Cambria Will Not Yield

Saturday, March 26, 2011

The Law of Mercy

Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. – Matthew 5: 17 – 19

John "Devil Man" McCain says bombing Libya is not enough, and every retired general still alive has appeared on Fox News to recommend bombing the Libyans into submission. To whom are they supposed to submit, and to what end? Why does the United States feel compelled every few years to bomb some Arab nation into oblivion? The government officials always tell us we must bomb in order to free the Iraqi people, the Libyan people, and on and on, from a very bad dictator. Oh really? There are very bad dictators in the African nations who are killing white people, which the liberals claim is permissible and even laudatory, but they are killing black people as well, which is not supposed to be permissible. Why don’t we bomb those black dictators? Of course I’m being disingenuous; I know the reason we don’t bomb the African dictators: black men are without sin. But it is obvious that our government is not bombing Libya because Gaddafi is a bad man and a dictator. We must keep looking in order to find the real reason for the bombings.

The Protestant evangelicals tell us that we must bomb Libya because Gaddafi and his people are Muslim, and the Islamic faith is opposed to Christianity. Yes, the Islamic faith is opposed to Christianity, but is the race-mixing, porno-loving, aborting United States a Christian nation with a moral right of conquest? What gives the United States and or the organized terror organization called the United Nations the right to violently intervene in the internal affairs of other nations? And let’s make an incredible imaginary leap from secularism to Christianity and say that the United States is a Christian nation. Would that give us the right to slaughter millions of innocent Libyans just because they were Muslim? That is a horrendous interpretation of Christ’s Gospel. I recall a conversation I had with a Protestant evangelical during the Iraq bombings. I was in favor of banning all Muslims from our country, but I was against the bombing of Iraq. The evangelical thought my “exclusiveness” was incredibly cruel, but he had no problem with the saturation bombing of Iraq. What can one say to such creatures?

If we are not bombing Libya because Gaddafi is a bad man, and if we are not bombing Libya because we are Christian crusaders, then why are we bombing Libya? We are bombing Libya because Israel wants us to bomb Libya. And that is where the white nationalist usually stops -- at the Jews -- but that still doesn’t give us the whole answer. We still must ask the question, “Why do white Europeans feel compelled to do whatever the Jews tell them to do?”

Yeats supplies us with the answer to that question:

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

The white European has lost his moral force. He doesn’t believe, in his heart, in the same faith his European ancestors believed in. The Jew still believes in his hate-based faith, so he can easily make a slave of the faithless European.

The Jews are not a monolith. There are Orthodox Jews, ethnic Jews, and completely secular Jews, yet all seem to share an instinctive hatred for all things European, because of the European’s long standing connection to Jesus, the son of God. The Jews have always been at the forefront of various movements to secularize Europe, which has not always worked to their advantage. The Jews are not infallible; the secularization of Germany in the 1930’s, for instance, did not turn out the way the Jews had hoped. The bond that keeps the Jews together is their eternal hatred of the European, Christian culture. Why the hatred? Walter Scott addresses that point in his book Religious Discourses By a Layman:

They could not endure the friendly zeal of the Divine Physician, when he rent from their wounds the balsams with which they soothed, and the rich tissues under which they concealed them, and exhibited festering and filthy cancers which could be cured only by the probe, the knife, and the cautery. Hence they were, from the beginning of our Saviour’s ministry until its dreadful consummation, (in which they had a particular share,) the constant enemies of the doctrine and of the person of the blessed Jesus. Under his keen and searching eye, the pretensions which they had so long made in order to be esteemed of men, were exposed without disguise; their enlarged garments and extended phylacteries, their lengthened prayers, their formal ceremonial, and tithes of mint and anise, were denounced as of no avail without the weightier matters of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. Feeling thus their own sanctimonious professions held up to contempt, and their pretensions to public veneration at once exposed and destroyed, the Pharisees became the active and violent opposers of those doctrines to which the Sadducees, with sullen apathy, seem to have refused a hearing. It was the Pharisees who maligned the life of our blessed Lord; who essayed to perplex the wisdom of Omnipotence by vain and captious interrogatories, and who, unable to deny those miracles by which the mission of Christ was authenticated and proved, blasphemously imputed them to the agency of daemons.
The antique European who took Christianity seriously was taught from the time of his baptism till his death that it was better to be a publican – “God, be merciful to me, a sinner,” than to be a Pharisee – “God, I thank you, that I am not like the rest of men.” And it was from a consciousness of his own sinfulness and his need for God’s mercy that the European built the only civilization in the history of the world in which mercy was considered greater than sacrifice. The Jew stands before his God demanding justice, because he feels himself to be without sin. The Christian asks for mercy, because he feels himself to be a sinner. The difference between the two orientations was articulated once and for all in William Shakespeare’s play The Merchant of Venice. If Christ be not risen, Shylock is right; he deserves his pound of flesh. But Christ is risen, and Shylock’s demand for justice without mercy strikes us as an abomination.

