The Symbol and Substance of Europe

“The sign o’ the cross – the spirit above the dust.” – Herman Melville

Edward James Corbett was a British hunter, conservationist and author. He was born (1875) and raised in British India, holding the rank of Colonel in the British Indian Army. Between the years 1907 and 1938, Corbett tracked down and killed 19 tigers and 14 leopards. But Corbett did not hunt for sport. He hunted man-killers. It is estimated that the man-killers Corbett disposed of had killed more than 1,200 men and women.

Corbett always hunted the man-killers alone and on foot, at great peril to his own life. The natives regarded him as a saint with mystic powers. But of course Corbett had no mystical powers; he was simply a white man whose Christian faith was bred in the bone. In later years Corbett wrote a book about his experiences (Man-Eaters of Kumaon) and tried to teach the natives of India how to preserve their wildlife. The man-killers never got Edward James Corbett; he died peacefully in bed in 1955 at age 79.

Without in any way trying to diminish Corbett’s remarkable achievements in India, I must assert that Corbett’s efforts on behalf of Indian natives (“the least of these my brethren”) were duplicated by white men in India, Africa, and all of the colored lands. Wherever white men set foot, there was charity and mercy where there had never been charity and mercy before. Corbett’s efforts only differed from other whites’ charitable efforts by virtue of the fact that Corbett’s work was acknowledged and appreciated by the natives. Most other whites were rewarded for their charitable work with hatred. And some, like the missionaries Edmund Hodgson and Elton Knauf, suffered torture and death at the hands of the natives for whom they had labored their entire lives.

In hindsight it appears to me that men like Corbett and Hodgson should have stayed in Europe and worked to defend Christendom from the heathens instead of trying to make heathens part of Christendom. But what we cannot say about the liberals, that their hearts were in the right place, we can say with certainty about whites like Corbett. Their hearts were in the right place. They tried to convert the heathens of color. Their efforts were unsuccessful because of the colored peoples’ hatred of the light, not because of any failing on their part.

Will I not concede any imperfections in the whites who lived and worked in the colored lands? No, I will not, because throughout Liberaldom there is a hue and cry against the whites who took up the white man’s burden. I will not join the mob of liberal Jacobins. When taken for all in all -- and that is how human beings should be taken – the white man’s efforts on behalf of the colored heathens should be lauded to the skies, not condemned and covered with liberal scorn and derision.

The liberals present themselves as the light-givers. On a daily basis they shed light on the terrible racist past of the white men who ruined the Eden-like perfection of the colored lands. In print, television, and movie the white man is depicted as the great despoiler of the noble colored people. But is this unquestioned doctrine of the liberals true? Isn’t there anyone left who can see that the liberal Emperor has no clothes on? The naked truth is this: Wherever the Christian European went – China, Africa, India, and so on – the colored heathens in those lands were shown there was something infinitely more sublime and beautiful to be found in Christianity than in their heathen faiths. What has happened since the white man left the colored lands? The natives have returned to their Egyptian night.

I wouldn’t want to see the white imperial era return, not because the whites of that time period were evil – far from it – but because I don’t think whites should waste their spiritual energy in a futile attempt to convert colored heathens to the light. Far better to keep the faith in your own corner of Europe and let the heathen who has the humility to do so learn by the example of the Christian Europeans. Still, what the antique Europeans did by going to the lands of the colored barbarians and trying to convert them was far better than what the modern Europeans have done: they have denounced Christianity and invited the colored people into the European lands so that they can worship them, always reserving the center of the church altar for the black gods.

And we must ask, “Is this what our ancestors fought for during the Christian era of Europe? Did Alfred fight so that his posterity could worship negroes? Did the great composers, writers, painters, and sculptors of Christian Europe work and labor so that colored barbarians could destroy the work of centuries in one moment? Everywhere we see Satan triumphant. He has placed black idols at the center of what used to be Christian Europe, and he has managed to turn Christian worship into negro worship. Such abominations will end when the Europeans’ awake from their death-in-life existence. What would it take to awaken them? If God took flesh, dwelt among them, was crucified, died and was buried, and then rose again from the dead, would that revive the death-in-life Europeans? Yes, it would, and it shall. The neo-pagan is wrong to try to abandon the Cross. It is now and always shall be our hope, our strength, and our salvation. We need to strip all the theological blasphemies and anemic ethical systems away from the Cross. The Cross is a flame, a sword; it is the symbol and substance of Europe. By the Cross we conquer.

