Destroyed by Fire

“I may not hope from outward forms to win
The passion and the life, whose fountains are within.”

-Samuel Taylor Coleridge

I recently saw a baseball game at a relative’s house, but it was far from the enjoyable experience it could have been if white Americans did not worship Negroes. The players all wore the uniforms of the old Negro Leagues. (Apparently it was “civil rights’ week” in baseball – although isn’t every week “civil rights’ week” in baseball?) And every other word out of the white, play-by-play announcer’s mouth was in condemnation of the bad old days when evil white men kept Negroes out of baseball. The other word out of the announcer’s mouth was of course in praise of the godlike Negroes, past and present. I feigned some vague illness and left my negro-worshiping cousin’s dwelling before the game was over.

In a totalitarian, democratic, egalitarian society such as the United States of America, there is no aspect of the citizen’s daily life that is not used for propaganda purposes. Sport, at least as pertains to males, is the primary propaganda instrument of the government. You could claim that the United States government does not force white males to watch Negro-worshiping sporting events, and you would be correct, to a certain extent. The U.S. government does not use the straight-forward, masculine form of compulsion championed by the former Soviet Union, but the United States does compel in a more feminine, seductive way. In the soulless, meaningless world of modernity that is the United States, where can a man turn to get some transitory relief from the mundane reality of modernity? The more energetic turn to illicit sex, while the rest of the white males turn to sport. And our sports reflect the ideology of our government. Men that couldn’t be reached by any other means, because they don’t care about anything else, are reached and indoctrinated through sporting events. The South was not dead as a viable living alternative to the modernist, Unitarian North until they integrated their local Little League teams in order to be allowed into the universalist, integrated Little League of the liberals. And likewise the white South Africans; they sold their souls for the right to participate in worldwide sporting events.

While watching the ballgame and watching my cousin’s enraptured love for the Negro ballplayers, I thought of Carl Jung. Jung was a protégé of Sigmund Freud, but he broke with Freud on the issue of religion. It was Freud’s contention that all religious belief was neurosis, but Jung saw that all of his patients had some kind of longing for the transcendent. “How,” Jung asked, “could you call something a neurosis that was a universal feeling or sentiment?” The religious impulse was not a neurosis confined to one individual, like an impulse to drive one’s car off a cliff or to plunge a dagger into a stranger’s heart, so how could the religious sentiment be a neurosis? It couldn’t, Jung decided. And ministers and priests were delighted with Jung. “You see he says we are not sick.” Who is the greater danger though: Freud or Jung? I think it is Jung. Freud attacks your faith head on, and you can meet his attack head on. But Jung tells a Christian that it’s OK to have a faith in Christ, because He is a symbol of a need for some kind of transcendent being that exists in all people. “But what of Jesus of Nazareth?” the Christian asks: “Did He rise from the dead on the third day?” Of course, not,” Papa Jung tells us, but it’s all right to feel the need to go to Church and pretend that He rose again from the dead on the third day. “You’re alright, and I’m alright.” Thanks for nothing, Carl Jung.

Jung and his discipline Joseph Campbell, the author of the Hero with a Thousand Faces, uses the term ‘oversoul’ and the ‘oceanic feeling’ to describe man’s religious longing, but in the end Jung, like Shaw with his “creative evolution” bids us have faith in an airy nothing without a local habitation and a name. It is regurgitated Platonism, and like the original Platonism, it proved unsatisfactory to men because “hope without an object cannot live.” (1) Which brings us back to the baseball game. What if we combine the psychological mumbo-jumbo of the ‘oversoul’ and ‘creative mind’ with Negro worship? At last! Now the liberal intellectual and the common man are one; they have found an object to worship – the generic black man. Of course the new fusionist religion of abstract philosophy, pop psychology, and Negro worship is a very superficial religion. There must be constant state-sponsored events and programs to keep the Negro ever before the white man’s eyes, lest he forget that he is supposed to worship and adore the Negro, who is not really (when we look at him as he is) a very adorable object of worship.

The reason right-wingers from the BNP and the American Renaissance fail to make a dent in the liberal machine is because they do not see that the civil rights movement was not about equal rights for blacks. Some whites who were involved in the civil rights movement, quite possibly a majority, might have told themselves and believed their own lie, that they wanted civil rights for the black man. But that is not what they were after then or now. The white liberals wanted a new god to replace the old, dead God named Jesus Christ. No disenfranchised white European will become enfranchised by pleading for equal rights with the black man. Such a plea strikes the white liberal as blasphemous. How can sinful man (remember original sin still exists in the white man) obtain equality with the black gods? It’s not possible within the Negro-worshiping confines of Liberaldom.

The white man cannot fight for equality within Liberaldom, equal rights will not be given to him; he has only the right to dig his own grave. But the European can and should fight with his whole heart and soul to destroy Liberaldom. Think in terms of kingdoms. We live in a kingdom that is irrevocably opposed to everything an antique European holds dear. And it’s not a question of choosing war over peace; there is no choice. We can’t make peace with liberals that have only one definition of peace: an open grave for white men.

Liberaldom has been set up along the lines of the old Roman Empire. All faiths are tolerated so long as they are subservient to the state gods. That’s where the Christians ran afoul of the Roman Empire. They refused to bend their knee to any God but Christ. The new halfway-house Christians, who are not Christian by the old European standards, save their “faith” by discarding their belief in Jesus Christ as the one true God. In the modern Christian churches Christ is a ‘best man’ type of God; He plays ‘best man’ at the one-sided marriage (all the love comes from the white man) between the European and the black man. Of course the new marriage vow is somewhat different than the traditional Christian marriage vow. In the new vows the white man pledges to forsake the true God and to worship and obey only the black god.

In old Europe the Christian faith was woven into the fabric of European culture. When you attacked the European’s God, he rightly saw that it was an attack on his home and everything he held dear in life, because everything that the European valued was connected to Christ. Likewise the modern liberal. If you attack Negro worship, you attack a whole pantheon of values that stem from Negro worship. The feminist circles the wagons, because Negro worship precedes feminism on the slippery slope; without racial Babylon there could be no sexual Babylon. And sexual Babylon is a necessity for the feminist and her cousin, the homosexual. The capitalist who thrives on the idea that there are no natural ties of kith and kin, only ties forged by self-interest between atomistic individual units, will fight to preserve the atomistic theology that dissolves all bonds of kinship within the white race. How can he run roughshod over his fellow competitors in the marketplace if he respects kith and kin? And on it goes, doctor, lawyer, and Indian Chief all have a vested interest in keeping the Negro as the centerpiece of the new religious faith.

The white liberal has given up his childlike faith in Christ for an adolescent crush on the Negro. And he thinks, in his mush-brained adolescent way, that if he will only be faithful, loving and true to his new god, the great black god will be true to him. “Only bad whites will be exterminated,” the white liberal intones. I can still hear the voice of that insipid, loathsome, play-by-play announcer mawkishly weeping over the poor Negroes who were forbidden to play baseball with the evil white players, while he simultaneously hurled invective at the evil white players of the segregated era. Someone tell that modern homosexual version of Little Lord Fauntleroy that Pope John’s nuns were flaming Negro-worshipers, but that didn’t stop the Negroes from raping and torturing them. And I have yet to hear of a black rapist or murderer extending mercy to a white person because of their liberalism. “Though you slay them, yet will I believe in you,” is the cry of the white liberal to his black god.

