One Oath

“... when once our grace we have forgot,
Nothing goes right;...

-- Measure for Measure

Racial anemia is not a disease from which only white Americans suffer. It is a worldwide epidemic. White people in Sweden, Spain, Britain, Finland, Poland, New Zealand, and every other white country suffer from the same racial anemia as in America. Some white countries show more advanced symptoms of racial anemia than other white countries —Holland for instance – but every white country has the same disease.

Having never been Christian, the colored races are free from racial anemia, because racial anemia only occurs when a Christian people seek to return to paganism. The cross of Christ is a two-edged sword. Having once taken it up, as the European people did, it cannot be put down without the most severe consequences.

Christianity without the cross is liberalism, and racial anemia is the result of liberalism. Too little note was taken of Pope John XXIII’s forgiveness of the black torture-murderers in the Congo. His act of ‘Christian benevolence’ revealed a growing cancer in the vitals of Europe. The Christian, in imitation of his Lord, sacrifices for others, first for his kin, then for his kind, and then for others outside his kith and kin. But self-sacrifice is difficult. It’s much easier to do as the colored races do, sacrifice others to fulfill their selfish needs. However, having once been Christian, the white person can never be a happy-go-lucky pagan. He must couch his paganism in Christian terms. Hence, the selfish sacrifice of others to the tender mercies of barbarians is given a Christian cast by such liberals as Pope John XXIII. At the heart of such ‘loving charity and forgiveness’ is a selfish, blasphemous desire to be rid of the cross. The Christian precept, 'we must die to self,' is replaced with the pagan precept, 'we must make others die for us.' This is also the dynamic that drives the abortion industry. A pagan Aztec eats the heart of his enemy because his enemy is his enemy. But a post-Christian European, because he is a post-Christian European, must justify himself. He doesn’t sacrifice babies on the altar of his selfishness; instead, he aborts babies for their own good: 'There is nothing as terrible as an unwanted child.'

For centuries the blood wisdom of the white man told him that his personal salvation and his people’s salvation were to be found on a cross. But now the white man is afraid of his blood. He listens to a different drummer, a satanic drummer, who whispers satanic advice into the white man’s ear.(1) “Avoid the cross – it is a lie and a sham. Seek enlightenment, not pain. Go to Africa, go to the East, to Buddha, to the Obama, to Confucius, or the Dalai Lama, but never go to that man on the cross.”

The young neo-pagans openly spit on the cross of Christ while the older neo-pagans subtly reject the cross by characterizing Christianity as an ‘imaginative invention of those marvelous Europeans.’ But the Europeans’ glory was not that they invented a wonderful, imaginative religion; their glory was that they answered His call. The Europeans heard a voice in the mist, and they walked through the valley of the shadow of death to keep a tryst with their kinsman and their Lord.

I’ve read the neo-pagans’ plan for the restoration of the white man by 2020, but I see nothing in the plan about the European’s covenant with God. Go through the European’s history; everything the European ever did of lasting consequence was done because he kept faith with his God. Even if the neo-pagans could achieve their goal of a white-dominated society by 2020, who would want to live in such a world? A Godless Tower of Babel with whites at the top is still a Tower of Babel. What the faithful European wants to see is a renewal of the covenant between God and the European. We can’t possibly know the day or the hour when the European restoration will take place, because the grace of God is a mystery. Why do some men respond to it and others reject it? We don’t know. We do know that Europe became Christendom because Europeans responded to God’s grace.

It will avail us nothing if we achieve equal rights within heathendom or if we teach “white history” without mentioning Christ. The European achieved world dominance because he sought and found the God above the gods of the colored tribes. Without his God, the European is a pathetic member of the rainbow coalition of colored peoples.

In the magnificent Western movie, The Searchers, the main character, played by John Wayne, refuses to take an oath to serve in the Texas Rangers. When asked why he refuses, John Wayne’s character replies, “I figure a man’s only good for one oath at a time. I gave mine to the Confederate States of America.” When the devil came to the European and asked him to form a covenant with science, he should have told the devil that a man can only make one covenant and that he had made his with Christ.

The scientific method when applied to the study of man is nothing more than a return to paganism. Man seeks to harness the forces of nature in order to attain mastery over God. And what has been the result of the European’s covenant with science? He now worships at the shrine of technological barbarism and at the altar of the natural black savage. There is a fearful symmetry between the white man’s abortuaries and the black man’s blood orgies. That synthesis of blood is the modern world. The gods of the technological barbarians and the black barbarians demand the blood of others.

There is another symmetry, a sublime symmetry, that stands in direct contrast to the fearful symmetry of the technological white barbarian and the savagery of the black barbarian. And that sublime symmetry is the symmetry between bardic Europe and the Christian faith. Whenever we plunge to the depths of the European tradition we find that He is there. The God of the antique Europeans shed His blood for others; He gave His blood freely rather than demanding our blood.

