Saturday, November 06, 2010

Modernity: The White Man’s Albatross

“The self-same moment I could pray;
And from my neck so free
The Albatross fell off, and sank
Like lead into the sea.”

-- Coleridge

Halloween has come and gone. And I’m not talking about the Halloween where little kiddies dress up as goblins and witches and ask for candy. I’m talking about something a lot scarier. I’m referring to the macabre spectacle called ‘elections,’ in which infantile adults dress up in costumes and tell a lot of lies about themselves and their opponents. Of course not every politician involved in Tuesday’s elections was an outright liar. But at the very least, the ones who were not blatant liars were participating in the great lie, the great lie of American Gnosticism: “Government for the people, by the people, and of the people.”

There is no ‘we, the people,’ in the United States or in the European nations. White people deny that their skin color makes them a ‘people.’ It makes no difference whether the pundit is Buchanan, Kristol, or Clinton; the refrain is the same: “We are a nation founded on an idea.” If we probe further we might be treated to a dissertation about the idea upon which our nation was founded. The answer will vary from pundit to pundit, but in the main it will boil down to the triune principles of the French Revolution: liberty, equality, and fraternity.

The United States did not completely crumble at its inception because it took time for the white people of the United States to actually put their abstracted principles to the test. Our un-Civil War was a battle between non-utopian Europeans and abstracted, utopian Europeans, who wanted, quite in keeping with our marvelous Constitution, to extend the ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity to the black race. The utopians won a partial victory in the War, but the white men, as oft this stage we have shown, fought a successful rearguard action until their surrender in the 1950’s.

When a people who do not believe they are a people attempt to apply the abstract principles of liberty, equality and fraternity to a savage race of people who do see themselves as a ‘people,’ the extermination of the utopian people is the inevitable consequence. The Europeans are currently suffering through the extermination process.

Of course the racial identity of a people is only half of the equation. There is also the religious component. Race and faith merge to produce a people. Without a racial identity, a people are without a local habitation and a name; they are airy nothings. And without a religious faith, they are an aggregate herd without the animating, transcendent, spiritual life that comes from a connection to the living God. The colored tribes are races without faith, and the whites are non-entities without a racial or a religious aspect to their lives.

I saw nothing in any platform of the white candidates that indicated they were seeking to represent white Christians as a distinct people, separate from the multitudinous, aggregate herds of the colored tribes. Indeed, you would be immediately ushered into a mental asylum or a prison if you treated white people as a people apart from the colored people, and if you spoke favorably of white people or Christianity. Let’s do a little practical test. Observe what happens when a white television commentator even suggests that black people are not godlike creatures deserving all honor and praise. The white commentator immediately becomes a former white commentator. But when the reverse happens, when a black commentator derides the white race as the source of all evil in the world, what happens? The black commentator is petted and adored by whites and blacks. And what happens when Islam or any other non-Christian religion is attacked? The outraged liberals and the colored tribes strike back. When Christianity is attacked? The chorus for toleration and moderation reaches a sickening crescendo.

Behind the white man’s flight from his race is a flight from the living God. Christ came to us through the blood; He became part of us, body and soul. A European can only deny God by forsaking his blood. This is the reason Christianity only survives as an intellectual system, not an incarnational faith. You can pick or choose when you are dealing with a mind-forged system, agreeing with some tenets and disagreeing with others. But a blood faith is different. It is all or nothing. You must either trust your instincts and plunge headfirst into the raging river, trusting that the current will take you to a safe harbor, or you must stay on the dry land and create abstract theories about rivers and currents and cabbages and kings.

I do not like the mind-forged utopia of the liberals and the neo-pagans. It is a world devoid of the stuff that dreams are made on, the affections and sentiments that come from the human heart. The Europeans longed for the coming of the hero. Who was Thor, who was Odin, if not the European’s waking dream of a hero that would come and save his people from the forces of the underground world of evil, sin and death? Christ was Thor, He was Odin, He was Siegfried, He was all the gods and all the heroes, and He was more than the gods: He was blood brother, Savior, and King.

I’ve often wondered why it is the white, halfway-house Christian conservatives who are the most vehemently opposed to any suggestion that faith comes through the blood, not the head. Possibly it is because such an admission would mean that the clergy, who are the intellectuals, would not be the final arbiters of divine revelation. And there is also the ecumenical problem. It seems very anti-democratic and unecumenical to claim that your ancestors were something special because they, and they alone, made the living God part of the fabric of their culture. Our modern academics reject such antiquated notions. Aztec poetry and voodoo charm bracelets are rated higher as works of art than Michelangelo’s Pieta or Shakespeare’s King Lear.

