The Hope of Europe

Light may come where all looks darkest,
Hope hath life, when life seems o’er.

-Thomas Moore

The rebellion in Libya is big news because it can be cast in an angelic light: “The common people are rising up and casting out an evil dictator; soon there will be a democracy in Libya.” First, it is highly unlikely that the demise of Khadafy will bring about the establishment of a Western-style democracy. And secondly, even if the Libyans could establish a Western-style democracy, it would not be a blessing, it would be a curse. But since the “rebellion” can be placed in a utopian context, part of the ongoing and upward march of mankind, we will be treated to non-stop bulletins about the rebellion’s progress until the new government comes to power and starts slaughtering its citizens, at which point there will be silence.

The recent London riots by the Muslims and the blacks did not receive the laudatory coverage from the Western media that the Libya rebellion received. The reportage of the London riots was vague and mystical: “Some unknown thugs are causing problems.” The reason for the difference in the news coverage between the two rebellions is obvious. The Libyan riots can be proclaimed as a movement toward utopia while the London riots, if reported accurately, would show that the great liberal utopia of religious inclusion and Negro worship is not working.

In my first year as a police officer I shared a patrol car with a veteran officer who was, looking back on it, one of the last instinctual Europeans. His uncommon common sense came from his instincts as a white man, instincts that modern white men have forsaken. Jim was particularly sound on the subject of Negroes. When they were under lock and key, and when one of the weaker Negroes needed help against the stronger, predatory Negroes, Jim was humane to them, much more humane than the Negroes were to each other. But Jim knew the Negroes; he knew about their propensities toward rape, robbery, and murder, and he knew that those propensities could break out at anytime if the Negroes were not kept in check by white men. Jim never could understand why the educated establishment of his own country encouraged black violence and persecuted and prosecuted white men, especially policemen, who tried to stop black violence. Having come from academia I tried to explain liberals to Jim, but I never could get him to understand liberals. Their beliefs were just too alien to him. He retired a confused and embittered man.

It was good for me to look at liberalism from Jim’s perspective, because we tend to get too accepting of liberals, too tolerant of their inhumanity, and too tolerant of their presence among us. They are loathsome, reptilian creatures devoid of all the attributes of humanity. Jim understood that. What he failed to understand was the reason for the liberals’ inhumanity. Why would people who seemed to be white themselves preach white genocide? And why would outwardly respectable whites laud and praise black barbarians? Of course, we know the answer. The liberals preach white genocide and praise and honor black barbarians because they worship the Negro, who is the centerpiece of their utopian vision of a Christian paradise on earth that is devoid of Christians and Jesus Christ. Everything that seems to serve the liberals’ vision of a brave new world devoid of Christian Europeans is supported by the liberals. The rebellion in Libya, for instance, feeds the liberals’ fantasy that all people everywhere (except antique Europeans) want to move their country towards the universal utopian state envisioned by the liberals. And often Arab rebels, who know the liberals’ vision of utopia, use that vision of the liberals for their own propaganda purposes. Do you remember, if you’re old enough, when the Iranian “students,” who took the Americans hostage in the late 1970’s, let the Negro and women hostages go? They were aware of the liberal hierarchy. Blacks and women were part of utopia and therefore valued; white men were not slated to be part of utopia, therefore they were of no consequence.

There is a wall, a spiritual wall, that is much more formidable than the old Berlin Wall. It is the wall that Satan has built around Liberaldom. Outside the wall are the antique European males and the European women who have remained faithful to them. Inside the wall are the people of color, the liberals, and the white grazers. The grazers are permitted to feed in the pastures of Liberaldom so long as they behave themselves and don’t make a fuss when some of their own are taken out of the herd and sent to the slaughterhouses of Liberaldom. When the grazers seek to improve the conditions of their grazing pastures, they must frame their appeals in terms that do not suggest there is anything wrong with Liberaldom. Indeed, what could be wrong in paradise? So when grazing whites protest abortion, they make it a black issue: “It is black genocide” they say, “and therefore it is racist and wrong.” The Pope of the grazing whites includes all faiths in his pasture and talks about the necessity of getting a black pope to preside over the integrated pastures of black and white sheep. “Christianity is compatible with Liberaldom,” the head grazer tells the liberals, “and we are quite willing to subordinate our faith to the dictates of your Negro-worshipping faith.”

