28 Replies on “Linder quote

  1. There is no legal solution to our race’s dilemma, whatever ‘legal’ is anyway. Who decides what’s legal? Certainly our enemies would decide that the methods we undertake to survive are illegal, while we would judge them guilty of breaking our laws and enact punishment on them. The law is subjective and at the end of the day only the might of force and violence can decide what is right. The entirety of the law depends on violence to back it up i.e. the force of the law, without a police force who have permission to enact violence on the general population the law is worthless.
    Everything the National Socialists enacted in Germany was legal until the Allies decided it was illegal. What determines who is right? Only war, violence is always the last resort and history is determined through it. The Allies prevailed and tried the Germans as war criminals.
    Ultimately to prevail we will need a monopoly on all weapons to ensure we are always ‘legal’.

    1. @ Joseph Walsh,
      “Ultimately to prevail we will need a monopoly on all weapons to ensure we are always ‘legal’.”
      Absolutely.
      And I would like to rephrase that into a need to monopolise all technology. Of course it is far too late for that now. But if our race would always have acted and would act normal, meaning as an exclusive Aryan organism instead of universalist humanists, i.o.w. suicidal imbeciles, like we currently do, then we would be totally untouchable. There would be no need for exterminating other, lesser races.
      Let me elaborate a bit. In my opinion the East Asian race never was and never will be a threat to us, not even if they have access to technology. I think we could perfectly co-habit this planet as two species of advanced humans and in fact even benefit each other. However, currently niggers and other primitive humanoids will be and are a threat precisely because they have access to technology and the surpluses of our civilisation, all of it alien but nevertheless very useful to them.
      They would be harmless left to their own devices and there would not nearly be as many of them as there are now thanks to our technology and surpluses. How could primitive hominids which take showers under urinating cows and rub themselves with cowshit ever be a threat to us? They should be regarded as what they are, part of what we currently call the third world’s local flora and fauna.
      Anyone who would share our secrets, meaning our technology or knowledge, with outsiders should be regarded as a race traitor and be executed on the spot. In fact, this should be seen by all of society’s members as the ultimate criminal act. I would even go further and suggest that that should be the core of Aryan religion. To never, ever share our ( ‘holy’ , if you like ) secrets with others. Comparable to a company guarding itself against company espionage, only on a vastly higher serious level.
      However, I do believe we should exterminate at least one group, and that is the Jews. They are the great corrupters in this world and most probably the root cause of the ‘spilling’ of our race’s advancement to the lesser advanced which translates into suicide.

      1. On the one hand you say that the Asians are no threat to us (you ignore the Huns, the Mongols, the militarism of the Japanese, the Ottomans, the Tartars etc.) and that our two Races can “benefit” each other, yet on the other hand you say:
        “Anyone who would share our secrets, meaning our technology or knowledge, with outsiders should be regarded as a race traitor and be executed on the spot.”
        Make your mind up. You can’t eat your cake and have it too.
        You also say: “How could primitive hominids which take showers under urinating cows and rub themselves with cowshit ever be a threat to us?”
        I am sure many Visigothic Iberians said the same about those turban-wearing weirdos southwards across the pond. I am also sure that is how the Romans described the Judean Kikes.
        The worst thing you could possibly do in this type of situation is underestimate someone. It will be the death of you.
        What you also ignore is that at some point in the future, an Aryan State will want to invade and colonise another area. If there are any non-Whites in that area, Race-mixing is soon to follow, whether Jews occupy such a society or not.
        What is the point in sharing the Earth with Mongoloids? What does that do for us? What is the idea?
        Also, what is Aryan technology to you? What are you referring to when you say this? When Spahn Ranch was saying that it would be ideal to get rid of technology, you said “live like Niggers?”
        So I am very confused at what you mean when you say “technology.”