Satan never attacks head on. He comes at a person through “zigs and zags.” He didn’t tell the European to give up the Christian faith, he told him to give up the silly notion that the faith could be passed on through the blood. He claimed, and the intellectuals believed him, that the incarnation of our Lord was a metaphor and not an historical fact. The faithful heart will always reject the bloodless Christianity of Satan. William Blake’s poem, in which he makes reference to Christ’s trip to Glastonbury, England when He was a child, is an example of how seriously the Europeans took the incarnational aspects of their culture: (1)

And did those feet, in ancient time,
Walk upon England’s mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God,
On England’s pleasant pastures seen?
And did the countenance divine,
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here,
Among those dark satanic mills?
Bring me my bow of burning gold!
Bring me my arrows of desire!
Bring me my spear! O clouds unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!
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.

The overriding tendency of the moderns, a tendency that the resurgence of Europeans of blood will countermand, is to sever all ties of blood between the European and his God. A conservative Gnostic, recently deceased, used to prattle on about the absurd notion that a common, middle-class Englishman named William Shakespeare could have written Shakespeare’s plays. He claimed, as his Gnostic progenitors claimed, that only an intellectual, an academic, could have written Shakespeare’s plays. But that is precisely what could never happen. Shakespeare’s plays show us the intimate connection between man and God; could such a connection be felt and depicted by an academic? Fitzhugh didn’t think so:

“Had Shakespeare been as learned as Ben Jonson, he would have written no better than Ben Jonson .”

Anthony Jacob also saw through the Western intellectuals' attempt to destroy the European’s heritage by attacking the heroes and poets who are the pride of his race:

“Of course it may be objected that slavery, however beneficent, was scarcely a suitable medium for improvement. Or it may be protested that until recently the Negro lived in circumstances of neglect and illiteracy making advancement impossible. But if we were to accept these popular objections as valid, we would be at a complete loss to explain why similar adversities never for a moment succeeded in suppressing the energy and genius of our own kind. We would be at a complete loss to explain why such circumstances failed to hold back the inventions of the English weavers, the illiterate founders of the industrial revolution. Certainly the egalitarians would hardly care to ascribe their inventiveness to the fact that they were uneducated work-slaves living on an island and entirely cut off from intercourse with other peoples and ideas. Unlike the vast majority of other nations, when it comes to reckoning our Anglo-Saxon geniuses and men of great talent we do not know where to begin or end, there have been so many. Yet many among them were only part-educated or self-educated – aside from those who were totally uneducated – and as boys had to struggle to acquire their book-learning while slaving away at work-benches. Men such as these still surprise even ourselves; so that many cannot believe that Shakespeare was Shakespeare, and have discovered that he was somebody else.”

It’s all connected. The attack on the heroes of our blood and on The Hero of our blood, in the name of a higher, more intellectual Christianity, is meant to destroy the Christian faith and the European people who championed the Faith. (2) My reason says it’s the end for the European, but my blood tells me something quite different. “So long as the blood endures” is a fitting war cry for the European.+


(1) The pious legend is that Christ visited Glastonbury when He was a child, in the company of Joseph of Arimathea, a relative of Christ who was involved in the tin trade. I don’t know if the story is true, but I tend to think it is because the old legends are usually more reliable than the modern histories.

What difference does it make? Well, our faith in Christ certainly does not depend on whether or not He walked upon England’s mountains green, but I think the fact that the English wanted to believe that Christ had set foot on their soil speaks volumes about their desire to weave love of country and love of Christ into one seamless garment. And the fact that the modern anti-European whites want to separate Christ from their nations and their blood speaks volumes about them.

(2) The pernicious, arrogant assumption that the Europeans of the good, old times were all liars about their own history should never go unchallenged. It’s not just Shakespeare who is supposed to have been the beneficiary of a massive cover-up, there is also Davey Crockett: “He didn’t really fight to the death at the Alamo; he surrendered and begged for his life”! Wyatt Earp? The modern movies change his courageous and victorious bare-knuckles fight against two vicious outlaws into an ignominious defeat. The list is endless. Conservatives and liberals alike play the ‘Debunk the European Heroes’ game. “To hell with Europe and to hell with Europe’s heroes” is their war cry. “To the knife” is the European’s response to the liberals and their conservative lackeys.

Labels: ,