The walls of Liberaldom are invisible but they are real and the liberals guard them with a religious zeal. The United States of America has the most impregnable walls. Just look at American-European Liberaldom and compare it to European Liberaldom. In European Liberaldom there is some room, albeit not very much, for dissent, because of the European multi-party systems. A Le Pen or a Geert Wilders can actually run for office while holding views that are contrary to Liberaldom, but even those men must couch their dissent in the mildest terms: “I respect all people; I just want my people to receive equal rights.” And when has a mild dissenter ever achieved actual power in Liberaldom? But still we must give the liberal star to the United States, “The Land of the Free.” In the United States there are only two parties and no one running for office in either party is permitted to speak against Liberaldom and for white Europeans. The only voting option that is left an American European is a vote for a candidate, such as Ron Paul, who wants to liquidate the white race at a slower rate than his democratic counterparts. We ultimately are talking about a minute difference between the European and the European American. They are both in the same boat, and they are both, as the saying goes, seasick.

Every parent who home schools now, or did home school when his children were growing up, has heard the refrain, “But what about socialization? How will your children become socialized? Of course, that is the point. The antique European does not want his children socialized. He wants them to hate Liberaldom with all their heart and soul. And if they don’t hate Liberaldom with all their heart and soul, they will eventually become part of Liberaldom.

The antique European is like the home schooled child. Christ has nurtured and taught the European at home, by the hearth fire where charity reigned supreme over ruin and death. If we leave that hearth fire to become part of Liberaldom, instead of spreading that hearth fire throughout Liberaldom until Liberaldom is in flames, we will be drained of faith and life by the liberal succubus.

When you claim, as I do, that there is no hope for the white man within the framework of liberal, Negro-worshipping democracy, the conservatives and the halfway-house Christians claim you are depriving them of hope. I don’t see it that way. I am trying to turn their hearts away from a false hope in order that they might someday turn to our only hope. Spiritually Russian communism was akin to liberal democracy. Just as Russian prisoners living under a death sentence needed to divest themselves of a false hope in a reprieve from the Central Executive Committee, so do white men living under a death sentence within the walls of democratic Liberaldom need to divest themselves of their false hope.

There were eight prisoners under sentence of death in the cell, but every one of them, after all, had sent a petition to Kalinin and every one expected a commutation, and therefore: “You today, me tomorrow.” They moved away and looked on indifferently while the condemned man was tied up, while he cried out for help, while they shoved a child’s rubber ball into his mouth. (Now, looking at that child’s ball, could one really guess all its potential uses? What a good example for a lecturer on the dialectical method!)

Does hope lend strength or does it weaken a man? If the condemned men in every cell had ganged up on the executioners as they came in and choked them, wouldn’t this have ended the executions sooner than appeals to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee? When one is already on the edge of the grave, why not resist?

But wasn’t everything foredoomed anyway, from the moment of arrest? Yet all the arrested crawled along the path of hope on their knees, as if their legs had been amputated.

There is no mercy in liberals, so let’s keep our powder dry and at the right moment cry, “God for Harry! England and Saint George!”

Hope is part of a triumvirate that includes faith and charity. It would be blasphemous to think that true Christian hope can exist in a world without faith and without charity. It is not pleasant to feel one’s self alone in a hostile world, but it is far more unpleasant, in fact it is unbearable, to live in a land without faith, hope, and charity, and to think that there is no other world. This is the reason we need to believe in a spiritual realm, the realm of Christian Europe, beyond the walls of Liberaldom. So long as we see that other world clearly we will never be part of Liberaldom; instead we will be the scourge of Liberaldom. There is no higher calling for a European.

Look at the two worlds clearly. There can be no fairy tale endings if we no longer chose to live in that land of faith, hope, and charity called Christian Europe. Liberals systematically constructed a world where genuine faith, hope, and charity are outlawed, but for how long can they maintain such a kingdom? They will maintain it only so long as the Europeans deny their blood. When the men of fairy tale Europe, His Europe, see with their hearts instead of their heads they will be ready to take back their own again. And once taken, they will hold Christian Europe against all the world. +

Death in Life

Wake ye from your sleep of death,
Minstrels and bards of other days!
For the midnight wind is on the heath,
And the midnight meteors dimly blaze:
The Spectre with his Blood Hand,
Is wandering through the wild woodland;
The owl and the raven are mute for dread,
And the time is meet to awake the dead!