The European who still calls his soul his own is in the same situation as Hamlet the Dane. A kingdom of Satan has been built over a once Christian kingdom. All the externals of a Christian kingdom are intact, but they are being used for satanic purposes. A hero is needed, a man who has “that within which passeth show…” It was our Lord who said, “For behold, the Kingdom of God is within you.” In that kingdom, the kingdom inside a faithful European’s heart, is the fire and passion to destroy ten thousand liberaldoms. If we wonder where our ancestors got the innards to keep the Jew at bay, defeat the Moslems, and turn back the colored hordes, we need only go back to the deserted European village, which still exists, waiting to be repopulated, in the heart of every European.

It’s not second sight that we need. The European needs first sight. He needs to see God as the first Christian Europeans saw Him, pure and undefiled. He calls us still, to follow in His train. The old hymn tells of “a glorious band, the chosen few on whom the spirit came.” It’s a mystery why so many do not see. St. Paul tells us that moral blindness comes from a hardened heart. The vision of our Lord softened St. Paul’s heart and turned his hate for Christ into love for Christ. The simple vision of a European hearth presided over by Christ the Lord once inspired the European people to build Christendom. When the external façade is removed from Satandom, the façade of Negro worship, and all that Negro worship spawned, the light of the world will once again be able to touch the hearts of Europeans who now seem dead to the light.

It’s difficult, when viewing the immense superstructure of Liberaldom, to believe that there ever was anything besides Liberaldom, or that Liberaldom could ever cease to be. But the faithful heart sees through the external façade of life to the Kingdom within. In that Kingdom He still reigns and will reign forever and ever. It is now only an underground whisper, the European Hallelujah Chorus, but just a whisper of His name once set Europe ablaze. Liberaldom is not forever; eternal Europe, which is His Kingdom, is forever. +
_____________________

(1) ) The result of Hardy's management was that Tom made a clean breast of it, telling everything, down to his night at the ragged school, and what an effect his chance opening of the Apology had had on him. Here for the first time Hardy came in with his usual dry, keen voice, "You needn't have gone so far back as Plato for that lesson."

"I don't understand," said Tom.

"Well, there's something about an indwelling spirit which guideth every man, in St. Paul, isn't there?"

"Yes, a great deal," Tom answered, after a pause; "but it isn't the same thing."

"Why not the same thing?"

"Oh, surely, you must feel it. It would be almost blasphemy in us now to talk as St. Paul talked. It is much easier to face the notion, or the fact, of a demon or spirit such as Socrates felt to be in him, than to face what St. Paul seems to be meaning."

"Yes, much easier. The only question is whether we will be heathen or not."

"How do you mean?" said Tom.

"Why, a spirit was speaking to Socrates, and guiding him. He obeyed the guidance, but knew not whence it came. A spirit is striving with us too, and trying to guide us--we feel that just as much as he did. Do we know what spirit it is? Whence it comes? Will we obey it? If we can't name it--we are in no better position than he--in fact, heathens."

The Light of Europe

“It’s my world, and I don’t want any other.” – Ratty in The Wind in the Willows

Reading the literature of two halfway-house Christian churches, which both present themselves as “the” Christian church, I saw that one church damned “white supremacists,” consigning them to the deepest pit of hell, and the other church urged the European remnant of their church to embrace their fellow black Christians in Africa.

Let’s take on the anti-white supremacist church first. What is the halfway-house Christians’ definition of a ‘white supremacist’? They don’t really give us a definition, but if it is such a serious sin shouldn’t we be told in very explicit terms what the sin of white supremacy is? In lieu of a definition we’ll have to infer one from the totality of the halfway-house Christians’ ravings about the sin of white supremacy.

The first thing we notice is that only a belief in white supremacy is a mortal sin. Belief in black supremacy is not a sin; it is a virtue, whether the belief is held by a black or a white. The second thing we notice is that a white man is considered a “white supremacist” if he believes his race should be separate from the colored races because it is superior to the colored races; and he is also viewed as a white supremacist if he makes no value judgment whatsoever about the races, but simply prefers to cling to his own people and forsake the stranger. There are no distinctions. If a white man wants to segregate the races for any reason whatsoever; he is a white supremacist and therefore damned. One doesn’t need a doctorate -- although you do need a Christian conscience – to see the un-Christian nature of the anti-segregationist Christians. In the case of the white man who believes his race is superior to the colored races, we witness a man who respects humanity enough to make distinctions of value between peoples and cultures. What could be more Christian? And in the case of the white man who prefers his own because they are his own, we have a man who knows that the love of God is closely allied to the love of hearth. Again, what could be more Christian?

The second halfway-house theologian, who urged that all white Christians should embrace their African brothers, tells us what is more Christian than segregation: it is the universal brotherhood of all Christians.We are constantly being urged to replenish the ranks of believing Christians by turning to the African church which has the numbers that the European churches lack. And did not Our Lord enjoin us to spread the Gospel of Christ throughout the world? Yes, He did tell us to spread the Gospel. But can the Gospel be spread by Babylonians? If Europeans do not remain distinctly white and distinctly Christian, how can they spread the Gospel? Where is the beacon light if the European light is extinguished? The blacks who actually became Christians did so because they saw white people acting as Christians within a distinctly white, segregated culture. The pre-Civil War Southern whites evangelized by keeping their churches separate from the black churches. They knew that the black churches would never be without a barbaric African taint, and without a counterbalance in the white churches the African influence would completely eradicate the Christian influence. Is it Christian, is it charitable, to paganize Christianity in order to buttress up the numbers of your flagging denomination? Christ was concerned with winning souls, not numbers. If we just count numbers, the Christian churches are doing great in Africa. But is that really the case? Does spreading the Gospel mean you should betray your own people? It seems to me that Judas Iscariot would approve of the new missionary efforts of the modern halfway-house Christians. Didn’t he betray his own under the guise of an abstract love for humanity?

Missing from the halfway-house Christians’ agenda is a respect for the faith of their fathers. They believe they have a computerized printout from God that can be used like a magic wand to change heathens into Christians. Why didn’t our ancestors see how easy it was? For centuries they tried to convert the African, to no avail, but now the modern halfway-house Christian has done it. He has converted the heathen. Wonderful!

Something more than an adherence to outward forms is necessary to make a Christian. The halfway-house Christian who condemns past and present Europeans as white supremacists, and the halfway-house Christian who thinks a little ecumenical pixie dust makes a Christian would be better advised to find out what Christ meant when he said he required mercy and not sacrifice. Salvation comes to us through the blood; it would indeed be suicidal to forsake our blood simply to avoid being called ‘white supremacists.’ Rather penny-wise, pound foolish, don’t you think?

The halfway-house Christian polygamist needs to preach a new colored Christianity for two reasons. He wants numbers because they increase the power of his denomination and his own power (let’s face it, we are always talking about a clergyman) within the denomination. It is more prestigious to rule over a congregation of millions than to be a pastor for a remnant band.