But mercy is above the sceptred sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of Kings;
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth show likest God’s
When mercy seasons justice.

An attribute of God himself? So the Christian believes. However, many years have passed since Shakespeare’s time, and the European’s beliefs are now more in line with the Jewish people than with the Christian people of old Europe. The Roman Catholics fight over their formal ceremonies and the fine points of dogma much like the Sadducees and Pharisees used to do, and the Protestants proclaim the Jews to be the chosen people and behave as if they are still waiting for the promised Messiah. At the heart of the bombing then is the tragedy of a people who once believed in mercy and not sacrifice, but who now can no longer distinguish between the two.

Just as the Jews are not all of one piece, but end up being united on that one issue – the hatred of the Christian European – the modern soulless Europeans are not all of one piece, but end up united on that one issue – the hatred of the European. The mad-dog liberal sees the distinctiveness of Christianity and the distinctiveness of the European who placed Christ at the center of his civilization. For that very reason the mad-dog liberal hates with the passionate intensity of the Jew. He wants no part of Christianity, so he wants the European people to disappear from the face of the earth. The tiny minority of halfway-house Christians still want to maintain the name of Christian, but they no longer see the distinctiveness of Christianity. John Paul II’s Assisi conferences were celebrations of halfway-house Christianity. The halfway-house Christians have a schizophrenic relationship with the culture of the antique European. On the one hand, they deny it ever existed, and then in the next breath they condemn it as sexist, racist, and unchristian. The end result of the mad-dog liberal’s attacks and the halfway-house Christian’s schizophrenic denials and attacks is that the mad-dog liberal is demonically opposed to the Christian European people, while the halfway-house Christian hasn’t the moral force to do anything but acquiesce to whatever the mad-dog liberal tells him to do. And the mad-dog European liberal has decided that Christ be not risen, which entitles him to be just as merciless in his attack on all things European as the Jew. This is the reason that the mad-dog liberal celebrates integrated sports teams, Somalis in Minnesota, and every colored encroachment on European culture. Whatever diminishes the white and enlarges the colored is sacred to the spiritually Jewish, mad-dog liberal.

The Christian Europeans of the pre-modern era had the right attitude toward the Jews. They prayed for the Jews’ conversion as their Lord had: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them, that are sent to thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!” And they then took measures to protect themselves in case the Jews rejected Christ’s divine charity.

The European and the Jew who have united in their hatred of Christian Europe are united in their misery. Neither an individual nor a nation can live with a religious faith that is pure negation and hate. The Jew has only survived over the centuries because he has fed off the humanity of Christian Europeans. No man is an island; the Jew has never acknowledged it, but without the secondary light reflected on his nation from Christian Europe he would have perished in a fire of pure negation. And likewise the modern European, if not for the light from the European past, would also perish in the fires of negation. But now that there are no longer any Europeans to take up the burden of a Christian culture, the Jew and the European have only Babylon to look to. And the dark night of Babylon is descending on Jew and European alike. Initially the Jew encouraged race-mixing in order to destroy the Christian European, and many Jews still do so for that reason. But the Jew, like the European, needs something that is more than pure negation. Secularized Jews have begun to long for Babylon; they too, like the mad-dog liberals and the halfway-house Christians, worship the Negro, the natural king of Babylon.

