Cambria Will Not Yield

Friday, February 03, 2012

In Spite of Liberaldom



That nature which contemns its origins
Cannot be bordered certain in itself

-Shakespeare

The billboards in Duluth, Minnesota on which white people are depicted as loathsome reptiles not fit to live were put up by the mad-dog, liberal Directory of Duluth. The usual suspects make up the Directory:

Central Labor Body
CHUM (Churches United in Ministry)
City of Duluth (the white, effeminate Mayor, Don Ness – no relation to Eliot – from the Mayor’s Office, the Human Rights Commission, and the American Indian Commission)
Community Action Duluth
Domestic Abuse Intervention
Lake Superior College
NAACP
St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services
University of Minnesota Duluth
University of Minnesota Superior
YMCA
It’s not often that white-hating liberals surprise me by the extent of their white-hating programs, but I must admit to being somewhat surprised by the billboards. It’s so blatant. If I were a mad-dog liberal on Ness’s advisory committee, I would have advised them not to be so blatantly anti-white, lest they arouse some whites, who had, prior to now, been too stupefied to act in their own behalf. Then again, jackals and vultures have an instinct for carrion, so maybe Ness and the Directory knew the white grazers were soul-dead and would not tear down the posters and launch a punitive expedition against Don Ness and company. Kipling warned the world that the English “were not easily moved,” but when they were they were dangerous:

It was not suddenly bred,
It will not swiftly abate,
Through the chill years ahead.
When Time shall count from the date
That the English began to hate.
Would that such a chilling prophecy was true today, not just of Englishmen but of all white men.

What has happened to the white man? Why does he permit his race to be vilified? Does he really believe what the liberals say about the white man? Unfortunately, to a large extent the white grazer does believe what the liberals say about the white race. He accepts the liberals’ interpretation of the white man’s history, which is, according to the liberals, a history of white exploitation of the colored races. Where the grazer differs from the liberal is on the subject of racism present. The white grazer does not believe he is racist, and he resents being told he is. For a time the “institutionalized racism” charge, that is, “you’re not necessarily racist but all your institutions are” kept the white man’s resentment at bay. Not anymore. Every major institution is stocked full of colored barbarians. So the resentment smolders: “Why am I accused of racism and labeled a pariah?” The white grazer doesn’t do anything with his resentment, because he doesn’t know what to do with it. Instead he tries harder to prove he is not racist and grumbles in private to his fellow grazers about being called a racist.

The white grazers lack two things that are needed to make them into white men again: they lack leadership and they lack faith. And the two components, leadership and faith, are interrelated. When the European intelligentsia, which consisted of the clergy, the academics, the politicians, and the journalists, succumbed to rationalism, they inevitably – over time – infected the European people with their faithless faith. The emergence of negro worship within the ranks of the white intelligentsia signified the failure of rationalistic materialism. Something more, something with blood in it, was needed. Enter the black Übermensch. Not exactly what Nietzsche envisioned, but negro worship is the logical outcome of a fusion of rationalism and vitalism. It’s the bloodless rationalist’s attempt to renew his blood by losing himself in the sacred blood of the black man. The once-Christian liberal will always keep elements of Christianity, in twisted, perverted forms, in his new Christless faith. Christians once believed that they were saved by Christ’s redeeming blood. Now the liberal believes that he will be freed from his rationalist prison by fusing his lifeless blood with the “vital, earthy, sexy” blood of the black man. It sounds insane, this new religion of the white intelligentsia, but it is their religion. They are attempting to become pagans again, not realizing there is no vitalism in blood without the spirit; there is only death. The antique Europeans were vital because their blood was infused with the spirit of God. That infusion of spirit and blood is quite different from the satanic fusion of white and black blood that the modern Europeans seek.

The great English historian, Herbert Butterfield, stressed that most of the important changes in the Europeans’ history came quietly, almost imperceptibly, while the noisier, seemingly more important events, but in reality less significant, got all the attention. He cites the Protestant-Catholic divide of the 1500s as an example of one of the less significant developments that got all the attention while a more significant revolution occurred that quietly changed the European people forever. That revolution was the scientific revolution of the late 1600s and early 1700s. The Protestant revolt was not an atheistic revolt against God; it was, in its essence, the revolt of a Christian people against a clerical elite that valued an abstract, rational system more than Christ. In contrast the scientific revolt was a revolt of positivist materialism, even though the original advocates of it were professed Christians. If that philosophy prevailed in Europe, the European would be worse than ere he ever was, because prior to his embrace of the Christian faith the European had ‘eat, drink, and be merry’ paganism to comfort him. Unable to return to paganism and unable to believe in Christ, the European would be lost. And of course that is what has happened. Positivist materialism, which sailed into Europe on the good ship Abstract Theology, has triumphed in Europe. There will be no revival of European culture or the European people until the positivist, materialist dragon is faced and overcome. But in order to face the dragon we must be connected to our past and believe what our ancestors believed. In the absence of that connection and belief we are dead souls whose spiritless faces appear on billboards that proclaim the evil of white people.

The liberal does not forbid the white grazers to invoke their past because the whites of the past were racist; that’s just a subterfuge. The liberal has closed the door on the Europeans’ past because he can’t bear to look at life as the antique Europeans did. Only the European of the old stock looked positivist materialism in the face without caving into despair. He didn’t need the soul-deadening escapism of negro worship because he had a faith in the God who lived. Life is indeed unbearable without faith, but the white cannot return to paganism. If he won’t have the faith of his ancestors, he will have oblivion.