The liberal has pushed Satanism to its logical extreme: the worship of the negro and his culture and the demonization of the Christian European and his culture. It certainly would have been preferable to live in the 1950’s and the early 1960’s when white people still had a Christian hangover. But the evil was present then, couched in high-sounding words such as ‘civil rights.’ Now with the benefit of hindsight, we can see that the civil rights movement was the final nail in the coffin of Christian Europe. From that movement came women’s rights, which means abortion rights, and diversity, which means the extermination of white people. Satan needed a sign of contradiction to be the focal point of his earthly reign. And the negro was chosen to be that sign of contradiction to Christian Europe. Christ cannot reign in a nation consecrated to the negro. And if the whole world is consecrated to the negro? Then the Son of Man will have no place to lay His head and all the earth will resemble our modern college campuses where lost souls wander in and out of houses of desolation.

In the not-to-distant past, when there were a few social conservatives left in the conservative ranks, American conservatives would debate whether America was polluting Europe or Europe was polluting America. When Obama was elected that question was answered. The Europeans are like unto the American Europeans, but the United States has earned the title of The Most Satanic Nation on earth. When the Ayatollah Khomeini called the U.S. the “Great Satan” he was correct, but he was correct for the wrong reason. The Ayatollah looked on the U.S. as the foremost nation of Christendom, which made the U.S., from the Ayatollah’s Muslim perspective, the Great Satan. In reality, the U.S. was and is the leader of the new anti-Christian states of Europe. The sooner the current rulers of this nation and their European puppets are dead and gone, the sooner we can rebuild Christendom, purged of the colored tribesmen and the mad-dog liberals.

It has been a heart-breaking experience for me to watch my children, who were raised in the Europe of Walter Scott, have to go out into the cities of desolation in an effort to make a living. I recently told one of those children, now an adult, that I was sorry I hadn’t managed to fix it so she never had to have anything to do with Liberaldom. My daughter told me, “At least I know that Europe, and I’ll always carry the memory of it in my heart.” God bless her.

The death of Christian Europe is like the death of a loved one. The pain of their passing is only eased by the memory of their life here on earth and the hope of their resurrection to a better life. Of course the analogy isn’t a perfect one. All mortal men must die in the flesh so they can live eternally in the spirit; such is the will of God. But Christian Europe did not have to die; its death was not the will of God, but the will of the liberals and their master. And that is where our passionate hate should come into play. If we spend our whole life hating Satan’s Liberaldom, hating it because we love His Europe, we will at least be able to say we kept faith with our people and our God.

As regards our daily existence the Christian hangover years were certainly better than this our modern age. During the hangover years, there was still a certain sense of modesty and decorum between the sexes, and ordinary kindness had not yet become the political entitlement of only one sainted race. But there is one great advantage for an antique European living in modern Liberaldom. That one great advantage consists in this: The liberals have flown their colors. They have raised the flag of negro worship for all the world to see. Wherever that flag flies, we can strike home and know we strike an enemy.

I’ve been forced to observe the liberals at work and play for many years. And two pillars of liberalism stand out as the primary pillars of the liberal cathedral. Those two pillars are the church and the university. Every major university at one time was an adjunct of a Christian church. Now every church is an adjunct of the university. Such a reversal was inevitable once the church men unfettered reason from revelation and the human heart. If reason is all, why shouldn’t the academy, the citadel of unfettered reason, be all? But if reason is all why did the Christian churches’ only genuine theologian tell us that understanding comes from the heart and ignorance stems from the blindness of the heart? Academy and church keep the anti-European bonfire aflame and the flag of negro worship flying. At the onset I said that Edward James Corbett had no mystical powers, that he was just a white man whose Christianity was bred in the bone. That type of faith is far greater than any mystic mumbo-jumbo. The white man with such a faith will endure to the end. We must refuse to evolve, and stay with the bred in the bone faith of our ancestors who rejected the wisdom of the sages and placed their hope in the foolishness of The Cross. By the Cross we conquer. +

In Defense of the Non-Inclusive European

Yet many a minstrel in harping can tell
How the Red-cross it conquered, the crescent it fell:

-Walter Scott

When I was an undergraduate I had a professor who was a Marxist. Now, a Marxist in academia is not a rare thing, but this particular Marxist was different from the typical American Marxist. For one instance, this Marxist was a Stalinist. He denied the purges that even Khrushchev said took place. It was all lies -- the Gulag stories of Solzhenitsyn and so many others -- lies, lies, according to my professor. Secondly, the Marxist academic was more consistent than his liberal brethren, most of whom considered themselves Marxists as well. He was more consistent because he hated Shakespeare and regularly denounced him from his Marxist pulpit. A Marxist should hate Shakespeare’s vision of life; it is diametrically opposed to Marxism. On the other hand, the other academics, the liberal fellow-travelers of the Marxist, did not share his opinion of Shakespeare. They went into raptures about Shakespeare’s poetry, about his humanity, and about his keen insights into human nature. But they had no right to rhapsodize about Shakespeare. The Marxist professor was correct. From a liberal or Marxist view, which amounts to the same thing, Shakespeare is poison; he is a corrupter. As much as I hated the Marxist for hating my Shakespeare, I hated his liberal colleagues more, for trying to take comfort and sustenance from Shakespeare when, based on their professed beliefs, they should have left Shakespeare to the non-liberal Europeans and tried to take sustenance and solace from their modern garbage poets of Liberaldom.

I’ve come to have the same feelings toward the halfway-house Christians that I had towards the Marxist professor’s liberal colleagues. Why do they want to retain Christ for comfort and solace while remaining steadfast supporters of Liberaldom? They support Negro-worship, Christian fusionism with the Jews, the Muslims, etc., and they have an undying commitment to secular democracy. When they oppose the liberals, on such issues as abortion and evolution, they do so within the framework of Liberaldom. They differ respectfully and never try to topple Liberaldom for institutionalizing infanticide or blaspheming God. Indeed the halfway-house Christian believes that democratic, egalitarian Liberaldom is the Christian form of government. How does he reconcile that belief with legalized abortion and the sacred status of the theory of evolution? He reconciles his Christianity to liberal egalitarianism by calling legalized abortion and Darwinian evolution a misunderstanding: “If they only knew that the fetus was a child, and if they only knew the scientific evidence against evolution, they would understand and join hands with the Christians and celebrate what we all believe in: the worship of the Negro, the inclusion of all faiths in a pantheon of faiths, and the divine mandate to live and die according to the principles of democratic egalitarianism.” Negroization + inclusion + democracy = Christianity. Such is the faith of the halfway-house Christian.

The new false Christianity of the halfway-house Christians has done more damage than all the direct assaults on the faith by outright Christ-haters such as Marx and George Bernard Shaw. Why? C. S. Lewis gives us the answer in his seventh and final Narnia novel, The Last Battle. The Christian heroes of the novel find out, to their horror, that the result of years of false teaching about Aslan has made people stop believing in the real Aslan. “Tirian had never dreamed that one of the results of an Ape’s setting up a false Aslan would be to stop people from believing in the real one.” And where has halfway-house Christianity, the false Christianity, come from? It has come from the organized churches. If we break the stranglehold that the organized churches have on Christianity, we will have taken the first step, the most important step, toward bringing down the walls of Liberaldom.

There are no liberals in the colored cultures. There are some coloreds, like the Obama, who parrot liberal catch phrases because their bread is buttered by the liberals, but there are no people of color who have formed a passionate attachment to the liberal faith. The reason for the absence of liberal coloreds is obvious. Liberalism is a disease of the post-Christian white; the non-white people have never embraced Christianity, so they have never suffered the after-effect of post-Christianity.

The white man’s fate has been the same as Peter’s when he walked on water but then fell victim to fears and doubts:

“But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth His hand and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?”

The building of Christian Europe, through the grace of God, was equivalent to walking on water, but when the European started to sink he didn’t ask Christ to save him; he turned to science, and he turned to organized, inclusive Christianity instead of Christ. Churches are buildings; they are not the faith itself. If Christianity is not preached in the Church buildings, then the Christian Church is somewhere else. Why should this be so difficult to understand? St. Paul clearly tells us that the Church consists of those who believe in Jesus Christ. There is no other church. The Christianity of St. Paul, of the Gospels, is not compatible with the fusionism of the modern churches.

In the black mass the devotees have a valid priest say the mass, using the proper words of consecration. The Satanists think they can use Him for their own satanic purposes. What blasphemy! As if the Son of God would allow Himself to be used in that manner. The devil and his adherents are strict formalists, but our Lord, who bids us worship in spirit and in truth, is not.