The Christian poets have been warning us about the dark night of Babylon for centuries. The only unity that can exist outside of God’s grace is the unity of Babylon, where every man is united in his hatred of the living God. In such a world, bombing innocent civilians is holy, the denial of kith and kin is a sacred duty, and Satan reigns supreme. Is this then the promised end? No, it is not. The third dumb brothers of Europe have yet to venture forth. The first worldly-wise brother ventured forth with his church documents, and he was consumed by the fire-breathing dragon of Babylon. Then the second worldly-wise brother ventured forth, armed with constitutional platforms and petitions against fire-breathing dragons, and he too was consumed by the dragon. Finally, the third and youngest brother, the foolish one who is not wise in the ways of the world, ventures forth. His faith is a blood faith; it is the ancient faith of the European people. And the dragon falls before the third dumb brother, because the third dumb brother’s heart is united to His heart. That is how the European fairy tale ends. We have His guarantee that it is true.

Our ancestors bequeathed to us a tradition of venturing forth in His name to slay dragons and kill giants. It’s a tradition we should hold fast to because it is the only tradition that is rooted in the divine charity of the Son of God. Having seen the risen Lord we can never be satisfied with pure negation or the dark night of Babylon.+

Labels: ,

Saturday, March 19, 2011

This Our Greatest Battle

We now are joined, and ne’er shall sever;
This hearth’s our own…

-- Gerald Griffin

In the face of the most devastating earthquake of modern times, the Japanese people are behaving with incredible courage and fortitude. If we compare the way the Japanese have handled their national disaster with the way the Americans handled the New Orleans flood, we are left with a very disturbing portrait of the Americans. And if you tell me that it was only black people who responded to the crisis of a flood with the savagery of wild animals, I would completely agree with you. The white Europeans responded just as heroically to their crisis as the Japanese are responding to theirs. But the European Americans have committed themselves to the inhuman idea that race has nothing to do with a nation’s identity. If you claim a mixed race nation can be a strong, healthy nation then you can’t make excuses when your multiracial nation fails to respond to disasters as well as a racially homogeneous nation does.

It’s not my intention to glorify the Japanese people; they have institutionalized infanticide and elevated capitalist greed to even higher levels than the Americans, but they have shown the European people, if the European people had eyes to see, what a culturally homogeneous people, as distinct from a culturally diverse people, can do in the face of a national disaster.

The Europeans were once a homogeneous people and their record of heroism in the face of disaster and charitable outreach to kith, kin, and the stranger was unparalleled in human history. But unless Europe is restored the world will never see such heroism and charity again. The liberals have already told us that there was really no such thing as heroic and charitable Europeans. “The age of chivalry is not dead; it never existed.” So they say, but they are mad-dog liberals who are in a desperate flight from reality; they can’t be relied upon to tell the truth about anything of a spiritual nature. Nor can the colored tribes be relied upon to tell the truth about things of the spirit, though there is a huge difference between the European liberal and the people of color. The colored tribesman cannot tell the truth about spiritual things because he doesn’t know of such things; the liberal cannot tell the truth about the life of the spirit because he denies its existence.

The traditional faiths of the colored peoples are all grounded in fantasy; they are untrue. The colored tribesman, be he Asian, African, Indian, whatever, does not have to deny his own people in order to cling to his fantastical and often very fulfilling (from a pagan standpoint) faith. The European does have to deny his own people if he is to escape reality. Christ was and is the white man’s burden. If the liberal is going to escape from the living God, he must escape from everything European. He must eradicate, with the fury of the satanically possessed, everything that is distinctly and uniquely European. And of course the most distinctive and unique tradition of the European was his faith in the Son of God. That crucial distinction between the colored and the white – the white must eradicate his heritage in order to escape reality and the colored must embrace his heritage in order to escape reality – is the reason white people are committing racial suicide and colored people are holding fast to their own race and exploiting the suicidal tendencies of the white race.

It’s easy to see why the pre-Christian pagan wanted to escape reality – life without faith in Christ is unbearable. The greatest of the pagan poets was Sophocles. And what was his opinion of existence? Better never to have been born. All pagan religions, despite their many and varied ways of dealing with their cosmic complaints, all seek an escape from the inexorable laws of nature by either losing themselves in nature, as in the sex and blood cults, or separating themselves from the pain of existence in the natural world by mentally divorcing themselves from the world, as the contemplative sects do, but all pagan religions are escapist religions.

