The Forsaken Past of Europe

That all, with one consent, praise new-born gauds,
Though they are made and moulded of things past.

--William Shakespeare

Writing in the war-torn London of 1939, H. V. Morton had this to say of an Englishman’s debt to his past:

In times of peace it is permissible for all but a few antiquaries to forget the past and to forge ahead cheerfully into the future; but in war-time a nation, calling up its spiritual reserves, draws unconsciously upon the strength of its past, and owes to its ancestors more than it knows, or than may be set down in words. So if these sketches of a past that still influences the present have any interest, it is because they remind us of certain permanent values, and they promise that London, so old in experience, will one day pick up the threads of her existence and go onward in history.

Things didn’t turn out as H. V. Morton hoped. As a true-bred Englishman of the old stock, Morton quite naturally thought that the essential England would always remain: “There will always be an England.” But the jettisoning of the past which holds a nation’s spiritual reserves had begun before World War II, indeed it was the main reason for World War II, and it continued at an accelerated rate throughout the European nations after the war. This pillorying of the past, which is tantamount to national suicide, has continued unabated in every European country up to the present day. There is virtually nothing left of Europe’s past in any European country. Of course this is by design. You can’t get your ticket punched on the great Liberal Express train to Babylon if you don’t sever your ties to the past.

Tragically most Europeans have complied with the required act of renunciation. And by doing so they have lost their spiritual reserve when they need it most, when they should be fighting a war for the survival of the white race. They are not fighting that war, a war infinitely more vital to their interests than any of the World Wars, because they have surrendered their right to exist as a people.

At this point the conservative always brings in Malcolm Muggeridge’s 1979 article about the great liberal death wish. But the liberal doesn’t have a death wish. The policies he advocates will certainly result in his death, but the liberal is not supposing his death when he proposes the death of European civilization. The essence of the great liberal death wish is the sacrificial offerings of other whites, in order that the liberal can be ensured of life eternal. It’s a twisted reversal of Christ’s death on the cross. Christ shed His blood so that men might have eternal life; the liberal demands that the blood of others shall be shed so that he can attain a Faustian life everlasting. Babies shall be aborted so that the liberal will have breathing room, and the black gods must be appeased with white victims so that they will not vent their wrath upon the liberal. Of course the black gods will vent their wrath on the liberal and the non-liberal, but the liberal doesn’t believe that, and he doesn’t want the white grazer to believe that either. Which is why the victims of the black “gods” such as Eugene Terreblanche, the South African nationalist murdered by blacks, are called ‘white supremacists’ rather than ‘white nationalists’ or ‘white rights advocates’. The implied message in the use of the term ‘white supremacist’ is that the white victim would not have been a victim if he had not been an advocate of ‘white supremacy’.

There is an element of fear in the liberals’ new-found faith in the black man. They keep their fears at bay by the continual sacrificial offerings to the colored gods, and by constant propaganda against the European people who lived prior to our modern age of Aquarius. The obsessive-compulsive nature of the sacrifices and the relentless propaganda campaigns is a result of twin fears: the fear of the wrath of the black man and the greater fear of the return of white, Christian Europe. The second fear is the greater fear to the liberals, because such a restoration would mean, in the liberal’s mind, a return to Christianity that would necessitate the return of justice, mercy, and faith. The liberals want only justice as they, not God, define it. They have no need for mercy because they are the righteous ones, and they have no need for faith in Christ because they now have a new god in the form of the black man. Thus the liberal keeps his fear of the black man in check with sacrifices of white people and the pillorying of their past in order to avoid what he most fears, the Christian faith.

Satan serves as a kind of technical advisor to the liberals. And he has advised the liberals not to destroy the Christian churches or directly insult the Christian God. “Instead,” Satan advises his liberal fellow-travelers, “you must attack the European version of Christianity as something cruel, racist, and unscientific. Urge people to practice a new Christianity which is kind, non-discriminatory and up-to-date (meaning Christ is not the exclusive son of God – we are all sons of God).” Satan is very flexible – “whatever works” is his motto, and the attack on European Christianity and the people who championed it has proved most effective. All the white “Christians” have fallen in line with Satan’s command. In the name of racial equality, the Christian churches preach a “purer,” non-culture-bound Christianity designed to appeal to the colored races. The problem with that broad-based, broad-minded Christianity is that it is not true. In every century of the Christian era of Europe there were blasphemers who championed the forms of the faith against the substance of the faith. Walter Scott depicts such a “Christian” in his novel Old Mortality. John Balfour, a fanatical Scottish Covenanter, violates the law of chivalry, which was written in the hearts of all Christian Europeans, by killing, in the name of his mind-forged Christless faith, a Christian soldier of the royalist party who came to Balfour bearing a flag of truce.

