March of the Titans

The following sentences of March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race by Arthur Kemp caught my attention:


germanicsThe useful foe:
Rome and the Germans

The Germans had settled almost all the land which later became Germany by approximately 2000 BC. They lived a lifestyle very similar to that of the Celts—working iron, textiles, semi-precious stones, ceramics, pottery and gold, and living in villages rather than great towns. Also, like all their Indo-European cousins bar the Balts, the Germans continually made land grabs whenever the opportunity arose.

By 300 BC, they had advanced westwards as far as the Rhine river, and shortly thereafter advance tribes crossed the Rhine and settled what is today Belgium (the Romans called these tribes the Belgae, hence that country’s name).

These advances invariably brought the Germans into conflict with the Celts in France, and after the Romans occupied Gaul, with the Romans themselves.

[Kemp proceeds to recount the history of the clash of Germans and Romans; the first, second and third Roman invasions, the use of German mercenaries; Hermann Cherusci, trained by the Romans, and the ambush of Teutorburgerwald: a decisive defeat for Rome; how Germans were “a pure and unmixed race” and how, ironically, the Germans and the Romans increasingly mixed; finally, how German and Celtic mercenaries filled the ranks of the Roman army.]

9 Replies on “March of the Titans

  1. The Germanic tribes rebuffed the word laws and group gods of ‘civilized’ Rome. They found the pseudo-morality of groupism repugnant. Indeed, tribal cohesion was conspicuous. any man who insisted on living alone instead of with the tribe was considered ‘crazed’. However, the Germanics recognized that a loss of a humans innate animal sovereignty, as exemplified by the natural world, was madness. They elected their ‘king’ but were not subservient to him. Lycurgus, the wise man ruler of the Greeks refused to allow laws to be reduced to rigid form. Custom was considered superior to rigid laws and the written law was considered undesirable.

    For he thought that the most material points, and such as most directly tended to the public welfare, being imprinted on the hearts of their youth by a good discipline, would be sure to remain, and would find a stronger security, than any compulsion would be in the principles of action formed in them by their best lawgiver, education.

    Germanic universalism was born not of man-made word constructed rigid written law, or philosophy but of sovereign individualism. The Christianity preached by the Latin Church with it’s canonical law based upon the word serpent of Roman jurisprudence was clearly antithetical to the authentic European just as was National Socialism’s blatant choseness a reflection of Judaism’s creed of racial superiority.

    …individuals felt free to fight each other, so long as it was a fair fight. With such readiness to fight, all the dastards, and all who tired underhanded methods to gain their ends, were bred out from among the people. Those who remained were all so dependably well behaved that it was the custom to give any stranger who asked for it a night’s lodging and share one’s food with him.

    The Vikings called the duel einvigi; literally “single combat,” but the concept was developed well before the Viking Age by their Germanic ancestors, for cognates appear in Old Swedish (einvighe), Old High German (einwic), and Old English (artwig), as well as in Old Norse (Bø, “Hólmganga and einvigi,” 145). Einvigi was an unregulated duel, fought with any weapons, in any location and by any methods: in short, a brawl.

    http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/holmgang.shtml

    1. I’m an Italian Germanophile, but realize that part of the reason Rome was converted before Germania to that idiotic faith was because Rome was more successful and built an infrastructure which allowed it to become manipulated.

      What happened to Germany in WW1 and 2 had already happened to the Italian people in the first centuries of the Common Era; their country was destroyed by the serpent and turned into a mercantile shadow of what it once had been.

    2. I find the article nonsensical, for one i have no idea what the terms “word laws”, ”group gods”, ”groupism” and ”innate animal sovereignty ”means, if they mean anything.

      Second I object to the use of the terms individualism and universalism in an article about the white race, clearly neither concepts exist, because I have never seen an individualist or an universalist.

      Then the idea that they elected there king but where not subservient to him is nonsense, because you die for your lord and are loyal to your lord and a king without loyalty is not a king, but a joke.

      That custom is superior to written law is something in common to all Indo-European systems of law including the Germanic, Roman, Common and Civil law. Google Jurisprudence.

      Again we see the unfounded claim that National-Socialism is the shadow of Judaism, because National-Socialism adapted the creed of racial-superiority from the Jews.

      Except that Jews do not belief in racial-superiority, but in religious-superiority because the color of skin, eye and the shape of the skull do not matter to a Jew. That is why they are importing black Jews from Ethiopia and India into Israel.