The white European wants to return to paganism; he finds life under the Christian mantle to be too painful. However, he can’t quite manage a smooth transition from Christianity to paganism. He has lost the Christian faith of his ancestors, but he can’t shake his ancestors’ disbelief in paganism. The result? The liberal combines secularized Christianity, which is utopianism, with paganism. The liberal performs all the pagan rituals, but he does so using new age terminology. The ritual slaughter of infants becomes ‘legalized abortion’ and ‘planned parenthood’; the worship of the Negro is called ‘civil rights’ and ‘diversity’; and the extermination of the whites is called ‘social justice.’

The question that we need to ask is, “Why does the white European want to escape from the Christian faith?” He wants to escape from Christianity because the living God exists only in the depths, and it is painful to live in the depths. Most of a man’s life is spent dealing with superficialities and minutiae. The pagan religious systems and the halfway house Christian churches are set up to deal with a man’s need for gods who will help him with the daily natural shocks that flesh is heir to. Dostoevsky addressed that point in the Brothers Karamazov. His Grand Inquisitor rebukes Christ for rating men too highly. He tells Him men don’t want depth; they want bread, authority, and mystery. The Grand Inquisitor makes a good case for a religion of superficiality, and his program has been adopted in all the formerly Christian churches which now preach Negro worship under the guise of Christianity.

Let’s say it outright: Christianity is an agonizing faith. Most of our life is spent on the surface of existence, because to be always plunging to the depths is incredibly painful. So rather than be comfortless, the apostate European seeks the mundane gods of paganism, just as the Israelites returned to Baal as soon as Moses went up to the mountain. But the white moments? Can a man live without white moments? I still maintain that the European cannot live without depth. In Lord Jim Conrad depicts a man, Lord Jim, who lives and dies according to a spiritual ideal. When he is dead, his friend is often inspired by his life and death, but at other times Lord Jim passes from his eyes.

Is he satisfied – quite, now, I wonder? We ought to know. He is one of us—and have I not stood up once, like an evoked ghost, to answer for his eternal constancy? Was I so very wrong after all? Now he is no more, there are days when the reality of his existence comes to me with an immense, with an overwhelming force; and yet upon my honour there are moments, too, when he passes from my eyes like a disembodied spirit astray amongst the passions of this earth, ready to surrender himself faithfully to the claim of his own world of shades.

Christ lives in the depths of the human heart. If we never go there He will pass from our eyes and we will dwell in the land of the pagan gods forever.

Liberaldom is maintained with the armor of superficiality. Every book written by an antique, Christian European comes with a preface by a scholar (translation: a liberal) that either puts the author in a neat, psychological, secular box or tells us that he was racist and/or sexist, and therefore damned – in a metaphorical sense, of course, because we all know there is no eternal damnation, just the damnation of being denied a place in Liberaldom. In the same vein I once read a “scholarly” account of the ill-fated voyage of the Titanic. The moral eunuch who wrote the article took great pleasure in quoting newspaper articles written at the time of the tragedy in which the men who gave their lives so that their wives and children could survive were quoted as saying, “Pip, pip, cheerio, have a good day” and other such British-isms. The thrust of the modern cynic’s criticism was that the men didn’t say “Pip, pip, cheerio, etc.” But does the absence of a “Pip, pip, cheerio” negate the fact that the men on the Titanic acted according to the highest standards of Christian chivalry? “Bury them all in the superficiality of snide remarks and the satanic sneer” is the liberal mantra. “To live by their code is to live in the depths, which I must avoid at all costs.”

We tend to think of hell in graphic Dantesque images, but I think modern Liberaldom is a very close approximation of what the real hell is like – the hell of superficiality. By my mid-twenties I had made the pilgrim’s regress to the God of the Europeans which was a faith diametrically opposed to the faith of my older sister, who was a mad-dog liberal. At a family gathering I got a chance to take a long walk with my sister, whom I had not seen for several years. Young men in their twenties have an inflated opinion of their own persuasiveness and of the effectiveness of rational apologetics. I was guilty on both counts. I was sure I could convince my sister of the absurdity of liberalism and the truth of Christianity. What I encountered shocked me. I was not shocked by my sister’s atheism – that was expected – but I was shocked by the superficiality of her atheism. I was prepared for Ivan Karamazov, and I got Phil Donahue (or Phyllis Donahue, if you want the correct gender). “Why were there no women or blacks at the Last Supper?” “People used to believe in God, because they were afraid of lightning.” That conversation was hellish, and a world dominated by such superficiality is hell.

