or:
Christian axiology, our main enemy
My (late) aunt Blanquita
Her son was my classmate
in a Mexico City
grammar school
In my life I have declined a couple of marriage proposals for the simple reason that the Mexican ladies were not pure whites. And last year I lost an internet friend, the Catholic administrator of the paleoconservative site La Sexta Redoma: a Spaniard who, when I confessed that I had just rejected one of such proposals, commented:
But you would have whitened her descendants. That is what Spaniards did in the XVI-XVIII [centuries] in Mexico.
So here we go again after half a millennia! While 16th-century Spaniards were extremely tough on Jews they were, at the same time, fairly tolerant of the natives—with Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians had souls and declared them fit to marry the bachelor conquerors!
This astronomical blunder caused the mess that any racially-conscious visitor can see with his own eyes in the city where I studied grammar school with my blond cousin (Blanquita’s eldest son). I refer to the thoroughgoing mestization of Mexico, with overwhelming Indian blood over the European: the primary cause of Mexico’s backwardness and ultimate historical demise in the coming decades.
Alas, like my former friend who claims to strenuously defend the West (his blog receives many thousands of hits from very conservative Spaniards each day), Protestants are also tolerating massive miscegenation at the North of Río Grande. Some of the most devout, particularly the Evangelicals, are actually saying: “Racism is the worst sin.” A flabbergasted Paul Gottfried who has met them comments: “I don’t know why ‘racism is the worst sin,’ even in terms of the Bible.”
This suicidal behavior of both Catholics and Protestants moved me to reproduce, in my previous entry, a 10,000-word post collecting blog comments blaming Christian meta-ethics for the ongoing destruction of our gene pool. Here I will re-quote some of the phrases by Conservative Swede that in that post I gathered under the title “The Red Giant”:
Our progressivist paradigm is based on Christian ethics. The Left is all about Christian ethics. What the left-wing is doing is not destroying Western civilization, but completing and fulfilling it: what I call “The Finish of the West.” The current order is the last and terminal phase of Western Christian civilization.
Among the bloggers who claim to defend the West, Swede’s worldview strikes me as the antithesis of Tanstaafl’s point of view. Tanstaafl is perhaps the foremost critic of those who believe that westerners are committing racial and cultural suicide. It’s not suicide, Tanstaafl tell us, but homicide: the nefarious influence of the Jews in our civilization. Con Swede, on the other hand, dismisses Judaism as a truly substantial factor. He believes that Christianity’s moral grammar, and more specifically secular Christianity, is the basic etiology of Western malaise.
I believe that strictly monocausal explanations of our current predicament are myopic. At least from the religious viewpoint the etiology is basically twofold: both Christianity and Judaism are the culprits. Der Juden merely represent a very strong catalyst of a chemical reaction that had started since their emancipation by the gentiles during the French Revolution. However, since the homicidal interpretation of our problems has become almost orthodoxy in white nationalism, let’s continue to quote Swede, whose suicidal POV is virtually unknown in the white movement:
It’s the Western Christian civilization that feeds all these processes (population explosion etc.). So the Western Christian civilization is in fact the worst enemy of what I call European civilization: another reason for wanting the Western Christian civilization to go away. For the very same reason that Christian ethics abhors infanticide, [presently] it causes the population explosion in the world.
Incidentally, I’ve written a whole book on infanticide through history and the heroic role played by Christianity in the abolition of it in Europe (see e.g., here). In this year I’ll publish rest of the English translation in this blog.
But Christian ethics cannot stand the sight of little brown children dying. They must help them, or they will freak out. According to Christian ethics it is forbidden and unthinkable to think in terms of not saving every little brown child across the planet. But the consequences of this mindset are catastrophic, not only to us but also to them, as I have already explained. But since people are so programmed according to Christian ethics, what I’m saying does not seem to enter their heads. The thought is too unthinkable to be absorbed. It’s an utter taboo.
Absolutely. In fact, recently a white nationalist woman said in a very well known white nationalist radio podcast that abortion of non-whites is immoral: the opposite of what the Nazi Germans, who had revaluated Christian values, did: legalizing abortion in such cases.
This is derived from the deepest moral grammar of Christianity. The population explosion is not caused by liberalism, it is caused by Christianity in its most general form.
My emphasis above! Obviously, blaming everything on the Jews is a crude form of ideological myopia. This is why Swede believes that “the fall of the Western Christian civilization should be celebrated,” and that “this is the paradigm that stands in the way of our saviour.”
However, it must be noted that in the threaded discussion Swede got mad at me when I pointed out that the logical conclusion of his worldview would be to restore the image of Hitler and the Nazis before our brainwashed psyches. His outrage when I confessed my views surprised several commenters precisely because of the Nietzschean stance that Swede had manifested in that very thread:
It’s not until the westerners thoroughly revise their view on World War II that a change of paradigms can take place.
Strange that when I just tried to do that the Swede started to insult me. But he’s right about one thing: Christian axiology is our main enemy today. If this is so, fuck Christianity. After all, no Jew has real power in Muslim countries precisely because Islam doesn’t preach the craziest inversion of values: Love your alien neighbor, and even your enemy!
What we badly need throughout the West after the coming financial crash is what Nietzsche called the Umwertung aller Werte, the transvaluation of the most toxic Christian and Secular Christian values back to the Greek, and particularly Roman, values: precisely what Mussolini and Hitler tried to do. This is the crux in the Swede’s gospel:
With Christ as part of the equation, the Christian ethics of the Gospels became balanced. Humans were seen as imperfect and it was Christ who covered for us with his self-sacrifice. In Secular Christianity each person has to be like Jesus himself, doing self-sacrifice, since there’s no other way to realize Christian ethics. On top of that, with the Industrial Revolution and the surplus it created in our societies, we came to the point where all the good deeds of Christian ethics could finally be executed by giving off our surplus to all the poor and weak foreign people around the world: food, Western medicine, and other aid.