Something similar to a black mass is taking place in the Christian halfway-house churches. They want to further the cause of their black gods, so they invoke Christ’s name to aid them. But does anyone believe that Our Lord, who sees into the secret recesses of our hearts, can be made to support the worship of Negroes just because halfway-house Christian clergymen invoke His name? Negro-worshipping clergymen will be forever at war with Christian Europeans, because in order to deify the Negro they must demonize the Europeans of the past, who did not deify the Negro. And in that European past, in the lifeblood of the European people, is the true image of Jesus Christ. You can’t have a church that worships the Negro and that worships Jesus Christ. The liberals and the halfway-house Christians have made their choice, and we have made ours. All talk about a European resurgence is useless if we do not break with the Negro-worshipping, anti-Christian Christians, who constitute the heretical center of organized Christianity.

Time and time again, I’ve seen some struggling white turned away from drugs or alcohol or sexual depravity by a burgeoning faith in Jesus Christ. And time and time again, I’ve seen the stream of that emerging faith diverted into a fusionist hell of Negro worship. The halfway-house Christian is like the seed in the Gospels that falls on the rocks; he has no roots, he has nothing to keep his faith in Christ from being washed away by liberalism.

Satan knows what has to be done to keep his kingdom, Liberaldom, in order. It is necessary that the European should divest himself of prejudices. And what are prejudices? They are the European’s link to the past. He prefers the values of white Christians to the values of black barbarians, and he prefers his exclusive Christian faith to the inclusive anti-Christian faith of the liberals. Burke said all this many years ago:

… in this enlightened age I am bold enough to confess that we are generally men of untaught feelings; that instead of casting away all our old prejudices, we cherish them to a very considerable degree, and to take more shame to ourselves we cherish them because they are prejudices, and the longer they have lasted and the more generally they have prevailed, the more we cherish them!

Herein constitutes the great blasphemy of the Negro-worshipping, halfway-house Christian: he flies in the face of the time-honored prejudices of the Christian European people. The modern, halfway-house Christian self-righteously takes it as a given that the Europeans of the past were insufficiently Christian because they placed a wall between the races and punished those who tried to breach the wall. Why would you assume such a time-honored prejudice was wrong? Was God wrong to discriminate against Ham and his descendants? Were millions of Christian Europeans wrong for century after century because they discriminated in favor of the white Christian civilization against the black barbarian civilization? If we are looking for diseased souls, we will find more than enough in the ranks of the halfway-house Christians. They see, when they look at the Europeans of the past, nothing but shameful prejudices, when (if they had eyes to see) they should see the image of the God they have forsaken for the Negro and the gods of the inclusive Christian churches.

The white man’s sphere of activity has been limited to “whatever serves Liberaldom.” It’s sad to see a once great race of people, the Christ-bearing race, beg to be allowed a small corner of Liberaldom. In the wake of the recent race riots in London, for instance, some 60 members of the English Defense League gathered in a park in a London suburb, sang patriotic songs, and chanted, “England, we love you!”

When I read that statement for an instant my heart soared. Were patriotic Englishmen about to make a stand for white, Christian Britain? No, they were not. They followed up their patriotic songs with a declaration that indicated they belonged to the new, inclusive England which is not England; it is nothing: “The EDL and all decent people be they black, white, Christian, Sikh, Jewish or Muslim are sickened by this mindless, selfish and ultimately self-defeating behavior.” The white man has been carefully trained to preface all his protests against colored violence with “not all blacks, not all Muslims, not all…” – why go on repeating the drivel of trained parrots? The black and Muslim violence is not “self defeating”; it is meant to further the defeat of the retreating white Englishmen. The blacks and the Muslims do not dream of a multi-racial Britain where “all decent people” live together. The blacks don’t dream at all; they just murder, rape, and pillage, and the Muslims dream of an Islamic Britain. Only white men who consider their race, their nation, and their faith as one sacred entity, which must be defended against all the world, will be of any use in the ongoing war against Satan and his colored legions. +

Shielding Innocence

“There can be no charity in Liberaldom because the liberal, of necessity, must kill Christian charity so that Liberaldom can survive. It’s a war to the death.” – CWNY