The great enemy of the white man are those whites who jettison the Europeans’ Christian past in order to lead mankind to a new and brighter future in which the white man becomes one with inanimate nature, rather than transcending dumb nature through faith in Jesus Christ. Tolstoy was one of those false prophets of the future. He rejected St. Paul’s Christianity and replaced it with a type of Jungian, Emersonian, over-soul religion in which a man’s personality is extinguished by death, but he survives as an essence. The reluctant atheist, Anton Chekhov, rejected Tolstoy’s brave new faith.

He recognizes immortality in its Kantian form, assuming that all of us (men and animals) will live on in some principle (such as reason or love), the essence of which is a mystery. But I can only imagine such a principle or force as a shapeless, gelatinous mass; my I, my individuality, my consciousness, would merge with this mass – and I feel no need for this kind of immortality.
Nor do I. Chekhov gives us life without a commercial. The men and women he writes about are personalities of infinite worth, but because of some horrendous cruel trick of the universe they are condemned to die and fade into nothingness. But is that the promised end? Even Chekhov the atheist saw hope in the European past:

Now the student was thinking about Vasilisa: if she wept, it meant that everything that had happened with Peter on that dreadful night had some relation to her…

He looked back. The solitary fire flickered peacefully in the darkness, and the people around it could no longer be seen. The student thought again that if Vasilisa wept and her daughter was troubled, then obviously what he had just told them, something that had taken place nineteen centuries ago, had a relation to the present—to both women, and probably to this desolate village, to himself, to all people. If the old woman wept, it was not because he was able to tell it movingly, but because Peter was close to her and she was interested with her whole being in what had happened in Peter’s soul.

And joy suddenly stirred in his soul, and he even stopped for a moment to catch his breath. The past, he thought, is connected with the present in an unbroken chain of events flowing one out of the other. And it seemed to him that he had just seen both ends of that chain: he touched one end, and the other moved.
Maybe Chekhov was not the atheist he purported to be. For one moment when he wrote of the event that took place nineteen centuries ago, Chekhov stood in the presence of the redeemer who defeated dumb nature and will stand between us and extinction at the hour of our death. Would that Chekhov had been able hold to that vision for more than one shining moment.

It was Chekhov’s countryman, Dostoyevsky, the prophet with blinding sight, who diagnosed Chekhov’s dilemma and the dilemma of the modern European. “Can an intelligent man, a European, believe in the divinity of Christ?” The intelligentsia of Europe answered Dostoyevsky’s question with a definitive ‘no.’ But why should the answer to that question, the only question that matters, be no? Why should the advent of science make Christianity false?

In my father’s hometown the town character had an answer for anyone who wanted to talk about rocket ships and space. “Space is no place,” he told the townspeople. And likewise, “science is nothing.” It is not wise, because wisdom comes from the heart, and science has no heart. Chekhov was right to weep in the face of death. But he was wrong to separate his heart, which wept, from his head, which saw only dumb nature claiming its own when a human soul passed from this world to the next. Shouldn’t our tears in the face of death remind us of the Man of Sorrows who wept in the face of Lazarus’s death? And shouldn’t the heart that truly loves remember what occurred on that day long ago? “Lazurus – come forth!” I have much more sympathy for Europeans like Chekhov, who want to believe but cannot see past the façade of the material world to the spiritual world, than I have for the liberals who rejoice at the demise of Christianity and place their hopes in the fusion of science and negro worship. But ultimately, whether it is the heartfelt hopelessness of Chekhov, or the triumphant, satanic glee of the liberals, I don’t understand them. Nor do I want to understand them. A European who is connected to His Europe and His people will know, in his blood, that his redeemer liveth. The strength of the European people was always their faith in Christ. In the midst of paganism they cried out from the depths, “In life, in death, O Lord, abide with us.”

A false conservatism seeks to preserve the forms of things past even if those forms no longer conserve the spiritual values of one’s ancestors but are in fact used to further the destruction of the older civilization’s spiritual reserves. There is no need to preserve our democratic process, our established churches, our universities, or our “free” press. What needs to be preserved are our ties to the past, our ties to a people who placed their kith and kin above all others.

The grazers will return to their blood when the remnant band produces leaders who see with blinding sight because they see life with the heart of an antique European. Nationalist leaders who reject the Europeans’ Christian past are no more fit to lead white people away from the darkness of negro worship than a chimpanzee is fit to command a battleship. The European hero is a Christ-bearer, a warrior. His weapons are vision and memory, the vision of the Risen Lord and the memory of a Europe that was consecrated to Him.

The liberal Directory of Duluth did white people a favor. They made it crystal clear. Church and state consider themselves in a holy war against all things European. Since mercy only abides in old Europe we can expect no mercy from the rulers of Liberaldom. And to expect mercy from the barbarians of color is the height of absurdity. We have no choice but to call on Him who saves and ask Him to abide with us in the day of battle. +

Labels: ,

Friday, January 20, 2012

The Threads of Our European Past


“It is with an armed doctrine that we are at war.” – Burke

Martin Luther King Jr. Day has come and gone, but we are enjoined by the liberals to keep the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr. Day in our hearts 365 days a year. And most whites do just that. I saw a horrendous story out of Britain (there don’t seem to be any good stories coming out of Britain) about a 14-year-old white girl who was beaten by a gang of black girls. The white girl’s father said his daughter “was just a grain of sand,” without significance; no need to make a fuss about the incident. And the white girl who was beaten reiterated her father’s unconcern. Some have suggested that the girl who was beaten and her father are suffering, like so many whites, from the Stockholm or Patty Hearst syndrome, in which a kidnapped victim, after long captivity, starts to identify and/or sympathize with his captors. There are certain parallels. The white race is currently held captive by the black race, and the white people have given up their own identities in order to submerge their whiteness in a sea of blackness. But there is a huge difference between the Stockholm syndrome type of kidnapping victim and the modern black-worshipping Europeans. The Stockholm syndrome hostages and Patty Hearst were forcefully taken prisoner and converted after months of isolation from anyone but their kidnappers. The modern Europeans were not forcibly taken; they willingly surrendered to the black marauders. Why? What took place before the whites’ surrender to make them so willing to become worthless grains of sand, who lived only to serve the needs of the black race? I think my sister, who is a mad-dog liberal, can supply us with the answer. My sister has been mugged many times by negroes, but after each mugging she is more vehement than ever in her defense of the essential goodness and divinity of the black man. While listening to her talk about the ‘black man’ I can’t help thinking of the words from the Bible: “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him.” My sister’s credo, which is the credo of all mad-dog liberals, is, “Though the black man slay me and thee and every white person, yet will I worship him.” And why must the liberal worship the black man? Because the post-Christian white needs to worship something, and the black man fulfills that need.

