Eternal Ties That Bind
“I am weary of your yoke of iron. A light beams on my soul. Woe to those who seek justice in the dark haunts of mystery and of cruelty! She dwells in the broad blaze of the sun, and Mercy is ever by her side. Woe to those who would advance the general weal by trampling upon the social affections! They aspire to be more than men – they shall become worse than tigers.” – Sir Walter Scott
Writing in the late 1800’s the English historian William E. T. Lecky claimed that Edmund Burke had exaggerated the dangers the French Revolution posed to the rest of Europe. After all, Lecky asserted, was not England still standing, free, constitutional, and Christian? But if Lecky had been able to see through the surface events of life to the spirit animating the events, as Burke could, he would have seen that the ideology that made Christian men and women into inhuman monsters in France was slowly and insidiously enveloping Britain and all of Europe. What in essence is the ideology of liberty, equality, and fraternity? It is a flight from the non-abstract, personal faith in Jesus Christ, to an impersonal abstract faith in humanity. And the most striking thing about the practitioners of the new faith, which is now a very old faith, was their hatred for the natural ties of affection that had previously bound all Christian Europeans to their nations and their people. When Edmund Burke strongly criticized the radical clergyman, Dr. Price, for exulting over the capture and humiliation of the King and Queen of France, Price asked Burke why he was a so concerned about the Monarch and his Queen.
Why do I feel so differently from the Reverend Dr. Price, and those of his lay flock, who will choose to adopt the sentiments of his discourse?—For this plain reason—because it is natural I should; because we are so made as to be affected at such spectacles with melancholy sentiments upon the unstable condition of mortal prosperity, and the tremendous uncertainty of human greatness; because in those natural feelings we learn great lessons; because in events like these our passions instruct our reason; because when kings are hurl’d from their thrones by the Supreme Director of this great drama, and become the objects of insult to the base, and of pity to the good, we behold such disasters in the moral, as we should behold a miracle in the physical order of things.“Because it is natural I should.” Ah, there’s the rub. Burke, and most of his fellow Englishmen at the time, had no desire to have a new religion where original sin was vested in one unpopular branch of the human race, such as the rich or the white, and virtue was invested in only “the people” as narrowly defined by their lower class origins or by their noble, black skins. The sentimental English still believed that natural attachments to kith, kin and God were the best attachments. They did not, except for the radicals like Price and Priestley (1), abandon their natural ties to each other for a new faith in the god of abstract Humanity. One can appreciate the pride Burke had in his people when he wrote of the contrast between them and the French radicals.
I almost venture to affirm, that not one in a hundred amongst us participates in the "triumph" of the Revolution Society. If the king and queen of France, and their children, were to fall into our hands by the chance of war, in the most acrimonious of all hostilities (I deprecate such an event, I deprecate such hostility), they would be treated with another sort of triumphal entry into London. We formerly have had a king of France in that situation; you have read how he was treated by the victor in the field, and in what manner he was afterwards received in England. Four hundred years have gone over us, but I believe we are not materially changed since that period. Thanks to our sullen resistance to innovation, thanks to the cold sluggishness of our national character, we still bear the stamp of our forefathers. We have not (as I conceive) lost the generosity and dignity of thinking of the fourteenth century, nor as yet have we subtilized ourselves into savages. We are not the converts of Rousseau; we are not the disciples of Voltaire; Helvetius has made no progress amongst us. Atheists are not our preachers; madmen are not our lawgivers. We know that we have made no discoveries, and we think that no discoveries are to be made in morality, nor many in the great principles of government, nor in the ideas of liberty, which were understood long before we were born, altogether as well as they will be after the grave has heaped its mold upon our presumption and the silent tomb shall have imposed its law on our pert loquacity. In England we have not yet been completely embowelled of our natural entrails; we still feel within us, and we cherish and cultivate, those inbred sentiments which are the faithful guardians, the active monitors of our duty, the true supporters of all liberal and manly morals. We have not been drawn and trussed, in order that we may be filled, like stuffed birds in a museum, with chaff and rags and paltry blurred shreds of paper about the rights of men. We preserve the whole of our feelings still native and entire, unsophisticated by pedantry and infidelity. We have real hearts of flesh and blood beating in our bosoms.“Oh, what a falling-off was there.” All Europe has now gone astray and institutionalized the abstracted, cruel inhumanity of the first French radicals. The European has been “completely embowelled” of his natural sentiments. In the French Revolution of America, the Civil War, the white people of the South became victims of the brave new doctrine of abstracted humanity. White Southerners became non-persons and the negro was declared a demigod and invested with all the humanity that the evil, white Southerner was said to be devoid of. Then, in the 1960’s, to the eternal shame of the Roman Catholic Church, the pope of abstracted humanity, Pope John XXIII, institutionalized the satanic principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity in the Roman Catholic Church. He spit on his own people, who were tortured and mutilated by bestial black savages, by lovingly forgiving the black barbarians who gleefully tortured and murdered white Christians. And every black atrocity since that loving forgiveness was extended by John XXIII has been praised and excused by the abstracted inhuman creatures that have come to be called liberals. The original French radicals were moral monsters – they had no right to kill their king. Nothing he had done reached the level of tyrannical despotism. But everything the French radicals did and everything our modern liberals do clearly marks them as tyrannical despots. Are such men fit to govern? Macduff had the answer to that question: “Fit to govern? Not fit to live!” Such men as the Rev. Price, Priestly, Pope John XXIII, and the legion of modern liberal academics and clergymen were created by God, so we will not, as they have done to the Christian Europeans, abstract them from the human race, but we will call them what they are: inhuman hellhounds who have betrayed their own people and their God in order to serve the satanic abstraction called “The People,” which in modern times has become equivalent to serving the negro. And why should we oppose them? We oppose them because it is natural that we should oppose those who try to kill our feelings of affection and love for our kith and kin. Such feelings and attachments sustain us in our day of battle against principalities and powers, and keep us connected to Christ, the God of the European hearth.