We should remember that our progressivist paradigm, which is always going left, is based on Christian ethics. And Christian ethics means the inversion of values. So it’s the weak that is considered good, while the strong is considered evil.
How Nietzschean (and again, the emphasis is mine)!
The only people that are guaranteed to survive until the end of days in Christianity are the Jews. Swedes, Italians etc., are of no significance whatsoever. We see all these tenets of Christianity manifested around us today: even in how the struggle for ethnic survival of the Jews is accepted within our current paradigm, while it is not accepted for the other people of our civilization.
Each ethnic group needs her great mythological narrative, starting with the birth of her people and guaranteeing their existence until the end of times. Without such a narrative the dissolvement of the ethnic group eventually becomes self-fulfilling: there’s nothing holding it together.
The Swede is not only wrong in rejecting Nazism out of hand. I’d go as far as, in all seriousness, propose that we replace the calendar era introduced by Dionysius Exiguus in the 6th century, traditionally identified with Anno Domini in reference to a Jew called Jesus (real Hebrew name: Yeshu). Instead of the conception of Yeshu, with AD counting years after his birth, the new era may use the year of 1945, when the most tragic Aryan character that ever walked the earth died and his corpse set on fire. Remember the final words of William Pierce’s masterpiece: “But it was in [that] year, according to the chronology of the Old Era—just 110 years after the [death] of the Great One—that the dream of a White world finally became a certainty.”
Leaving Christian ethics has nothing to do with becoming secular (as I explained above). To the contrary, it makes it worse! What is needed is to introduce another great mythological narrative into the minds of the Germanic people. This is the only way to replace the moral grammar of Christianity. Something with roots in our long history. This must be done by political means, by a regime with such a focus.
Which, of course, reminded me the National Socialists’ infatuation with Wagner. The Swede continues:
What I have suggested is: 1) A new great mythological narrative where our own ethnic group is given the pivotal position; 2) A constitution where citizenship is reserved for people of our ethnic group. 3) Alien ethnic groups, typically from the Third World, that do not identify with our ethnic group, will have to be removed one way or the other.
Spain’s Counter-Reformation experiment in the Americas was an utter disaster: the best refutation of the Judeo-reductionist trends in white nationalism I can think of, since the Jews were not involved in promoting massive mestization. Had the Swede’s program been implemented in the conquered Aztec Empire that my former friend mentioned—the Catholic Spaniard who ethno-suicidally advised me “to whiten her descendants”—, no brown swarms would presently inundate the streets of the town I happen to live in. However, after the dollar crashes and the world falls into chaos, what will happen to these Untermenschen? The Swede concludes:
So the concrete effect of Christian ethics here is to make the number of people that will die in starvation and suffering as high as possible once [the dollar collapse] hits (we are speaking of billions thanks to Christian ethics). Only the devil himself could think out such a brutally cruel scheme, and Christian ethics of course, in which case it’s according to the idiom “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
Will “billions die and we will win”? I find it hilarious that in a nationalist German blog I have been scolded by a commenter who has pointed out that I liked the final solution fantasies of a New Yorker. Hilarious I said, because it looks like we won’t need much staining of our hands with mud blood. No. As will become apparent in a forthcoming post, Mother Nature will probably wipe them out, just as the Swede predicted.
My wildest dream is that, in the future, the female inhabitants of Mexico, a nation that might revert to the name it had when pure whites were in charge—New Spain—will look like my aunt Blanquita.
Meanwhile I shall remain a bachelor…
60 replies on “Blonde aunt”
Large families require wars of conquest. This is the basic problem with Christianity. First, they have large families. Then they conquer territory against their own rules, and then they feel guilty about it, and destroy their own society.
For any man, getting married in theUnited States is stupid since it likely that his wife will divorce him for fun and strip himof his children, his house, and his income.
Nice link to Keith Preston — he wrote that more than half his “mentors” have been Kikes. Check out how kike these “Alt”-Righters are: [YouTube link]
Interesting essay. What part of Mexico do you hail from?
Mexico City, Iranian: the largest mestizo town in the whole American continent (20+ million). And now that you are here, let me revisit our previous discussion on music.
I cannot understand why Greg Johnson continues to delete your comments critical of the cacophonic tastes of present-day white nationalists (so-called German “New Hard Rock”, etc.). Each day I feel I am distancing myself farther and farther from American-style nationalism and approaching the spirit of what the true Germans, the Nazis, called “degenerate music” when my father was a small child.
Let me quote here the comment of yours that Greg deleted today in this thread:
My most recent entries about the nefarious role played by Christian values in the demise of the white race, the above one included, ought to be understood in the much wider context that something very, very unhealthful is going on in the psyche of Caucasians throughout the West, white nationalists included. It’s not only the “inversion of values” among secular humanists and Christians that the Swede talks about. It’s also their music, their sexual mores, and the debasing of the spirit of the age when my late aunt flourished.
He deletes them because I’m making him look bad. I am continuously offending his musical taste and that’s worse than insulting his religion.
Yes, rock is degenerate, no doubt about it.
You are indeed not alone in that sentiment.
It’s telling that Greg constantly publishes James O’Meara (who must never, ever be confused with Michael O’Meara). In his interview of James, Greg said: “His own blog is Where the Wild Boys Are, with the arresting subtitle ‘Aryan Futurism, Heavy Metal Entheogenic Mysticism, and pitiless hordes of adolescent warriors in rainbow thongs.’”
And who are the “warriors in rainbow thongs”? Last month, when James linked Greg’s interview in his blog, he used a pic of a transvestite under the title “Shameless Public Posturing”. I guess James is trying to say that there’s nothing wrong with such posturing.
By the way, it’s worth noting that James’ blog features this disgusting image. (If you click on the pic, note the blood/semen—whatever—running thru the hairy legs, presumably of a male.)
The Wild Boys is a novel about the violent world of homosexual renegade boys. It was authored by William Burroughs, a well-known homosexual writer who despite marrying a Jewess he picked up boys in steam baths and moved in a circle of homosexuals and runaways.
I cannot understand why Greg, who seems fairly sophisticated in literature, allows such writers in his site.