At first it was only the post-Christian liberal elite who worshipped the black man, but the halfway-house Christians soon followed in the mad-log liberals’ train. If we look at the phenomenon of Abraham Lincoln, we can better understand the relationship of the halfway-house Christian to the liberal. Lincoln found the mad-dog abolitionists personally abhorrent, yet he ultimately did their bidding, saying, “We are both moving toward Zion.” Dishonest Abe was a halfway-house Christian. In the absence of a firm Christian faith, he was unable to resist the passionate intensity of the thoroughly secular abolitionists. Such is always the case. When a man wavers in his faith moral rot sets in, and he is unable to resist the blood red tide of men who are full of the passionate intensity of demonism. The modern halfway-house Christians have gone with the tide of liberalism because it is easier to surrender than resist, and because they lack the intensity of faith of the negro worshipping liberals. The end result is that the halfway-house Christians become one in faith and brotherhood with the liberals. The whites who do not suffer from the Stockholm syndrome are those men and women who have strong religious faith. If the halfway house Christians had not already had one foot in the liberals’ camp they would not have succumbed to the new faith of the liberals.

The grazers fill in the European demographic chart. They do not love the negro like the liberal and the halfway house Christian, but the grazers want to survive and they think they can survive if they appease the ruling elite. Their position is kind of like the average Joe who works for a boss who has made his son plant supervisor. The average Joe must be nice to the boss’s son for the obvious reason that he wants to keep working. The grazers must pay lip service to the liberals’ gods because they want to keep working as well. But sadly the grazers do not figure in the liberals’ plan for the future, because in the end the liberals do not trust the white grazers. They are always worried that a leader might arise and turn the grazers into white men again. So the mad-dog liberal, the halfway-house Christian, and their black gods will trudge on into the future together. Or so the liberal and the halfway-house Christian purpose. Their black gods have something else in mind for them; not by plan but by instinct, they hate the white man.

Many of the saints and mystics (we won’t debate here how saintly they really were) talk about losing themselves in God. They talk about dying to self in order to be open to the will of God. I see this religious mysticism, directed toward the negro rather than the Christian God, in the white liberals such as my sister and the ‘grain of sand’ father. Such “mysticism” seems somewhat sick to me even in the Christian mystics, because it seems in the extreme cases to be an attempt to place the ecstatic religious experience above communion with the living God. But in the case of the liberals, who want to die to all things white in order to become one with the soul of the black man, it is the height of blasphemy. And just as the Christian mystic often puts the religious experience above genuine contact with God, so does the liberal put the ecstatic experience of losing himself in cosmic blackness above the experience of actually dealing with the black as if he was a fellow human being. If the latter was the case, that the liberal really viewed the negro as a human being, he would deal with the negro as Prospero dealt with Caliban; he protected his own from the savagery of Caliban while sternly, but kindly, showing Caliban the light:

Prospero. He is as disproportion'd in his manners
As in his shape. Go, sirrah, to my cell;
Take with you your companions; as you look
To have my pardon, trim it handsomely.

Caliban. Ay, that I will; and I'll be wise hereafter
And seek for grace. What a thrice-double ass
Was I, to take this drunkard for a god
And worship this dull fool!

The secular-oriented nationalist publications set great store in “getting the message out to white people.” But isn’t that putting the cart before the horse? White people have to first regard themselves as a people before they will respond to pleas to rise up in defense of their people. The colored races have the same pagan blood and sex religions that they have always had. They hate each other, but above all they hate the white man. And the liberal worships the negro and hates the white man with a religious fervor. How can mere pragmatism counter such hatred? Passionate religious intensity can only be countered with passionate religious intensity. I share the white nationalists’ disgust with the Christian churches, but mere occupancy of a building that was once a place of worship does not make a gaggle of fusionists into Christians. It’s not as if there is no historical record of Europeans who were Christian. There is! And European Christians, for all of their faults, did not betray their own people by blending with the colored races or by sacrificing their own to the colored savages to be tortured and murdered. Let me amend that. No honorable white mixed his blood with the coloreds or offered his people up for sacrifice to the coloreds. Pirates, prostitutes, and carpetbaggers did just that.

After the worst of the reign of terror was over and France was under the Directory, the practical men thought it was time to make peace with regicide France. Edmund Burke objected to such a peace. He pointed out that no man could be a member of the Directory who had not given his consent to the murder of the King. How could such men be trusted to make an honorable peace with Christian nations? And how could Englishmen and men of honor in every European nation permit the principles of atheistic revolution to spread throughout Europe because of the failure of the European nations to punish regicide? Well, practical men did make peace with the regicides, and the ideals of the French Revolution did poison and kill Christian Europe.

The racial suicide of the Europeans is the final denouement of the French revolution. First, regicide was permitted and celebrated as a great step forward for mankind. Then every advance that pushed Europeans further away from God and closer to Satan was celebrated until an atheistic hierarchy passed a death sentence on the Europeans by mandating the worship of negroes throughout the formerly white Christian nations of Europe. In Liberaldom there is one major condition, to which one must agree in order to be a member of the governing Directory of Liberaldom. One must consent to the death of the European people through miscegenation, and no member of the base populi can dissent from the primary credo of the Great Liberal Directory if they want a share in the post-Christian, post-European world of the future.