When I read the literature of the presiding anti-Christian caretakers occupying the buildings that were once Christian European churches, I am thrown back in time to that conversation with my mad-dog liberal sister. Have you heard these (we dare not call them Christians) purveyors of superficial filth pontificate?

  • “Heaven is multiracial so our churches must be multiracial.”
  • “We need to de-anglicize our church services.”
  • “Why are there so few canonized black saints?”

On and on it goes. Where does it end? It ends in hell of course, where the master of the superficial revels lets his superficial neophytes boil in their own banal, superficial juices.

We reach the God of the depths through the little things of the heart. I love the imagery in C. S. Lewis’s magnificent masterpiece, The Chronicles of Narnia. The children reach Aslan’s land through a wardrobe in an old English house, where kith and kin gather. Such sacred houses are the stuff that our European dreams are made on. In the depths of our soul we know those dreams are the only reality; the rest, the world of Liberaldom, is the superficial dross of the devil.

One tiny sacred Heart was once enough to illuminate the Europeans’ world. The path back to that Sacred Heart leads through our old, non-diverse, European home. Surely our European home is worth fighting for? Can the European, who once shared his hearth fire with the Living God, settle for the superficiality of non-stop images of Negro gods on the television screen? The battle for our European home and the battle for our God is the same battle. We cry from the depths, “O Lord, preserve us in this, our greatest battle.” +

Labels: ,

Saturday, March 12, 2011

In the Face of the Whirlwind

And he said unto me, son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord God, thou knowest.
– Ezekiel 37: 3

“Throw our paper platforms, preambles and resolutions, guaranties and constitutions, into the fire, and we should be none the worse off, provided we retained our institutions – and the necessities that begot, and have, so far, continued them.”

Fitzhugh makes the point that it is the unwritten traditions of a people that determine what they are, not the paper-and-ink nonsense called constitutions. A constitution is no better or worse than the people who are interpreting it. In our own anti-nation, for instance, the diabolists on the Supreme Court discovered, in 1973, that the crime of infanticide was a constitutional right. That constitutional right was not proclaimed because wise men finally discovered the real meaning of the constitution. It was proclaimed because the unwritten traditions, which were based on the Christian faith of the European people, were altered. And if we go back further and look at the precursor of infanticide, namely race-mixing, we can see the Supreme Court in Brown v. Topeka reversing the older Supreme Court ruling (Plessy v. Ferguson) against race-mixing, to a ruling in favor of race-mixing. European Americans had changed their faith and the traditions based on that faith so they changed their interpretation of the Constitution.

Liberal-conservatives can blather from now to doomsday about electing men who will appoint judges who are “strict constructionists,” but they will accomplish nothing even if they succeed in their goal. The traditions of our nation have changed; there will be no restoration until there is a traditional counter-revolution, and counter-revolutions (like revolutions) first take place in the human heart. When Europeans repudiate liberalism in their hearts they will naturally seek to destroy the traditions and laws that are the result of liberalism. They won’t need a guidebook or an intellectual guru to tell them how to proceed against the liberals; they will know what has to be done.

Of course it is not written that the Europeans will ever desire to restore their deserted European villages, but if Europe is restored it will be restored because hearts that were dead came alive again. It’s not a question of optimism or pessimism. In the realm of the spirit those arbitrary categories don’t exist. It would be ignoring reality to deny that the European people in the main are behaving like the swine in the Gospel. But it would also be unrealistic to think because the Europeans seem, at present, to be dead to the life of the spirit that they will continue in the same vein until their ultimate extinction. Things of the spirit are not subject to the “2 + 2 = 4” rules of the material world. There could be, even in our modern Babylon, some European hearts that are not spiritually dead, and those hearts could form first a crack, then a fissure in the concrete, soulless world of Liberaldom. Nothing is written.