Don’t take me wrong. As I said in one of the music threads, I consider myself fairly open toward homosexuality. But that tolerance is restricted to the homos who live discreet lives and keep their preferences in the privacy of their homes. Overt transvestite behavior, rock and nihilistic film tastes cross the line. As far as my opinion of Counter-Currents is concerned, a string of film-reviews promulgating Hollywood filth (including TV series), specifically the cheering that in the commentariat section Jef Costello got for his review of Fight Club last month, was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
We are living in utterly different cultural worlds. Like the Judeo-reductionists who cannot see that Christian axiology is involved in the darkest hour of our civilization (tonight I didn’t let a comment pass through: “Fuck Christianity”? — How clever. How witty. Such heights of rhetoric! What a plan! Fuck you”), these other “nationalists” are clueless about the fact that they are part of the cultural movement that is driving our civ straight toward the abyss.
Wow, I was unaware of O’Meara’s freakishness. I, too, am tired of CC’s garbage cultural articles. Bad movies and music are intolerable. I recently commended Greg Johnson on his well-written essay and that, surprisingly (ha!), got published.
One reason why I’m distancing myself from the WN “movt” is because of this cultural alienation, that you suffer from as well. Honestly, I’m not just tired, but sick and tired, of bad music being written about and praised by so many dunderheads in “our” movt.
The White race is doomed.
My only hope is that the Swede is right and that only what he calls “Western Christian civilization” and its bastard son, secular liberalism, are doomed—not the white race…!
But you are absolutely right. How could I go to a white nationalist meeting in the future if I feel what I feel about their music, film and TV tastes? I am talking of the largely positive feedback that many commenters in that site have expressed about the filth with which the Hollywood Jews are poisoning our minds.
My hope is that an ethno-state is formed and its culture reverts back to the mores of our ancestors, just as it is depicted in Covington’s The Hill of the Ravens.
This is another image I picked up from James’ rainbow site. One is left to wonder what will happen to the pink and blue wild boys in The Day of the Rope…
I delete most of IFA’s comments because they are as boring, predictable, and annoying as a barking dog. I approved the positive comment not because it was about me, but because it was so unusual for him to have a nice word about anything or anyone at CC.
Untrue, Greg, I have had positive things to say about CC and its contributors.
I’m impressed by many things on your site and your knowledge of painting and art history. I have praised you for it before. Also, I think CC is the pre-eminent, well-rounded, catholic WN site. Your CC is the creme-de-la-creme and I have stated something to that effect before. In short, I value your site and have learned a lot from it.
However, you brush off my criticism as inconsequential because it is unswervingly cynical (realist, really) and a hard pill to swallow since I insult – and will continue to do so – the execrable musical aesthetics that are promoted as “progressive” and “cutting edge”. That rock is liked is proof-positive that many-a-WN is a nincompoop and enamored by the modern aesthetic which has been instrumental, excuse the pun, in wrecking us. Your inclusion and promotion of said “music” is incommensurate with the purported spirit of CC, at least as I see it.
I won’t waste your time and/or money on any WN meetings. Trust me, there are innumberable ne’er-do-wells in the “bowel” movt.
This is the transvestite photo I referred to above, the one from James’ blog as his personal interpretation of his interview at CC.
With these brave soldiers who “defend” our interests —just like my friend who, at the top of this entry, advised me to mix my blood and who, at the same time, fancies himself as “a brave defender of the West”— who needs Jewish enemies? If Secular Christianity has not produced these Jew-wise, “WN” freaks who has?
With quotation marks, because I think a child could easily grasp the idea that it means a nation for whites, a nation where hetero men enjoy the privilege to live in an amiable milieu to found large families.
What a child of sound mind can understand the pundits can’t: That degenerate sexual lifestyles, even heterosexual, drive the soul to “New Hard Rock”, nihilistic movies based on novels by homos (like The Fight Club) and garbage television programs manufactured by the Enemy for mass-market, gentile consumption.
Yesterday I watched a documentary of the Hassidic Jews in New York. Guess what? They forbid among themselves that sort of music, that kind of television, and even the internet: the only way to convince all of their women to get married, according to the documentary. On the other hand, so-called white nationalists believe that, like the Lotus, they can grow their pure beauty from the mud on which they float.
But they can’t.
We are not Lotus flowers. In our species if men wallow around in the mud created by the Jews and the liberals, they end up, spiritually, like the grotesque photos of this thread, both homos and heteros.
Eloquently stated. How interesting that we both are in revolt against cultural modernity.
If allowed to chime in… again, I don’t get the rationale: I wish a white society. WHAT happens in that society is secondary, as long as it’s white. So, as long as any of the objected individuals on the photos support that, I have no issue.
I would see the point if the claim is: that kind of culture, music… CAUSES ethnic dissolution.
Chechar, I think you appreciate Nietzsche. One of N.’s fundamental concepts is the Dionysian. I equal that as the complementary pole to rationality. I have the thesis that European culture is crucially lacking the Dionysian element (I made a point here before that the lack of resistance to brown-invasion might reveal a secret attraction towards The Brown as a representant of the opposite pole: the intuitive, emotional, uncontrolled…). All the elements of the 68er movement and similar movements I consider as expressions of the Dionysian aspect, and appreciate them. I don’t consider that as a problem; much rather the contrary, as, if I’m right: any such activity should only REDUCE brown-invasion as it reduces the (psychological) NEED for it.
Nothing wrong with classical music, classic literature or what… but I also see nothing wrong with any kind of craziness as expression of the Dionysian pole (BTW… while I myself have not a bit affinity to metal music, it seems to be one of the true reservations of Whiteness…).
If I’m right, then the attractiveness of many Whites to wild forms of expression is no problem. I feel that this is a crucial aspect as probably the main emotional source for rejection of WN by liberal Whites is the suspicion that WN is repressive. Actually, I think that is not even true historically, considering NS-culture. Certainly it’s not true for me, as a self-identified White Ethno-Identitarian. If WN is no longer associated with repressiveness to the Dionysian, we could gain WN followers in huge numbers. It’s not plausible that they should be white self-haters. I think they shy away from WN because the image of repressiveness.