We should have no room in our hearts for any other oath than the one we gave to Him, blood of our blood, heart of our hearts. And surely if the European will renew his covenant with Christ he need not fear the pestilence of liberalism or the destructive fury of the black savage. In Him and Through Him is the way of the European. +
________________________
(1) Why did Thoreau assume that a different drummer would be a benevolent drummer? The different drummer is Satan.

One Cure for Racial Anemia

“They are like sheep penned up in the shambles, that the butcher may take his choice among them... so general is the depression, so universal the despair.”

___________________________________

It is obvious to anyone who wants to see the obvious that the white European is suffering from racial anemia. He has no desire to defend his race or to see his race perpetuated. The liberal thinks that racial anemia is merely intellectual maturity, but of course the liberal is diseased and incapable of making a judgment on important matters. And racial suicide is an important matter.

The white, neo-pagan, nationalist cartel holds it as an article of faith that the Christian faith is the cause of racial anemia. The reasoning from that quarter, to the extent that one can find any reasoning in their anti-Christian diatribes, seems to go as follows: “The non-European races which do not have a Christian tradition do not have racial anemia, and the vast majority of the Mass-going and church-going, white Christians do have racial anemia. Therefore, the Christian faith and those who adhere to it are the cause of white, racial anemia. If we eliminate Christianity and all white Christians, there will be no more racial anemia; there will be a small, elite band of superior white intellects that will have dominion over the face of the earth.”

The problem with the white neo-pagan is that he drinks from the same stream as the liberal, the stream of abstracted unreality. The waters do not have the same effect on each individual, but every individual that drinks from them becomes unable to see through the eye, past the material world, to the spiritual world behind the arras. In the case of the liberal, the waters make him deny the concrete spirit and blood Christianity for an abstracted religion of his own invention. With some variations, the liberal has chosen to worship the idea of the black man.

Like the liberal, the neo-pagan has rejected spirit and blood Christianity for an abstract religion of his own, but in the neo-pagan’s case (remember that the stream of unreality, like an LSD trip, inspires different visions of unreality) his drink from the stream of unreality causes him to worship the white Übermensch, the man with the superior intellect. However, divorced from God, the white Übermensch is a pathetic, hopeless creature, because the white man cannot, like the other races, make his race into his God. The white man needs depth. He must seek his beginning and his end.

Tho’ much is taken, much abides ; and tho’
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are, --
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

“Is Christ risen?” must be the first question a European asks. If He is risen, then Christianity cannot be repudiated because it is “bad for white people.” The second question that needs to be asked is, “Must the white European commit racial suicide in order to be a Christian?” The liberal says yes, but the liberal’s answer is disingenuous because he no longer believes Christ is risen. He simply wants to use the old Christian faith to support his new, black-worshipping faith. And the neo-pagan accepts the liberal’s distortion of Christianity because he hates the white, Christian European just as much as his liberal counterpart does. He only loves the new European, the man of the future, who is devoid of faith, honor, and humanity.

What the neo-pagan and the liberal will not do, because both drink from the stream of unreality, is to honestly confront the white man’s past. Did the Christian men at Rorke’s Drift feel that surrender to the Zulus was the Christian thing to do? Did Alfred, on his deathbed, tell his sons to give England back to the pagans because he, Alfred, had done a terrible thing when he wrested England from the pagans? The only way you can claim that faith in Christ results in racial anemia is to claim that our European ancestors were not Christian. And that is what the liberals claim and that is what the neo-pagans claim. The liberals say that their abstracted Christ-less Christianity is the real thing, and the neo-pagans deny that the Europeans really believed in or took seriously the Christian faith. “It was their white genes that motivated them, not their professed faith.”

Let us leave the liberals and the neo-pagans at the stream of unreality and look at the reality. The white man’s racial anemia has one source, his lack of faith in Jesus Christ. Any white Christian who thinks that he can cure white racial anemia through alliances with pragmatic, “Let’s leave religion out of the picture” conservatives, or openly ‘hostile to Christianity’ neo-pagans is deluded. The only cure for a disease that stems from a lack of faith is faith. But of course neither I nor any other Christian European can make the modern European believe, as his ancestors once believed, in the God-Man, Jesus Christ. The Christian faith is not a suit of armor that can be used for the utilitarian purpose of fending off the barbarians and then discarded when the barbarian threat is gone. It is all or nothing. Either we believe in the white Christ and fight for His Europe, or we perish.

It is customary, when writing about the demise of the European people, to suggest some kind of five-point plan for a restoration. But I can’t even think of a one-point plan that will restore Christian Europe. I can only observe that the antique Europeans did not look on Christianity as a practical “guide to success” religion. They acted as they thought Christian men and women should act and left the rest to God. If we call that absence of a plan a plan and follow it, we will be more in line with the third dumb brother of fairy tale fame. And that brother, the brother with a heart united to His heart, always ends up inheriting a Kingdom.