-Walter Scott

There is a relatively new development in the ongoing race war which only one side, the wrong side, is fighting. Blacks are now using what I believe is called ‘social media’ to aid them in their war against white people. The blacks target a particular area, such as a mall or shopping center, and they use their cell phones to help coordinate the attack. At the opportune moment, a black horde of twitterers descend upon their white victims to rob, rape, and murder them. O brave new liberal world that has such creatures in it!

Of course the media do not report the crimes as racially motivated. When the crimes are reported at all, and they generally are not reported, they are reported as crimes committed by “youths.” Wouldn’t the liberals howl if I did a documentary on Nazi Germany and reported that the upper echelon of the Nazi party was composed of middle-aged men of unknown origin?

Let’s look at this as Shane would look at it. He didn’t like the fact that Stark Wilson had the front wall and he was left in the open part of the room. But he accepted it as the reality he had to face and deal with. And in the end Stark Wilson was dead.

The reality is that the black race hates the white race. Blacks will kill, rob, and rape white people unless white people show them, in no uncertain terms, that there will be consequences for their actions. The black hatred of the white is not the result of slavery or poverty or anything the white is supposed to have done to the black. The blacks hate the white race because it is in their nature to hate; they have been at war with the white race since the beginning of time. It is only in modern times, however, that a large minority of white people, called liberals, have joined with the blacks in their maniacal hatred of the white race. And the rest of the whites, the grazers, have consented to their own destruction, so long as they are properly fed with Superbowls, NASCAR, and porno movies on their way to the slaughterhouse.

There is also nothing to be gained by ignoring the obvious source of the white hatred of white people; the source is the Christian churches. I know that a great deal of white nationalists blame the Jews for the decline of the white man, but the European-hating Jew we have always had with us and always will have with us. Christian Europeans used to know how to protect themselves from the Jew just as they knew how to protect themselves from the Negro. We need to ask ourselves why the white European has caved in to the Jews and the Negroes. Again, the obvious answer is that the Christian churches preached the inclusion of the Jews and the worship of the blacks. And the clergy of the Christian churches preached those ungodly heresies because they had ceased to be Christian. Just as the Greeks abandoned their gods, the Europeans abandoned Christ.

The Renaissance poets and painters often brought the old pagan gods into their works, but the pagan gods were no longer real to the Europeans; they were used to symbolize some aspect of the Christian faith, which had supplanted them. It might seem like a sad fate for a god, to become merely a symbol for another religion, but the pagan gods could not satisfy the longing in the European’s heart. He needed a Hero-God who was a hero because of His humanity. Christ was like unto men, but He was more than men, not by virtue of His inhumanity but by virtue of His humanity. He was strong yet meek, and He was just yet merciful. And above all His heart was aflame with the charity that passeth all understanding, at least the understanding of the human mind; European hearts did understand and believe. - The Trumpet Shall Sound

In Liberaldom, Christ merely represents, as was the case with the Greek gods in Renaissance Europe, the virtues of the new religion that has supplanted Christianity. Christ is the civil rights worker, the man who condemns apartheid and segregation; he is the pacifist who is against violence; he is the communist who condemns private property and greed… he is the embodiment of all the liberal virtues, but he is not, to the liberal, the Son of God. The reason the liberal clergymen scream “Inclusion! Inclusion! Inclusion!” is because they hope to fill the void, created by Christ’s demotion to a virtuous liberal, with a pantheon of heathen gods such as the generic black man, Mohammed, Buddha, the unrepentant Jew, the gods of Montezuma, and every other heathen deity they can stuff into their new, inclusive pantheon of heathen gods. What about Christ’s warning that He is a jealous God? That’s the old Christ; the new Christ is a hero from an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel. He is the nicest liberal in town, and he would never be jealous of other gods.

The Christian clergy, who are not Christian, are the embodiment of Stark Wilson, the hired gun who came to town to destroy the white homesteaders. We must face them, just as Shane faced Stark Wilson. I know the objections by heart, “What about the sacraments -- how will I get valid sacraments?” “What about honoring the Sabbath -- God wants us to attend Church!” There are one thousand reasons and ten that one could list in favor of a pious, humble acceptance of clergy-worship. But in the end we must ask ourselves if Christ, the Son of the Living God, wants us to hate our own kind. And we must also ask ourselves if Christ wants to be worshipped as one god among many and have His name linked to modern liberalism. When the modern clergy blather about inclusion, we should take a page out of Cyrano and tell them, “Say this to all the world, then whisper to me, 'I no longer believe'.”