I feel that this rationale could be important to the WN cause.
But that’s my point: that that kind of music causes ethnic dissolution. It inspires getting laid. And getting laid sexually simply means not having numerous white families, as my ancestors had.
It already happened in Rome. When the Romans abandoned their severitas pursuing instead hedonistic interests, demography fell. Society fell. And eventually the Roman Empire fell—precisely what is happening in the American Empire today.
Nope. It’s impossible to live in Gomorrah and, at the same time, having large, healthy white families. I say this because in the 1980s I lived in the Bay Area and I noticed the cultural gulf between the inhabitants of the city of San Francisco and the family-oriented town of Novato in Marin County at the other side of the Golden Gate, where I lived. I felt the difference between San Fran and Novato as conspicuous as the two sides of the border with my native Mexico. No hyperbole: that’s really what I felt then.
No, you cannot have millions of healthy white families in Sodom or Gomorrah: the mere sight of the pink and blue Sodomites inhibits altogether your wish to reproduce. And there can be no unabashed transvestite who, at the same time, is a genuine white nationalist.
You say that I appreciate Nietzsche. Well, I believe that I appreciate the Dionysian concept as well.
Neither the Greeks nor the Romans allowed pink and blue wild boys in their cultures. Quite the contrary.
Precisely when I lived in Marin County I purchased a book, Greek Homosexuality. If the Harvard academician got his scholarship right, Greek homosexuality was altogether different from today’s so-called “gay” movement. I would venture to say that Greco-Roman sculpture represents the very antithesis of the grotesque characters that we see in Frisco today, called by some people I met in California “The Sin City”.
In the Greco-Roman world the accepted institution was the erastes-eromenos: a young man in his twenties, the erastes, courted a teenager, the eromenos, sometimes depicted as an androgynous ephebe (see pic: here).
This has absolutely nothing to do with the man-with-man degeneracy of today’s “gay” world. Incidentally, today I went to downtown Mexico City and in the subway I watched a truly Fellini-esque grotesquery: two ugly brown machos with voluminous and tattooed biceps kissing each other.
Sorry, but I look forward to the Day of the Rope…
Well written and thought out!
The liberty of today is extreme and uncontrolled libertinism. Civilizations exhibiting this are in decline. Every cultural expression now is decadent and needs a cleansing.
A homogeneous society can decay without any racial admixture. Having an all-White society is insufficient.
But above you related the brown race with the Dionysian, Pit! I’ve been dealing with the browns almost on a daily basis for about 45 years, and believe me: they have nothing whatsoever to do with the Dionysian side of the Western psyche. If you want to experience a character truly Dionysian, go to Spain or Italy.
By the way, I am Dionysian. That’s why my posts are so full of sanguine, Mediterranean character that sometimes shock the phlegmatic Teutons of your blog. But the millions of brown people here are not “Dionysian” at all: their emotions are just childish, and primitive.
The above pic of Ascyltus and the handsome Giton is taken from the film Satyricon. There’s a scene in that film, with Ascyltus and Encolpius joyfully playing with a female slave, that do reflect the true Dionysian spirit.
Not convinced of that:
See nigger countries: loose sexual morals (which I, by the way, much appreciate), and a flood of offspings (appears kinda logical, isn’t it)?
No: whitey doesn’t procreate for much different reasons than hedonism and libertinism: he doesn’t procreate because we are subjected to an economic model, which doesn’t inspire nesting, because of an environment of extreme ethnical stress, suggesting danger for the offspring.
Ask any woman and she will say, she wants children. If we have functional communities instead of dysfunctional multiethnic hellholes, if we have some basic economic safety, there would be children, and that is at any time compatible with various forms of non-traditional forms of self-expression. The woman is always mother, saint and whore: it has always been a matter of temporal roles. So: Wednesday and Friday is kink-day in white-country. No problem here.
Just stumbled upon an aussie site of a working class guy who points out that the white-hating liberals are the puritanic-calvinist-protestant types: i.e. the anti-Dionysians: [link]
The same forces that make craziness, and wild forms of self-expression, make a healthy will to live, to procreate and to fight and defend the own.
If anything, a LACK of the Dionysian causes our predicament, also in the procreation department. It’s the creation of an extremely unpleasant environment that depresses the will to live and procreate.
I can’t follow the basic assumption that hedonism is at the root of our predicament. We whites are not supposed to live an unjoyful life in puritanical restriction. I consider that a mere unproven assumption. And actually it’s probably just the other way round: in order to get rid of the puritanical restrictions and to get back our Dionysian rights, we were in need of the help of the Jewish subversion. That came along with a price: there is no logical reason for a conjunction between hedonism and racial blindness, it’s the Jews who put that artificial, unnatural and undesired linking upon us. That’s why I say: let’s get the white liberals back into the boat. Had we had a healthy, balanced society including our legitimate Dionysian parts, there would not have been need for rebellion and Jewish support (and of-course subsequent treason) for that rebellion.
Bottom line: you make a linkage between hedonism and lack of procreation and I don’t buy that.
I never said that hedonism is the basic etiology of our predicament. It’s certainly a contributing factor.
By the way, long comments sometimes get stuck in the filter (I already deleted, as requested, the one you said was a mere “test”).
Hedonism is sex without the responsibility. Aren’t we deluged with this? If one researches the past, hedonism was never the rule and it was severely punished, especially in women.
Yes, and I would add that Pit should read Devlin’s magnificent piece on this very subject.
ConSwede: “Our progressivist paradigm is based on Christian ethics. The Left is all about Christian ethics.”