    2. @ jack halliday,
      Yes, I ignore the Huns, the Mongols, the militarism of the Japanese, the Ottomans, the Tartars etc. There is a reason for that.
      Let me explain; Tartars and Huns are not EAST- Asians and Ottomans don’t even come close to that. Genghis Khan supposed to have red hair and blue eyes according to many sources. Sources more informed and wiser than you and me combined so I think you got a little confused here about whom I was referring to, throwing in a collection of VERY different groups. Besides, if one looks at the Mongols today, in heartland Mongolia, one doesn’t get the impression that this lot was ever able to conquer half the world. At least I’m not convinced. But then again, I’m also not convinced of the cooked up official narrative about JFK’s murder being true.
      East Asians, Japanese, Koreans or Chinese have and never will be a threat to us. We are and always have been a threat to them, Japan, Korea are occupied by force of White technology ( US military ) in servitude of jew. China suffered tremendously from the British/jew opiumtrade, forced upon them by white armies in servitude of jewish drugdealers like for instance the family Sassoon. There is long list of other examples. WE traveled to Japan, China, centuries ago. They never traveled to us. So who is a threat to whom?
      There are many Chinese living in every country on earth. None of these communities have ever caused the slightest problem for the receiving countries. That is proof we can co-habit, let alone when both groups are living ‘at home’, respecting each other’s souvereignty.
      Outside the white countries, there are only a very few other first world countries. Japan, Korea and Singapore. Currently these societies are way safer and nicer to live in than any white nigger/middle easterners infested country. Not to mention their racial awareness and traditional values are way higher than the average white tattooed nigger emulating imbecile.
      I don’t recall having said that we should share anything vital with anyone, my mind is made up.
      “You also say: “How could primitive hominids which take showers under urinating cows and rub themselves with cowshit ever be a threat to us?”
      I am sure many Visigothic Iberians said the same about those turban-wearing weirdos southwards across the pond. I am also sure that is how the Romans described the Judean Kikes.”
      I wouldn’t know what many Visigothic Iberians said about those turban wearing weirdos southward the pond, but I do know that they, those turban wearing weirdos southward the pond, were not taking showers under urinating cows or rubbed themselves with cowshit. Same for how the Romans described the Judean kikes and the latter’s showering habits.
      “What you also ignore is that at some point in the future, an Aryan State will want to invade and colonise another area.”
      Oh? And why? That kind of thinking has gotten us in trouble in the first place, but you just want to continue this idiocy? This way of thinking is jew’s way of thinking.
      “What is the point in sharing the Earth with Mongoloids? What does that do for us? What is the idea?”
      I have no answer. What is the point of sharing the earth with any living thing? All species belong to earth’s ecosystem, so deliberately actively exterminating entire species is acting against the laws of nature. If some species will die out, including primitive humanoids, it will be because their own lack of competiveness. What IS wrong in today’s world is the misallocation of Aryan knowledge and surpluses, causing far too many inferior humanoids than there should be according to nature’s laws. Take that away and this problem wil solve automatically.
      “Also, what is Aryan technology to you? What are you referring to when you say this? When Spahn Ranch was saying that it would be ideal to get rid of technology, you said “live like Niggers?” ”
      Wrong. Again. I never said that. I asked SR if he considered it a good idea to abolish CIVILISATION, not technology. Then I asked, if so, then what? Live like niggers. There is a reason for that too, because without civilisation there is only life like niggers live it. Or else tell me about the good savage life. Anyway, what exactly would be the point of preserving the Aryan race, then?
      Aryan technology is the result of science. The scientific approach to things is an Aryan development.
      Also, technological society is the inevitable result of the Aryan’s inquisitve mind, intelligence and creativity. What do you suggest, “oh well, we have a great idea which will improve our lives and safety greatly but alas, we can’t actually act upon it because maybe in the future it might make us corrupt and degenerate, so let’s live in the trees forever so that we spare ourselves from that awful fate” ?
      Who knows, maybe that’s the nigger’s motto; ” , yeah, we could build particle accelerators all day long, but we choose not to.”
      All the questions have been answered already, we have the blueprints ready, National Socialist Germany set the example of what actually works. Trust me, it doesn’t involve abolishing technology or civilisation all together. I should say quite the opposite, wouldn’t you agree? Should white people consider themselves as an exclusive organism, like any other race or species, we literally would be considered gods by all lesser human species. So I think you need to make up your mind.