The white-hating clergy have managed to make the white man’s love of his own into something filthy and dirty. The mere mention of black on white crime or the need for segregation brings the label of “white supremacist” down on the head of the white man who dares mention the unmentionable. I’ve noticed that even “white nationalists” try to escape the white supremacist label. I recently heard a white nationalist leader deny that he was a white supremacist: “I’m for equal rights for all people.” Is that really something a white man should be for? Are black people willing to accept equal rights? The black man only understands a master-slave relationship. If you grant him equal rights, as the French revolutionists did in Haiti, he takes that as a sign of weakness and sets out to do what he does best: rape, murder, and pillage. The white and the black can only co-exist in a master-slave relationship with the white as master. If the reverse becomes the case, if black men rule, then the whites will be exterminated, and the blacks will be in constant warfare with each other. But since the modern world demands equality, the liberals (especially the clergy) should accept segregation: “Let the blacks have their equality of the dung heap, but keep them away from my people.” The disingenuousness of the liberals becomes crystal clear when we see their unwillingness to let the white man segregate himself from the Negro. If blacks are so wonderful, and whites are so evil, shouldn’t the liberals be demanding that the two races segregate? We have brought the lie of the liberals out into the open. They don’t want ‘separate but equal’ because without the white man the black man will perish. When the whites were exterminated in Haiti, did a new paradisiacal world emerge? No, of course it didn’t. And when the black man’s war against the whites of Europe and the United States ends with the extermination of the whites a new paradise will not emerge.

Of course it’s a “if these shadows are not altered” scenario. The death of the white man only seems inevitable when we look at contemporary, Negro-worshipping Liberaldom. We know that the white European once drew strength from Christ, not from democratic ideals and dreams of liberal utopias. If He could once again become the focus of the European, then there would be no attack on the innocent that would go unavenged and there would be no “inclusiveness” in the Christian churches.

In Scott’s epic poem Marmion he writes about the tangled web of a liar:

O, what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practice to deceive.

Satan ensnared Adam and Eve with his lie about a power in nature that was greater than God. And when the clergy studied nature as something separate and distinct from God, they came to believe in the lie of their own godlike powers. “If God is less than nature, and we can understand and harness nature, are we not at least co-equal if not superior to God?” The liberals have returned to a pagan concept of God, and the grazers have fallen in line with the new-old pantheon of pagan gods. The great deathlike sleep that has fallen on the people of Europe is the result of the new paganism. There are no longer Europeans with personalities; they all resemble vegetative matter. They no longer love, strive, or worship; they simply vegetate.

Can a human vegetable become a European again? He can if he sees that other Europe, the Europe of the incarnate God. But he won’t be able to see that Europe unless someone from old Europe shows it to him. That is the task of the hero. The hero is one who has not broken faith with the past and who embodies in his person the virtues of the past. The survival of a remnant, a “chosen few,” is a mystery. Why are there always some men who still see with blinding sight? It’s not given to us to know such things as we might know the answer to a mathematical equation. God’s grace and our free will are of the spirit, and such things cannot be measured, quantified, or put in a silver rod.

There is a false dichotomy that theologians addicted to the dialectic often set up. They label certain virtues ‘active virtues’ and others ‘passive virtues.’ In reality, there is no dichotomy. The inner contemplative war against invisible principalities and powers that takes place in the dark night of our soul is a necessary preparation for the outer war against visible principalities and powers. What does that mean in the modern world? It means that white people won’t fight for their own because they no longer have the spiritual depth to fight the good fight in the deepest recesses of their souls. Without the spirit to protect and defend their kith and kin, white people have lost the will to protect and defend as well. It would take a miracle, like a man rising from the dead, to put the spirit of faith and the will to fight in the white man.