      Your post is full of liberal ideas and makes a lot of unfounded claims.

      1. And again, the first religious creed of racial superiority was the caste system of the Aryan Vedas. The whole “the ‘Zionists’ are the real fascists!” conservative nonsense needs to stop.

        “Individualism” is a Capitalist euphemism for selfishness. Selfish societies are tyrannical because rulers don’t care about their subjects and revolutionaries aren’t willing to sacrifice their own well-being for the sake of anything else.

        “Universalism” is usually a euphemism for humanism, though if used in a positive sense it can just refer to a personality that’s curious about abstract questions.

        Customary law is unrevolutionary and adapts poorly to changing technological circumstances, which is why it’s unsuitable to modern industrial society. You might as well replace formalized trade agreements with “the honor system” of a hunter-gatherer band. If the Germanic tribes were harder they never would have been conquered (and later Christianized) by Rome to begin with, but they weren’t as quick on the draw. The price of reaction is obsolescence.

      2. Stubbs, Just curious: What is wrong with stating that the Catholic Church was… catholic (i.e., universal), that Catholics are thus “universalists”?

      3. @Stubbs

        I am not convinced that the first creed of racial superiority are the system of the Aryan Vedas, because any race that really thinks itself superior would not life amongst nor enslave other inferior people, but would wipe them out.

        That is why I think the creed of racial superiority you refer to is more a case of a creed of class superiority, which defines the class as being made out of white people.

      4. I guess my problem with it is that it’s an inherently humanistic use of the term; it assumes that the most “universal” class is what’s called the human species, and that a vast chasm exists between the soul-having humans who can listen to bible stories and “everything else” (from apes down to rocks).

        The idea of dogs and chimps ever possibly being our “Brothers in Christ” is beyond the pale, and if we accept that the human species is the “universal” class then we wrongly give a sense of broad-sightedness and scope to a doctrine which is shallow, dishonest, and completely discredited by modern science.

        Even the ancient Hindus, as noted by Savitri Devi (“The Impeachment of Man”), believed in a cosmic hierarchy in which types of human and types of animal existed on a continuum (which a righteous soul migrates across). That was closer than this “created in God’s image” bullshit.

        Make the Christians look at a chart of evolving primates and point to the one that gets a soul, make the liberals point to the one that gets “Human Rights”, remind them that we have all their DNA on file and the Koreans could clone one up tomorrow. Point out that pygmies and chimps both hunt with sharpened sticks and ask why chimps can’t be “people” too. Make them eat their own stupid cocktail party pseudo-morality.

        Fuck the “starving”-yet-multiplying-exponentially Africans, fuck the Arabs in Palestine, if I feel the need to go protect something besides my race I’ll go protect trees or moose. A world where humans were the only species would be awful, a world where Aryans were the only race of human would be fine. So enough about human rights.

      5. The Indo-Aryan caste system was certainly biological, the Aryans could see how mongrel offspring looked way more black than white and understood animal husbandry enough to get what was going on. A class comprised of a certain biological group, and open to no others, is basically a race which has established a certain economic niche for itself, in my view. I also consider the Jews an example of this (albeit an overrated one), so our standards probably differ to some extent.

        I think the Indo-Aryans basically just didn’t care enough about the long term. Their decline was very slow, and a mere sense of superiority isn’t the same as racial idealism (example: White slavers fucking Negros or Indians). Idealism is more advanced and self-conscious, it actively looks into the distance because it genuinely cares about what happens in coming centuries. The Aryans of that time had some degree of idealism but not enough, and once they lost it they died out (as Rosenberg catalogued).

        In any case, we can agree that there is no basis for the claim that Jews or Judeans first invented a sense of racial exceptionality or superiority, and that the NSDAP was somehow “Judaized” in their racial policy.

      6. A lion brought into captivity apparently has a strong memory that it was born free. After long servitude, a jack ass apparently ceases to distinguish between servitude and freedom; he begins to accept his condition as “the way things are.” Nonetheless it is easy to find a jack ass and a jenny ass who have found the gate down, simply wandered away, and,in one generation, a baby ass is born free. They have taken no verbal conditioning along with them and passed it on to their offspring.

        We humans, who tried to escape from the establishment,had a verbal conditioning that dated back to our first months in the cradle. We took it along with us. We were less than other animals.