Time has proven Burke right, and the practical men, who thought Burke exaggerated the dangers of the spread of French utopianism to England and the rest of Europe, wrong. For years England was held up as a model of civilization by French and English historians. England vowed “never again” after their bloody civil war, and they kept that vow, always moving into the future “while holding on to the threads of the past.” This was true of England up to and through World War II, but then England let go of her past at an accelerated rate as if the English people, having been the most “backward” of people (from a French avant-garde viewpoint) became the most determined anti-European nation in Europe. It is only a difference in degree though, because all European nations are liquidating everything that stinks of old Europe.

The spirit of abstraction that Burke rightly saw as the spirit of atheism and revolution turns a people into an aggregate herd and an individual into an inanimate grain of sand. There is no such thing as a practical world distinct from the spiritual world. We are not meant to be divided men; we are meant to live connected to a non-abstract, personal God who bids us live and die connected to Him through our love for our kith and kin. When the liberals tell us we must walk away from our race in order to be accepted in their world they are really telling us to turn from our personal God to their abstract black idols. The eternal quest of Satan is to separate man from God by dehumanizing and depersonalizing every aspect of our existence here on earth. And the most dehumanizing and depersonalizing thing a man can do is to give up his racial identity, which is of the spirit, in order to serve in Satan’s Babylonian dystopia. That man who said the beating of his daughter had no more significance than a grain of sand is a man of whom we can say, “He did not die but nothing of life remained.”

When Burke turned the sentiment in his own country and other European nations against the French revolutionists he evoked images from his nation’s past. He showed his countrymen that in their past was kith, kin, and God. Why should they give that up for an abstract future devoid of kith, kin, and God? And the Burkean vision of a people that marched into the future while holding on to the threads of the past stood the blessed plot and her people in good stead, until they cut the threads to their past in the second half of the 20th century. Now the blessed plot is leased out to the abstractionists and the barbarian hordes of color.

The moral conservatism of Burke was not invented by Burke; it was embedded in the soul of all European nations. But Europeans needed a Burke to redirect their vision to the sacred treasures contained within their own countries’ traditions that were not the traditions of abstract thought unconnected to the human heart; they were traditions connected to the hearth fire, where a man was not an abstraction, but a particular person connected to a particular people and a personal God. Burkean conservatism was the conservatism of our Lord. Throughout His ministry here on earth, He took great pains to show that His future death and resurrection were tied to the past that His people must know and cherish. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”

And at the inn at Emmaus it was Christ who showed the apostles, His people, just how intimately their past was connected to Him.

Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

“Did not our hearts burn within us…” Yes our hearts do burn within us when we are connected to our European past that contains the European Christ story, which is not an abstracted theory about the rights of man; it is the story of God’s grace and a people who responded to His grace. The new multi-racial, multi-faith world that we are told we must accept is a world we most certainly will not accept. We will not accept that world because He doesn’t dwell in that world. We are bound to our European past with ties that cannot be broken by liberals, colored barbarians or Satan himself. In the midst of the Babylonian night the European remnant turns to Him, who never has and never will refuse to hear the prayers of His people:

“Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent.” +

Labels: , ,

Friday, September 16, 2011

One Civilization


The poison of diversity kills the soul just as surely as a knife in the heart kills the body. – CWNY


In H. V. Morton’s book In Search of South Africa (1946), he tells us of waking up in a small town in South Africa on Christmas day and feeling homesick for England. But then he hears the villagers singing some English Christmas carols, and he attends a Christmas dinner “right out of Dickens.” The carols and the dinner make him feel at home. In fact Morton felt so ‘at home’ that he eventually settled in South Africa. The European people used to make foreign countries – such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and South Africa – into European countries. Now the reverse is the case. The European people invite colored tribesmen into formerly European nations and allow the colored tribesmen to turn European nations into colored, tribal nations. And the assumption behind all the suicidal surrenders to the colored barbarians is that there should be less white people in the world and more colored people. Why? Because white people are bad and colored people are good. That, in the liberals’ eyes, is a self-evident fact. It is not self-evident to me; in fact I think the reverse is true, but we’ll let that pass for the moment.


No-one except the antique Christian European has faced the present consequences of a diminished European presence in formerly all European nations. Nor has anyone, except the antique Christian European, faced what will be the final consequences of the absence of any European presence in the formerly European countries.


The mad-dog liberal sees a coffee-colored future where only black skins and brown skins exist. But in his mind he shares that coffee-colored world with the black and brown skins. The Gnostic liberal believes if he thinks black, he will be black. The mad-dog liberal also sees, in his coffee-colored world, wine and cheese parties where everyone uses biodegradable cups. He sees a world where Elizabeth Gaskell is awarded the honors over Shakespeare, and non-polluting homosexuals and feminists join together to stop global warming. Does the mad-dog liberal realize that blacks do not read the white man’s literature, whether it is feminist literature or genuine literature? Does he realize that black and brown people do not care about biodegradable coffee cups or global warming? Of course the mad-dog liberals don’t realize such things; they are too intent on their headfirst plunge off the cliff, like the swine in the Gospel.


