My latest comments at CC

Lew,

Perhaps it’s time to make a personal confession.

Since I awakened on the JQ [Jewish Question] in 2010 a question had tormented me: to assign—intuitively of course—percentages of blame on JQ vs. other factors.

After much inner struggling I discovered that it all depended on the sources I was reading. If I happened to be eating too many Jews for breakfast, it looked indeed like the JQ constituted 90% of the etiology of our current mess or more (I myself was a sort of “monocausalist”). Surprisingly, when following next I reread intriguing discussions like this one it became apparent that Christianity and its liberal offshoots were the damned ninety percent.

I simply could not make my mind… Throughout 2010 and 2011 my inner life looked like sine/cosine graphs alternating Monday, Wednesday and Friday believing that Jews were the main factor while changing my mind on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday below the “x” axis of the graph. Again, I realized all had to do with the chosen sources and with the subsequent confirmation bias.

Everything started to change by the end of the last year after digesting the implications of Michael O’Meara’s “White Nationalism is Not Anti-Semitism”.

O’Meara’s claim that, if financially sponsored like KMD [Kevin MacDonald], he could demonstrate that the West’s darkest hour had to do more with capitalism, Protestantism and Catholicism (among other factors) than to Jewry started to make sense in my soliloquies only after I posted a couple of entries about how the Spaniards’ lust for gold (and sex), together with the crazy approval of the Pope to marry Indian girls, caused the horrible mestization that I see every time I step outside my home.

Thinking about what happened in New Spain (not to be confused with “Mexico”) provoked a change in my worldview, and gradually the sine/cosine alternations ceased, to my relief.



Spanish-English translation of the painting’s footnote: “A male Spaniard and an Indian woman produce a Mestizo”


This does not mean that my present point of view is necessarily right. I am still learning. However, for the moment I believe that my “catalyst” metaphor accurately depicts the Jewish Problem.

Jewish subversive activities are a strong chemical, granted; but like O’Meara I believe that it is not the main ingredient of the witches’ formula. Some of KMD’s papers on how whites have some unique hardware characteristics such as individualism, abstract idealism and universal moralism, together with the software that I call the Christian / Secular Christian problem (liberalism run amok after the Revolution), constitute, to my mind, the main ingredients of the brew that’s killing us. (I think that Wallace is doing a good job illustrating it in the case of the US, what he calls the “Yankee Question”.)

But as I said, I’m still open to new ideas, just as I was open when O’Meara’s short piece made an impact on my previous thought.

P.S. of August 15th:

@ Lew,

The importance of clear definition as a tool for clarity…

For more that two years Hunter Wallace (and sometimes Guessedworker) have been using the term “single Jewish cause” in their blogs. As to racial preservation, you can define it as those who believe that there is essentially a single cause for the West’s darkest hour, but it has been something so obvious at MR and OD that a formal, dictionary-like definition has been deemed unnecessary there.

…won’t be able to sustain the position that monocausalism is a dominant view in WNism.

I think it’s pretty dominant. Besides Revilo Oliver and me who among white nationalists blame more Christianity than Judaism? Who besides O’Meara and a few others blame more a capitalism run amok or even, before the rise of capitalism, “economics over race” policies (again, cf. Arthur Kemp’s book)?

Above I talked about the “witches brew”. While in my blog I’ve added quite a few entries about how Christianity is a megalodon compared to Judaism (in the sense of a far larger predator of whites), the meaning of my metaphor is that even the history Christianity, which is a huge subject, is not enough to understand the brew’ formula. O’Meara for one has published here some intriguing articles purporting to demonstrate the havoc that corporate capitalism has caused for the white race. And again, if you study why whites disappeared in the Middle East, India, Egypt and later mongrelized themselves in Greece, Rome and throughout the American continent at the south of Río Grande after conquering all of these lands—sans Jews—, you start getting the big picture.

The criticisms of Christianity recorded in my blog are not original. It’s a collection of articles from other authors. If we add to these factors the Jewish Problem and my truly original contribution to the field (my interpretation of Psychohistory as to why some whites hate their race), my “brew” metaphor starts making sense: The etiology of Western malaise is extremely complex indeed, with several exotic ingredients—not just one—that must be deciphered, one by one. Any theorist who picked one of the above-mentioned ingredients and claimed that it’s the single element of the brew would be a “monocausalist” (e.g., if I claimed that my book on Psychohistory explained it all I would be a monocausalist).

