YD: Which one?

INT: The one that’s supposed to be about Christ.

YD: I take it that you didn’t care for the movie?

INT: I never actually saw the whole film, I only saw some clips of it, so I’m open to the charge that my extreme distaste for Gibson’s other movies has blinded me to the value of his Christ movie. But I hated the parts of the movie I did see. Gibson seemed to be taking the Christ story and turning it into a horror film. I don’t see how a human being could watch it. And yet, millions of people went to see it.

YD: Why should that surprise you? You live in the most decadent of times in the most decadent country.

INT: True, but decadence masked as Christianity is even more repulsive than straight decadence. It wasn’t that long ago that Zeffirelli made a beautiful movie about Jesus of Nazareth. We are not numbed with horror after viewing Zeffirelli’s film, we feel uplifted.

YD: But couldn’t Gibson claim he was finally making a realistic movie about Christ, a movie that actually depicted the reality of the crucifixion?

INT: He might make that claim, but he would be in error. The object of art is to manipulate or distort material reality in order to show the spiritual reality behind the material facade. Virtually every European depiction of the crucifixion, prior to Gibson, certainly showed a suffering Christ, but at the same time the older artists turned our eyes away from gore and toward that face, whose light could never be dimmed by gore. The older artists were aware that too much “realism” is unrealistic. If you are going to be totally realistic, why not depict Christ naked as our modern historians tell us he was? How realistic do you want to be? Too much realism has a dehumanizing effect.

YD: I agree with you about the dehumanizing aspects of the Gibson film, but I don’t think everyone who went to see it went because they were decadent. With some, it was the Emperor’s new clothes syndrome. Some expert clergyman told them it was a good Christian film, so they didn’t dare say it was a disgusting blood fest lest it be said they were not good Christians. Those are the best of the people who went to see the film. I’m sure there were many hardcore sadists who went to see the film for reasons it is not necessary to dwell on.

INT: But why did so many ‘religious experts’ want the film to be seen?

YD: Because the experts have a vested interest in a non-personal Christianity. The Gibson film fit right into their world-view. When Christ is seen as just a bloody carcass, one can project whatever meaning one wants to project on Christ’s Passion. To a trad like Gibson, it means God is a tough guy who can take it and dish it out. No one but Gibson and his fellow sedis can enter the Kingdom. To the Novus Ordo, New Age bunch, it is the example of a good man suffering for social justice. And to the pagan tough guys, it means a whole host of booted Nazi-type things that again, I’d rather not dwell on.

INT: It all hinges on the person of Christ, doesn’t it?

YD: Yes, it does. The Mississippi River winds through the United States like a big snake. At certain points of the river it seems like one branch of the river is the whole river, but the branches are just that, branches of the river; they are not separate rivers. They are parts of one river with one source. So it is with Christianity. It is quite easy to take an isolated branch of it for the whole. God’s omnipotence might be one branch. His mercy might be another, His justice another, and so on... The way to avoid that type of truncated religion is to go back to the source – to the God-Man.

INT: That sounds so simple, but it isn’t, is it?

YD: No, it is not. Satan wants to depersonalize all of our existence. If he succeeds in getting us to believe that we are impersonal essences rather than personalities with a personal existence, then he can rule the roost. You should keep these words before you: “It stands on me to defend, not to debate.”

INT: I understand, but that can get awfully lonely.

YD: Yes, it can. But if you’re going to give up the fight because you’re lonely, change the name of your blog to something else.

INT: Point taken. Conceding that all topics end up being the same topic, let’s move on to another topic. I’ve noticed, to my dismay, that things are even worse than they seem.

YD: To what do you refer?

INT: The right-wing. One would like to be a member of a group, no matter how small, opposed to modernity. But the right-wing is not opposed to modernity. They are simply modernized pagans – Odins with computers – they are not the Christian men and women one wants to throw his lot in with. They don’t seem to realize that the survival of the white race is a matter of no importance if it only means the collective survival of the race. I want the faith that says individual personalities of the white race, and every race, survive after death, to be preserved. Hence I want the Christ-bearing race to survive. But if He be not risen, I could care less about race, or anything else for that matter.

YD: Yes, they are a pathetic bunch. There isn’t much difference between Odin and Gandhi in the end. One eats beef, the other eats fruit, but both are pagans.

INT: Which is why my fellow 21st century human beings simply make me feel my aloneness all the more acutely.

YD: Choose the past. You admire the 19th century Christians — stay with them. There is a Welsh poem that speaks to your problem specifically:

The ash grove, how graceful, how plainly 'tis speaking,
The harp through it playing has language for me.
Whenever the light through its branches is breaking
A host of kind faces is gazing on me.
The friends of my childhood again are before me,
Each step wakes a memory as freely I roam.
With soft whispers laden its leaves rustle o'er me,
The ash grove, the ash grove alone is my home.

My laughter is over, my step loses lightness,
Old countryside measures steal soft on my ear;
I only remember the past and its brightness,
The dear ones I mourn for again gather here.
From out of the shadows their loving looks greet me
And wistfully searching the leafy green dome,
I find other faces fond bending to greet me,
The ash grove, the ash grove alone is my home.
My lips smile no more, my heart loses its lightness
No dream of the future my spirit can cheer;
I only can brood on the past and its brightness,
The dead I have mourned are again living here.
From ev'ry dark nook they press forward to meet me;
I lift up my eyes to the broad leafy dome,
And others are there looking downward to greet me;
The ash grove, the ash grove alone is my home.

INT: Yes, that poem has a haunting beauty. But one can’t live in the past for the obvious reason that it’s past, and it no longer has a material body.

YD: That’s not true. In the spiritual realm there is no past. Everything that is of the spirit is always in the present. And the dead have bodies and personalities even if they don’t have fleshly bodies. But mere material bodies without a spiritual dimension, such as you see in modern men and women, are less real than the so- called dead are.

INT: Again, I understand, and, more than just in part, believe what you are saying. But living it is not easy.

YD: I think there is a connection between the fairy tale apprehension of the Faith and Christ’s admonition: “Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” If you allow the dead souls of the living to obscure the true fairy tale Faith of the dead, you will lose the Kingdom of Heaven.

INT: When seen in that light, namely that to fail to apprehend life in a fairy tale manner is to lose God, one cannot yield one inch to modernity.

YD: Yes, think of those who would deprive you of that insight as the Zulus, and in some cases they will be actual Zulus, attacking the Welshmen at York’s Drift.

INT: You seem to be on a Welsh kick today.

YD: Not by any plan. The Welsh poems seem appropriate this time.

INT: Well, are you going to quote the lines or do I have to?

YD: You do it. They are good lines to end an interview with.

INT: “Keep these fighting words before ye — Cambria will not yield.” +

Labels: ,