The second reason is much more sinister than the first. The halfway-house Christian wants to be in step with the secular world, and in the secular world decent white people worship Negroes and despise all non-liberal Europeans, living and dead. To be completely in step with the new Christianity the halfway-house Christian must hate the recalcitrant "racist" European. The neo-pagan has correctly identified the greatest enemy of the European people – the Christian clergy – but the neo-pagan errs when he blames Christ for the crimes of the apostate clergymen. Christ is our source of strength in the struggle against the white-hating Babylonians. It is supposed to be bad to hate, but that is just liberal and halfway-house Christian doublespeak. When the halfway-house Christians say the ‘old school’ Europeans are great 'haters' they mean to say that white Europeans love their own people. And when they say they love their black brothers, they mean that they hate whites with all their heart and soul and love the false image of the black man they have created in their own minds. But it is only an image that halfway-house Christians love; they are incapable of loving one particular people, one particular individual human being, and one particular God. Behind the ecumenical doublespeak of the halfway-house Christians is a lifeless skeleton.

The war against the white Christian Europeans has reached a new phase. Neither the liberal nor the halfway-house Christian debate with the antique European. They simply anathematize: “You are a white supremacist -- I damn you.” While differing on a wide variety of topics pertaining to sexual mores, the halfway-house Christian and the liberal are a united front in the ongoing war against white, Christian Europeans. Pope John XXIII spoke for all halfway-house Christians when he forgave the torture murder, by blacks, of his own people, and he implicitly, by his “loving forgiveness,” encouraged blacks to continue their outrages and whites to remain passive in the face of black barbarism. The good darkies in the Thomas Nelson Page novels are good because whites punish them when they do evil. That is true Christian charity. Isn’t this new found concern for the darky among “Christians” simply a shirking of the white man’s burden? In a marvelous short story called “The Old Planters,” Thomas Nelson Page depicts an old Southern colonel who goes unarmed against a crazed Negro with a revolver. He feels it is his responsibility to do so because the crazed black is the son of one of his servants. The halfway-house Christian can call such parentalism ‘white supremacy’ from now till doomsday, but I’ll always call it by its true name: Christian.

Christmas in Liberaldom is a very different affair than Christmas in old Europe. There is no truce between warring factions in Liberaldom as there once was in Christendom. Liberals do not see the need to be charitable to men who are sinners like themselves because they do not see themselves as sinners. There is only one sin in the liberal’s catechism and that sin is racism, of which he, the liberal, is free. Since he is sinless, the liberal can hurl stones at the sinful white supremacist. And when I read the literature of halfway-house Christians who call white supremacy a “damnable sin,” I am confirmed in my belief that the halfway-house Christian is only one hairs’-breadth from embracing the entire liberal agenda.

In 1980 the Royal Shakespeare Company staged a nine-hour adaptation of Charles Dickens’ novel Nicholas Nickleby. The play featured 42 actors playing 250 roles. The play, which was made available on tape a few years after its opening in London, never deviates from the text of the book. We get to see flesh and blood descendants of the 19^th century British acting out the thoughts and feelings of the 19^th century British. I have no doubt that the actors are as far removed spiritually from their 19^th century countrymen as Hamlet’s uncle was removed from Hamlet’s father, but because they were trained in the Shakespearean theater and because they were of the same blood as the 19^th century British, the actors and actresses were able to recreate, on stage, a world where Christianity mattered. Every time I view the play, I feel transported to a different plane of existence, a world where the light shineth in darkness.

I feel like the stammering Billy Budd whenever I attempt to write, but never more so then when I attempt to write about His Europe. The Nickleby production is just one small piece of the Europeans’ witness to the light. To suggest that the textbook wisdom of academics and clerics can be put in a silver rod, exported to the colored races, and then serve as a replacement for the blood faith of the antique Europeans, is a blasphemy of tidal wave proportions.

Europe is our home, it provides all the warmth and light we will ever need in this world and the world to come. If other people want to use the warmth that comes from our hearth and the light that emanates from our home to heat and light their hearths and homes, they are welcome. But we will not put out our hearth fires and extinguish the European light in order to worship in the dark by a hearth that provides no warmth. Let it never be said that Europe cannot produce at least a remnant band of men who comprehend that the light of Europe is the Light of the World. +

The Ancient Faith

Racial segregation does not imply racial oppression or genocide or anything Communist like that, but means purely what it says. It means that the white race and the black race, the one advanced and the other primitive and polygamous, instead of mixing retain their widely disparate customs and identities. Basically it means only this: That the white race is determined to stay white. This, aside from the sheer impossibility of two such widely disparate races living on mixed, equal terms, is absolutely all that racial segregation means.

– White Man, Think Again! by Anthony Jacob

The Obama’s recent apology tour around the world is reminiscent of the late John Paul II’s famous apology tour. Like the late Pope, Obama is unapologetic for his own sins – indeed from his perspective he is without sin – but he is very apologetic for the sins that the American government and the American people have committed in the past.

Of course the sin that Obama and the liberals think America is guilty of is racism. It is the only sin that liberals believe in, and it is an unpardonable sin. Ethan Brand thought that he had found the unpardonable sin in the man of intellect who hardened his heart against all humanity. (1) But the liberals, being guilty of Ethan Brand’s unpardonable sin, have redefined the unpardonable sin. If “conservative” politicians such as Trent Lott could grasp the fact that racism is the unpardonable sin, they could save themselves a lot of groveling after their “racist” gaffes. No amount of groveling can atone for the unpardonable sin.

Americans are guilty of many sins, the paramount one being the spread of the democratic heresy throughout the world, but the white European Americans are not guilty of racism as it is currently defined by the liberals. When the liberals label someone as a racist they are saying that such a person is a moral pariah outside the ken of humanity, who manically and irrationally hates people with a different skin color than his own. But what is at the heart of the white European American and the white European’s "racism"? A love of his own kind and a love of Christ is at the heart of the European’s alleged racism. The European sought to protect his own Christian people from heathendom so he built walls around his culture and placed sentries on the ramparts to guard that culture. His Lord enjoined him to “go ye forth into all the world and preach the Gospel to every living creature.” And that he did. Works of mercy were seen by people who didn’t even have a word for mercy in their language and the light of Christ’s Gospel shone in the darkest regions of the earth. Of what then is the European guilty? Of not being perfect? Granted, he was not perfect, but has the Indian ever been helped by the Indian? The Negro by the Negro? The Asian by the Asian? No, every small step toward the light, not the false light of science and progress but the true light of Christ’s love, which the colored tribes have made, was because of white Europeans. So, again I ask, why is the European pronounced guilty of racism? He is held to be guilty because he did not, when he was Christian, admit the colored races into a position of full equality with the white. But that would have been suicide for the white race as well as for the colored races. Should Satan be accorded a position above Christ? Where is mercy to be found, where is the light of Christ’s love to be seen if the heathens are allowed to extinguish the light of white Europe? Thomas Nelson Page sums it up so well. Just substitute "Europe" for the word "South":

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

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

“...[W]e will not be dominated by him.” Ah, that is what is at the crux of this thing called racism. The colored savage, particularly the black, is the liberal’s new God. When a liberal calls a white man a racist he is calling him a blasphemer. And as a blasphemer, the white man is damned. But what is damnable in liberaldom is salvation in Christendom. The white racist is the last knight of Europe. He is Galahad, he is Robin Hood, he is William Tell. What they call racism is European Christianity, the only hope for the white and the colored races.