I didn’t vote in the last Presidential election because Obama was a soul-dead, brain-dead stooge of the liberals, and McCain couldn’t have been more obviously a spawn of Satan if he had sported the sign of the beast on his forehead. I would have voted for just about any other Republican candidate if the Republicans had had the sense to run someone besides the devil man, but I would not have voted for a Republican candidate with any hope that my vote was helping to restore the European people. How could a European hope for that result by voting in liberal-sponsored elections? There was no Republican candidate campaigning for white Europeans. I saw no banners proclaiming that Europe should belong to Europeans and that Christ should reign instead of Satan. No, there is nothing for the European within the confines of liberal democracy. A vote for a liberal-conservative candidate is simply a vote for a rearguard delaying action. It is to be hoped that a liberal-conservative will implement liberalism at a slower pace, but an antique European should never place his hopes in elections. “Trust not in princes.”

Everything for good or ill that the European does can be traced to his Christian roots. When he does ill, it is because he has bastardized the Christian faith of his forefathers. And the good he used to do was done because he lived and breathed what David Balfour called “the good Christianity.” Without the good Christianity, the European is a willow reed that blows whichever way Satan wishes him to blow.

One of the many things I learned from Walter Scott was that the people within a nation should be judged by what and whom they honor. In Scott’s Europe the Christian gentleman who was fierce in defense of the innocent and charitable to the poor and helpless was honored. The mother who stayed by the hearth fire and nursed and reared her children was honored. And Christ, from whom all the virtues flowed, was honored.

In contrast to Scott’s Europe, we have modern Babylonian Europe. The Christian gentlemen is now called a sexist; the Christian housewife is now designated as a repressed, stifled, and repulsive woman; and Christ is only accorded a secondary place of honor in support of the primary black gods of our Babylonian world.

The Marines’ Hymn, sung today, strikes me as blasphemous: “Keeping our honor clean.” What honor? The only honor left a Christian European is the honor of facing and defying the liberal Leviathan. There is only dishonor in fighting and defending Babylon.

In Kipling’s story “The Man Who Would Be King” Daniel Dravot’s only concern, when he is facing certain death at the hands of thousands of murdering savages, is that his friend, whom he has wronged, will forgive him. When he gets that forgiveness, he feels that everything is all right, and he tells the heathens to “Cut you, beggars, cut!” The bastard Europeans and their heathen allies don’t matter. Our only concern should be that we don’t dishonor Him, the Christ, and them, our ancestors.

Europeans have gone from being the first fully human people to being the first non-existent people. Blake’s The Book of Thel is a pre-existence myth; the European is living (if you can call non-existence ‘living’) through a post-existence myth. Think about it. If a man has no ties to a particular race, family, or religion, can it be said that he exists?

The liberal’s solution to the non-existence that he has created for himself is to lap the blood of the colored tribes in the hopes that he will feel something, anything, that will stave off the feeling of nothingness he lives with. I’ve spent more of my life in academia than is good for a person to spend there. And I saw, in academia, the non-existent Europeans up close. I recall one professor, one of a legion of such non-existent Europeans, of the homosexual persuasion who could only be aroused by young men of color. And that professor’s sick fantasy forms the basis of the liberals’ civilization. Race-mixing and sexual perversion are the cornerstones of Liberaldom.

In Scott’s Europe the man who saw beauty in virtue and ugliness in vice was the Everyman of Europe. The decadent liberal who needed the opiate of illicit, interracial sex and saw beauty only in vice was on the outer fringes of society and had to, in order to survive, ape the ways of the virtuous and indulge his vices in secret. Now that the virtues of Scott’s Europe have been proscribed and the sins of the decadent avant-garde have been declared virtues the antique European is an outlawed man. But it is better to be an outlawed man than a non-existent man. Rather than drift with the satanic winds, the antique European stands in front of the satanic whirlwinds and refuses to yield, confident that his God will sustain him.