The recent skewering of the liberal-conservative commentator Glenn Beck was a striking example of the cruelty of the utopian liberals. Beck was one of their own. He regularly had shows on “our black founding fathers,” he said that Geert Wilders, the Dutch immigration restrictionist, was “too extreme,” and he always made sure to have blacks in his audience. Still he was driven off the air while the mad-dog liberals sat around gloating. Why was he driven off the air? He was driven off the air because he failed to understand the nature of the democratic liberal utopian machine that he served, just as Alexander Solzhenitsyn failed to understand, prior to his conversion, the nature of the communist utopian machine he served. Solzhenitsyn told us in his Gulag books that he was a good communist before going to prison. He was a true believer. He had merely written a letter to a friend criticizing some of Stalin’s wartime strategies. There was no criticism of communism in the letter, but Solzhenitsyn was more of a believer in communism than Stalin. Stalin believed only in the personal aggrandizement of Joseph Stalin, so Solzhenitsyn got what turned out to be a fortunate trip, for him and us, to the Gulag.

Beck was more of a believer in democratic egalitarianism than the mad-dog liberals. He failed to understand that in all utopian states “some are more equal than others.” From Beck’s perspective all racism in utopia is evil whether it comes from the white or the black, so he pointed out the racism of The Obama. But utopian states are not about democratic egalitarianism; they are about power. The liberal must have power to crush the enemies of utopia. He believes in an anti-white paradise presided over by a benevolent black god. With the election of the Obama, the United States liberal feels he has lived to see the coming of his god. When the Obama was elected the ecstatic faces of the liberal commentators told us all we need to know about liberals, utopian states, and the noble savage. It’s a war between two diametrically opposed visions of existence. The liberal sees Babylon, and the antique European sees Christian Europe. Beck’s failure to understand the nature of the conflict was not surprising: how can you understand the satanic nature of the democratic egalitarian heresy if you are a true believer in the democratic egalitarian heresy?

So long as white “conservatives” believe in utopian democracy they will continue to be white meat for the liberal machine. And it is a machine the white man is up against, an inhuman entity devoid of pity and full of remorseless cruelty. The white man must renounce Founding Fathers egalitarian democracy or he will be ground into nothingness in the gears of the liberal machine.

In America and Europe the democratic era is treated as an ascent, a triumph of progress, but in reality the democratic era signals the demise of Christian Europe and the rise of Babylon. From approximately 1914 to 1965 the European people had problems believing in Christ’s divinity, but they still maintained the ethical standards of Christianity. From the mid-sixties to the present the European has been trying to live without faith in Christ and without the ethical system that stems from a belief in Christ. The result has been legalized abortion, war without the mitigating influence of chivalry, the absence of charity and mercy, sexual permissiveness and sexual perversion, the rise of the effeminate white male and the decline of the masculine white male, and the de-feminization of the white female. And at the top of the perverted list of European innovations is the innovation that holds Babylon together (or should we say keeps Babylon from being anything but Babylon): the worship of the Negro. For how can a man be expected to be better than his god? With the Negro as his god the white man can descend to the level of a primitive ape and call such a descent progress because he is getting closer to his god. But he cannot quite make it. He can’t be as truly “natural” as his god; there is always something in his way. That something is of course his racial memory of a Christian past; it is a memory he denies in himself and seeks to eradicate in other whites. He has been largely successful in his denial and eradication, but he will never be wholly comfortable with the noble savages.

Some conservatives such as Beck and some halfway house Christians such as Pat Roberson and Pope Benedict XVI will express dissatisfaction with the declining sexual mores of the modern European, but in the same breath they will denounce the racism of the Europeans of the past and praise the new racially diverse future mankind is heading toward. You can’t have it both ways. Racial Babylon and sexual Babylon are one! If white people worship the black they will have no frame of reference to launch an attack against the evils of a sexual Babylon presided over by black gods.

In a religious cult the leaders of the cult try to get the members to have only one frame of reference: the cult leader or leaders. The behavior of cult members might seem bizarre to individuals outside that particular cult, but that is precisely because they are outside of the cult. From inside the cult it makes sense to drink poisoned kool-aid, to go into battle believing no bullet can harm you, to sit on a platform waiting to be taken up to heaven… and on and on. Everything the cult leaders say makes sense to the religious devotee because whatever the cult leader says represents God’s truth. That is why it is useless to point out the savagery of the NWCL (Negro Worshipping Church of Liberaldom) because as a member of that organization the liberal believes that whatever the black does is good and right. That is the liberal’s unshakeable faith, his black gods can do no evil. This is why crimes of rape, murder, and mayhem, when perpetuated by blacks against whites, are called natural responses to racism – or a simple overflowing of youthful exuberance. Only members of the NWCL could remain steadfastly loyal to their gods despite the white genocide going on around them.