There is a racism that is every bit as ugly as the racism the liberals claim they see in the culture of the white man. That is the racism of the colored races. The colored barbarians want their race to be powerful so they can be powerful. They have a very elemental, animalistic view of existence. With the white, Christian European it was different. The Europeans saw the continuance of their racial dominance as a sacred duty. They had to be dominant to protect their own from the merciless barbarians of color, and they had to be powerful to keep the stronger barbarians from destroying the weaker barbarians. In Mexico, in India, in Africa, and in North America it was the white European who saved the colored races by keeping tribal warfare in check. I know you can always find the white low-life who has the same view of race as the barbarian of color, but is such a person representative of white Europe? Let’s look at the European’s culture through glasses untainted with liberalism. When we do that we must conclude that outside of the old European culture, which the liberals and the barbarians have destroyed, there is no honor, no mercy, and no love. We see before us an endless night of barbarism.

Liberaldom was not built in a day. It took years and years of preparation. Satan started small. He sought out men and women who hated humanity and the humane God as much as he did. He seemed to have had a sixth sense that told him who was a kindred spirit and could be openly courted and who was weak in spirit and could be easily seduced. Now he has reached the summit of his power; he has built liberaldom over the ruins of Christendom. But uneasy lies the head that wears a crown. Satan still worries about those who will not serve in liberaldom. He worries about the white European. “Are there any left?” he asks his minions every day. “Yes,” is the reply, “There are a few.”

“Then hunt them down.”

You see Satan is a racial profiler. He knows who can destroy his kingdom: the European who stands outside of liberaldom and calls on Christ to save. The conservative white columnist who pleads for equal rights within liberaldom, or the neo-pagan who demands to be part of liberaldom, do not worry Satan. The man who stands with old Europe, that man worries Satan. So he cries, “For darkness, for liberaldom and Satan,” While we Europeans cry, “For England, Harry, and St. George.”

The great historians are few and far between: Homer, Shakespeare, Scott, and Butterfield. They don’t look for isolated historical facts to prove a pet theory of theirs. Instead they make a visionary journey back in time in order to understand the past and form a sympathetic bond with the men and women of another time. The modern European who makes the visionary journey to the European past and truly feels with the heart of the ancient Europeans will find that nothing can sever him from the ancient Europeans or from their God.

All white men are called to be Knights of the White Cross. They are called to seek that ancient scroll of Europe that holds the secret to the destruction of liberaldom and the restoration of Christian Europe. But the European must believe in ancient scrolls more than in liberalism, liberal conservatism, or neo-paganism. When he leaves those fiendish ideologies behind, he will be strong enough to face the ordeal. He’ll go through the valley of the shadow of death, he’ll face dragons, sirens, and sorcerers, but in the end he’ll find the ancient parchment. “Saved through the Cross, redeemed by the Blood, through the Blood and the Cross you shall conquer.” +
_______________________
(1) The Idea that possessed his life had operated as a means of education; it had gone on cultivating his powers to the highest point of which they were susceptible; it had raised him from the level of an unlettered laborer to stand on a starlit eminence, whither the philosophers of the earth, laden with the lore of universities, might vainly strive to clamber after him. So much for the intellect! But where was the heart? That, indeed, had withered—had contracted—had hardened—had perished! It had ceased to partake of the universal throb. He had lost his hold of the magnetic chain of humanity. He was no longer a brother man, opening the chambers or the dungeons of our common nature by the key of holy sympathy, which give him a right to share in all its secrets; he was now a cold observer, looking on mankind as the subject of his experiment, and, at length, converting man and woman to be his puppets, and pulling the wires that moved them to such degrees of crime as were demanded for his study.

Thus Ethan Brand became a fiend. He began to be so from the moment that his moral nature had ceased to keep the pace of improvement with his intellect. And now, as his highest effort and inevitable development—as the bright and gorgeous flower, and rich, delicious fruit of his life’s labor—he had produced the Unpardonable Sin!

-- Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “Ethan Brand”

Easter

I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; And though worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God. For now is Christ risen from the dead, the first-fruits of them that sleep.

I see that the liberals of Newsweek, with the impeccable good taste we can expect from liberals, ran a lead article on the decline of Christianity. The “conservatives” immediately responded with their rebuttals, saying that “76% of Americans were still Christians.” This is not a complex issue. Christianity is not just in decline, it no longer is the faith of more than a small percentage of Europeans. I think the confusion arises when we simply count those who attend Christian churches and then proclaim the attendees Christians. But the rationalist Christianity of the churches is not Christianity. One frequently hears from such “Christians” that they don’t believe in Christ’s resurrection from the dead, original sin, or the divinity of Christ; nevertheless, they call themselves Christians. “After all, who’s to say what constitutes a Christian?”

There is no absolute date when Christianity ceased to be the faith of the European people. I use 1914 as the date when Christianity was no longer the faith of the vast majority of the Europeans, and 1965 as the date when the Europeans abandoned the morals, such as chastity and respect for life in the womb, which stemmed from a belief in Christianity. Every evil of the modern world – legalized abortion, sexual promiscuity, the West’s suicidal surrender to the colored races, the Moslemization of Europe – all stem from the fact that Europeans no longer believe that Christ rose from the dead.

There is no simple cure for the unbelief of the modern European. It’s not a case of handing out more Bibles or writing more books such as Frank Morrison’s magnificent Who Moved the Stone. The European’s heart is stone; he is not interested in hearing the case for Christ. Why? Shouldn’t everyone be interested in Christ’s resurrection from the dead? Is it not the only event in history that should command the attention and interest of the entire human race? In the face of death, what hope have we but our faith in Him and the resurrection of the dead?

Take, he said, the belief in immortality, which, according to some men, is a matter of mild indifference. It is really a belief which affects our whole conception of the human race. Consider, he said, the carnage of war, with its pile of unnumbered corpses. It must make some matter to us whether, according to our serious belief, each man has died like a dog, and left nothing in the way of a personal existence behind him, or “whether out of every Christian-named portion of that ruinous heap there has gone forth into the air and the dead-fallen smoke of battle some astonished condition of soul unwillingly released.”

- John Ruskin quoted in W. H. Mallock’s Memoirs of Life and Literature

What has happened in the past one hundred years to make Europeans discard the faith of their ancestors? Maybe we can answer that question if we ask the reverse question: What made the Europeans believe in Christ’s resurrection from the dead? They believed because they loved Him. He set their hearts on fire with His life and death. The Europeans ceased to believe when they lost the capacity to love. And we lose the capacity to love when we detach our minds from our hearts. Unamuno put it so well -- detached reason is indeed a whore. What was Satan, who roams the world seeking the ruin of souls, trying to accomplish by tempting Adam and Eve? He was trying to destroy the filial heart-to-heart relationship they had with God. And he succeeded. He got them to think about God as a competitor. He enjoined them to fix their minds on the forbidden fruits of the natural world in order to become God’s equal. The modern European has reverted to the ethos of the old Adam, and he has institutionalized original sin. Because he no longer believes in original sin, he is incapable of seeing the consequences of seeking to be God’s equal.

The older European civilization was not utopia. It was only a pale imitation of the kingdom of heaven. But it was in line with God’s kingdom. The values that Europeans held dear were the same values He held dear. Can the modern European make the same claim for the civilization which he has built? Is God a race-mixer, an abortionist, an atheist? What is the hymn of the modern European? His hymn is, “Science has spoken: The dead shall not be raised, and we have no need to be changed, for we are perfect. The corrupt are the recalcitrant Christians and they shall be changed or slain.”