It’s the other way around: the degeneration of Christianity was caused by leftism. And we know that the rise of leftism has a lot to do with Jewish activism. Until a few decades ago, Christianity was the strongest bulwark against leftism and most leftist activists were openly anti-Christian. In fact, the need to define Christian ethics and values probably appeared in reaction to the development of leftism and militant atheism, especially by Jews. Before that, everybody was Christian, and Christian ideals were simply European ideals. Today, the idea that the Christian thing to do is to sacrifice our own children for the sake of half-witted violent brown people is defended by brainwashed European bishops who no longer believe in the tenets of the Christian religion. Real Christianity doesn’t approve of race-replacement. For example, in World War one, Christian priests prayed for the success of their nations. It was all right to kill the enemy.
“Christian axiology is our main enemy today.”
In Europe, most people no longer care about religion. The real enemy is not “leftism” either, but the activist network behind leftism, and it is mainly in the hands of Jews (media, politics, school, and so on).
“Spain’s Counter-Reformation experiment in the Americas was an utter disaster: the best refutation of the Judeo-reductionist trends in white nationalism”
No matter what happened in Mexico, it remains a fact that the media and the political parties in France and the USA are under the domination of anti-White Jewish activists. If you speak up for White people in those countries, you will soon come under attack by Jewish activists.
As I said, the etiology basically is twofold: Christian and Jewish. But not monocausal. Promoting massive mestization, at least in this part of the continent, started long before the emancipation of the Jews. That’s why I believe that the problem is:
• Christian axiology – the primary factor or AIDS virus of the Western mind
• Judaism – a secondary infection in an already immunologically weakened civilization
• Islamization of the West – a tertiary infection, as a result of Judaic influence
I have asked myself hundreds of times how come my father, a fanatic Catholic who studied in Madrid, sides the Amerindians against the Conquerors. Could it be because the Jews brainwashed him? Hardly. I know the sources of his Amerindian sympathies and I have written many pages trying to analyze him. My conclusion is that he got all of this philo-Indian stuff from Christian ethics, particularly from the spirit of St Francis. (What I did with the crazy Spanish woman who hates the West elsewhere I plan to do with my poor dad: publishing an exquisite analysis of him for this blog.)
It doesn’t matter that formally the old-time gospel of my grandma didn’t approve race-replacement. The point is that as the Christian dogma continues to deteriorate, and this includes losing faith in eternal damnation (it’s telling that no commenter said a peep about my posts on this subject), the Zeitgeist of the continuously deteriorating Christian culture degenerates into deranged altruism: precisely the disease that my father suffers.
The Swede’s sentence that starts with the phrase: “With Christ as part of the equation, the Christian ethics of the Gospels became balanced…” has always reminded me the figure of St Francis and the Franciscan characters of Umberto Eco’s The Name of the Rose. These guys were clearly suicidal. St Francis stopped feeding himself (in our time he would be labeled anorexic), practiced self-harming stigmata and died with an extremely aged body when chronologically he was supposed to be still in his prime.
I admire St Francis because even if I am now an unbeliever I value his religious genius in his age. Medieval Christendom could tolerate a few self-harming eccentrics as long as self-harming behavior, fully inspired in Christ, did not spread among the larger population in times of violent Yang (the Crusades, etc). But as the Swede says, presently, in Secular Christianity, each secular humanist—most Westerners today—has to be like St Francis himself, “doing self-sacrifice, since there’s no other way to realize Christian ethics.”
I see this suicidal ethos, the “Red Giant,” throughout our civilization today. It’s as if secularists are trying to unconsciously imitate St Francis’s ways. Of course: in a single thread comment I cannot fully explain these ideas.
That’s why I believe that the Jewish problem is a very strong contributing catalyst and that the Swede is completely myopic with his monocausal explanation.
And by the way, it was not only Mexico but almost the whole continent under the rule of Spain and Portugal. You cannot understand the tragedy of the American Continent by focusing on the history of the peoples at the North of Río Grande (territorially, about half of New Spain was located in what today is the US anyway).
I look forward to your father’s analysis.
As for Catholicism, it has ruined the New World by its miscegenatory ideology.
Imagine Brazil and Mexico bereft of mestizos: paradise!
Chechar,
“Pink and Blue” were used to mock what the 20th and 21st century interpretation of homosexuality. A cultural distortion we can thank Magnus Hirschfeld and his degenerate White followers for. In the same article, James also critiques the Judeo-liberal powers that be for ignoring the anti-“gay marriage” sentiment of 7 million voters.
I’ll admit that his blog aesthetic is rather tasteless at times. Something is amiss with that man. Yet he correctly names the Jew and their puppets in the world financial system. If or when the Day Of The Rope comes, he’ll find himself in awkward postion to say the least.
I am confused. Are you saying that James is not something of a pro-“gay” (I hate that word) activist?
Then he is wrong: and the whole subject is intriguing enough for me to write an article on homosexuality.
You see?: I don’t dislike some of Greek and Roman homosexuality, as long as it restricts itself, visually, to what I’ve said in this thread about the characters of Satyricon, the very first novel in the Western world. Since on the subject of sexuality I can only think in visual terms, click on the pic of Ascyltus and his boyfriend Giton; put it as your desktop background, and see what do I mean.
He views hatred of homos as something Judeo-Christian and not intrinsic to Aryan societies.
The ancient Jutes punished homosexuality with live burial – in a bog.
If most Christians approved of immigration and race mixing while most non-believers didn’t, then you could say there is a problem with Christianity. On Amren.com, I had seen a poll about attitudes to immigration depending on religion. I cannot find it back, but I found this sentence in another Amren article: “Although polls show that Americans who are religious are more likely than the non-religious to oppose immigration, many Christian organizations support massive Third-World immigration.”
Well, if he was an anorexic, it was not really caused by religion. Anorexia is probably typical of White people, like concern for the welfare of animals. Even if he had a screw loose, at least there was something poetic about St Francis.
What is deteriorating is White society as a whole. In the last few generations, society was turned upside down and made vulnerable due to technological change. There was the end of rural life and close-knit communities, the centralization, the advent of television, and so on. It was the perfect environment for Jewish/leftist activists to launch their assault on central institutions. Even if you don’t have many Jews in Mexico, you probably have leftists, and they probably had an influence on the religious elites. It isn’t the belief in God that turns people into White traitors.