If you want to have a really depressing experience, go get some of the old Protestant and Catholic works of apologetics. They never convinced anyone that Christ was the Son of God, but they did provide millions of men and women with an excuse for atheism or religious indifference. But while the rather childish turf wars went on between the Protestant and Catholic clerics, the Christian Everyman of Europe was doing the real missionary work. He was forging an apologetic work called European civilization which was built out of the European’s love for Christ.

I don’t hold out any hope for European man in the ‘catastrophe theory’, which claims that when the barbarian hordes complete their conquest, or when the European economies fail, Europeans will come to their senses and unite. Suffering does change some noble souls for the better, like Alexander Solzhenitsyn, but more often than not it hardens the sufferer against all humanity. I take more hope from the fact that Walter Scott’s Europe once existed. We have before our eyes, if we will just look into the past, the embodiment of the Christian faith in the lives of those ancient Europeans. Our fidelity to Scott’s Europe will, in the long run, bring other Europeans back to the Europe that was built by the Christian Everyman. In the long run, we are not dead; in the long run there is life if the Last Europeans are steadfast.

The greatest dangers to the European who wants to remain steadfast against the liberals and the barbarians often are those dangers that need to be resisted by denial. Against the seductive democratic temptation – “don’t go outside the democratic process” – and the clerical temptation – “Father Riley says don’t worry, the Pope knows what he is doing, just don’t use the word ‘nigger’ and pray for Obama and all will be well,” we have our eternal ‘no!’ We can refuse to serve the liberals and those who would have us compromise with liberals. Such denials are part of the hero’s quest. If he lets himself become ensnared by the dark ladies of democracy and clergy-worship, he will never have a chance to wield his sword against the dragon guarding the gates of liberaldom.

There has never been a time in the European’s history when the battle lines were so clearly delineated between good and evil. On the liberal’s side is legalized abortion, the worship of black barbarism, homosexuality, feminism, and every satanic perversion of the good that Satan could stuff into the minds of his liberal minions. On our side is the Man of Sorrows, who looks at us as He looked at Peter after the third denial. It is a look of infinite mercy and compassion. If it had been a look of anger or rebuke, Peter would have been able to bear it. But to know that he had failed the God who could forgive and love those who denied Him thrice put fire into Peter’s heart. And that same fire that kindled St. Peter’s heart stirs our hearts. +

The Darkness of Liberalism

“You can’t have just a little bit of liberalism...” CWNY

That their enemies are “hate-filled” is a favorite axiom of the liberals, but in reality the essence of liberalism is hatred. No white Christian can hate like a liberal. And Herbert Butterfield tells us why this is so in his book, The Englishman and His History:

When he has failed, or when he is in difficulties, the liberal of the continental type too often has only one thing left—his moral indignation. At this point he does indeed pick up the doctrine of sin, but it is important to note that he wears it with a difference; for, as we have seen he does not commence with it, as the Christian tradition had always done—he drags it from under his sleeve at a later point in the argument. Concerning the sin, of course, he is (as somebody wisely said) “against it”: indeed he hates it, with the added frenzy of the partisan who has discovered here the totally unexpected obstacle. On this view of life the sinners are indeed fewer in number, but how much wickeder to make up for it! And none is so unforgiving to the transgressors as the person who does not believe in original sin. Here is a system which releases us from self-discipline, authorizing us to treat the political enemy as
subhuman, irredeemable. In consequence the good are engaged against the wicked in a more irretrievable warfare, where the makeshift of the ballot-box may itself become intolerable, and nothing is left but the resort to force.

I think Butterfield has described the inner dynamic of liberalism. Liberals always hate those who oppose them, because if you oppose them you are standing in the way of the perfection of mankind. (1) They don’t believe that all men are tainted with original sin; they only see sin in those who oppose liberalism. And there is no self-control in the liberal’s makeup; being without sin he needs no self-discipline. Like a spoiled devil child he can indulge his every whim. And his whim is that his enemies must be eliminated at all costs.

We know who the liberal’s enemies are. They are white Christians who believe in original sin and the rest of the Christian story. The escalating hatred of white people throughout the world is a direct consequence of the triumph of liberalism. Any white counter-attack, if it is to be successful, must be fought with an uncompromising faith in the whole Christian, European tradition and a clear understanding that liberals will never allow white Christians to live in liberaldom, hence a Christian European’s only defense is to destroy liberalism. But that is never seen as an option among the European people. Some group will emerge that doesn’t like one aspect of liberalism, and they will try to change that one thing, but they will retain the essence of liberalism, which is a hatred of the white, European, Christian tradition. The groups that just want a little bit of liberalism, the liberalism that suits their fancy, are in many ways more dangerous than the total liberal, because the half-way house liberals are more deceptive. You think they can be your allies, but in the end their hatred of the white European Christian is just as intense as their liberal cousins. Let’s look at two of the half-way house liberals.