In my mid-twenties I was a member of a parish in which a young white boy, about 14 years of age, was shot by several black “youths” in a drive-by shooting. The boy was an only son with four sisters and a mother and father who loved him with an intensity of love that only a white man could fathom. Neither parent asked the men of the parish to go out and find the blacks responsible for the shooting; they knew vigilantism would be punished, but the parents did hope for justice. They were old-fashioned enough to believe that the murdering scum who killed their son should be killed themselves, even though they were black. The poor, unenlightened bigots! Didn’t they know that black youths were never wrong? If they didn’t know that they were soon going to be informed of that doctrine. The parish priest gave the most blasphemous homily I had ever heard (since that time I’ve heard many such) in a house of God. The priest talked about racial justice, about white people who called black people niggers; about healing the wounds caused by slavery… you know the litany. But not one word about the necessity of loving one’s own and protecting them from Satan’s minions, the Negros. Nor was there a call to punish home so that such an atrocity would be less likely to happen in the future. Of course I was naïve! Imagine expecting a Christian response to existence from a modern clergyman who was a card-carrying member of the NWCL.

If I’m becoming too anecdotal, forgive me and just chalk it up as an old man’s failing. I see another young white boy in my mind’s eye. He was a student in my English Literature class. In that class I took it for granted that my students had all been born and raised to be good liberals. I saw it as my task to try to make them start to divest themselves of their liberalism, or, failing that, to let them know that the literary giants of the Western world were not liberals.

There was one particular student who was always shocked at what he saw as my off-the-wall declarations: “With very few exceptions there has been nothing written of any value since the early 1900s”, “All English literature is a footnote to Shakespeare.” He would respond to my off-the-wall declarations with exclamations of “Mr. ___, how can you say that!” I got into so many arguments with the young man that I began to think of him as the “How can you say that” boy. But he was alive, he had a soul, and he was open to the call of the poets. When he asked me, “How can you say that,” after I called Stephen King a hack writer he actually listened to me when I explained the difference between Shakespeare’s Macbeth and a Stephen King horror novel. And during the course of the year the How-can-you-say-that boy actually saw the difference between Shakespeare and Stephen King. “It has to do with spiritual depth, doesn’t it?” “Yes, it does,” I told the How-can-you-say-that boy, who became a man during my class. Only God knows why he died at the hands of a “black youth” who robbed the convenience store at which he was working the late shift. Don’t ever let your children work at such places. Convenience stores are convenient places for blacks to drive to in order to murder and steal.

There is an organization that all remaining antique Europeans should be members of; we needn’t write up any official documents because we don’t need paper and ink and notary for things of the spirit. We are members of the OWT (Order of William Tell). Our order is dedicated to the fight the enemies of His reign of charity and to hunt down and kill anyone who comes against our kith and kin. There is certainly enough work to last a lifetime for men who want to join such an order. What did the old Jacobite say? “I’ve drawn my sword and thrown the sheath away.” +

Time was, my dearest children, when with joy
You hail’d your father’s safe return to home
From his long mountain toils; for, when he came,
He ever brought with him some little gift,--
A lovely Alpine flower—a curious bird—
Or elf-bolt, such as on the hills are found.
But now he goes in quest of other game,
Sits in this gorge, with murder in his thoughts,
And for his enemy’s life-blood lies in wait.
But still it is of you alone he thinks.
Dear children.—‘Tis to guard your innocence,
To shield you from the tyrant’s fell revenge,
He bends his bow to do a deed of blood!

The Blood Red Tide of Liberalism

Turn, hell hound, turn!

(Macduff’s challenge to Macbeth)

Spirit, Water, Blood recently ran some excerpts from Charles Dickens’ essay on “The Noble Savage.” Dickens got it right: the savage is savage, but he is far from noble. From Samuel Johnson (“Don’t cant to me of savages”), to Dickens, to Thomas Nelson Page, the consensus opinion of the white poets was in line with the Bible. The sons of Ham were meant to be subordinate to and kept in check by the sons of Shem and Japheth, because left to their own devices they would inevitably become predatory animals. Nothing happened in the 20^th century, in regards to the Negro, to refute what would now be called the racist rants of poets such as Johnson, Dickens, and Page. In fact, everything that happened in the 20^th century in Africa and the United States (read Anthony Jacob’s White Man Think Again! and the U. S. crime reports) make the white poets’ comments on the Negro seem much too mild. And the activities of the 21^st century Negro has only confirmed the warnings contained in White Man Think Again!, just as Jacob’s book confirmed the insightful writings on the Negro of the 18^th and 19^th century white poets.