The conservative-liberal does not hate white people as the mad-dog liberal does. He simply views white people as irrelevant. In church and state the generic person is what counts to the conservative-liberal. “If white people won’t work for slave wages in the factories then we will get non-whites to work in the factories.” “The faith is transmitted from great minds to lesser minds; it doesn’t matter what color the new neophytes are; it is the docility of their brains we are interested in, not the color of their skins or the state of their souls.” Thus the capitalist wants an influx of colored people into his nation so that he can “compete” in the “free market,” and the churchman wants an influx of colored so that he can compete with his different denominational rivals. Both variants of the conservative-liberal do not see the consequences of their betrayal of their race. The conservative-liberal might stave off economic disaster for a time, but ultimately the social unrest caused by anti-white immigration policies will kill the businesses that sought to profit by betraying the white race. And in the church the conservative-liberal who tries to transmit an anemic philosophy to the colored barbarians, while holding as naught the bred-in-the-bone faith of the ancient Europeans, will reap a whirlwind of barbarism that will kill the Christian faith by diffusing it into other faiths.


In the last week throughout my anti-nation, which none dare call a country, there was much devastation wrought by floods. Many people were left homeless, and whole towns looked more like abandoned towns than towns where people actually lived. The flood-devastated towns represent the present spiritual state of the European people. The floods of diversity have left the European people in a state of shell-shocked somnolence. Will they never wake from the hideous nightmare of diversity? If they don’t their future will be that of the people and towns who were not merely devastated, but were actually consumed by the flood waters.


We must – those of us who are not Negro-worshipping liberals of either the mad-dog or conservative camp – ask why Europeans must now be governed by a barbarian race. Is the black lifestyle, the black religion, which is really an absence of religion, something a European should adapt as his own? Of course it isn’t, but the liberal seldom deals with the black man as a black man. He casts him in the role of the noble savage as described by Rousseau, as the noble victim as described by Harper Lee, and the noble man of the future as described by the liberal legion. What kind of future is there for a people who worship a lie? The cult of the great black god is like the cult of the golden calf; it is unadulterated paganism, made all the more heinous by the shameful spectacle of the white Europeans worshipping at the altar of their black god.


During the recent floods white grazers came to life. They manned pumps and organized rescues for stranded flood victims. They were finally allowed to do something! Rescuing flood victims is still not a proscribed activity in Liberaldom, but in the floods of the future, when the white rescuers are extinct, who will rescue the flood victims? Will the great black gods step forth to rescue white people? Will they step forth to rescue black people? Anyone who has eyes to see can answer those questions.


I once served on a police force in a city that lost its power for three days. The mayor said that looters would be shot. Immediately the black organizations and the liberal press called the mayor a racist. But why did the blacks and the liberals assume the looters would be blacks? Isn’t such an assumption racist? In point of fact, all the looters were black, and the liberals put their own spin on the black looting. “It’s only natural that black people should steal things during a power outage. They are the most disenfranchised people and they don’t have the extra quantities of food and water that whites have.” But why do they never steal food and water? Why do they steal television sets and electronic devices? And why do they step up the rapes and murders during a power outage? Is that because they are poor and oppressed? Of course the liberals don’t really try to answer the last question; they just scream ‘racist’ and that, in their minds, ends all arguments. Nothing the black man does is the black man’s fault. Everything is the white man’s fault because he and he alone has the taint of original sin. The colored people were all born without original sin; they are the pure, innocent children of nature.


It’s a curious phenomenon, which could only occur in a post-Christian nation, this phenomenon of white grazers suddenly leaving their pastures to protect and serve in national emergencies. Then, when they are no longer needed, they are sent back to graze, while the blacks, who raped, murdered, and looted during the national disaster, are set right back on the altars of the white church-going grazers to be worshipped and adored. “Penance have they done, and penance shall they do,” is the liberal plan for white men.


The European countries and their offspring, such as the United States and Canada, are dying slower than countries like South Africa or the San Domingo of the 1790’s, because whites, up until the last 20 years, were the vast majority in those countries. When the blacks outnumber the whites, the rules of egalitarian democracy dictate that formerly white countries will be transformed into modern day South Africa's and modern day Haiti's. And the black majority in those newly-formed black European countries will not respect the rights of the white minorities any more than their black brethren in South Africa and Haiti respected the rights of their white minorities.


Edmund Burke almost singlehandedly turned English public opinion against the French Revolution. He appealed to the innate conservatism of the English people, and they responded. Only the utopian liberals, such as Priestly, supported the homicidal radicals of the French Revolution. One of the overlooked aspects of Burke’s criticism of the French radicals was his defense of the French aristocrats. Burke personally met with and aided many of the French nobility who managed to find asylum in Britain. Burke found the French aristocrats to be the best of the breed, whose loss France could ill afford. It’s quite possible if France had not lost such men, and many others who didn’t manage to get to England, that Europe would have been spared the militarism of Napoleon who became an inevitable consequence when the French radicals murdered their aristocracy.


France never did recover from liberty, equality, and fraternity. Appalled by the extreme violence, they decided, after Napoleon was deposed, to commit national suicide at a slower, democratic rate. And all the other nations of Europe have followed France’s lead. “Utopia Now,” if it meant violence, was not acceptable to Europeans (except to the Russians), but “Utopia Soon,” so long as the death toll was not excessive, was acceptable to Europeans.


What happens when the radical ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity are injected into a nation with a white ruling class and a black majority underclass? The result is Haiti. The U. S. Civil War almost produced another Haiti, but white Southerners had greater solidarity than the French of San Domingo. Now white people do not have either the solidarity or the faith to stand up for white people and their civilization.


The black barbarian we will always have with us. The white men never civilized the blacks. When white men were strong and believed in their civilization, they kept the blacks in check, but that is all they did. Contrary to what the Unitarians and the other assorted sectarian sects have said, the black man was never civilized. The fuel on the fire is the Utopian white man. When the white forsakes Christianity for Utopianism the inert mass of black men are set on fire to murder, rape, and pillage.