1) The neo-pagans.
The neo-pagans are not the pagans of the stream, the field, and the hunt; they are not the pagans of old. If they were, a Christian could work with them. The old European pagans were willing to bend their knees to a God above the pagan gods, but the neo-pagans have no God. Most don’t seem to feel the need for one. Others write articles about the need for a new religion for the white man. That type of thinking typifies the neo-pagans, who have no ties to the white European tradition and no ties to reality. Can you make any claim of solidarity with white people if you reject Christianity? And can you be taken seriously as a man if you think religious faith can simply be manufactured to serve as a motivational tool for the advancement of the white gene pool? Reading the writings of the neo-pagans is similar to looking at a surreal painting; there is no trace in either of beauty or truth. I recently read a self-promotional ad in one of the neo-pagan’s publications; the author quoted Dostoyevsky’s assertion that only “beauty could save us.” But the neo-pagan neglected to say what Dostoyevsky considered beautiful. The Great Russian had one true love who combined, in His person, perfect beauty and complete truth: “... he passed through all the circles of human hell, one more terrible than the medieval hell of the Divine Comedy, and was not consumed in hell’s flame: his duca e maestro was not Virgil, but ‘the radiant image’ of the Christ, love for whom was the greatest love of his whole life.”

The more subtle of the neo-pagans include Christianity in the white man’s history. They use phrases like, “Our Celtic, Saxon, Germanic, Greco-Roman, Christian heritage.” But when you get past the clever phrasing you realize that the neo-pagan who talks about that kind of encyclopedic heritage thinks the European invented Christianity. To such a neo-pagan, Christianity is a reflection of the brilliant creativity of the European, but it is not true. The neo-pagan has already made the determination that the natural world is the only reality.

What does the neo-pagan look to as a substitute for God? He, like his liberal cousins whom he despises, looks to the future. In that world there will be no individuals, just an intellectually, biologically superior herd of white technocrats. The neo-pagan’s dream is the same dream as the liberals: they too look to a future where the herd has triumphed over the individual. The two groups simply differ over the preferred color of the herd, but they are united in their common hatred of the white, Christian European.

2) The half-way house Christian Rationalists.
The neo-pagan wants to sever Christianity from the white European in order to save the white European, and the half-way house Christian rationalist wants to sever the white European from Christianity in order to save Christianity. But the half-way house Christian, in his rejection of “European Christianity,” is really rejecting Christ. Let’s look at this rejection more closely.

St. Paul tells us that neither the Greeks nor the Jews rejected the idea of God. They simply rejected the notion that Christ was God. To the Greeks the idea of an incarnate God was foolish, and to the Jews the idea of a suffering servant who came to them via the humble things and the meek and mild people of the earth was blasphemous. And we see this twofold rejection of the incarnate God in the half-way house Christians’ rejection of white European culture. Do we need a historian from Mars to render an objective account of the European’s history? Why is the obvious fact that pre-20th century Europe was a result of a particular peoples’ love affair with Christ so difficult to see? And can the Christian faith be severed from those people and remain the Christian faith? I say no. A philosophical system can be passed from one mind to another mind. A scientific formula can be passed on from one scientist to another. But a faith? A faith is held in the heart and is passed on through the blood. Sever the white men from Christianity, and you have struck a blow at the heart of Christianity. It can survive as a bloodless philosophy or as a utopian, feel-good universalism, but it will no longer be the faith that men wrote hymns about and martyrs died for.

Again I refer to St. Paul. “Who shall separate us from the love of Jesus Christ?” he asked. The liberals say, “We shall!” And they mean it, because they hate with a hate that is inspired by Satan. Satan knows that if he kills the connecting link to God, the white man’s culture, he will separate mankind form God. The radical democrat, the neo-pagan, the half-way house Christian are in their liberalism all compact. They hate the white, Christian European, and will continue to hate him until they are converted or defeated.

Theoretically we all have homes, but the true, spiritual reality is that only a Christian European has a home he loves. The liberal, in his many guises, looks to the future when he will have his perfect home; then, he will love it. And the barbarian sees a home as something of merely external value, that one robs and plunders when it belongs to someone else and that a man uses until it becomes despoiled if it is his own. But here again he does not love his home. The Christian loves his home because He is there, and He has consecrated it with His love. The European home is the source of our strength and our faith. As the liberals’ hate intensifies around us, we will cling to our European home, and surely the love that we have for our home will prevail over the liberals’ hatred. +
____________________________
(1) Robespierre was the quintessential liberal. He was an anti-capital punishment zealot who nevertheless ordered thousands of executions in order to build a perfect world where capital punishment was unnecessary.