Lincoln was wrong when he claimed that the fate of modern Europeans hung on the slender thread of democracy. It was Dostoevsky who was right when he asked whether it was possible for a modern European to believe in the divinity of Christ. Is our faith still so ancient and so new? If we don’t believe it is, then to whom can we turn? All the pagan world can turn to the gods of color and the god of science, but not the European who still believes that his Redeemer liveth. +

Children of Wonder

And all the old romance, retold – Robert Louis Stevenson

The response of the British establishment to the London riots was so predictable, so quintessentially liberal, that we can only conclude there is a little yellow book (yellow for cowardice) that all liberal regimes have access to, which explains the proper liberal response to every situation. On page 4 we might see the following:

Question #17: What should we do when Muslims and coloreds start ripping our major city apart, thus exposing the violent underbelly of diversity?
Answer #17: First say that violence and thuggery will not be tolerated. Secondly, warn all Britons that this is no time for “right wing vigilantism.” That would be the worst thing that could happen. Third, never blame the riots on people of color or people of the Muslim faith. Fourth, criticize the police for provoking the riot and promise a more diverse police force in the future and more diversity training for the few remaining white policemen. Fifth, make sure that any act of self-defense by white shop owners or white homeowners is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

The London riots this summer, the French riots in 2005 and in 2007, the riots in the New Orleans Superdome during Hurricane Katrina all stem from religious and racial diversity. The Muslims and the coloreds are barbarians who want to destroy white people and their culture. The riots, when they break out, are only slightly more dramatic manifestations of the daily murders, rapes, and mayhem performed by the Muslims and the people of color. What is highly revealing is the liberals’ reactions to the crises. They always circle the wagons and protect the new Babylon. They react according to the program described in page 4 of their “Yellow Book.” Their main concern is that there shall be no “right-wing” reaction to the violence of the barbarians of color. All the standard vehicles for diversity – church, press, and state – are brought to the fore to denounce a violent, white reaction to the colored violence. And by and large the diversity machines of church and state will be successful. There might be a few white Britons who will vote for the BNP in the next election, but in the main the white Britons will remain stupefied by the propaganda of the diversity-loving British establishment. Why will the white Britons (and there is no other kind of Briton) remain stupefied and helpless? For the same reason you can’t keep a man in prison for twenty years on a starvation diet of bread and water and expect him, upon his release, to fight in the arena against a well-fed, well-conditioned gladiator. The prisoner won’t have the muscle to fight, just as the modern Brits do not have the spiritual muscle to fight the satanic, diversity-loving British establishment. The Muslims have a faith, the Negroes have a faith, but the white European has no faith. Men of faith have “prejudices” which see them through life’s emergencies. Men without heartfelt prejudices about existence, men who have only formed a propositional faith of the mind, are swept away like the two little pigs who built their houses with straw and sticks.

To the extent that there is ever a response to the violence of the Jihadists and the people of color in Britain, France, the United States or any other European nation, the response is always an appeal by white people to be allowed to exist within the New Babylon. The appeal is not granted because white people, according to the wisdom of the Babylonians are evil. But even if the liberal Babylonians were willing to grant the white peoples’ appeal it would not be possible for white people to coexist with Negroes and Muslims, because both groups are committed to the extermination of the white man. Diversity does not mean ‘varied’; it means the death of white people. There is a type of malaise that descends on a people when they are in a hostage-type situation. The modern European has been taken hostage. His liberal foe has sentenced him to death, but he is killing Europeans incrementally. European hostages are very compliant to the murderers’ demands, because each one hopes the executioners will kill them later rather than sooner. I recall a hostage situation in my police district. A black murderer was taking the employees of a restaurant back into the storeroom and killing them one by one, while his accomplice stood guard on the other victims. One man decided, “He is going to kill me anyway, so I might as well go down fighting,” and he attacked the man standing guard, took his gun, killed him and then killed the other Negro when he stepped back into the front room. Why don’t more Europeans follow that unsung hero’s lead? The blacks, the Muslims, and the other colored tribes have been very blunt about their murderous intentions. Why shouldn’t we fight back? Of course the answer to that is clear. The European people do not believe they are a people. Abstract minds cannot fight.

Practical programs of nationalist leaders that are geared to gain acceptance for white people who are living in Babylon are doomed to failure. No pagan, having defeated his enemy, turns over a piece of his conquered territory to his enemy. Only Christian warriors are magnanimous in victory. When mounting a counterrevolution, we can’t leave out the faith that inspired the antique Euroepans to fight, and win, against the forces of Babylon.