Should there be less white men? No, there must be more white men, ready to fight for the only civilization that ever existed. Don’t tell me about the pyramids or even the Parthenon. I care only about the civilization that produced men and women who took Him into their hearts and lived by the creed articulated by the Gentle Bard:



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



The humanity of God! A people who once felt so close to God that they could hear His heart beat, just as the Apostle John heard it on the night of the Last Supper when he laid his head on the Sacred Heart, is a people that must not perish from the earth, lest the earth lose all connection to His Sacred Heart.+

Labels: , ,

Saturday, May 07, 2011

Returning Home



“Once beyond the village, where the cottages ceased abruptly, on either side of the road they could smell through the darkness the friendly fields again; and they braced themselves for the last long stretch, the home stretch, the stretch that we know is bound to end, some time, in the rattle of the door latch, the sudden firelight, and the sight of the familiar things greeting us as long-absent travelers from far oversea.”

Two sad events, sad from my perspective at any rate, both occurred within the last seven days. The first event was the royal wedding. I did not find the wedding sad because I am in love with pure democracy and think that all the money spent on the royal family should be absorbed by the working class. Far from it. White people thrived under monarchies, and they committed suicide in the democratic era, so I have no desire to see a democracy anywhere in the European world. What was sad about the spectacle of the royal wedding was that all the symbols of Christian Britain were dug out of moth balls to serve the new secular Britain. If the royal wedding was the occasion for the abdication of Britain’s mad-dog liberal Queen and the ascension to the throne of a fighting King, determined to wrest Britain from the Muslims, the colored barbarians, and the liberals, it would indeed be a wedding to celebrate. But that was not the case; the wedding was merely a celebration of the British peoples’ desire to leave traditional Christian Britain behind, while maintaining their right to have a big dress-up party once in a while. The modern Brits are like King Lear who wanted to retain all the privileges of kingship while abdicating the responsibilities of kingship. And if the Brits do not stop the colored invasion, they will soon discover that their colored “friends” will no longer allow them to have their little dress-up parties, just as Regan and Goneril did not permit Lear to maintain his one-hundred knights.

The second sad event was the death of Bin Laden. It was not a tragedy that he was killed – he was a murdering, Islamic jihadist, just as George Bush II was a murdering, democratic jihadist, but it was tragic that he was not killed for the right reason, which makes all the difference. Bin Laden was killed because he attacked Liberaldom. He was not killed because he was a militant Muslim who killed white Christians. The rulers of Liberaldom would not have tried to kill Bin Laden had he confined his killings to white Christians; it was his attack on Liberaldom that earned him the ire of the liberals and the grazers. A Christian is not permitted to choose the lesser of two evils, but if one was forced to choose between the evil of Bin Laden’s Muslim faith, and the evil of the liberals’ black-worshipping, Israel-worshipping faith, who’s to say which is worse? It’s the Cyclops vs. the Dragon.

On a certain level, it’s understandable that Americans should applaud the death of Bin Laden. He murdered people, and he finally paid for it, but when the applause becomes applause for America, the foremost nation of Liberaldom, it should sicken and anger every white European. As soon as Bin Laden was dead and buried, The Obama was proclaiming America’s undying love and respect for Islam. Is religious indifferentism something we should applaud? Is the death of Osama Bin Laden going to stop Negro worship and the massacre of whites? Is the death of Osama Bin Laden going to stop the ruling elites in Europe and America from allowing Muslims to overrun their nations? Is the death of Bin Laden going to stop Pakistani Muslims living in Britain from raping white British girls? Is the death of Bin Laden going to stop black barbarians from raping white women who join the Peace Corps to “help Africans”? Is anything good going to happen to white people as the result of Osama Bin Laden’s death? No, nothing good will come from Bin Laden's death because “once our grace we have forgot, Nothing goes right.” Our nation is not a traditional European nation. We are not a nation that treasures the evening lingering of Europe. Our people, like the European people throughout the world, look to a Utopian, Babylonian future, not to the Europeans’ Christian past.

A neighbor told me he was delighted with the Bin Laden killing because it showed that the “United States still had guts,” but that is hardly something to be so proud of. Every nation in the world can find men willing to fight for that nation’s government, but every nation cannot always produce men with the vision to see the good and the moral courage to fight only for that good. Even if the killing of Bin Laden ended terrorism, which of course it won’t, his death would not be a victory for white Europeans. The white European would be, and is, in the position of Tennyson’s King Arthur, in the chapter titled, “The Last Tournament.” Arthur’s knights win the last tournament, but in winning they break every rule of chivalry, “So all the ways were safe from shore to shore, But in the heart of Arthur, pain was lord.” When young white men are sent overseas to kill Arabs on behalf of Israel and Israel’s satanic partner, the United States, their success brings me no joy; in my heart, pain is lord.

If we could see with the eyes of an antique European knight of the cross, we would see something quite different than the modern European, who sees with not through the eye. The antique European does not see the Muslims, the Jews, and the liberals as separate and opposed religious groups; he looks upon them all as part of one religious body that is opposed to the mystical body of Christ. The Jews, the Muslims, and the liberals are all competing to fill the void left when Christian Europeans decided to abandon their God and their respective European nations. What we are witnessing are turf wars between religious atheists with denominational differences. Who will prevail? Will it be the Muslim, the liberal, or the Jew?

The white liberal tries to conquer by assimilating the other atheistic religious denominations into his own denomination. This is the reason the leaders of the Western world always insist that they are not against Muslims; they are just against fanatical Muslims like Bin Laden. The anti-Christian, anti-white rulers of the Western world are of the opinion that Muslims can be made conformable to Babylonian liberalism. Their plan doesn’t seem to be working, but viewing life realistically was never a favorite pastime of the liberal. The Jews seem to be more conformable to modern liberalism than the Muslims, but that could be because the white post-Christian liberal never opposes the Jews. It is not given to us to know who will conquer, the liberal, the Jew, or the Muslim. We only know that there is no place for the white Christian with the Jews, the Muslims, or the liberals, but then why should we want a place with any of the blasphemers?

