Cambria Will Not Yield

Saturday, September 26, 2009

The Worship of Darkness

“And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” John 3:19

There are so many illustrative moments from which you can choose to reveal the new black-worshipping religion of the white man in all its glory. I choose the recent Jimmy Carter-moment. “The overwhelming majority of people who oppose the Obama health care plan are racist,” he solemnly and piously intoned. Would that it were true. How did it come to pass that the Christ-bearers have turned to the worship of the generic black man? Let’s go back a ways.

The Europeans came into the Roman world as conquerors, but they were then conquered, not by force of arms, but by a story. This is something about the European that we must never forget. He cannot be conquered by outside forces; he can only be conquered if he willingly gives his consent to the conquest because he has first given his heart to the conqueror. The Europeans saw no shame in acknowledging Christ because they saw in Him the true Hero-God, and they loved Him for His heroism. And why shouldn’t they? He faced the ultimate enemy, death, for their sake.

It is difficult – no, not just difficult – it is impossible to fathom why the white man has forsaken Christ for the black man. We’ve seen the heights to which the white man can rise, and now we are seeing the depths to which he can sink. Is there any limit?

The great European poets have always depicted Satan as a rather apish fellow. Lacking originality, he tries, often with surprising success, to ape the good in order to seduce the faithful. I don’t think the new black faith is a great masterpiece of apemanship, but it seems to have worked beyond even Satan’s wildest expectations. There are some surface resemblances between Christianity and the black faith, but they are only surface resemblances. If we go below the surface, the two religions have nothing in common. But that is the key. The European has forsaken depth. He is afraid of what he might find there.

We first note that Christ’s birth was miraculous; He was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the virgin Mary. And His birth was humble; he was born in a manger surrounded by beasts of the field. In contrast, the generic black man’s birth was not a miraculous birth, it was an abstract birth. He was conceived in the abstracted mind of the white man, and he was born in Africa, surrounded by the beasts of the jungle. Christ came to earth to free us from sin and its consequence, death. The black man was anointed our savior so he could free the white men who believed in him from the sin of racism and from death at the hands of the black avengers.(1)

The new story of the black man which has conquered the liberals’ hearts lacks many elements the old Christ story contained. One striking omission is the lack of a spiritual component. The new faith is a ‘this world only’ faith. The white man is saved temporarily from physical death if he worships the black man, but there is no personal resurrection when the white man eventually dies from natural causes. The black God cannot resurrect the dead.

Another missing component is the personal, human component. Christ was a personal God who cared about individual human beings. The new generic black god cares only about the black herd and those whites who worship the black herd. Let us never forget Ratzinger’s plea for a black Pope, any black Pope.

And finally there is the missing attribute of charity. Where in the new faith is charity? There is only room, in the black faith, for bestial cruelty on the part of the black gods, and cowardly acquiescence to the cruelty on the part of the white faithful. Is the black faith worthy of the white man’s loyalty and devotion?

That Jimmy Carter and the liberal elites of America and Europe believe in the black faith I have just outlined is indisputable. But the non-elite who do not have any power do not really believe in the black faith with the fervor of the elite. The great unwashed give lip service to the black faith because they want to survive. Since there is no charity in the new faith, anyone who appears to be other than an enthusiast for the new faith is a candidate for elimination. The liberals are always searching for racism, which is an apish, obscene parody of our Lord’s words, “seek and ye shall find.” The liberals always find racism. And the non-elites are defenseless against the liberals, because they don’t believe in the old faith, which is the only faith that could sustain them against the onslaughts of the enthusiasts of the new faith. You can’t wield a sword with a limp-wristed, vague faith in the democratic process or in the benevolence of liberals.

The apotheosis of the black man could only occur in a post-Christian society. The white Christian of old Europe always had a mistrust of the black. When the black’s baser nature was controlled, he could occupy a place in the lower tier of white society, but when the Negro was granted equality, or worse, supremacy, his cruel, barbaric nature created a hell in whatever country he dwelt. No white Christian ever believed in black equality or black supremacy.

The post-Christian, however, must elevate the black for the simple reason that the post-Christian’s technocratic faith needs a generic, barbarian god. To those who equate whiteness with intellectual brilliance it seems incredible, this marriage of the technological white with the barbaric black. But spiritually they are the same. The liberal believes in the material world only. His world of science does not go beyond what can be seen in nature. And when the white liberal looks in the microscope at the natural world, he sees the black man, the pure natural savage. Obviously even the Negro is not just a product of nature, he has an immortal soul. But the liberal is blind to the things of the spirit. How can he see a quickening spirit in the Negro if he can’t even see it in the culture of the old Europeans? The liberal’s mind is immersed in the Darwinian logic of the jungle, so it was inevitable that he would make a god of the black barbarian who comes from the jungle.