There have been thousands of lost treasure books written, but for me there is only one treasure book, Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island. In the book Stevenson shows us the type of civilization that produces men who can fight and defeat the forces of Babylon. The pirate culture that Stevenson depicts is a culture much like our modern, liberal Babylonian culture. All races are united in their love of murder, rape, and pillage, and homosexuality is just another form of recreation. Against this culture is the bred-in-the-bone Christianity of Jim Hawkins, Dr. Livesey and Alexander Smollet. When Ben Gunn says he is “sore for Christian diet,” he need not say European food because Europe and Christianity are inextricably bound; who could imagine they would ever be rent asunder?

The Christianity that is bred-in-the-bone never surrenders to Babylon because… Well, because it just isn’t done. If you would probe a man like Alexander Smollet and ask him why it isn’t done, “Why not strike a compromise with the Babylonians?” he would tell you the same thing he told the pirates:

“Now you’ll hear me. If you’ll come up one by one, unarmed, I’ll engage to clap you all in irons, and take you home to a fair trial in England. If you won’t, my name is Alexander Smollett, I’ve flown my sovereign’s colours, and I’ll see you all to Davy Jones.”

A true-bred Englishman does not beg for a share of Babylon, because he prefers death to dishonor, and because he has the Christian European’s ability to distinguish between Christ and Satan. Satan’s minions offer a compromise only as a means of destroying the white man. They can only be defeated; a Christian European cannot arrive at a mutual understanding with Satan.

When the spirit is right, when the ability to distinguish the difference between a colored heathen and a Christian European is bred-in-the-bone, the practical measures fall into place. Jim Hawkins is armed because he knows there is such a thing as evil.

“I began to recall what I had heard about cannibals. I was within an ace of calling for help. But the mere fact that he was a man, however wild, had somewhat reassured me, and my fear of Silver began to revive in proportion. I stood still, therefore, and cast about for some method of escape; and as I was so thinking, the recollection of my pistol flashed into my mind. As soon as I remembered I was not defenceless, courage glowed again in my heart; and I set my face resolutely for this man of the island, and walked briskly towards him.”

Firearms are illegal in Britain and most of America’s urban centers, because the rulers of Liberaldom do not want white men to set their faces resolutely and take violent action against the murderous colored thugs of Liberaldom, but it isn’t necessary to wait for the legalization of firearms before we protect and defend our people. If the spirit is willing a man will find the means to fight.

Spiritually the Europeans are dead; no “practical,” get-out-the-vote, nationalist movement can revive them, because the nationalist leaders have not chosen the better part. They are pleading for an allotment of the liberal-barbarian pie. (1) Death in life can only be remedied by a faith in the God who turned death into eternal life; no amount of liberal pie, no matter how large the slice, can bring the dead Europeans to life.

When the Muslim and colored riots break out, the liberal establishment treat them as aberrations, but they are not aberrations. They are the logical outcome of white-hating liberalism. Contra church, state, and press the white man must refuse to be eradicated. The “love that once was there” still resides in the hearts of those Europeans who have not renounced their blood. It’s more than an uphill battle to restore Europe; it’s an impossibility if we succumb to pragmatism or philosophical indifference. But if we make the battle what it truly is, a battle of good vs. evil, and we love the good, which has a name and a personality, we will do more than keep the beast at bay, we will send him back to hell.

Where in Liberaldom is the face of Jesus Christ? In the fusionist churches? In the mosques built next to the churches? In the abortuaries? In the black-infested urban centers? And where is the face of Satan? In the fusionist churches, in the mosques… There is nothing redeemable in Liberaldom; we are bound to a wheel of fire so long as we try to adjust to Liberaldom. The raison d'être of liberalism is the destruction of white Europeans, who are standing in the way of utopia. Our raison d'être is the restoration of Christian Europe, which was not utopia but something infinitely superior to utopia; it was a land where meek souls “received Him still.” No mere liberal or savage barbarian can stand against a European who draws his sword on behalf of the European people who honored, in their hearts, the incarnate Lord of Europe. Set pragmatism and philosophy aside and become once again a child of wonder and soldier of the cross. That is the life for a man of Europe. +

___________________________

(1) ^“And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee…”

“And no man gave unto him”: there is no place for the Christian European in Babylon. We need to return to our Father’s house.