There is a powerful scene in the book of Ezekiel in which the Prophet Ezekiel sees the Lord bring life to dry bones:

So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army. – Ezekiel 37: 10
And the vision of dry bones being raised to life is repeated by St. John in the book of Revelation:
And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them. – Revelation 11: 11
Liberaldom is the valley of dry bones, the dry bones of the science lab and the sacrificial altars of the savage tribes of color. The culture of dry bones restored to life is the antique European culture. When we passed from the European culture to Liberaldom we went from light to darkness. Every step backward toward Babylon was proclaimed to be a journey toward the light, but how can dry bones produce light? Light comes from God and the people animated by the spirit of God. When Liberaldom is dust, eternal Europe, built on St. Paul’s affirmation of faith, “But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept,” will still be standing. +

Labels: ,

Saturday, March 05, 2011

Surviving Bablylon

Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life. – Prov. 4:23

I feel, when watching the contest between Wisconsin’s Governor and the mad-dog liberal Democrats, like John Tyndall did during the Iraq war when reports of the torture of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers came out. He didn’t want to talk about whether the torture was proper or improper, because he didn’t think the British or Americans should have been in the war to begin with.

I don’t believe in democracy, so I must preface all my comments on the Wisconsin debacle with the statement, “If we had a real nation with real people…” So, with that preface, if the mad-dog liberals really believed in democracy they would let the Wisconsin governor make the economic reforms he was elected to make. No country can function if its elected officials don’t respect the process through which they attained office.

During the macabre Wisconsin carnival act the essential difference between the mad-dog liberals (usually members of the Democratic Party) and the conservative-liberals (usually members of the Republican Party) became apparent. The mad-dogs believe that anything that advances their cause is holy. There are no rules of fair play, no democratic procedures that mad-dog liberals must follow; everything that promotes liberalism is lawful.

The conservative-liberal is much more likely to back off from his more moderately liberal agenda if his moderately liberal agenda is against the law. The conservative-liberal is more demure, because he senses he is not as holy as the mad-dog liberal, much like the Kerenskyites of Russia were always vulnerable to the more radical-than-thou (and therefore more holy) Bolshevists. The conservative liberal never repudiates liberalism; he just claims that Liberaldom will be better served with the policies he advocates than with the policies advocated by the mad-dog liberals.

What is going on in Wisconsin is symptomatic of the type of politics we find throughout the Western world. Having ceased to believe in original sin as something with which all human beings are tainted, the modern Europeans try to align themselves with a ‘sinless’ group of people and to invest their enemies with original sin. In Wisconsin the unions claim they represent the “working class,” which we all know is a group of people without sin. The Wisconsin Governor has pointed out that he was elected by a majority of the people of his state who voted for him because he promised to do something about Wisconsin’s fiscal woes. The Governor also has pointed out that union members represent only about 10% of the work force. But just being elected might not give the Wisconsin Governor enough clout to overcome the unions, because he is a white male and therefore tainted with original sin, while the unionists are without sin.

The only reason the unionists and their Democratic allies have not triumphed already is because the “working class” gamut has lost some of its effectiveness in the last 25 years, for the reason that the Negro has trumped the working class. If the unionists could manage to put their case in racial terms, the unionists representing the blacks, and the Wisconsin Governor representing the whites, then the battle would be over and the unionists would be victorious.

It’s always surprising to me – although by now it shouldn’t be – that professed Christians cannot see how the liberals whom they support have used Christian doctrines to preach Satanism. For instance, the liberals still believe in original sin, but they believe that only the white male is tainted with it. The liberals still believe in a savior; it is the generic black man. And they still believe in heaven and hell; heaven is the future where there will be no white people, and hell is the past when white males were in authority. Every university, every secondary school, every elementary school, every media outlet, every church, and every single official in every single European state proclaims, espouses, and adheres to the principles of the new satanic anti-Christianity.

Sanctity in the new anti-Christianity exists only in the black. White females can achieve a kind of Third Order status if they attach themselves to the black race, but such an attachment will not elicit one drop of pity from the ruling, liberal oligarchy when the women suffer the fate that all white women who embrace the black race suffer. The rape, and often the murder as well, of Third Order white girls who naively joined the Peace Corps to “help the Africans,” by African barbarians is just one example of the relentless attacks on the white race which are constantly covered up by the liberal media. But I wonder if the cover-up is necessary any more. The black savagery in the New Orleans Superdome got national attention, and there was not a ripple of protest from white Americans. I think the liberals’ work is done. White people will never blame the black man for anything. No matter what evil the black man does, it is always the white man’s fault. And the only way, if you are a white man, to mitigate the evil of your whiteness is to scream at the top of your lungs that the atrocities committed by blacks are the result of white racism.