At the time Johnson was telling Boswell “don’t cant to me of savages,” and even later, when Dickens wrote his attack on the noble savage heresy and Page wrote about the Negro problem, the majority of the European intellectuals and the bulk of the European people did not believe in the Noble Savage; they believed, with the white poets, that the black man and the other colored races were the “lesser breeds without the law.” But there were a few atheists such as Rousseau and Voltaire who needed a substitute for the Christian God whom they had forsaken. So they created, in their sick, demented minds, abstract, paradisiacal states inhabited by pure, sensuous, earthy, noble savages (see Till the End of Time.) And the utopian fantasies of a few white intellectuals have become the faith of the modern Europeans.

The worship of the black man is a uniquely European phenomenon. Other colored races see the black man for what he is, a savage predator, who is a danger to any stable society. I remember asking a Korean shop owner in my home city, why, during a spate of black riots, was his business the only business in five blocks of businesses that was not touched by rioters. His answer was quite simple: “I don’t taken any b___ from niggers. They know I’ll shoot them.” The Korean shop owner did not believe in the Noble Savage.

Of course the time is fast approaching – in Britain it has already come – when no one will be allowed access to firearms with which to defend themselves against the barbarian hordes. The NRA has never grasped the fact that gun control and Negro worship are woven together. To own a gun for self-defense is to openly declare that you do not believe in the sanctity and goodness of the Negro. But if the will to defend one’s own is in a man, he will fight with whatever weapon he can lay his hands on.

In his excellent book Counter Revolution Thomas Molnar pointed out that revolutions first succeed in the hearts and minds of men before they succeed on the battlefield. The seeds of Christian atheism, which substitutes the Negro for Christ, were sown by philosophers such as Voltaire and Rousseau. “Mock on, Mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau, Mock on!” was the impassioned defiance that William Blake hurled at the utopian atheists, but the Europeans preferred the promise of a Negro-infested future to the green and pleasant pastures of Christian Europe.

Utopian atheism and Negro worship are eternally bound together. The unspeakable atrocities in Haiti that occurred in 1789 (see Tintagel vs Haiti) came about as a result of a fusion of utopian atheism and Negro worship. In the utopians’ minds, the old Christian regime was evil; therefore, the antithesis of white French Christians, namely voodoo-worshipping Negroes, had the right – nay, not just the right, the duty – to exterminate the white, Christian French. And they did, to the last man.

In the United States during the infamous “reconstruction” period in the South, the Negro worshipping, democratic egalitarian, atheists turned the white Southerners over to the tender mercies of the Negro barbarians. The Southerners were saved, but only temporarily because the extermination process was resumed in the latter half of the 20^th century, from the fate of the French in Haiti by the emergence of Nathan Bedford Forrest and the Ku Klux Klan.

The English everyman of the 19^th century reading Dickens’ “The Noble Savage” might even have said to his wife, “Why does anyone have to write this down. It’s just common sense.” But now? Just common sense is uncommon. We live in a cruel dystopian oligarchy where good common sense about the sacred things, such as the love a man has for his own and the hatred he has for those who would destroy his own, has been outlawed, and the practitioners of good common sense have been forced to go underground.

I once read a neo-pagan blog in which the author tried to maintain that the European people had never really taken Christianity seriously; they had just had it foisted on them by their leaders. Such an argument undercuts the neo-pagan’s professed love for white people. How can you respect a people who practiced, for over 1500 years, a religion that was merely “foisted” upon them? I couldn’t accept the ‘foisted upon them’ theory of the neo-pagan, nor can I accept the ‘foisted upon them’ theory when it is used to explain the reason for the Europeans rejection of Christianity for utopian Negro worship. Granted, the utopians were quite clever. At first (and some still do) they fused Christianity and utopianism in order to slowly wean the European from his Christian faith. And utopianism was always posited as a cure for some genuine evil. But ultimately a man doesn’t change gods because he was tricked; he changes gods because he believes in the truth of the new god and not in the truth of his old god. It was inevitable once the forces of rationalism and science undermined the European’s faith in Christ that the European would embrace Negro worship. Seen through the eyes of faith Christianity is the natural faith for a man, because it is a faith that encompasses all of reality; it tells a man what he is and where he is going. But if a man foreshortens his vision and looks at the natural world as a self-contained world devoid of a personal God sustaining it, he will be doomed to worship at the satanic altar of the natural savage forever. Nature divorced from God is a Medusa’s head; to look upon it in such a distorted fashion -- and science bids us to do just that -- is death.