The non-elite in the half-way houses often try to separate the racial Babylon of the brave new world from legalized abortion, gay rights, and the rest of the liberal agenda. This is not possible. It was first necessary to destroy Christian civilization and replace it with a racial Babylon before perversions such as legalized abortion and gay marriage could be deemed acceptable. Think about it. If a people is so perverse that they let the white blend with the black, is there any other perversion they will not permit? Just give the Bob Jones University people time. Now that they have repudiated their ancestors’ beliefs about race-mixing, they will, over time, repudiate their ancestors’ beliefs about legalized abortion, gay marriage, and Christ’s resurrection from the dead. The path to liberaldom is that downhill, slippery slope that we have heard so much about. And at the top of that slope is race-mixing. There is no stopping the slide once a man becomes part of racial Babylon.

If we look at the history of European man it appears that he always gets himself in trouble when he views himself as the "thinking, rational man" in contrast to the "poetical man," the man who “sees life feelingly.” The “thinking man” can always keep God at a distance or recreate Him as an abstraction, a figment of the rationalist’s mind. But the man who sees with his heart, which is only a physical organ to the scientists, cannot abandon the Christ he has seen at the European hearth fires. All that is essential in the European man is connected to Christ. Separate him from Christ and he ceases to be a man; he becomes ... well, he becomes what he is, a techno-barbarian who worships the black man and gives his consent to all the barbaric rituals that go along with racial Babylon.

The scientific man believes he is facing reality by staring at nature and then anointing the black man as king of the natural world. The European man, the man who sees through the natural world, sees life as a quest. The natural world simply provides the raw material, the background for the hero’s journey through the labyrinth of existence. And as Shakespeare so rightly observes, the labyrinth of existence is the human heart, and we must constantly strip off the outer layers to get to the core. And then we discover the person who is the object of the quest: “And thou, all they, hast all the all of me.”

There is no such thing as a merely passive virtue or just an active virtue. The internal process of stripping away the false layers in our hearts corresponds with our refusal to accept, and our battles against, the false concepts of reality which the scientific men, the men of unreality, try to stuff down our throats. The reason the non-elite are powerless to resist the scientific men of unreality is because they have not cleaned the sludge from their hearts. They don’t really believe in the new black faith of the elite, but since they can’t see any other reality – and they do see that the new faith is the ruling power – they acquiesce.

We must ask ourselves, “Is this the promised end?” Does Jimmy Carter speak for white Christians? The European who still has a heart of flesh will not accept the new faith and the new order. But are there any Europeans left? There must be a few, and a few are enough. Christ triumphed over Satan and his legions, and so will the faithful few who see through the eyes of faith. +

(1) I’m not suggesting that the barbarians will spare the liberal’s life, but in the liberal’s abstracted fantasy faith he dreams of averting death by worshipping and appeasing the black man.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, September 19, 2009

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. +

Labels: , ,

Friday, September 11, 2009

The Man on the White Horse

And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean – Rev 19: 14

A politically conservative newsletter recently ran the following report:
Over the next two decades, Europe will be transformed. The mass Third World immigration promoted by the West’s political and commercial elites is changing the cradle of the modern West into a mixture of non-Western peoples. The transformation is already well underway, with world-historical consequences that will forever alter what is meant by “European” art, culture, language, religion, and society. With an estimated 23 million Muslims now living in the European Union, as well as many more non-Muslim Third Worlders, many of Europe’s largest cities will fall under the political control of non-white majorities. Whites will be a minority in Birmingham, England, by 2026, and sooner in Leicester. By mid-century, Muslims are projected to outnumber non-Muslims in France. In Austria, where the population was 90 percent Catholic in the 20th century, Islam will be the religion of a majority of the country’s teenagers by 2050 or sooner. In Cologne, Germany, two thirds of the population will be Muslim. There are 164 Mosques in Germany today, and 200 more are now under construction.
It certainly will be much worse when white people are an actual minority in the previously European countries. But the white Christian has been a minority in the European nations for the last fifty years. “European” art, culture, language, religion and society already have been obliterated in the name of liberalism. What the liberals do not realize, however, is that when whites become a small minority in European countries, liberalism, and liberals themselves, will cease to exist. The Muslims will kill them all.