The common thread of the religious atheists is their hatred of the incarnate God. They do not believe that the spirit can take flesh. Christian Europe stands as a monumental contradiction to the religious atheism of the Jew, the liberal, and the Muslim, so all three work to remove that monumental contradiction by demonizing the European past and destroying any remnants of that past. This is what makes the racial issue so important. God took flesh and dwelt among us, and the European people, as a people, took God’s loving embrace and made it the lifeblood of their culture. A home was no longer just a dwelling place to the European; it was an altar to the incarnate God. If the people who became a sign of contradiction to heathendom because of their faith in Christ can be eliminated, there will no longer be a sign of contradiction to the heathens. Without a human dwelling, Christ will become merely an idea for the philosophers to play with and discard as it suits their fancy. You cannot defend a king without defending his Kingdom. The halfway-house Christians who claim we can keep Christ while jettisoning the European people are either fools, cowards, or a combination of both. They would give a hungry man the bare bones of a carcass and tell him it was meat enough for him.

The European needs the incarnate God, not the black God of the liberals, or the cruel remote God of the Muslims and the Jews. (1) He is now a pawn of the Muslims, the liberals, and the Jews because he has accepted Gnostic Christianity as the true Christianity. Conservative politicians tell us that it doesn’t matter if all formerly white European nations become colored nations. What matters is that the idea of the conservative party, or the Republican Party, survives. And the way to survive is to “win the coloreds over to our party.” The coloreds are sacred to the white conservatives, and to the liberals as well, because they bring numbers, and in a democratic world numbers rule.

It’s the same in the churches. The churchmen tell us to let the sacred coloreds come to the Lord: “Christ’s church does not need Europeans to survive; so long as we have our church documents and pure, natural savages, we will survive and thrive.” Will they? The soul needs a body, a local habitation and a name. If the true faith that was embodied by the European is set “free” and forced to float through the airy halls of academia, how will men of flesh and blood, because the Gnostic’s denial of flesh and blood does not change the reality of flesh and blood, know God?

The royal wedding celebration and the celebrations of Bin Laden’s death were spiritually linked. In both cases the European people were celebrating the demise of the European people. At the royal wedding the Brits were celebrating a puppet monarch pledged to support the liquidation of white Britain. And at the celebrations of Bin Laden’s death we saw Europeans celebrating a victory for an anti-European government that is determined to turn the United States into a colored nation.

The experts tell us that human beings do not have a homing instinct as animals do. ‘Tis not so, at least it is not so for the European. The European does have a homing instinct. Liberaldom was built to kill that instinct, but there are certain men who refuse to let go of their homing instinct. They will make their way back through shipwreck, fire, and storm. And once back they will cleanse their home of heathens, be they liberals, Muslims, or Jews; they must do this because every European hearth fire needs to be kept pure and undefiled for the day when Europe’s King of King returns. +

________________________________________________________

(1)
When Christianity was supreme in Europe the Jews and the Muslim often came together to undermine the European status quo. They are natural allies really, as both worship only God the father and reject the Son who was the Light of Europe and is still and always shall be the Light of the world.

Labels: ,

Saturday, January 03, 2009

Polytheistic Hell



And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters. -- Matthew 8: 32

If we just look at the surface of organizational Christianity, the Christian faith seems to be alive, and if not prospering at least holding its own. But if we go just a little below the surfaces of the various Christian churches, we can see that the Christian faith is very far from thriving or holding its own. There has been an incredible shift in emphasis in the Christian churches. Every Christian church was originally founded on the belief that Jesus Christ’s entrance onto the historical stage (birth, life, death and resurrection) was the colossal event of human history. All of mankind’s existence hinged, Christians believed, on that earth-shattering event. But the new emphasis of the religious intelligentsia is on what Christianity has in common with other religions and what Jesus Christ has in common with other religious leaders. How often have we heard Christ lumped in with Gandhi, Socrates, or -- in the ultimate insult – coupled with Nelson Mandela or Barack Obama? Christ’s importance as a religious leader is not denied, but Christ’s special identity as the Son of God, the Lord of history, is being denied. What has taken place in the latter half of the 20th century and in the beginning of the 21st century is a world-wide apostasy. The Europeans have returned to polytheistic atheism. They don’t deny Christ; they simply place Him on an equal or subordinate level with other gods. And of course that type of non-denial is really the deepest, the most blasphemous denial of all. Christ is the one true God. He is not a religious leader or a great prophet.

The hierarchies of the Christian churches almost never say it explicitly, but what they imply by the causes they support and the people, such as Obama, whom they worship, is that the Christ story in its unadulterated form is too irrational and fantastical for a rational person to believe. They will place the man called Jesus in a place next to Gandhi and slightly below Obama, but they will not grant Him divine status. “The original, un-amended Christ story, you must know by now,” they tell us, “is ridiculous; it’s against nature.” And that is really what is at the crux of the race issue. The white liberals want to return to nature and the polytheistic gods of the colored races.

When the white man believed his God was the true God, he was a racial segregationist. He sought to preserve the integrity of his race because in doing so he was preserving the integrity of his faith. When he ceased to believe that his God was the one true god, he sought to blend with the colored races in order to be part of a natural religion that appeared so much easier than Christianity.

It will not be tragic if the white man discovers that he can never really be happy in the natural, polytheistic world of the non-white races. The real tragedy would be if he was comfortable in their world, because if that becomes the case the white man will have lost his soul.