Soulless, Godless Diversity

“Breathes there the man, with soul so dead…” – Sir Walter Scott

Every so often I’ll read a conservative writer’s expose of the public schools. He tells us of the gender-mixing classes: “Gender identity is a spectrum where people can be girls and feel like girls, or feel like boys, or feel like both, or feel like neither.” Or he’ll tell us about some hideous sex ed class in which the only sexual option that is never considered a viable option is the Christian option. The assumption in all the expose-type articles is that the public, especially the parents of public-schooled children, would be “scandalized” if they knew what was being taught in the public schools. It’s as if the conservative writers are frozen in time and think there is a generic American public out there from the 1950’s who are shocked by the sexual depravity taught in the classrooms of America. The public does know, and the ones who do not completely approve, a small minority, are indifferent. The indifferent ones don’t really care what the curriculum is; they just want their children to have a “good education.” Why does the conservative hold on to the belief that there is a “moral majority” out there who do not want the sexual ethics of Liberaldom taught in our public schools? For the same reason pro-lifers back in the 1970’s and 1980’s kept insisting that the majority of the American people did not want legalized abortion. If you believe in the democratic heresy, and the majority of your countrymen want to live where sexual degeneracy is taught in the classrooms and practiced in society, you must acquiesce to degeneracy. After all, “majority rules”!

In the beginning of all radical movements there is not a majority in favor of radicalism, but once the radicals come to power and institutionalize their beliefs they manage to get the approval of the vast majority of people because they control the educational establishments, the churches, and the media outlets. Conservatives keep referring to a moral majority on their side long after there has ceased to be a moral majority on their side. They fail to realize that once a revolution is successful and revolutionary ideals become part of the establishment, a conservative can’t continue to merely conserve, because he will simply be conserving radicalism; he must become a counter-revolutionary. And saying that the conservative “fails to realize” is being charitable. I suspect in most cases the conservative doesn’t want to look too closely at the sins of Liberaldom, because he doesn’t want to be part of a counter-revolution trying to destroy Liberaldom; he wants Liberaldom to survive because he dreams of ruling Liberaldom. Again, the pro-lifers are a classic case. They persisted, despite all evidence to the contrary, in viewing legalized abortion as a misunderstanding, because if it was not a misunderstanding, if liberals were really killing babies because they wanted to kill babies, then that would necessitate a counterrevolution, which would take the conservative outside the parameters of liberal democracy. And of course outside the parameters of liberal democracy is, according to the conservative and the liberal, nothing but darkness. But by failing to let go of liberal democracy, which celebrates racial, religious, and sexual diversity, the conservative has ensured that he and his mad-dog liberal brethren will live in a world without light.

The conservative who deplores the teaching of degeneracy I and II in our classrooms is not a reliable ally in the war against Babylon. Such “conservatives” think it is possible to pick and chose what parts of Babylon they desire while discarding the Babylonian elements they don’t desire. That is impossible; once you have accepted the democratic principle of diversity you must then accept racial diversity, religious diversity, and sexual diversity. The conservative’s protest against the teaching of sexual depravity is never that strong because he has accepted the principle of diversity. John Paul II, for instance, once issued a mild protest against the feminist love of infanticide, but then in the next breath, he called feminism a great boon to mankind. Such will always be the schizophrenia of the diversity-loving conservative.

Sadly the greatest purveyors of diversity are the Christian churches. It is an unquestioned belief of the Christian churches that racial diversity and religious diversity are the main tenets of the Christian faith. It’s not possible, if you listen to the Christian clergy, to deny that “diversity” is the sum total of their faith. What is difficult to comprehend is the reason diversity became synonymous with Christianity when the Bible, a book Europeans used to respect, and the traditions of the European people, traditions Europeans used to respect, expressly forbid sexual, racial and religious diversity. The answer can be found in Shakespeare: Human beings, the bard told us time and time again, have an incredible capacity to lie to themselves. The European intelligentsia wanted passionately to jettison the traditional faith of Europe, but they still wanted to use the organizational strength of the Christian churches, especially the Roman Catholic Church, so they kept the churches and banished Christ. The Son of God now wanders throughout the European nations, looking for a non-diverse, antique European hearth fire at which to warm His bleeding hands. He can’t find any because the great lie of the modern Christian churchmen is that they still believe in the Son of God, but they do not believe and they cloak their unbelief in diversity. They tell us that Jesus wants the sons of Shem and Japheth to mix with the sons of Ham, and that Jesus wants to make Mohammed, Nelson Mandela, Gandhi, and Buddha equal – even more equal in some cases – with Himself. Liars! You hate the Man of Sorrows because He bids you take up your cross and follow Him. How gauche. You want the diversity of the pleasure dome, where there is no sin, except the sin of opposing religious and racial diversity, and you tell us there is no God who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords; there is only a pantheon of heathen gods. One yearns for the days of honest atheists like Nietzsche and Freud. They said it outright: they hated Christ.