Today the problem is Secular Christianity. Have you read the previous, rather long article on the “Red Giant”? This entry just highlights some of its points.
No: you misunderstand. I’m not talking of Mexico but of New Spain (1521-1821), which covered much territory of what today is the US and did not allow kikes in it; and of what happened at the South of New Spain, where the gigantic mestization experiment also took place in those years, before the kikes were allowed to enter.
Chechar,
If you plan on writing a piece on homos, consider checking this out:
http://elysiumgates.com/~helena/Sexuality.html
Homos like James actually are a comparatively minor concern of mine. I’ve just reread William Pierce’s “Why the West Will Go Under” and these sentences seem to summarize what I believe about the homicide (“die Juden”) vs. suicide (“We are doing it ourselves”) debate in the movement.
In this very second my deracinated family watches the 2012 Oscars Academy Awards. Take heed that I reproduced Pierce’s piece last year as a result of my disenchantment with the nationalists’ degenerate tastes, including music, movies, TV… Pierce wrote:
And who will do that? Fat chance, Dr. Pierce.
I’m of the opinion that we have enough websites and forums. What we need is something viable, such as a movie and media production company. Obviously, something like this will never take off and cannot take off, given the dilapidated nature of our White “leadership”.
Basically, until the new Iron Curtain comes down, we’ll keep on writing articles, reading them, bickering amongst ourselves, and moaning the whole while.
Game over.
Pierce wrote that essay long ago, when he tried to create a thriving organization that could shelter the cream of the movement (now of course there are no well-funded leaders with such goals).
I couldn’t feel more than alluded to by the themes touched upon in this post and the one before it. Although I share the notion that Jewish supremacy could not be possible without a passive European entity dominated by Christianity, I believe the practical approach towards the problem should still emphasize and point a finger towards those who benefit the most from societies that eventually lose all traditions and distinctive characteristics: the Jew.
The longing for a European ontological emancipation, cannot be separated from the Jewish question. Furthermore, I personally believe that It is the starting place for such a discussion to take place.
It really isn’t about simplifying European malaise and pointing all fingers towards the single monolithic, self contained explanation of “the Jew”, but even on a philosophical level, it’s extremely important to spell out what is apparent: That the origin of the invasive axiology that has crippled Europe is Jewish. The advent of Judeo-Christianity is inexplicable without the careful study of all things Hebrew that came before it. Christianity is not a product of spontaneous combustion. The darkest concepts in Christianity stem from Jewish notions of guilt. Judaism, as opposed to Christianity, became more aggressive as years went by and the power of the religion shifted towards rabbinic talmudism which eliminated the more benevolent interpretations in Jewish law and made the distinction between Jew and gentile a central part of the religion, a notion which in itself already played a major part of the foundational doctrines of Judaism. Christianity is a bastardized form of Jewry, which maintained all those suicidal notions of resignation and guilt which western masses embraced and that now are an important cause of the systemic crisis of the European continent.
All these ruminations are nothing new and had already been elaborated on by Evola (and others) at the beginning/mid twentieth century. His insights on the Jewish question and the effects Christianity had on the European “soul” are incredibly prophetic. In a blogging community where many times, simplicity is a given and little or no deep reflection about the foundational points that feed nationalist and racialist movements takes place, I can only find a very informed synthetic capacity in Conservative Swedes’ comments, but not much originality. Evola, Parker Yockey, and Oliver detected the symptoms of European downfall long ago, but they saw western decline as something inevitable with the common man unable to alter the course of history that was already taking place.
That is why in my assessment the discussion of which is the larger problem: that of the self-destruction via the adoption of Judeo-Christian values by the European masses or Jewish supremacy in itself is quite a sterile one. Both things are essentially manifestations of the Hebraic hegemony we live under, the material beneficiaries of which are quite naturally, that ever present and scheming sectarian clan called the Jews. To stop emphasizing that, because of philosophical considerations would be in my opinion another manifestation of how invasive suicidal ideologies have been for westerners.
Hi D and welcome to this forum.
Well I for one, who believes in final solutions (all Jews must be deported to Madagascar and/or Israel) cannot be accused of timidity as to the JQ is concerned.
But if this is so how do you explain that the Spaniards and the Portuguese pretty much screwed up the continent before the Jews were allowed to enter into Spain’s viceroyalties in the Americas?
Oh I see: the infection of the West started before the Middle Ages, when a Galilean cult infected the minds of the Romans? Is this what you are trying to say?
Unlike Gibbon, I would not only blame the Galilean cult for the empire’s problems, but Rome’s machinery itself. Rome was never really a people or nation but a system, a machine. From the very beginning, Rome populated itself by opening its gates to refugees from other cities, liquidating its founding stock, the farmers, and—like New Spain—replenished itself with foreign blood.
In fact, passages of Brooks Adams’ 1895 book on Rome reminded me Harold Covington’s eloquent speeches of “Iron Man” versus “Economic Man”: the same sickness of the spirit that westerners in general and Americans in particular suffer today.
Incidentally, about Evola, Yockey and Oliver, did they blame the Jews in monocausal terms? I don’t remember this at least in Imperium, which I didn’t finish by the way (brilliant but bombastic prose is not for my palate).
Graeco-Roman monogamy made it impossible to assimilate conquered peoples. Look at the failures of Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanes.
William Pierce: “The problem is not to cull out the mongrels, the Judaized, the degenerates (…) / The problem is to pick the few who embody the best of what the West once was (…)”
I think that Pierce later said in several of his broadcasts that he had changed his mind on that point. I searched his speeches for the expression “I used to” (site:www.natvan.com/free-speech/), and I came up with this (May 2000) :
“Ten years ago I used to think that the way to straighten out the thinking of Republican lemmings was to hit them up alongside the head with a piece of two-by-four or with a sturdy, oak table leg. Then as I learned more about lemmings I realized that wasn’t really necessary. Trauma and privation certainly aren’t bad things when people need to be reoriented, but what is far more effective is simply to change their authority figures. Lemmings don’t need to have their thinking straightened out with a piece of two-by-four, because in a very important sense of the word they don’t think.”