Right now the white liberals, who are legion, are imitating the swine that St. Matthew describes. They are rushing headlong for the cliff and an ocean perishing. And there is a dynamic energy to their insane rush that can only be resisted by a faith that is just as dynamic as their faith. Halfway-house Christians like the Bob Jones University potentates and the late John Paul II, who think they can run with the swine right to the edge of the precipice and then turn back, will go over the cliff with the swine.

I don’t think white people can ever be comfortable in the polytheistic religions of the “natural races.” I think, for the white man, there is only Christ or the abyss. And it certainly seems like the white European has chosen the abyss. Maybe ‘chosen’ is not quite the proper word for it implies more of a conscious choice on the part of the white man. It would be more accurate to say that the white man feels compelled to plunge headlong into the abyss. Satan is obviously the one who is doing the compelling, but the post-Christian does not believe such stuff and nonsense. One thinks of the French writer André Gide, who remarked, ‘I don’t believe in the existence of the devil, but of course that is what the devil wants me to believe.’

I spent a number of years in the pro-life movement before I realized that abortion would remain legal until the white man repudiated the abortion which spawned legalized abortion. When the white man aborted Jesus Christ from the womb of European civilization, it made every womb a potential death chamber for God’s children. Without a safe dwelling place in a culture that honors mercy and not sacrifice, the Son of Man cannot enter in. In the barbarian cultures He is relegated to the status of a minor deity.

For my entire adult life I have listened to the church men, conservative and liberal, tell us that it is no great tragedy that Europeans have abandoned the Christian faith. Asia and Africa will pick up where the Europeans left off. Is this the case? Organizational Christianity might have gained some converts in those continents, but can an honest man really claim that Asia or Africa have become Christian continents like Europe was once a Christian continent? No, an honest man cannot make such a claim. But a clergyman who has traded in his belief in Christ as the Son of God for a belief in Christ as a religious leader can and does make such a ridiculous claim. What the modern clergymen are telling us is that it is better that the whole world should be enveloped in a polytheistic hell than that they should be forced to give up their belief in a harmonious, one-world-one-race-and-many-gods faith. The post-Christian rationalists (PCR) talk about diversity, but the only type of diversity they support is a diversity of gods. Muhammad, Buddha, Obama, and Gandhi – we know the litany. Christ usually comes in somewhere in the lower tier because after many years of association with white Europeans, His reputation has been soiled in the eyes of the barbarians and the post-Christian rationalists.

Let us be clear about old Europe and the brave new world we are facing. The central event that created and sustained the European for centuries was the incarnation of Jesus Christ. The central event that sustains the new world order is the abortion of Jesus Christ from the womb of European civilization. We have not evolved to a higher form of Christianity. We have de-evolved. There is not and never shall be on this earth a purer, truer vision of Christ than the vision articulated by the hearts of Europeans who saw and believed. And I’m not referring to any one theologian or religious sect; I’m talking about the Europeans who saw through, not with the eye. To the barbarian and the PCR white, the Athenian woods are merely woods. To the European they are an enchanted forest containing fairies and spirits that come to life on a midsummer’s night and carry out His command that charity and mercy shall hold sway in His civilization.

In the polytheistic world of the barbarians and the new age whites, individual men and women do not, once dead, come back to life. Nor do the natural gods of the heathens and PCR whites. They come back in different forms like the seasons but then they die again to be replaced by other gods. But in the Christian faith, the Christ, the God of the European, has broken the bonds of the natural cycle of birth, maturity, death and decay. He can once again become the center of European civilization because He is the only God who cannot die. Yes, the white man aborted Him, but He waits only for the faithful hearts to invite Him back. And He will come because He always responds to the cry from the depths of the human heart. He is one of us; He is our brother and our God.

We don’t need great numbers to restore European civilization. God always works from the particular to the general. Adam stood in for all humanity. One small tribe of people was chosen to bring forth the Christ. And one God-Man was the redeemer of all mankind. It is fidelity to the faith that is needed, not a Mongol horde or a democratic majority.

Our race is the outward symbol of an inner spiritual dimension. It is not a mere pigmentation of the skin or an insignificant accident of nature: “...the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb.” The European has a destiny. He is the Christ-bearer. If he stays close to the incarnational things of Europe, his home, his race, and the non-polytheistic Christ of faith, he will emerge from the seemingly overwhelming tidal wave of color, tattered and scarred, but victorious.

Every modern heresy, such as race-mixing, abortion, and sodomy, has been sanctioned under the umbrella of an evolving democratic system that is supposed to be self-evidently the process by which mankind, minus the recalcitrant white Europeans, will enter into the secular kingdom of the god who is not a god. Even those evangelicals who reject ape-to-man evolution have accepted the premises of democratic evolution. It is the task of the European to repudiate every single link in the evolutionary, democratic chain. You can’t take even one step with the swine. And why should we even consider it? Where is the evidence that the purveyors of democratic evolution have evolved to a higher stage of existence than our European ancestors? Are the PCR whites and the races of color the end product of the evolutionary process? In any other aspect of life besides the accumulation of scientific facts has liberal democracy brought forth the promised demi-gods of the earth? Is the Obama superior to Gordon, Hillary Clinton to Florence Nightingale, Jackson Pollack to Michelangelo, the Beatles to Beethoven, and J. K. Rowling to Shakespeare? And on and on we could go. Our modern Babylon gives the lie to all those who would justify such blasphemies as race mixing under the guise of the evolving democratic process.

The polytheistic gods and their followers are like the swine. They are legion and they have no humanity. In contrast, the European’s God is one God and He has a human heart. He is the soul of humanity. Certainly the antique European is recalcitrant; he refuses to run with the swine. And if he remains steadfast in that refusal, he will eventually see the triumph of His sacred humanity over the swinish herds of a polytheistic hell.

Labels: , ,