Home and church are linked in the spiritual imagery of the European people. In the past if you wanted to describe a good city, you would call it a city of homes and churches. Satan knew that and he used that imagery to destroy the spiritual home, which is the European people, of the Christian faith. Destroy the Christ-bearing people and you destroy faith in Christ.

A diverse home is not a home. When the Christian churches pushed diversity down the throats of the European people, the European people ceased to be a people! At the local park I frequently see families having reunions. Recently I saw a family reunion consisting of approximately fifty white people and one dreadlocked, vacant-eyed, black creature in their midst, who was attached to a white girl at the reunion. What is the future of those families? Will they adhere to the faith of their ancestors – they were obviously already undermining it – or will they become part of the new Babylonian world of the future/ One doesn’t have to be a prophet to answer that question. The white grazers will become part of Babylon and instead of munching on charcoal-broiled hamburgers and mumbling nominal prayers of thanks to an ecumenical Christ; they will become charcoal-broiled treats for black savages who will mumble some non-ecumenical prayers to their heathen deities before they dine on the white grazers.

Racial diversity has always been the battering ram of the liberals, because it opens the Christian churches up to all the other diversities. If the white race is evil and the colored races are good, how can the religion of the white man be good and the religion of the colored people be bad? The white people must give way to the fusionism condemned in the Book of Revelation. Christianity must be blended with black voodoo, Islam, Judaism, and every non-Christian faith of the colored tribes. And how can the sexual perversity of the heathens be condemned? They are non-white and therefore without sin. We all remember the horrible image of Pope John Paul II celebrating a Mass with bare-breasted African women. “Once our grace we have forgot,” by accepting racial diversity as a consummation devoutly to be wished rather than an abomination to be condemned, all the other faiths and sexual orientations come streaming through the church door and make themselves at home with the good “Christian” people of Europe.

The home, not the church, is the citadel of faith. Every antique European, no matter how poor, no matter how disenfranchised, can say, “Where I live there shall be no diversity.” The first Christian counter-revolution was started in a manger, by a poor, outcast infant wrapped in swaddling clothes.

There is an evil intelligence behind diversity. He instructs his white minions, even though they deny his existence, that there shall be no diversity in the colored tribes because diversity weakens a people, and he wants the colored people to be strong in their demonic pride of race. He wants diversity only for the white race, because a diverse race is not a race of people, it is nothing at all. Without the white people’s love of race there can be no personalities, no human beings capable of knowing the human in the divine and the divine in the human. The earth will truly be a house of desolation when the white race becomes as diverse as Satan desires.

A people with no identity as a race will soon cede their religious and sexual identities as well. They will be diverse, which means they will be spiritually dead. “Breathes there a man with soul so dead, Who never to himself hath said, This is my own, my native land!” The diverse white man is such a man. How can he love his homeland when he doesn’t believe in the home? He doesn’t believe that the love given and received at the hearth fires of a particular people with a particular faith in a personal God spreads from home to home until those homes constitute a homeland. “Nothing can compare to the love that once was there.” A diverse man cannot love because he has no connection to the source of all love, Who can only be known through an intimate connection to a particular race and one particular hearth fire. The poison of diversity kills the soul just as surely as a knife in the heart kills the body. The overwhelming majority of Europeans are whoring after diversity; they no longer see with the blinding sight of the antique Europeans nor do they feel with the passionate intensity of the antique Europeans. The few, the remnant, must stay wedded to our European home because there must be a counterpoise to diversity, a sign of contradiction to Liberaldom. “Where I live,” the antique European asserts, “there shall be no diversity.” +