The road to Negro worship was built brick by brick by theologians and philosophers who told the European to look to nature in order to find God. He wasn’t there, so the European assumed He didn’t exist. Now he has nature and nature’s god, the black man. Is he content with that god? He says he is, but behind the façade of Liberaldom is suicidal despair. We are a society addicted to every form of anesthetic: drugs, sex, blood sports, the list is endless. Why, if the Negro god is all sufficient, do Europeans need to anesthetize themselves?

We need to take the European’s anesthetics away from him and make him look at the “utopia” in which he lives. What is the essence of this brave new world? All utopian states are built on cruelty; without cruelty the utopian state crumbles because the utopian must destroy the old order where truth, honor, and Jesus Christ reigned:

“All tender and gentle feelings of kinship, friendship, love, gratitude and even honor itself should be choked off in the revolutionary’s breast by the single cold passion of his revolutionary task. He is not a revolutionary if he has pity for anything in the world. He knows only one science—the science of destruction. He lives in the world with a single aim—its total and swift destruction.” (Mikhail Bakunin)

Yes, destruction and cruelty is the inner law of all utopias. Christ’s law of charity, which was the inner law of Christian Europe, became the proscribed law in utopian Europe because utopias are built with the blood of the innocents of the present in order to ensure the security of the chosen ones in the future. There can be no charity in Liberaldom because the liberal, of necessity, must kill Christian charity so that Liberaldom can survive. It’s a war to the death – the Christian European is committed to the destruction of Liberaldom because the liberals are committed to the destruction of everything a European holds sacred.

When we see the essence of utopian liberalism, which is cruelty, we can see why two seemingly disparate groups of individuals are united. The rationalistic, scientific liberal seems to be miles apart from the Negro barbarians. But they are united in their cruelty. Having renounced the source of divine charity they can only live by hatred; they hate the Christian European.

The liberal hates because he must destroy Christ’s people, and the black hates because it is in his nature to hate the white. Needless to say there is no love in the alliance between the liberal and the Negro; both are incapable of love, which belongs to a higher order of existence that the liberal has renounced and the Negro only knew when he served in the tents of the white man.

There is a litmus test for entrance into Liberaldom. You must be willing to stand by and applaud the murder and destruction of your own people in the here and now, and you must applaud the condemnation of the Europeans of the past. Certainly the clergy of the anti-Christian Christian churches, particularly the Catholic popes, have passed the test with flying colors. And the European laity has followed the lead of their blaspheming priests and pastors. But there will be those who refuse to pass the litmus test. God bless them.

When I was young I read a number of the Bulldog Drummond novels by H. C. McNeile. Mr. McNeile always made light of his own intelligence and his hero’s intelligence. But Bulldog Drummond had wise blood. He was always up against some criminal mastermind who was trying to manipulate the various utopian radicals into a coalition that would bring Christian Britain down. Drummond was always in defense of, and he was always up to the mark. Two white moments from the novel Bulldog Drummond Strikes Back stand out in my mind. While convalescing in a hospital from wounds inflicted by the evil mastermind, Bulldog Drummond is informed that the evil mastermind has destroyed a trainload of innocent people in order to further his own devilish schemes.

“He listened in silence whilst Darrell told him everything that had happened: then without a word he got out of bed and rang the bell. He was still shaky on his legs, but on his face was the look of grim determination that Darrell know well of old.”

And then later:

“This thing is going to be finished one way or the other, Peter,” he said after they had turned the car. “This globe isn’t big enough for Demonico and me. And he and I will have a final settlement tonight.”

His law of charity demands that we refuse to accept the liberals’ law of cruelty. From Marxist Russia to the black-worshipping nations of America and modern Europe, the force behind the utopian movements is the same: it is our ancient foe. It’s not all that complex; either we serve Satan or Christ, Babylon or Christian Europe. +