      1. I am not reading g your long-winded reply with any care, as no care went into what you have said.
        I have made my mind up, by the by. The problem with you is that you are still stuck in Christian ethics. You actually want to live alongside another Race, and you tell me this stupid rubbish with a straight face.
        It is pathetic to see a White male like yourself actually feel empathy for Mongoloids. You are like the Liberals who say that all White people are evil because of colonialism. But you are not a Liberal, so what is your excuse?
        “Also, technological society is the inevitable result of the Aryan’s inquisitve mind, intelligence and creativity. What do you suggest, “oh well, we have a great idea which will improve our lives and safety greatly but alas, we can’t actually act upon it because maybe in the future it might make us corrupt and degenerate, so let’s live in the trees forever so that we spare ourselves from that awful fate” ?”
        Yes, what is the problem with this? If there is a danger of us falling into degeneracy due to mass-producing I-pads, then why are we doing it? Answer: Because people like you are so dependant on the Government’s help that you cant even conceive of living the way our own ancestors did. Why do you think that Negro countries are mentally healthy compared to Aryan ones? It is because they don’t care for your petty non-sequiturs and strawman arguments.
        What you have just said is pure strawman. I am just proposing that our Race does not rot indoors all day playing on their Gameboys and eating salty snacks. That is what your precious “inquisitive mind” has given us. Living in trees (a strawman) would be better than the former.
        How about this: Get rid of the Xtian malware from your mind (“evil White people oppressed the poor chinks”) and then come back to me.

      2. You say: “I have no answer. What is the point of sharing the earth with any living thing? All species belong to earth’s ecosystem, so deliberately actively exterminating entire species is acting against the laws of nature”
        But the absence of the Human Species as a whole will not cause any bad long term effects to the planet. If only Aryans existed, Nature will not deteriorate. We really are an obsolete species.
        Plus, I am losing patience with this “live like Niggers” crap. If you don’t want to debate properly, you might as well not even be here.

      3. Oh dear, it’s even worse than I already thought.
        I don’t even have the slightest sermitic malware. Never had. Unless Adolf Hitler had it too. You on the other hand seem to be the very source of it.
        P.S. please stop pretending you know “fuck all” , ( to use your kind of nigger babble ), about Adolf Hitler or NS. Trust me, you don’t have a clue. And it might put off any potential newbies to all that.
        You better join the niggers in their mentally healthy countries and procreate with one, then your offspring will be mentally healthier than the average Aryan, with the additional bonus that you don’t have to go through the trouble of abolishing technology and civilisation.

        1. Look at the tough guy.
          Why don’t you actually debate me properly, you dumb cunt. You can’t, so you puss out, and resort to strawman arguments and you hurl insults by the dozen.
          Our Race needs thinkers, not mindless scum like you.

        2. “You better join the niggers in their mentally healthy countries and procreate with one”
          And you better join the poor, innocent little gooks that you love so much and procreate with one. Why don’t you go to one of those East Asian communities and take up their way of life. According to you, there is proof we can co-habit, so show us the way, tough guy.
          You have no reason to be talking to me this way. I have done nothing to you. You wouldn’t be saying this shit to me in real life, so why are you doing it over the comfort of the internet?

        3. Okay, you know what? I was being unprofessional. Ignore my two replies.
          I would like to say this: You win, I lose.
          You are clearly the smartest person in this room.

      4. “…National Socialist Germany set the example of what actually works.”
        No, they didn’t. If they had, they would have won the war.
        It seems to me a big mistake to think that ideology can ever drive technological development, either in its invention or its use. Yet this is a mistake that is virtually universally made, including in NS Germany. If we take Darwin seriously, then it’s obvious that the point of life, the goal towards which all strive and MUST strive, is survival. The result of this is that ideology is always subordinate to survival, and that ideology MUST be abandoned where it conflicts with that. The price of not doing so is failure and death.
        Case-in-point: In NS Germany, if “Jewish physics” had been adopted instead of ridiculed, Germany might have won the war.
        link

      5. @ Spahn Ranch,
        Well, thank you for that very informative link. I am so much wiser now. Gosh, if I only had heard of Wikipedia before, then I already knew the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the Holocaust as well.
        Good night.

  2. On violence: it should be swift and decisive, not slow and grinding.
    I watched the post-soviet russian movie “The Chekist”. It shows how a state-sanctioned ideological cleansing would work from the executioner’s point of view, and how it leads to mental breakdown of the revolutionaries.
    Keep in mind, a white warrior wouldn’t be mentally scarred from mass-murdering five thousand niggers and jews – if it’s all done in a day or two.
    The amygdalic damage starts to accumulate if each death squad’s task of extermination of 5k is prolonged for weeks, and even months, by executing only two dozen per day.
    If there ever is a RaHoWa, there must be a Day of the Rope, not a Year of the Rope.