—
Pierce: “The essential aspect of what is happening to the West is spiritual, not just the scheming of the Jews”
The spiritual crisis is largely due to the scheming of the Jews. What happened is that traditional society has been disintegrating due to technical progress and political centralization. In that context, high-level moral and intellectual elites were all the more needed. Instead, our elites have become subservient to the Jews, and the Jews have opposed all efforts at moral and spiritual regeneration.
Even in countries with few Jews, the problem still comes from the top, not from the populace. And the top levels of society are influenced by what’s happening in other countries. A few years ago, I didn’t know about the JQ, but I was still complaining on internet forums that France was run by a small self-perpetuating clique, a kind of mafia with philosophical pretensions. But it makes more sense now that I know about the JQ.
I know the Europeans are not ethnocentric enough. That is probably because 10,000 years ago, our ancestors lived in small groups with little racial competition. Later, in Rome, New Spain, and so on, our lack of ethnocentricity became a problem. But it is no longer a problem if we have good governments. Our natural inclination is to do nothing and allow miscegenation to happen slowly. So, we need governments that will stop the slippery slope and make a deliberate effort to protect the national gene pools of our nations.
But the current crisis is not simply caused by negligence and by our lack of ethnocentrism. Western governments are now pushing genocidal policies. It’s worse than if they didn’t do their job. Now, they want to kill us.
Most people behave more or less like lemmings, as they have always done. Today, a number of them seem to agree with the idea that the White race must go. But it isn’t possible that the same fashion for genocide spontaneously and independently happened at the same time in every White country. The only possible explanation is that something happened at the top. We are now ruled by treacherous, phony elites. The obvious solution is to get rid of them. The solution is not to try to improve our spirituality, and the solution is not to make the European population more ethnocentric. There is no way we can do that.
Armor,
If there’s someone who spoke in extremely despiteful terms about his fellow Americans, he was William Pierce. Have you pondered about what I said above: that Jews have almost zero power in Islamic countries? It can only mean that there’s something very wrong with Christian and post-Christian axiology.
I’ve seen your recent comment at Counter-Currents.
Do Counter-Currents commenters promote white interests? I believed so until I discovered that quite a few of them are enamored of the Jewish filth with which the Hollywood Jews have been poisoning our minds. The same can be said of all and each so-called “nationalist” who watches TV. Keep in mind what I said of Hasidic Jews: that they forbid all of this cultural garbage in order to convince women to found traditional families. What a New York rabbi can do, Counter-Currents “nationalists” can’t? Why? What’s wrong with this picture?
I would say that Counter-Currents and the rest of the supposed nationalists in the blogosphere are, in some ways, race traitors. I am sorry, but there’s no way to escape this harsh judgment. If they like rock, television, Hollywood and a few of them boast their faggotry instead of concealing it they are race traitors. There’s no way to avoid this judgment if you realize that precisely pop music, television, Hollywood and sexual permissiveness are but the most conspicuous aspects of cultural decadence and eventual civilization demise.
Let me put a clear example. Until recently there was a “nationalist” that in very friendly terms (he seems to be a man capable of great love) usually commented here. But… his “nationalist” blog exhibits seminude women. When I pointed this out he simply said that precisely because of the erotic pics his site gets many hits.
But soft porn has been one of the major forces debilitating our ethnic group since the sexual revolution (I still remember the age when porn did not exist). It can be no coincidence that this man, despite his Catholicism, disliked my criticism of John Lennon and pop music in the threads where I discussed the subject with IFA (who has commented in this thread too).
If Catholic heterosexual nationalists are clueless about the fact that soft porn debilitates our ethny; if educated homos are clueless about the fact that publicly boasting their “preferences” debilitates our culture; if rock fans are clueless about the fact that their noise is anti-culture, anti-West, anti-spirit and anti-God as IFA put it, then it’s no wonder that the clueless can only see a Jude beneath every rock for all of our problems.
Don’t take me wrong. I am a fanatic who, as I said above, believes in final solutions to the JP. But at the same time, like Pierce I can also see that something abysmally wrong has been going on in the psyche of whites. So wrong actually that, sans Jews—and this is the crux—, my antecessors contributed to horribly screw this side of the continent.
In order to elucidate these points in my next posts I’ll probably reproduce entire chapters of my book, an introduction to Psychohistory. I am convinced that depth psychology can shed some light on the subject.
Chechar,
Thanks for the trenchant insight. You’re a rare bird.
What I see, as do you, is that the WNs are a spiritually corrupt breed that LOVE Jewish/Congoid-inspired and created pop “culture”.
Your next ineluctable epiphany will be that we share more in common, aesthetically, with cultured Jews than with our Aryan cohorts.
Yes: it’s paradoxical that, though I want to deport the above-mentioned rabbi, I have more in common with him as to how to fight Jewish influence than with Greg! —who has just published a French translation of one of the aberrant Counter-Currents articles denigrating classical music and exalting Congoid-inspired noise!
Yes, all that effort for a garbage essay.
Again, one can’t serve two gods. To say that one understands and love Bach, while listening to rock and extolling it, is laughably disingenuous.
And now the same piece has been translated to Portuguese…
Hi Chechar,
I do not know why you say you “lost an Internet friend” because of that comment. I posted my view, which I see now –but not then, because you did not replied- it was outrageous to you. I sent you an email asking whether you were thinking about suicide and if I could help. Should not you better say that you delisted me after my comment instead of that you lost a friend because you wrote that? How can you say that you lost a friend when he makes a kind comment?
More evidence that it is you who have lost interest in keeping certain contacts, not me:
http://nacionalismocriollo.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/el-cristianismo-responsable-del-mestizaje/
The fact is that you have engaged in certain tirades against Christianity -for instance this one, with profanities- which obviously cannot be accepted by any Catholic. Have I done something similar?