“A free pardon to all,” continued the young officer, still addressing the body of the insurgents—“to all but—“

“Then the Lord grant grace to thy soul. Amen!” said Burley.

With these words he fired, and Cornet Richard Grahame dropped from his horse. The shot was mortal. The unfortunate young gentleman had only strength to turn himself on the ground and mutter forth, “My poor mother!” when life forsook him in the effort. His startled horse fled back to the regiment at the gallop, as did his scarce less affrighted attendant.

“What have you done?” said one of Balfour’s brother officers.

“My duty,” said Balfour firmly. “Is it not written, ‘Thou shalt be zealous even to slaying’? Let those who dare NOW venture to speak of truce or pardon!”

Such individuals as Balfour have always been part of Christendom, and they often obtained positions of leadership in their particular church, but the substance of Christianity, the vision of a merciful God who so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, has always been at the center of the Europeans’ view of existence. Faith needs to be embodied. Where is the Christian faith now that the incarnational faith of the antique Europeans has been vilified and rejected? In academia? You jest. In our churches? They have become adjuncts of academia. Do we see the Christian faith embodied in the people of color? No, we don’t. The clerics and academics have made the colored people their gods, but that is not the same as seeing the face of Christ in His people. The attack on the white race and their antiquated Christian civilization – antiquated by modern liberal standards – is not a purification of Christianity, it is a termination of Christianity. The halfway-house Christians who want Babylon and Christ can spin it how they will, but it always comes back to a very basic betrayal: the white man turned from his God to the gods of the stranger. And the result has been the devastation of Europe.

“They that do change old love for new,
Pray God they change for worse.”

Why in the present war, the war for the preservation of the white race, do the Europeans not unconsciously turn to their past and draw upon their spiritual reserves, as they did in other lesser wars? Is it because they have exhausted their spiritual reserves in a losing battle with the liberals who have convinced them that the past is evil and the Babylonian future is good? Yes, that seems to be the case. We no longer see the “animation of the European” in their eyes.

I seldom read the white nationalist publications because they don’t seem to have any respect or love for antique Europe and her people. Their god is not my God, and their people are not my people. They treat the Europeans’ Christian past as the liberals treat it, as something that is dead, and good riddance to it. But does that narrow, modernist interpretation of the past, in which people are studied like dead insects, tell us the truth about existence? The testimony of our ancestors puts things in a different light. To them the things of the material world were symbols of the things of a greater spiritual world. In such a world the past, present, and future form a trinity in spirit, all three are separate, but all three are also united, because they are of the spirit. When the liberal or the neo-pagan posits a future without the Christian past of the European people they are trying to breathe life into a corpse. There is nothing eternal in liberalism or neo-paganism; both lack an animating spirit because both have rejected the European past, where the God who united the past with the present and the future dwells. When you see the gulf, the mind-forged gulf, between the modern European and his past you are tempted to despair and join with Melville in asking, “Is all this struggle in vain?” But then the past wells up before you, a past in which a whole people loved a Fairy Prince who rescued them from the dragon of death. And the love that once was there is still there for the European who rejects the liberal’s Babylonian world of the future in order to live in the European past, rooted in the spiritual trinity of past, present, and future.

It’s not possible to predict a gloomy future for the European people or a glorious future, because the love that built Christian Europe is not subject to the rules of the material world. A fire kindled in that world will burn according to certain laws of the physical sciences. But a spiritual fire, engendered by a man’s love of antique Europe’s people and their God, could become a consuming fire that destroys Liberaldom. Satan knows that, which is why he never sleeps, but neither shall we sleep till we have restored Christian Europe.

“I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England’s green and pleasant land.” +

Europe Regained

Expose thyself to feel what wretches feel,
That thou mayst shake the superflux to them,
And show the heavens more just.