    1. That’s pure idealism
      If there ever is a “day of the rope” it, by no means, would occur nationwide and instantaneously without the presence of a centralized organization with an abundance of members and equipment- and even then is borderline impossible.
      Realistically we’re looking at the YEARS of the rope.

  3. “I am so much wiser now. ”
    Somehow I doubt it.
    A flippant response such as yours only underscores how little thought you’ve put into the problem presented by technology. It reminds me of those supposedly race-conscious Christians who only become more determined to persist in their failed strategy when you point out to them that whatever its virtues, just like NS, Christianity has failed utterly in preserving the white race. This is so obvious that I’ve come to think that on some level, such people actually want to lose. They are part of the problem, not the solution.

    1. @spahn ranch,
      Yes, of course, get rid of technology, execute anyone who dares to improve anything, and to better be safe than sorry, forbid anyone to make even the most rudimentary tools and fire as well, one never knows when the degenerate rot kicks in after eating all that tasty roasted meat and the wearing of animal hides.
      Yes, I can see it clearly now, abolish civilisation, hell abolish life itself, that is the final solution to all our problems. You’re regular geniuses.
      It is a great pity that this website, which main goal is exposing christianity as the alien poison that it is is being polluted by a handful of crackpots at the risk of putting off potential new ‘recruits’.

      1. I’m sorry, who are you? Has Cesar even heard of you? You not only act like you have been here your whole life, but that this site will be doomed without your input.
        Nobody wants nor needs your input. You are completely useless. Cesar simply would not care whether you stayed or left. And that is the problem with you: You are just a little lonely loser who has nothing better to do with his pathetic life than to talk shit to everyone else.
        You are nothing. Just a faggot freak who has seen Pulp Fiction one too many times.
        Your entire existence on this site is relegated to strawman attacks and non-sequiturs. You do this because actually respectfully outlining your disagreements is something which you view as beneath you.
        You have clearly never actually been beaten up in your life. Everybody who has at some point had the shit kicked out of them don’t talk this way to other people, because they remember what happened to them the last time they did. Maybe that is what needs to happen to you.
        By the way, Cesar Tort agrees with about 90% of what me an Spahn Ranch have to say, especially regarding Civilisation. Cesar sees that Civilisation is a great corrupter of Aryans as well. Maybe you should ask him, and you’ll see that he is one of the very “crackpots” which you despise so much.

      2. My latest post on Plato, and especially the painting and the links, is a good starting point to ponder my POV. But that’s only a starting point. He who has read my Day of Wrath, most of it already published in this site, knows my worldview better. He who has read my two thick books advertised in the sidebar knows me well…
        I don’t entirely agree with Spahn Ranch because he lacks my meta-perspective. If he had it—billions of infanticides committed since prehistory, some of them very disturbing child sacrifices (references in Day of Wrath)—he would see that even before technology humans were extremely horrible apes. I’m closer to Joseph Walsh: Jews are evil, yes, but that doesn’t mean that the rest of the races are not evil to a lesser degree.
        The solution, to put it bluntly, is what I call ‘the extermination of the Neanderthals’, which means that only the best of whites should inherit the earth. Technology for the moment is bad because there are billions of human Neanderthals around the planet using it, which means stupidity at the speed of light.
        Extermination of the Neanderthals first. Only then you can give the Promethean fire to the remaining humanity—if they behave for, say, some thousand years in the Acadian stage.

      3. @ C.T.,
        Don’t get me wrong, I respect you for your work, and about many things we are in agreement. I enjoy reading a lot of stuff being published here. I also think that the aesthetics and presentation of this website are first class, very appropriate.
        But the noble task of spreading awareness about semitic poison will not benefit from associating
        with notions of abolishing technology or civilisation. What would be the point of living for aryans, then? We might as wel go extinct. Besides, if abolishing civilisation would be a good thing then we don’t have to worry anymore because this is the direction humanity is currently heading for. The jews are doing it for us. The only thing that has to be achieved is restoring our sanity and getting rid of alien rot is the best start. But overcomplicating will not attract new allies.
        Continue your excellent work.
        P.S.
        @ jack halliday,
        You need help.