The new, abstract, utopian faith of the liberal combines the rationalism of the Greeks with the pagan rites of the mystery cults. Rationalism alone leaves a void in the soul, so the liberal adds an infusion of colored blood to inject mystery and direct communion with his god into his faith. The obvious missing link, a real missing link, is a loving God, who surpasses the understanding of the rationalists and who also surpasses, in breadth and depth, the cruel, loveless mysticism of the mystery religions.
Despite our Lord’s and St. Paul’s insistence that our organ of sight is the heart, not the head (or maybe because of that), the heretics of the European world have always insisted that reason, divorced from the heart, is the lodestar of mortal men. It was of no small significance that the bloodthirsty French utopians enthroned a prostitute as the goddess of reason, for reason, divorced from the heart, is always a whore.
The history of the
noncolored people is a boring continuum of blood and sex. The only time their histories rise to the level of interesting is when they intersect with the histories of the white people. When the white people were strong, when they stayed close to the virtues of the heart and eschewed rationalism, their contact with the colored cultures did them no harm and humanized the colored people, to the extent that they could be humanized. But when European rationalism intermixed with colored barbarism, the bestiality of the coloreds was intensified, and the satanic evil of reason divorced from the moral sentiments inculcated by Christianity, was allowed to run rampant throughout the formerly Christian nations of Europe. The rationalist white Europeans returned to paganism and called it progress. Look at modern interracial Europe. Every pagan abomination has returned tenfold because the European has mixed his technology with colored barbarism in order to enhance and magnify the paganism which is called, by the European rationalists, the onward march of mankind toward heaven on earth. The dark minds of the rationalists will always seek to blend with the dark skins of the heathen because the light of Christian Europe is an anathema to them.
In Anthony Jacob’s magnificent book White Man Think Again, he emphasizes that the white race is not in decline because the black race is advancing. The white race is in decline because white people are retreating. And if we look at the retreat clearly, we can trace the retreat to one source, rationalism. When the white man renounced the ties of honor, faith, and love that formerly bound all white people to their European hearths, he became a creature created in the image of Satan, a sneering debunker of everything holy and sacred:
For this purpose Mephistopheles is, like Louis XL, endowed with an acute and depreciating spirit of caustic wit, which is employed incessantly in undervaluing and vilifying all actions, the consequences of which do not lead certainly and directly to self-gratification. – Scott
Yes, Scott has masterfully described the modern liberal. He uses his reason not to champion the divine longings in the heart, but to deprecate the very notion of divine longings. He is dead to the eternal verities; all he seeks, with the desperate cunning of a dope fiend deprived of his dope, is that which fulfills his own selfish appetites. The liberal doesn’t love his black god; he loves the gratification he gets from worshipping at the shrine of a god who permits every self-indulgence, so long as the devotee fulfills his sacrificial obligations. And such sacrificial offerings are easy for the liberal because he always sacrifices other whites, never his own sacred, self-indulgent person.
In capital letters writ large and ever before our eyes we should see the words, “Every time we abstract humanity, we aid Liberaldom and hurt the European people.” I recently saw a neo-pagan blogger applauding the beating of a white girl, by black marauders, in one of our major cities. The blogger was delighted because he thought that the beating and more such beatings would help whites to “wake up.” Nothing but more liberalism will come from such inhuman creatures as that white, neo-pagan strategist. To love the white race as a generic race, abstracted from individuals of that race, is liberalism. It is the liberalism of Hitler and other false purveyors of racial solidarity. There can be no solidarity where there is no humanity. The European does not love in the abstract. He loves his own particular nation, his own particular race, his own particular family, because God ordained that he love them over all. Such love – particular, intense, and personal – enables us to understand and respond to His love, which is particular, intense, and personal.
Exaggerate the dangers of French rationalism and utopianism? If anything, Burke underestimated the dangers. We have fallen infinitely lower than the French radicals that Burke so rightly deplored:
Little did I dream when she added titles of veneration to those of enthusiastic, distant, respectful love, that she should ever be obliged to carry the sharp antidote against disgrace concealed in that bosom; little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fallen upon her in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers. I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists; and calculators has succeeded…We still have our eternal, defiant “No” to the sophisters, economists, and calculators. And all Europeans still have a racial memory of the God who is the light that shineth in darkness, even in the darkness of rationalism and barbarism. +
(1) Priestley’s “advanced” views on the subject of bloodletting in the name of the universal brotherhood of man were so abhorrent to his English neighbors that they burned down his house, forcing him to flee to America, where he was petted and adored by American liberals.