In contrast, let’s listen to the voice of the antique European:
“The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”

Let me close with a fragment from Andrew Lytle’s memoir, A Wake for the Living:

These men and my ancestors and their neighbors are all ghosts now. All of them await somewhere the union with their true substance. I have not in pagan fashion called their shades up to lap the blood of life and reveal secrets I would like to know. But I do ask of them a compassionate sympathy for my ignorance in recalling them to mind. I ask it in language I can never imitate but only invoke, for our inheritance in the life Everlasting.

"Bring us, O Lord God, at our last awakening into the house and gate of Heaven, to enter into that gate and dwell in that house, where there shall be no darkness nor dazzling, but one equal light, no noise nor silence but one equal music, no fears nor hopes but one equal possession, no ends nor beginning but one equal eternity, in the habitation of thy Majesty and they glory, world without end. Amen."

Beyond the Cruel Thorns

The Briar Wood by Edward Burne-Jones

After many, many years a brave young prince came into that land. An old man told him the story of the thicket of thorns, and how a beautiful palace stood behind it in which a very beautiful princess, named Rosebud, lay sleeping along with all her court. He told, too, how he had heard from his grandfather that many, many princes had come and had tried to break through the thicket, but had become entangled in the cruel thorns and perished.

But the young prince said, “I am not afraid. I will go and see this lovely sleeping beauty.”

Writing in 1944 Herbert Butterfield made the point in The Englishman and His History that whenever the English had a revolution it was to restore their “ancient Saxon liberties.” Butterfield goes on to say that no two Englishmen could agree on the exact starting date of the ancient Saxon liberties, nor could any two Englishmen agree on exactly what the ancient liberties were. Nevertheless, the English people always rebelled in the name of the ancient liberties. Butterfield thought that this uniquely English way of rebelling had been very beneficial to the English people, because by citing the ancient liberties when they revolted they always kept a bridge to the past. Dickens described the very conservative English style of change in Nicholas Nickleby:

The first act of Nicholas, when he became a rich and prosperous merchant, was to buy his father’s old house. As time crept on, and there came gradually about him a group of lovely children, it was altered and enlarged; but none of the old rooms were ever pulled down, no old tree was ever rooted up, nothing with which there was any association of bygone times was ever removed or changed.

In contrast to the English, the French, in 1789, burnt all their bridges to the past. And in every subsequent revolution they revolted in the name of the future, not the past. The French revolutionists were the forerunners of the modern liberal who asks, “Why should we maintain bridges to the past?” We should not, if we believe as the liberals do that in the past is racism, sexism, puritanism, etc. But if we believe that the past contains the social customs and codes of behavior that stemmed from Christianity, then we as Christians should want to maintain the bridges to the past.

Unfortunately what Butterfield admired in the English people, an innate conservatism that kept them connected to the past, no longer exists in the English people. They have joined the French, the Americans, and the rest of the European people who have jettisoned their pasts in the name of an utopian future. The principles of the French revolution are now the principles of every European country.

The essence of the French Revolution was its godlessness. Reason, who, as Unamuno tells us, is always a whore, was made into a goddess, and abstract humanity was triumphant over the individual men of flesh, blood, and bone.(1) Speaking for the opposition was Edmund Burke: “I hate abstractions,” and Sir Walter Scott:

An established system is not to be tried by those tests which may with perfect correctness be applied to a new theory. A civilized nation, long in possession of a code of law, under which, with all its inconveniences, they have found means to flourish, is not to be regarded as an infant colony, on which experiments in legislation may, without much danger of presumption, be hazarded. A philosopher is not entitled to investigate such a system by those ideas which he has fixed in his own mind as the standard of possible excellence. The only unerring test of every old establishment is the effect it has actually produced, for that must be held to be good, from whence good is derived. The people have, by degrees, moulded their habits to the law they are compelled to obey; for some of its imperfections, remedies have been found, to others they have reconciled themselves; till, at last, they have, from various causes, attained the object which the most sanguine visionary could promise to himself from his own perfect unembodied system. (cited in The Conservative Mind as: Lockhart, Scott, III, 305-6)

Whenever the satanic principles of the French Revolution predominate, there is race-mixing and atheism. They are inseparable, because Satan hates the incarnate, Christian culture of the European people. Faith can not exist in the abstract. It must have a local habitation. It must take root in a people. If there is no such thing as a distinct people, then there can be no distinct God. Genuine, concrete, non-abstract human beings are the conduits for God’s grace; generic humanity is without grace. The Europeans no longer see Christ as the one true God because they no longer see anything in the particular. Abstracted, desiccated liberals do not see Europeans as a unique people with a special heritage. And they do not see the Christian God as a unique God separate from all other gods. There are no distinctions! Everything and everybody has been blended into a universal melting pot. But of course “some are a little more equal.” In the absence of Christianity, the unbrave rationalists rule without mercy or pity:

The Législatif had not been long in session when tidings of the great negro rising in San Domingo began to arrive in France; tidings coupled with frantic appeals for aid which grew in intensity and volume. Blanchelande’s initial report on the situation estimated six thousand regular troops, fifteen thousand stand of arms, and an immense matériel of war as the absolute minimum required to save San Domingo from destruction. And these colonial appeals were vigorously endorsed by the Civil Commissioners recently sent from France. Their very first letter emphasized the need of large and speedy succors, and their recommendations grew more insistent with every despatch sent home. When on February 20, 1792, the Colonial Assembly drew up an appeal for twenty thousand troops, the Commissioners appended their earnest endorsement. “Twenty thousand men,” it reads, -- “this figure, we certify, is but the absolute necessity.”

But against these appeals the Jacobins and the “Amis des Noirs” set themselves like flint, and in fact succeeded in preventing the despatch of any real aid to San Domingo. They first denied the existence of the insurrection, declaring it a ruse to assure a Royalist asylum over-seas; then, when forced to admit the fact, they branded it as the work of émigrés. “The massacres,” cried Brissot triumphantly, “began on the 21st of August; -- just at the moment when the news had arrived of the King’s flight to Varennes. Evidently they were organized by the Counter-Revolutionists.” Month after month frantic letters and petitions poured by hundreds into the Hall of Assembly, and these not only from over-seas, but also from thousands of Frenchmen reduced to ruin and trembling for the lives of kindred in San Domingo. These appeals, coupled with the horrors contained in every report from the island, might well have moved hearts of stone; --but not the hearts of the Jacobin opposition. Time after time a grim tragi-comedy was enacted on the floor of the Assembly. Some fresh batch of reports and petitions on San Domingo would move moderate members to propose the sending of aid. Instantly the Jacobins would be upon their feet with a wealth of fine phrases, patriotic suspicions, and a whole armory of nullifying amendments and motions to adjourn; -- the whole backed by gallery threats to the moderate proponents. And in the end, nothing would be done.