        1. Explain why it is I who needs help. Explain that to me.
          You can’t. You are just a stupid faggot who nobody ever loved in his pathetic life, and nobody will love you.
          Instead of excepting this and trying to improve yourself, you project all of your problems onto me, because you are sad loser who cannot excpt the fact that his existence matters not to the pretty teenage girls around him.
          🙁

  4. I don’t entirely agree with Spahn Ranch because he lacks my meta-perspective. If he had it—billions of infanticides committed since prehistory, some of them very disturbing child sacrifices (references in Day of Wrath)—he would see that even before technology humans were extremely horrible apes.
    I told you my motto: “Life is war.” Furthermore, I’d venture to say that it’s always been that way, and always will be. The world according to Darwin’s theory is a violent and terrible place, a hell both hideous and perfect. It sets built-in rules that guide life’s processes; rules that can’t be changed merely because we find them ideologically objectionable. If child sacrifice and infanticide were necessary evolutionary steps that resulted in the production of the white race, it seems odd to me that you would deplore them.
    With regard to abolishing technological civilization, we owe to Kaczynski the idea of using technique to abolish technique, which he sketches out for us in ISAIF using the example of refrigeration technology I previously mentioned. Broadly, the technique of destroying a technique by attacking its supporting structure also applies to insubstantial techniques, such as techniques like Affirmative Action and laws against “hate speech” that the technological state uses to induce race mixing and promote social harmony. Those could be gotten rid of by destroying the modern state, which alone has the ability to enforce them and carry them through, and which is the necessary precondition for their existence. If the state were to disappear (i.e.,after the collapse of “civilization”), the races would separate naturally, without effort. The white race would thereby be preserved, and if the condition of technological disorganization lasted long enough (perhaps a few centuries), even the geographic barriers which previously separated the races would return as Nature renewed herself.
    But such an attack can only be successful if applied to techniques requiring a high level of social organization. It wouldn’t work for simple techniques like spears or arrows, or schools; it wouldn’t prevent reorganization along tribal lines. So if high technology were to be made impossible, there could still be civilization, but only that of the sort that existed before the Industrial Revolution. I take it as an axiom that the primary driver of social and genetic change among whites for the past 10,000 years has been technological development. If this is accepted, it follows that if you want to stop or reverse those changes, then you have to arrest technological development at the stage you desire. If you want, say, Spartan culture, then you have to induce a permanent return to a Spartan level of technology. I’m convinced such a thing is doable, and even likely. The only question is whether the collapse of technological civilization will happen by accident, or be deliberately induced.

    1. I stopped reading your post when I hit this phrase: ‘If child sacrifice and infanticide were necessary evolutionary steps that…’ Obviously you haven’t read my DOW.
      I’ll put it in these words: No regular visitor of this site—not only you—knows my point of view because it requires delving deeply into what I say in my books, of which DOW is only a translated-to-English selection.
      I don’t harbour illusions. I’ll probably die unread. Most visitors come here (I am not referring to you) from the narrow POV of WN, which delimits discourse almost to the JQ. But I had a long history of lone philosophising before discovering WN in 2009, and even half of my writing was finished before that year.
      To give you an example. Most commenters treat my DOW posts as if they are independent articles. They are not: obviously they are chapters of a larger book, which in turn is a selection of even larger volumes.
      That’s why I cannot discuss child sacrifice and infanticide in this thread: I have not even finished my adding all the book’s chapters to this site; the remaining DOW chapters are only available in the printed book. Of course: I can already discuss what I have posted in the DOW entries, but the big picture only starts to emerge after reading the book.