The late Malcolm Muggeridge called the surrender of the liberals to Third World Muslims a death wish. I don’t see it quite that way. The liberals desire the death of the older European culture and the white men who still claim allegiance to that culture, but they do not desire death. In fact, there has never been a people more afraid of death than white liberals. They became the first people to proclaim that “there is nothing worth fighting and dying for.” The liberals will keep partying, like the characters in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Masque of the Red Death,” until the Red Death of barbarism and Islam unmasks, right in the middle of the revelry, and murders every last liberal.

The European Christian culture then is already gone. And the European Christian is already a minority. The actual physical destruction of the old European paintings, churches, books, and other ancient artifacts of European culture will occur when the European people are overwhelmed and swept off the face of the earth.

The practical conservative would like white people to “wake up” and vote to stop the death of white people. It is already much too late for that. Some have suggested that white people should learn, like the Jewish people learned, how to live as a tiny minority in nations with a large majority that is hostile to them. White Christians should learn to live as minorities, because that is what we are, but there is a fallacy in the reasoning of those who claim we can imitate the Jews. First, white people do not have the same solidarity as the Jews have. Most white people deny that there is any such thing as ‘white people.’ And secondly, despite Jewish protests to the contrary, the Jews were treated kindly by Christian Europeans when they were a minority. They were allowed to remain separate and distinct and still be a part of European culture. This will not be the case when the rulers of European nations are Muslim. They will not allow Christian or Jewish minorities to exist. What every non-Muslim minority does not presently realize is that they need white Christian European men to act like white Christian European men if they are to survive.

The European seems to be in a hopeless situation. But the situation is only hopeless if we continue to be mesmerized by the ‘democratic process.’ That process is a giant anaconda that gradually squeezes the life out of the European man. In a democracy, the European’s will to fight is destroyed, and he is isolated and eliminated by the democratic snake. A case in point: I entered the prolife movement some ten years after the legalization of abortion, but many of my fellow picketers had been on the picket lines since the beginning. I asked one of the veterans if they had ever considered, at the onset, blowing up the first clinic in order to nip the plague right from the start. I’ll paraphrase his answer:

“You know I suggested we do just that. I told Father _____ that I had over 200 men willing to meet here at midnight and burn the clinic to the ground.”

“What did Father _____ say?”

“He told us that was not the proper spirit. We were Americans and Americans do things democratically.”
The two fatal weaknesses of the European are illustrated in that exchange. The European has been neutered by the democratic process, and the European has a blasphemous respect for Christian clergymen who only represent the faith, but are not the faith itself.

In a novel by Ralph McInerny (I forget which), he has a woman enter the confessional and present Father Dowling with a difficult problem in practical moral theology:

“I never got my first marriage annulled and now I’m no longer living with my second husband. Am I allowed to have relations with my first husband, since I was never really married to my second husband?”

Father Dowling replies, “I think you know the answer to that yourself.”

“Yes, Father, I suppose I do.”

Father Dowling is relieved because he doesn’t know the answer to the question.

I often think of that fictional exchange between the woman and the priest when I read the practical, get-out-the-vote, conservative publications. They tell us to fight (democratically, of course) for the white culture, but they never say exactly what that white culture is. I think, like Father Dowling, they want us to come up with an answer because they really don’t have a clue as to what white culture is. So let me tell them.

The culture of the white European is the culture of the Man on the White Horse. That man is not a Greco-Roman sage, he is not a Germanic or Celtic warrior, he is not a neo-pagan Nazi, and above all, he is not a modern, democratic-process man. He is a Christian man who knows not Kismet, who knows not fate.

The older Europeans believed in the ‘Man on the White Horse’ solution to national and local problems because the God they believed in was a man on a white horse. Hence whenever the need arose, the Europeans looked to a Tell, an Alfred, a Roland, a Wallace, to aid them in their darkest hour. Every European instinctively, because of the legacy of The God-Man on the white horse, sought to aid his people by becoming, or else following, a man on the white horse. And as the European’s faith in Christ waned so did his faith in the Man on the White Horse. Now the European is a pathetic weakling, who can only hope, with Patrick Buchanan – and it is a futile hope – that the barbarian conquerors will be kind to him.