-- The French Revolution in San Domingo by T. Lothrop Stoddard

The white liberals in America and Europe look at Obama’s ascendancy to the Presidency and say, “See, nothing bad happens when blacks rule; in fact, that good darkie is doing everything we tell him to do.” What the liberals (and I need not say ‘white liberals’ because liberalism is alien to every other race) fail to comprehend is that black people respect only power. They will go with whoever has power. And Obama realizes that white liberals are still the ruling power in the United States. So long as he goes along with what his white masters want, he will be petted and stroked, loved and worshipped by his indulgent white masters. But if you were to place the Obama in South Africa or Rhodesia, you would see exactly what the French witnessed in San Domingo and exactly what the white South Africans and white Rhodesians are witnessing now: the wholesale extermination of whites. The American and European liberals who are now over 60 years of age will probably never live to see the night of sorrows when their “good” darkies take off their masks, but their “quality” children and grandchildren will. And then, those children and grandchildren will call upon white men to save them. Will there be any left by that time? There will be if we, the white Christian remnant, have left behind sons who believe in the non-abstracted Europe of Walter Scott and Edmund Burke, and not the abstract, dystopian Europe of Liberalism.

Of course there may never be a dramatic apocalyptic extermination of the whites. There is already an incremental extermination going on now which might be sufficient. We are seeing, in this monster called the modern world, cruelty beyond anything the world has ever witnessed before. On the one hand the barbarians are loose again, after centuries of being restrained by Christian Europeans. And on the other hand, in addition to the barbarian cruelty, is the cruelty of the new white techno-barbarian. He doesn’t kill with the blood lust of the barbarian. He kills with cold, bloodless detachment. His new religion of reason is beyond love and mercy. He can consign a whole race, his own race, to death and oblivion. He can consign millions upon millions of babies to die in abortuaries. And he can calmly watch millions of ‘collateral damage’ human beings be executed in saturation bombing raids. All this the modern techo-barbarian can do because he is no longer a European; he is an inhuman man of the future. He is the Übermensch of Nietzsche’s demented dream.

Against the nightmare world of modernity stands the last European, the Christian hero. He is now a rogue male. His hand is against every man and every man’s hand is against him. Since he has not burnt his bridges to the past, he is in possession of a secret that the barbarian and the liberal and even Satan himself can never possess. The Christian hero knows that the hopeless causes are not hopeless. They only appear hopeless to those who see Christianity from the outside. The prince in the fairy tale story of "Sleeping Beauty" is undeterred by the thicket of thorns because he possesses the knowledge of all Christian heroes: his King and kinsman will never abandon him; ‘Lo, I am with you alway even unto the end of the world.”
________________________________________________

(1) “Whatever Reason may tell us—that great liar who has invented, for the consolation of failures, the doctrine of the golden mean, the aurea mediocritas, the ‘neither envied nor envying’ and other such nonsense—whatever Reason may tell us—and she is not only a liar but a great whore—in our innermost soul, which we now call the Unconscious, with a capital U, in the depths of our spirit, we know that in order to avoid becoming, sooner or later, nothing, the best course to follow is to attempt to become all."

-- Abel Sanchez by Miguel de Unamuno

Eternal Europe

The fairy tales that were collected and recorded by the Brothers Grimm are such an important part of our European heritage. It is no more possible to separate the fairy tales from the European people than it is for a leopard to change its spots.

I often interview the Young Drummer, whose deeds are recorded in the Grimms’ tale called “The Drummer.” In that story, he travels through the forest of Giants and ascends a glass mountain in order to rescue a fair princess. I have always been impressed by the fact that he embarked on his rescue mission in spite of the fact that it is impossible to climb a glass mountain. Integral men of Europe do not live their lives according to the rules of science.

_______________________________________

Interviewer: Thank you for consenting to the interview.

Young Drummer: It’s no problem. I enjoy our discussions.

Interviewer: I don’t feel particularly connected to my country on any given date, but I always feel particularly unconnected on the fourth of July.

Young Drummer: It seems to be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Interviewer: Yes, that’s it exactly. I don’t think that a white man should be celebrating the demise of the white man, do you?

Young Drummer: Of course not. But the white-hating liberals are not celebrating their demise. They believe that they have transcended the barriers of race, sex, and family. What they celebrate when they celebrate cultural diversity on state-sanctioned holidays such as the 4th of July is your demise. They celebrate the death of the old Europe and the men and women who are loyal to it.

Interviewer: Is there any hope of winning the white-hating whites back to the fold?

Young Drummer: No, there isn’t. Their hearts are stone. They are wedded to Satan and the colored races.

Interviewer: Is the final conflict about to begin then?

Young Drummer: That’s more than I know. Many of the signs are there, but it would be presumptuous of me, or anyone, to claim they know the day or the hour.

Interviewer: Europe will never come back then?

Young Drummer: The real Europe, His Europe, is still there, it simply is no longer visible to most Europeans.

Interviewer: It’s almost as if Satan has imposed his vision of Europe over the old Europe.

Young Drummer: That is correct. From my standpoint, the standpoint of eternal Europe, you live in Satandom.

Interviewer: I don’t dispute that. And we must, while residing in Satandom, keep the vision of the old Europe before our eyes. But aren’t we ultimately supposed to turn Satandom back into Christendom? Isn’t having a vision of the old Europe only a first step?

Young Drummer: I wouldn’t put it that way. You are thinking too much like a modern man when you talk about first and second steps. That implies that vision is something passive and separate from the man. Vision is the man. When European man saw Christ, true-God and true-man, he acted on that belief and built a civilization of “incomparable symmetry.” Vision and love are inseparable. We see with the heart, and we act according to what the heart sees.

Interviewer: I don’t quite follow you.

Young Drummer: Let me put it this way – when you first met your wife-to-be, you fell in love because of what you saw in her heart. From that love flowed all those masculine impulses that the liberals sneer at: the desire to protect your love, to raise a family with your love, and to grow old (the best is yet to be) with your love.

It was the same way with the Europeans and Christ. They saw something in Christ that they loved. From that love came Christendom. Imperfect by divine standards, just as our love is imperfect compared to His love, nevertheless it was a love and a civilization as different from your modern Satandom, and every other civilization on the face of the earth, as heaven is from hell.

Interviewer: The modern European has issued divorce papers to Christ?

Young Drummer: Yes, he has ceased to love Him.

Interviewer: Is there someone else?

Young Drummer: Yes, modern man has returned to the second oldest faith, faith in man.

Interviewer: Is there any difference then between the barbarians of color and the post-Christian whites?

Young Drummer: There is a difference in degree, not in kind. The difference in degree consists of the different aspects of the religion of man. The colored races worship the blood. Their deities reflect “virtues” that the barbarians see in themselves. What an antique Christian would call savagery the barbarian calls faith.

The post-Christian white also worships himself. But the post-Christian does not worship his blood, he worships his mind. The reason white liberals get so upset when the people you call Kinists mention things like race, blood, and hearth is that such notions challenge the liberal’s faith. He believes all wisdom comes from the mind of man and not from the blood of European man united to the Spirit of God.

Interviewer: So the white techno-barbarian and the colored barbarian are united in their hatred of the incarnate God but not united in their reasons for the hatred.

Young Drummer: Yes. The white techno-barbarian, as you call him, worships rationality, which of course becomes the worst type of rationality when it is divorced from His spirit and blood. And the colored barbarian worships only the vital power of his blood, which of course becomes inhuman barbarism without the humanizing influence of His spirit and blood.

Interviewer: What is the result of the union of the technocratic white with the barbarians of color?

Young Drummer: Death for one’s civilization and death for the individual souls that adhere to the Christless religions of deified man.

Interviewer: You seldom mention the Jews or the Jewish conspiracy. Is that because you don’t believe the Jews are the main threat to Christian civilization?