    2. @ Spahn Ranch,
      What you suggest, deliberatly limiting our own technological advancement – is not only undesirable – IMO that is – but also quite impossible.
      First, it’s impossible and suicidal because technological advancement is vital in warfare. If nature, life, is war as you say, then in order to keep the upper hand and safe from natural enemies it is crucial to have the upper hand. One doesn’t keep the upper hand relying on primitive weapons. People’s who are not capable of advancing beyond that level are doomed to go extinct. Want proof of what I claim? Well, one doesn’t have to look any further than what happened to all the non-white societies around the globe who have been conquered and colonised by technological more advanced European invaders. I simply cannot grasp how anyone could advocate abolishing, or limiting technological advancement.
      Not only for that reason, because improving living conditions is also providing us more spare time we can dedicate to research and study nature so we understand it better which in turn makes us lesser and lesser dependant on superstition and its salesmen.
      Second; it is highly undesirable to deliberatly limited one’s own capabilities. It’s akin to deny who you are, to act unnatural, to not be yourself. A bit like being a Christian, which teaches you to not be yourself, deny your natural instincts.
      Third; where do you draw the line? It’s ok to use flintstones and spears? It’s ok to develop a bow and arrow? You think if the Spartans had modern industrial produced weapons they hadn’t used them? Technology is neutral. I can use a hammer to nail planks together but I can also use it to bash a man’s brain in. I consider it a non-argument.
      Didn’t Darwin also stated that the lesser capable human species would eventually naturally die out or become obscure because of their lack of competitiveness? I’m not sure he did, but if he did he was right.
      I repeat, we only have to restore our sanity. 150 years ago we effortles ruled the whole planet, only thanks to our technological advancement, nothing else. Mindrot is causing our decline, and the advancement of our natural – lesser capable – competitors. The source of mindrot isn’t technology.

      1. What you suggest, deliberatly limiting our own technological advancement – is not only undesirable – IMO that is – but also quite impossible.
        Contrary to the mythology that surrounds it, “Progress” is neither inevitable nor irreversible.
        Not inevitable:
        The Japanese are so disposed to cultural conservatism that they once turned their back on the global technological system altogether and became a closed society during the Tokugawa Shogunate (1603 – 1868). They realized that the inevitable effect of such technology would be to destroy their way of life. During this time, firearms and other western technological innovations were banned. It was only opened up by military force in the nineteenth century, when Perry’s arrival triggered the Meiji Restoration. They were right about the consequences of being open to Western technology, of course. These technologies completely destroyed their old culture. Where are the samurais now? Where is bushido? Where is honor? In truth, they have abandoned those things.
        The Japanese example provides us with a case-in-point lesson that any revolution against the technological system must be global. If technological society isn’t destroyed on a global scale, then the parts that survive will simply retake the parts that were damaged, and the system will reconstitute itself. You can’t simply drop out of it. If you wish to preserve race and culture, it must be destroyed.
        Not irreversible:
        The fall of the empire of Rome showed conclusively that technological systems can be lost as well as acquired. It could happen again, either on purpose or by accident.
        Perhaps a post-technological world would end up looking like ancient Athens or ancient Rome. But, if they can get that far, what will prevent them from quickly building the global technological system back again? I’m glad you asked. In ancient times, there was still plenty of easy to find materials with which to build technological civilization. Those are gone now, all used up. Resources vital to the technological system such as oil, iron, copper, aluminum, zinc, tin, gold, silver, etc., now require high technology to obtain. If that technology goes away, then they will in effect be permanently unobtainable. In the short term, cities could be effectively mined for materials only if enough people remained to do that, and a distribution network still was in operation, both to distribute the mined materials and to support the miners with food and other necessities of life. Depending on the method used to take the system down, this might well not be the case. Such activities are also somewhat constrained by time. If sufficient time passed before salvage began, much material would already have decayed to unusability. Wood and cloth rot, steel rusts, glass fogs and shatters, gasoline and oil oxidize and absorb water and go bad, plastic becomes brittle and breaks. A century or two of darkness, or much less, depending on the resource in question, and salvage would be unproductive. A blow to the system of sufficient power to cause a worldwide collapse and consequent population decrease from famine, disease, and conflict might well be something from which the global technological system could not recover. If an interruption to global technological society is imposed that lasts long enough, then the tools to extract those resources will no longer exist, nor the tools and resources to make those tools. In a few generations, even the knowledge of how to do so will be lost.

      2. If you wish to preserve race and culture, it must be destroyed.

        The One Ring must be destroyed if we are going to return to the Shire. There are two ways to write a critique of technocratic capitalism: the Jewish way (Marx) and the Aryan way (Tolkien). I prefer the latter obviously.