-King Lear

About ten years ago, when my mother was still alive, she sent me the obituary of the man who had been my Little League manager. He was the type of man who would make a good subject for the old Reader’s Digest feature called “My Most Unforgettable Character.” Mr. Gulf was the only manager who didn’t have children on a team. His kids were all grown, but he stayed on as a volunteer umpire and a manager. When he died at 88, he had only been retired from Little League baseball for six years. Mr. Gulf was a tall, barrel-chested man with a gravel voice, but he was very patient with his charges and seemed to have grasped the fact, unlike some of the other adults involved with the Little League, that Little League baseball was supposed to help boys become men, in the ‘Battle of Waterloo and the playing fields of Eton’ sense. The Little League was not designed, in Mr. Gulf’s eyes, to help grown men become little boys again. To many of the parents and other managers Mr. Gulf was a figure of ridicule because he regularly sat on the edge of the dugout and spouted sport clichés. But he wasn’t comical to us, because Mr. Gulf actually believed in the clichés and his belief made us believe.

One of Mr. Gulf’s favorite axioms, which he delivered to every boy before he stepped up to the plate, was, “Son, you’ve got to believe that you can hit that ball. If you don’t believe in yourself, you’ll never get a hit.” A cliché? Not to Mr. Gulf and not to us. More often than not, we did hit the ball because Mr. Gulf made us believe we could hit. And it seems to me that the problem with the modern European man is that he no longer believes in himself. I don’t mean this in the blasphemous sense, in that a man should believe only in himself and in nothing outside himself; I mean it as an extension of Mr. Gulf’s ‘Battle of Waterloo and the playing fields of Eton’ metaphysic. The European used to believe that his culture was superior to every other culture, and that superiority, which came to him by the grace of God, entailed certain responsibilities, chiefly the responsibility of defending his race and his people against the onslaught of lesser breeds who were outside the law and did not know or respect the God of charity and mercy. Strength, vigilance, and unflinching loyalty to white culture was thought to be necessary because the European considered his race as the Christ-bearing race.

The modern European, to the extent that he has any strength, vigilance, or loyalty, expends it all in attacking the white race and the religion that was championed by the white race. There is no escaping that fact. Halfway house Christians will claim that they are just removing the bad European cultural baggage from Christianity and restoring the Christian faith to its original purity, but it is not difficult to see the disingenuousness of their claim. Every single “improvement” on the European-centered Christianity is in line with liberalism; not the gospel of Jesus Christ, the God of the antique Europeans. The new spirit of inclusion is not an improvement; it is a dethronement of Christ. The new cult of Negro worship is not an advance; it is a blasphemous capitulation to the lowest form of paganism. And where in Scripture did Christ say that it was permissible to make Him subordinate to the democratic process?

The new Christianity is not Christianity. Those who equate Christianity with an organized, philosophical system or a social club will follow the new anti-Christian Christianity to its logical conclusion, which is hell. But the Europeans who yearn for a God of charity and mercy above the nature gods will still seek the Son of God. The problem facing the drug-soaked, sex-crazed, nihilistic European, who still feels a void in his soul, is that the Christ he sees before his eyes is a liberal Christ. He needs to seek out the same hovel that Lear took refuge in. And there, in the hovel of spiritual desolation, he will see the Christ, not the Christ of the liberals, but The Christ, The Son of the Living God.

In one post I wrote, titled “The Gingerbread House,” I mentioned that the United States and the western European countries used the seductive form of the egalitarian heresy. They covered the books about the European past with monkey-vomit and told the lost souls of modernity that they were welcome to read that filth if they could stand the stench. By and large the confused modern turned from a past covered with monkey vomit. But some pilgrims were so desperate or possibly so cynical that they had to see the monkey vomit books for themselves. I was such an individual. And in those books whose covers were sprayed with the liberal monkey vomit of scorn, derision, and accusations of racism and infantilism, there was a compelling image of a God whom the European people used to worship. He was not the God of the modern, organized churches; He was not the God of the philosophers or the Negro-worshippers; He was Jesus of Nazareth, the Man of Sorrows, who took flesh and dwelt among us. This the antique European believed.

The antique European also believed in his eternal moment. He believed that what he did on this earth made a difference, because his blood was connected to a loving Savior who had forged a connection to His people more mystical and mysterious than the most devout devotee of the ancient mystery religions could conceive, and more intrinsically humane than any philosopher or moral theologian could possibly imagine. The liberal has convinced the European that he has no eternal moment, that there is no link between mortal man and a loving God. We are all, we Europeans of the old stock, in Hamlet’s position. We are born to set it right. We will not be played upon by liberals who are determined to pluck out our mystery by denying our blood connection to the living God:

Ham. I do not well understand that. Will you play upon this pipe?