Don’t quibble over definitions, Lew. The term “monocausalism” is well known even in the academia. Edward Gibbon has been criticized by later historians precisely for being a “monocausalist”: claiming that the rise of Christianity was the main factor of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

Get in touch with [X, Y and Z nationalists]… I said I’m not a monocausalist… Tanstaafl explicitly says he’s not a monocausalist.

Are you kidding me?

Let’s suppose for a second that you are not one.

Are you ready to acknowledge that the whites’ hardware according to some of KMD’s papers (abstract idealism + individualism + universalism + altruistic punishments) in addition to whites’ cultural software (Christianity + its liberal offshoots + economics over race policies) all together constitute the major ingredients of the formula that’s killing us, and that Jewry merely catalyzes such process?

(Btw, you didn’t read my above link of what Franklin Ryckaert said about my exchange with Tanstaafl, did you?)

Original source: here

9 Replies on “My latest comments at CC

    1. Yes, hermanking, and regardless of what the breakdown is in terms of responsibility, the Jews are one of the major players and we have the evidence in print. For that reason, if for no other, they must be targeted and removed from White society.

  1. Firstly,there is a bounty of evidence pointing to the fact that de las Casas, the main force behind the revisonal law for the Indians, was a converso. Secondly, even if he wasn’t, Eurpean homelands were not being overrun by distant migrants. The situation in 1965 or post WWII is entirely different to one present during the formation of New Spain. Thirdly, when a mass migration of men largely w/o women moves into a new territory there will always be intermarriage. Mussollini discovered this fact after the Italian conquest of Ethiopia and thus the emergence of his manifesto de la razza. However, even then there were no mass migrations of Africans into Italy. Italy remained overwhelmingly Italian until long after WWII. Believing Spanish intermarriage in the 17th century somehow influenced the events of the last 70 years is nonsensical. Believing that Yankee abolitionism is a main force behind open borders, when those same Yankees closed the border in 1924 and mounted a back to Africa campaign in 1939 is delusional.

    1. You’re not even reading. Where the hell did I say that “intermarriage in the 17th century somehow influenced the events of the last 70 years”?

      1. “We have to be historically conscious of how whites blundered it horribly in every culture that Indo-Europeans created since the Ancient World, mostly without the J-factor, if we are to understand our current trappings.”

        In fact, the lament extends far beyond the 17th century to ‘every’ Indo-European culture, which has absolutely no baring whatsoever upon the current predicament. Just because you allege no influence previously does not mean it does not exist currently .

        Guessedworker claimed that Natonal Socialism, in one comment, was a Jewish ideology dressed up in fancy uniforms and then in the next breath proclaims there is no SJC. Which is it?

      2. The Briton Guessedworker wrote that because he was mad after a commenter said the truth about the traitorous Anglos.

        … ‘every’ Indo-European culture, which has absolutely no baring whatsoever upon the current predicament.

        The history of the blunders of whites cannot teach us lessons even if it involved the disappearance of whites in large areas of the world? Are you kidding me?

    1. Not unique. In 15th century Spain Jews were taking over and were expelled by the end of the century and those who stayed, persecuted by the Inquisition. The Spaniards were not suicidal then: it was a common sense move, inspired by something that had happened centuries earlier: the Jews had helped the Moors to invade the Iberian peninsula.

      Today all the culture is so degenerate that even in WN sites you can listen degenerate music in the diverse podcasts. I would not blame the Jews in this specific degeneracy (pop music, unthinkable in 15th century Spain) but degenerate WNists who ignore they are part of the problem.

  2. O’Meara’s claim that, if financially sponsored like KMD [Kevin MacDonald], he could demonstrate that the West’s darkest hour had to do more with capitalism, Protestantism and Catholicism (among other factors) than to Jewry started to make sense in my soliloquies only after I posted a couple of entries about how the Spaniards’ lust for gold (and sex), together with the crazy approval of the Pope to marry Indian girls, caused the horrible mestization that I see every time I step outside my home.

    Capitalism is totally compatible with racism and eugenics, because transforming a White country into a Nigger country causes capital destruction and decrease in capital yield over the long run. This is therefore an irrational economic behavior.

    Libertarianism and equality before the law, on the contrary, are indeed quite damaging.