Young Drummer: First of all, there is no longer any Christian civilization. So I take it that you mean to ask, “Are the Jews the major reason for the demise of Christendom, and are they the main obstacle to the rebuilding of Christendom?”

To both questions, I answer, no. The Jews represent an organized body of people who were and are opposed to Christ’s reign of charity. As such they will always be a danger to Christ’s church and His followers. But the Jews could not have undermined Christian civilization nor could they stop the rebuilding of it if it were not for an organized body of post-Christians who have steeled themselves to resist the light even more fiercely and maniacally than the Jews.

Interviewer: The Roman Catholics?

Young Drummer: Not just the Catholics. The Catholic Church is the worst of the anti-Christian churches because it has the most formidable organization, but all the Protestant churches, like the Catholic Church, have institutionalized the idea that God lives only in the mind of man.

Interviewer: He exists or doesn’t exist according to the whims of man?

Young Drummer: Yes, that is their idea.

Interviewer: I grant that there is no reclaiming the techno-barbarians, but isn’t there a small segment of white people who could, if they saw the Christ you see, be brought back to the European fold?

Young Drummer: There are. Although I don’t see how they will get a chance to see Christ. He exists in the European past as chronicled by the European poets. But the poets are not allowed to go directly to the potential converts. Literary critics and psychologists filter out their contents.

And the Gospels suffer the same fate as the poetic chroniclers of the soul. The content of the Gospels is distilled into a faithless vapor by Roman Catholic theologians and Protestant Biblical exegetes.

Interviewer: You don’t paint a very encouraging picture. There seems to be no hope.

Young Drummer: That’s not what I’m saying. Christianity is the religion of “when hope seems nearly gone, God’s relief by us is surely won.” Look to the European forest. Fight your way through the barbarians. And ignore the white rationalists who tell you that you are childish and racist to look for God in a forest. Then venture into the dark woods. You will meet witches and dragons there, but you’ll also find Him, and He will sustain you in all your battles.

Interviewer: You come from the forests of Bavaria and the world of the Brothers Grimm. Aren’t you just a little bit prejudiced in favor of forests?

Young Drummer: Yes, I am prejudiced. And I intend to stay prejudiced in favor of the European forest, in the sure and certain hope that my ‘prejudice’ will lead me to the King, who sanctified that forest with His blood.

Interviewer: Your faith is my faith and your blood is my blood.

Interviewer and Young Drummer (holding up their swords and crossing them): To eternal Europe, and death to Satandom.

Lord God of Hosts, Be with Us Yet

It appears that the lesser devil, Hillary, is about to be eliminated. That leaves us the demonic Mau Mau vs. the demonic technocrat. It’s difficult to say who will be worse.

I don’t believe, as some Kinists have suggested, that an Obama presidency will ‘wake up and mobilize white people.’ I would like to see that happen, but I don’t believe it will. And I don’t believe it, because Americans are the most conformist people on the face of the earth. They think whatever Big Brother tells them to think. The New Orleans debacle a few years back was a case in point. Despite the obvious fact that the black savages were committing horrible atrocities within the Superdome and throughout the city, white America accepted the verdict of Big Brother: “It’s only natural considering….” and “You must understand their…”

There is nothing that will make the liberal, white post-Christian give up his black-worshipping faith. And as long as the conformist, anesthetized, white Everyman dutifully complies with the “you must understand” instructions of the American hierarchy, there will be no reaction to anything a black barbarian does, whether he is the president, a mayor, or a street punk.

I think the fateful moment on the heath occurred under the pontificate of Pope John XXIII (1). Whether you are fond of the Catholic Church or not (and I’m not particularly fond of it), you must concede that the most visible representative of Christianity on this earth is the Pope. And when Pope John said that he had “no feeling of hatred—only loving charity and forgiveness” for the Congolese troops who tortured and murdered white missionary priests and nuns, the new Christianity, the worship of the black man, was given official sanction. Every single white Catholic who still believed that Christ was God and man should have left the Catholic Church at that moment, for the head of the Church had just announced his atheism. And as each individual Protestant pastor performed similar acts of public atheism, their parishioners should have left their respective churches. It makes sense for Rev. Wright’s black barbarian parishioners to sit and listen to black, satanic ravings (after all Satan is their master), but why should white Christians listen to it? They wouldn’t if they still believed in Christianity. But they have lost their faith. They believe lies because they listen to the Father of all lies as he speaks to them through the mouths of their pastors and the demigods of the media and the academy.

Day after day, week after week, we hear the refrain from white liberals that Obama the great will bring about racial harmony. What does that mean? I suppose if the white liberal thinks about it at all, he envisions a Coca-Cola commercial or a multiracial rock group. He does not envision the New Orleans Superdome, Haiti, Rhodesia, or South Africa. But that is exactly what racial harmony means to the black. It means the harmony that comes after savage blacks have gorged themselves on the blood of the white man. It has always been thus, and it always will be. American and European whites are not immune from the same racial “harmonies” that destroyed Haiti, Rhodesia and South Africa.

Obama’s presidential run is only a symptom of the disease; it is not the disease itself. The white-hating disease will be with us, whether McCain or Obama is president. The white liberals abandoned the Christian faith of their European ancestors for the faith of the sneering intellectuals whose prototype is the Archangel Satan. But the one drawback of a faith that is completely abstract is that it is bloodless. So they infused the blood of the black man into their sterile, abstract faith and came up with a new religion. I think a rather appropriate symbol for the new faith might be a white head, something like the head of the late Adlai Stevenson, on top of the body of some black athlete. But of course that is the white man’s new faith. The black man has a different vision. His god is all black and his racially harmonious world does not include any white man.

I know that the right wing pagan would have us counter the black faith with either our superior intellects (but the liberals have that) or with a faith in our blood alone (but the blacks have that). No, it is only through our faith in a God to whom we are connected with our spirit and our blood that we can hope to remove the virulent black plagues from the lands of the European people.

The upcoming presidential election presents us with an “any way you look at it you lose” situation. It’s not the lady or the tiger; it’s the tiger or the crocodile. The right wing democracy gurus would have us look to our local elections. “Put local congressmen in who will resist the policies of a McCain or an Obama.” Yes, we can do that so long as the local elections provide us with any candidates who differ from Obama or McCain, but how likely is that, considering how dependent every local candidate is on the good will of his party leaders?

If I sound like a broken record on the subject of democracy, it is because I have been listening to a broken record for my entire life. Over and over again I hear the voices of practical men telling me that we can turn the corner if we only will unite behind Candidate X. And sometimes our candidate wins and inevitably disappoints by what he fails to achieve, and more often, our candidate loses and his opponent disappoints us in what he does achieve.