It is funny that you use gross insults, declare that you are not interested in some people and then regret that you have lost friends. Please do not present yourself as a victim and take ownership of the consequences of your own actions. This reminds me the behaviour of the ethnicity you know.
In summary, you have not “lost” anything, you decided to quit.
* * * * *
I am not going to comment on the substance of your post. For me, there is no room for discusion with someone who considers a “theological blunder” recognising that the Amerindians have a soul (i.e. are humans of the same biological species as us). Just let me add that Mexico’s backwardness has been the result of its goverments after independence, which has been mostly in the hands of whites. Its historical demise is due to the fact that the whites are not breeding, as it is the case, unfortunately, of so many white nationalists.
You mean spreading the idea that abortion is worse than the holocaust?
Just for the record…
AMDG refers to this post. No, I never thought of it: it was AMDG’s own conjecture of what I said in that post.
AMDG’s reply is paradigmatic of how the overwhelming majority of conservative, even the very conservative, Spaniards are totally clueless that race matters, and that population changes in race alone (most Mexicans are genetically Untermensch) explains the backwardness of so-called “Latin” America (in my long chapter on infanticide I published yesterday I called it Mestizo America).
The above entry is merely a recapitulation of the previous post, “The Red Giant”. Christianity has fulfilled its role. It reached its peak in the 13th century, when Christendom was still basically white. But it made an extremely wrong turn in the 16th, when it conquered the American continent and bastardized the whites’ gene pool —literally, since the most serious insult in Mexico is “¡Hijo de la chingada!” or offspring of the fucked Indian women by male Spaniards.
The sad truth is that Mexico, as a nation, is mostly composed of hijos de la chingada, and Catholic doctrine is to blame that most Mexicans are brownies with a couple of white genes.
What we need is giving up the paradigm that has become not only toxic, but appears to be the basic etiology of today’s secular liberalism. Only apostasy can save us. And I mean full apostasy: not only apostasy from the dogmas of the Church, but the transvaluation of the suicidal values that the Swede calls Secular Christianity.
Thanks, Chechar: mestizos are untermenschen and Mexico is a hellhole because the majority is mestizo.
And that’s the whole point of these two anti-Christian articles: that sincere Christians and “Secular Christians” cannot see something so obvious. It’s an utter taboo.
It is no problem to me cooperating with and helping those with whom have a common interests even if they have different ideas, provided that they behave with civilty (not this case, as I can see).
To some extent, of course, I cannot really consider in his senses someone who thinks Indians do not belong to the Homo sapiens species or are “subhumans” (what is that exactly?).
I can neither consider in his senses someone who one declares publicly that has decided to severe any relations with people like me and then says he lost me as a friend.
Pathetic, Cesar. All the best.
I said those words because, since the last year when you advised me to mix my blood, I thought a lot on how someone who sincerely believes to defend the West actually harbors the most noxious idea: destroying our genetic capital, precisely what happened in Mexico over the centuries.
Technically, Indians are Homo sapiens. Untermensch is a rhetorical term used by the National Socialists. You have not lived in a city, for decades, with overwhelming Indian blood over the European (millions upon millions of them). It’s easy to cling to Christian egalitarianism and pieties when you don’t have to suffer every day the primitivism of the natives.
This said, it may surprise the readers of this blog to learn that I am known for treating the semi-Indian servants of my parents’ home far better than any of my family members, even though none of them are racially conscious—in fact, they freak out whenever I speak of racial subjects—and most of them are sincere Christians.
Bravo. The inherent inferiority of Amerindians and negroes has never caused me to maltreat them. I don’t pity them and I don’t condesend. You show the sign of a higher man by your behavior.
Too bad that you must live in a mestizo-dominated city. Tell me, where else have you traveled in mestizo America? I have been to Peru, Brazil, Costa Rica, and Mexico.
I’m not a bellicose or sanguinary individual, yet I think that the mestizo-ification of the New World could have been prevented if wars of containment were fought against the indigenes. Of course, the Catholic faith ruined everything in racial matters, but, based on what I have seen in the New World, the Whites of Latin America despise mestizos, Indians, and negroes.
One last note: I think mestizos are disgusting. Throughout my travels I couldn’t help but imagine the countries I visited as progressive places if the mestizos and Indians were non-existent.
What a pity.
The cause of the US’s problems (and Mexico’s) is “the quality of the people” as Mark Weber so clairvoyantly said in the second part of this podcast. (Incidentally, to hell with the trash music used in the break!)
As to whites breeding poorly in Latin America, the real problem is that non-whites have always bred geometrically. Read again what the Swede wrote here and pay attention to the graph beside the words, “For the very same reason as Christian ethics abhors infanticide, it causes the population explosion in the world”.
Moreover, even that would not be an issue had the treatment the Amerindians got in Mexico been the same of what they got in the US (in Argentina they were simply exterminated). Again, Christian and post-Christian axiology, so ingrained in the American Constitution —listen very carefully to the podcast linked above— caused the mess, not the “governments after the wars of independence”.
This thread is strange.
“…Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians had souls and declared them fit to marry the bachelor conquerors!
This theological blunder…”
I don’t agree at all. (Not that I claim the right to teach Christians who does and doesn’t have a soul. It’s their teaching.)
Whites have their own interests, and must resist the genocide being practiced against them. For this purpose we need to understand that a hostile elite must be displaced, and new, healthy culture must displace at least the worst parts of the unhealthy culture that’s been foisted on us. This new, healthier culture must include explicit White identity, and a determination to defend it as morally good. I don’t think we need to go much beyond that.
Perhaps these comments at The Occidental Observer may clarify our points?
The white race would be angels with fluffy white wings were it not for the jews who “entice” us on to vice and internecine war.
There would be no vice and no internecine war if,if,if, and another if, the “insidious” ones would just disappear. We would get our fluffy white wings back finally.
You whiteys crack me up.
Monocausalism is a bad thing, yes.
[…] The West’s Darkest Hour, Chechar, and individual with superlative prose, has quite a commentary on ‘religion’, […]