I first heard the story of Richard the Lionheart’s sword vs. Saladin’s scimitar from my 9th grade history teacher. Richard had an anvil brought into his tent and right in front of Saladin split the anvil with his broadsword. Saladin then tossed a piece of silk in the air and cut it in two with his scimitar. So who was the superior warrior? When I told the story to my younger brother after school there was no question in his mind who the superior warrior was. “How can you even compare the two? Who wouldn’t prefer to be able to split an anvil with a broadsword rather than cut a hanky in half with a scimitar?”

And likewise, who doesn’t prefer the older European culture of the man on the white horse to the suicidal, anemic, democratic culture of the modern European or the merciless, cruel culture of Islam? The conviction that only a man on a white horse can save us is in our blood. Why not listen to our blood? The democratic culture is the culture of numbers: “The white European will soon be outnumbered, one thousand to one; the battle is over before it begins. The Muslims win.” But the European is losing now even when he outnumbers the Muslims in Europe, and he was victorious in the past when he was in a minority. So it is not superior numbers that bring victory. Faith brings victory. Our faith is in the God-Man, Jesus of Nazareth.

At present all Europeans who wish to remain European are Highlanders in spirit. We are part of a clan that exists within a country, but we are not of that country. Our loyalty is to the clan, to the men and women of our own blood. And in our case, which is infinitely more just than that of the Highlanders of old, we serve a different God than our enemies. If we clear away the democratic sludge from our eyes, we can see our Lord in the mists, riding on a white horse. He bids us “rise and ride.” +

Labels: ,

Saturday, September 05, 2009

The Outlawed European and the Practical Conservative

“He was cold and phlegmatic, and utterly devoid of that sacred fire which is the incentive to noble deeds...”

In Shakespeare’s Richard III, Buckingham, having done every dirty deed that Richard asked him to do, balks at the suggestion that he kill the young sons of Edward, the former king. Buckingham felt he had done enough; he helped Richard become king by treachery and murder, and now he wanted his reward, a dukedom and the lands and revenue of those he killed. But Richard of Gloucester didn’t see things that way. Having become king by foul means, he needed to maintain his kingdom by foul means. His friends are those who do his bidding, and his enemies are those who will not do his bidding. So Buckingham, despite his former services, becomes a proscribed traitor.

Buckingham, like Macbeth, thought he could use the devil for his own ends and then opt out of the devil’s service. Likewise the modern conservative-liberal. He thought he could go along with part of the liberal agenda and then opt out of the parts of liberalism that he found offensive. It doesn’t work that way.

First the conservative-liberal caved in on segregation. “That’s not essential – in fact it’s antithetical -- to our vision of a democratic society.” Then came feminism and its logical consequence, legalized abortion. “Full equality between men and women is certainly compatible with democratic egalitarianism, and legalized abortion is something we will permit so long as there are laws that sanction it. Nothing should ever impinge on the democratic process.” And once you’ve made your peace with feminists, it’s only a matter of time before you must accommodate the homosexuals. Having made the commitment to liberaldom, you can’t flinch at any of your rulers' commands.

The practical conservative-liberal is the Christian European’s greatest roadblock, because Mr. Practical Conservative wants to make the war between liberaldom and Christendom into a family quarrel within liberaldom. In point of fact, Mr. Practical Conservative dislikes terms like liberaldom and Christendom. He is a no-nonsense, meat-and-potatoes man who simply wants white people to have their own culture within liberaldom. What, however, is the white man’s culture? What does it mean to be white? It wasn’t a complicated issue until the latter half of the 20th century. To be white meant to be Christian. The terms were synonymous. But practical conservative man doesn’t want to hear such nonsense. In his practical mind, the white man is a biological entity who supports the democratic process, tax cuts, and organized, integrated sports.
How practical is the practical, conservative man? For years he ranted at the European separatists, who told him that there was no hope for European man within the democratic process, that talk of separation was surrender. But who turned out to be correct? Practical, conservative man or the European Christian? What has ‘get out the vote, don’t be impractical’ accomplished? It has brought the European to the block, that’s what it has accomplished.

The practical conservatism that either treats Christianity as a small cog in the great Greco-Roman, Germanic wheel, or that dismisses it altogether, is not practical. It is not practical because it treats the most essential issue, “Did Christ rise from the dead?” as a side issue of no particular concern for practical men. How can white men band together without a spiritual connection? What is the common culture they are trying to preserve? Capitalism? Agrarianism? No, there was only one fire inside European man, the Christian fire. And when that fire went out, the European did not actually physically die, but nothing resembling life remained in his heart. It doesn’t matter which European country you look at – Sweden, Britain, the United States – they are all helpless in the face of barbarism. Why? Because they have lost their faith. Liberalism isn’t a faith; it’s an absence of faith, pure negation, or at least the negation of everything the European Christian once believed. So, how can a European stay connected to liberaldom and remain a European? He can’t.