When we were children and complained that we were bored, what did our mothers say? Well, admittedly my mother often said, “Then I’ll find something for you to do.” But just as often she said, “Use your imagination.” In other words, “Be a white man.” The black man has no imagination, and the white technocrat has abandoned the imaginative life of the spirit for the fun-filled life of the empirical man of science. But scientific thinking is just another form of voodoo. Throughout the Old Testament, continuing through the New Testament, and then through the history of Christian Europe, we see that God reveals himself only to those who see life in the mode of the fairy tale. In the fairy tale, evil is real and is embodied in the devil. And God is real as well and He is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The fairy tale hero does not see life compartmentally. He sees it in its entirety. There is not a practical, worldly realm and an otherworldly, spiritual realm. There is only one realm, the spiritual realm, in which all living creatures play a part in the great conflict between good and evil. The hero doesn’t ask, “Is this practical?” or “Is this politically correct?” He asks, “Is it God’s will that I give battle?” And if it is God’s will, the fairytale hero gives battle, and he lets his imagination, grounded in his heartfelt vision of His Lord, determine the means he will use to fight whatever evil he encounters. “Alfred the Great is past history. You can’t do what he did anymore; it isn’t practical!” the sensible, politically-minded men tell us. Of course, we can’t do exactly what Alfred the Great did, but we can see what Alfred the Great saw behind the material façade of this world. And we can feel the same love for the same God that Alfred the Great loved. And then we can use that vision and that love to defeat those same forces of evil that Alfred defeated. The façade of the enemy and the physical state of the battlefield are always different, but the spiritual components are always the same. It is the same old story: God vs. the Devil. If we give passive assent to the Devil by refusing to fight outside the parameters of the democratic structures of the Devil, we will be unworthy of our European ancestors. They joined their blood with His and fought on whatever ground the enemy fought on, and fought whatever enemy their Lord commanded them to fight. How does that old hymn go? “The Son of God goes forth to war… Who follows in His train?”
__________________________________________________

(1) The fact that the Mother Church has become a whore gives me no pleasure. But it does little good to deny it. Christ has been replaced, in the Catholic Church, by the great black Buddha. And the Protestant churches differ only in degree, not in kind. They, too, have enshrined the Black God in the hallowed place once reserved for Christ.

Reclaiming White Civilization

The "racist" remarks of John Watson hit the liberals hard because John Watson was a member of the liberal pantheon, a Nobel Prize winning scientist. A scientist! One of the elect!

The traditional condemnations by white liberals and black leaders followed quickly upon the heels of Watson's remarks. And of course we know that the white liberal outrage is feigned. They all know Watson's claims are correct; there already have been an infinity of "scientific" tests showing that blacks are less intelligent than whites. The white liberals have been hoisted on their own scientific petards. They made a god of science, and their god constantly embarrasses them by presenting them with findings that support "racists."

This "more intelligent" debate is not something a white European should engage in. It is tempting, when the enemy will accept no evidence that is not empirical, to cite intelligence tests in arguing the case for segregation and white autonomy. But that is not why we should segregate, and defend to the death white civilization. It is the European's spiritual sense of life which sets him apart from the other races. And that spiritual sense of things cannot be quantified or measured by any empirical study. It is simply there, part of the fabric of reality. And when we deny it, we are in a flight from reality.

Which brings us to the professed white Christians. They are adamant that the hatred of the white race and the love of the black race is mandated by Christianity. But did not Jesus Christ claim He was the truth and that same truth would set us free? Is there anything truthful in the liberals' racial Babelism? No, there is not. The races are not equal. The races were not designed to be mixed. And yet the white Christians aggressively assault every white Christian who refuses to bend his knee to the multi-racial idols of liberal Christendom.

In my early, zealous days in the Catholic Church (1), I taught C.C.D. classes on Sunday. I vividly remember going through the various Church Councils listed in the textbook, and explaining what each did. Every council, with the exception of the Second Vatican Council, was associated with the condemnation of a particular false doctrine, which was listed beside its name. But the Second Vatican Council had no such condemnation of a heresy listed by its name. That Council's summation read, "Condemns racism."

That's what it all comes down to? Two thousand years of Church history amounts to "Condemns racism"?

And of course this Christless, black-worshipping Christianity is not confined to just the Catholic Church; the Protestant churches are equally culpable. The Christless Christian churches have spent that "unbought grace of life" that Edmund Burke spoke of. We are no longer in a position of "if these shadows are not altered" our white civilization will be destroyed. Our civilization has been destroyed.

So we are facing a different situation than the white Southerners of whom John Sharp Williams wrote about, and even a different situation than Anthony Jacob wrote about in 1965. We are no longer talking about saving white civilization; we are talking about reclaiming it. Of course, any Spenglerian student of civilization will tell you that no civilization, once dead, has ever been reclaimed. But when talking about European civilization, we are talking about a completely unique civilization. No civilization was ever built on the premise that one man, who was also a God, broke the chains of mortality and rose from the dead. The type of men and women who believed, in the depths of their souls, in that miracle are not men and women who can be defeated by some mathematical, Spenglerian process of history.

That passage from the Psalm 130 always comes to my mind when I think of the white race: "Out of the depths have I cried to thee, O Lord." Spiritual depth is what distinguishes the European from all other peoples, not scores on some pseudo-scientific intelligence test.

Most white people today are soul-dead zombies. I don't say brain-dead, because you can still meet many brilliant, but soulless, white men. But occasionally you meet one of the remnant. Do you recall Kipling's "One in a Thousand"? It always seems like a miracle: "A man with a soul, a European!" Europe was the Round Table and Christ was our Arthur. His knights are certainly a wandering remnant now. But whenever they meet ("where one or two are gathered together in my name"), they form Europe. And from such meetings, a great civilization, the only civilization, will be rebuilt.

European civilization was based on a communion of souls. Whenever depth spoke to depth, He was present. And link by link an invisible chain was forged that bound European civilization together. The white technocrat must prevent white people from forming the type of bonds that would reconnect the chain. Their rule can only continue so long as European culture remains an anti-civilization which worships the generic technocratic man over the man of flesh and blood. Everything that stinks of humanity – ties to kith and kin, loyalty to a personal, humane God – must be systemically eliminated. I don't suggest that there is a conscious conspiracy to eradicate that element of the European, his spiritual depth, which connects him to God. It is more effective than a conscious conspiracy; it is a satanically inspired conspiracy (when the European rejects Christ, he is open to the satanic whisper). In the name of equality, brotherhood, rationalism, science, etc., we must all forgo communion. We must never gather together in His name, because he (the satanic 'he') forbids it.

The reason that only white men are forbidden to form ties of blood is because it was only white men who linked their blood with the spirit and blood of the God-man. That type of blood faith is anathema to the technocratic man, who wants the non-white cultures to be immersed in the pride of blood, because their blood is linked to the altars of the Aztecs and the magic of the voodoo priests. The religions of the colored tribes are generic; they all come from hell. Only the civilization of the European had a religion that was non-generic and personal and that was connected to heaven and not to hell.

This is why the technocratic white must always support the colored, and not the white. His coreligionists are the satanic colored and not the white Europeans.

We cannot see the divine links of the chain being reforged to recreate Europe. But we know the links are being forged every time Europeans of depth, of blood and spirit, come together in His name.
_______________________
(1) Once, after working past the dinner hour at a Catholic College, I stopped at the chapel for the usual reason one stops at a chapel. But I was surprised to see a nun in the chapel (normally, the nuns avoided the chapel.) The nun informed me that I couldn't use the chapel that evening because they, the nuns, were expecting a busload of blacks to visit them. "We are bringing some blacks up from the city," the nun said, with ecstasy in her voice.

Now, you might defend the nuns by claiming, "What is more natural; they are trying to convert the heathen." But that would be disingenuous of you. The nuns were bringing the blacks into the church to worship them. And by so doing, they were worshipping themselves, for what is the essence of the new Christianity? It consists of taking the correct stance on the racial issue. If you worship blacks, you are a saint, and you then have leave to worship yourself.