There were dangerous forebodings in the American Civil War. For the first time in the history of the European people, a group of Europeans went to war for a utopian, universalist ideal. All the Europeans who fought for the North were fighting against the white race; they were fighting against themselves. The realization of that fact was the reason for the draft riots in New York City and the Copperhead movements in some Northern states such as Pennsylvania.

Now every white man who serves in the armed forces fights against himself. It is a terrible tragedy to see white males in the American armed forces. What are they fighting for? Sadly, they are fighting for the extinction of the white race and the preservation of an American Babylonian state.

Once a Babylonian state has been established, anything that constitutes “good citizenship” is harmful to the white man. Do you support your local schools? Do you support your local church? If you do, you are supporting Babylon and your own extinction. When Alfred wrote about obeying the law, he meant God’s law. And likewise St. Paul; he wrote about obeying God’s law. The laws of Babylon are directly opposed to God’s law. We can’t serve two masters. Why should we want to? Following God’s law allows our people to be a people; following the laws of Babylon destroys our people.

The white European is not being pushed off a cliff by 'The Jew' or 'The Negro'; the white European is jumping off a cliff of his own volition. The Jews have pushed race-mixing and championed anti-European causes since Christendom’s inception. It is only now, when the European hasn’t faith enough to see any difference between Christianity and Judaism that the Jew can do whatever evil he wills without facing any opposition. And the Negro was never a threat until white men made him a threat by elevating him to a god.

The sickness of the European lies deep in his soul. In his heart, which contains his soul, the European believes that the liberals are right: Christian Europe and the men and women who built it and loved it, particularly the men, were evil. Any white man who stands with the white men of the past stands condemned before the tribunal of Liberaldom. Rather than face that dreadful tribunal, the modern European seeks to free himself of the original sin of whiteness by attaching himself to the Jews, to the Negroes, or (as is usually the case) to both. The flight from whiteness and original sin is what drives the halfway-house Christians to genuflect before the secular state of Israel and to burn incense in their churches to the great generic Negro god.

Does knowledge of a fatal condition help one to combat that fatal condition? Herman Melville didn’t think so:
“For in tremendous extremities human souls are like drowning men; well enough they know they are in peril; well enough they know the causes of that peril; --nevertheless, the sea is the sea, and these drowning men do drown.” -- Pierre
Is it all in vain then to know that the disease of the white man is one of faith and that only a recovery of his lost faith can save him? No, it is not in vain. Melville wrote Pierre in the throes of despair; he went on to write Clarel, in which he urged Clarel to:
Then keep thy heart, though yet but ill-resigned—
Clarel, thy heart, the issues there but mind;
That like the crocus budding through the snow--
That like a swimmer rising from the deep--
That like a burning secret which doth go
Even from the bosom that would hoard and keep;
Emerge thou mayst from the last whelming sea,
And prove that death but routs life into victory.
Those two quotes from Melville represent two different planes of existence. In Pierre, Melville speaks as a modern European, a man without faith. In Clarel he speaks from the depths of his heart and articulates the hope of a European who has regained his faith. Pierre represents the European’s dark night of the soul, and Clarel represents his redemption.

Reason alone cannot restore the European’s sanity, because reason lacks vision. Faith transcends reason, because faith involves the heart, which is the spiritual organ of sight. From an empirical, rational standpoint it makes no difference if one European stands before the great liberal tribunal and declares his eternal defiance of the tribunal and his unyielding support of the ancient Europeans. The tribunal is the sea, and the drowning men still drown. But in the spiritual realm, which we see when we look through, not with, the eye, every human soul contains a world. And the world of one antique European can outweigh the principles of a legion of liberal Babylonians. Satan conquers by distorting and diverting man’s spiritual eye, his heart. So keep thy heart, thou man of Europe, and thou shalt ride triumphant over ruin and death. +

Labels: , ,