The practical, conservative men always point out the futility of an armed, separatist attack on the liberal leviathan, but such an attack is not the essence of a European separatist movement. A final Armageddon-type battle may well be the final outcome of a separatist movement, but the separatist movement is first and foremost a spiritual movement. “I shall serve Christian Europe; I shall not serve satanic liberaldom.” That internal determination is the heart and soul of the separatist, European movement. If a European separatist actually has enough money to buy some land and physically separate himself from liberaldom, then God bless him. But most of us do not have the financial means to make that kind of a separation from liberaldom. Most of us have to live and work in liberaldom, but that should not deter us from being European separatists. We are among them, but not of them. We are outlawed men, and we shall do whatever we can to undermine and ultimately destroy liberaldom. Geoffrey Household once wrote an excellent novel called Rogue Male. The main character no longer accepted his nation’s definition of morality. He set out, in defiance of his country’s moral standards, to kill the dictator who killed the woman he loved. The liberals have killed the culture we loved, and they are killing, through their barbarian henchmen, the people who constitute the remnant of the civilization we loved. Should we ask the liberals, ever so politely, to let us live in liberaldom? Would it do any good to make such a plea? There shall be no mercy for the white man. Then let us take heart and make a virtue of necessity. We are outlaws, so be it; at least we can be men again, no longer bound by the satanic rules of liberaldom and no longer bound to meekly demure and confine our protests to angry letters when our fellow Europeans are despoiled of their lands and murdered in the streets.

The advocates of practical conservatism have undermined European man in two ways.
1) They have wasted his spiritual energy by getting him to focus on equal representation within liberaldom rather than focusing on resistance to liberaldom.
2) By denying the existence of a spiritual dimension to life, they have given the European the false impression that only the empirical matters. No movement which only acknowledges empirical results will ever be successful. When Claus von Stauffenberg made the decision, quite correctly in my opinion, to kill Adolf Hitler, he wanted the plan to succeed, and he did everything in the practical realm to make the plan succeed. But he didn’t view the assassination attempt as just a ‘practical’ step to insure that Germany got a more competent leader. Von Stauffenberg believed in a mystical, Christian Germany. He believed that the fact that there were Germans willing to oppose Hitler made even more difference in the spiritual realm than the actual success or failure of the assassination attempt. This might be impossible for a practical, conservative liberal, raised on think-tanks and opinion polls, to understand, but I understand von Stauffenberg, and so does every European who still remains European.

I once read a criticism of Whittaker Chambers by a leading proponent of the white, anti-immigration, practical conservative movement. He criticized Chambers for not leaving behind some program for white people to follow instead of some metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. Well, having read Chambers’ works and the works of the Mr. Practical Conservative, I can say that Mr. Practical’s works did nothing for white people compared to Chambers’ works. Chambers bore witness to the light, the light that inspired white people to fight for the people Mr. Practical Conservative claims to care about. To what did Mr. Practical bear witness? What inspiration can we take from empiricism?

One could, from the practical conservative’s standpoint, say the same thing about Alexander Solzhenitsyn that was said about Whittaker Chambers: “He didn’t leave behind a practical program.” No, he didn’t. Is it really necessary to point out that he left behind something more precious and spiritually practical than a plan to capture an electoral victory?

The conservative-liberal movement failed because the leaders of the movement had the same beliefs as the liberal-liberals. Both groups rejected the Christian European view of man. The antique European believed that each soul counted, that what happened to every single human being had eternal significance: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Hence it followed from that quaint belief of the older Europeans that every Christian act of mercy, every Christian act in defense of other Christians, made a difference no matter how insignificant it might seem to the empiricist who sees only the aggregate herd and not individual human beings. Any movement that discourages the European from those ‘insignificant’ acts of mercy and those insignificant acts in defense of, is a movement that beckons us to hell.

We have forgotten what Hamlet learned through suffering and travail. It is not given to us to know the future or to know what effect our individual acts will have on the future.

Not a whit; we defy augury. There’s a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, ‘tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come; the readiness is all. Since no man has aught of what he leaves, what is’t to leave betimes? [Let be.]
It is only given to us to know what our blood tells us. He will not leave us bereft of comfort, and He does not want us to become practical, conservative empiricists. “Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.”