Guil. My lord, I cannot.

Ham. I pray you.

Guil. Believe me, I cannot.

Ham. I do beseech you.

Guil. I know no touch of it, my lord.

Ham. ‘Tis as easy as lying. Govern these ventages with your finger and thumb, give it breath with your mouth, and it will discourse most excellent music. Look you, these are the stops.

Guil. But these cannot I command to any utterance of harmony. I have not the skill.

Ham. Why, look you now, how unworthy a thing you make of me! You would play upon me, you would seem to know my stops, you would pluck out the heart of my mystery, you would sound me from my lowest note to the top of my compass; and there is much music, excellent voice, in this little organ, yet cannot you make it speak. ‘Sblood, do you think that I am easier to be play’d on than a pipe? Call me what instrument you will, though you can fret me, you cannot play upon me.

There is a world in those words, “Call me what instrument you will, though you can fret me, you cannot play upon me.”

Just as Claudius sought to impose his world, based on adultery and fratricide, on Hamlet, so do the liberals seek to impose their world of Negro worship, infanticide, and Christ-less Christianity on the European. The grazers have accepted the legitimacy of the liberals’ world, but we few, we Europeans, will not accept their world. In our blood, which we have not forsaken, we have seen another and better world than Liberaldom.

The majority of the French people at the time of the French Revolution did not support the radicals who murdered the King, but the majority of French people had become grazers. They were indifferent to the ancient ideal of “I serve the King and the King serves Christ.” And no doubt the indifference of Louis XIV and Louis XV, not Louis XVI, to that ideal did much to breed the indifference. A small minority with conviction will always triumph over a majority of indolent grazers. This is why the polls constantly fool the conservatives. They take a poll among the grazers and find out that a majority favor older traditional values. “Behold!” the conservative exclaims, “We are turning the corner.” But the grazer is indifferent traditional. He would prefer his neighbor to be white, but he isn’t going to get upset if he is a Somalian; he doesn’t like the idea of homosexual marriage, but he isn’t going to lose any sleep over it so long as the network keeps showing football games. And on and on it goes. Has the white man really become such a creature of indolence that he can be played upon so easily by the liberals? Yes, he has become such a creature.

Virtually all white Europeans are liberals by what they acquiesce to. But liberalism still has only a minority of adherents who have given their hearts and souls to liberalism. If a European Hamlet emerges, he who has that within which passeth show, who is willing to attack liberalism, he will find that the walls of Liberaldom are not as impregnable as the liberals want us to believe. They are vulnerable to a passion for His Europe that is greater than their passion for Satan’s mind-forged walls of Liberaldom.

One of the many admirable aspects of Hamlet’s counter revolution was his complete unconcern as to whether the people, the grazers, were for or against him. He knew what his duty was and he did what his high calling demanded of him. We don’t know if any of the grazers will follow in our train if we attack Liberaldom, but by the same token we will never know if we don’t attack Liberaldom without any expectation of help from the grazers. There might be genuine heroes among the ranks of the grazers who are just in need of a heroic example. If the last Europeans do not act as Europeans they will truly be the last Europeans.

Last week I took my youngest children to an amusement park to enjoy the last rose of summer. While they were enjoying themselves on the rides, I ordered our hamburgers at the food stand. Ordering food at the same time were some liberal ‘care providers’ (liberals can always be identified) for a large group of retarded young adults and older adults. As the retarded people sat waiting for their food, they started yelling the f-word at each other. The care providers didn’t ask them to stop; in fact they seemed quite amused. I went up to the care providers and told them I wanted them to tell their charges to stop screaming the f-word as my children would soon be coming to eat their lunch at a nearby table. The care providers told me what was obvious, that their charges were retarded. Then they went on to explain that we all had to understand that retarded people had to be treated differently than other people; “we must make allowances” etc. But who teaches retarded people to yell the f-word across a crowded room? The liberal care providers do, by their smiling acquiescence. It is just as uncompassionate to allow retarded adults to wallow in moral filth as it is to allow them to sit in soiled diapers. I never remember retarded people screaming obscenities when I was growing up. They take their cue from their leaders.

The white grazers that I see every day remind me of those retarded people. They take their cue from the liberals and say and do horrendous things. But what if some Europeans would emerge and present a different example for the grazers to follow? Would miracles occur? We don’t know. But we do know that truth needs to be embodied in a person. He taught us that. The hero, not the solecism or the platitude, is the European bridge to His Kingdom come. +