Would Chechar fight for my balls?

Just look at the mirror every morning you shave—and be honest!

 
In a previous thread Mr Deutsch said:

What I am not a supporter of: Accusations that Mediterraneans (outside of specific areas) have a comprised genetic pool. There is no science to back it up, so Nordicists…

I responded:

Not only outside Sicily or Greece. I said above I’m planning to write an autobiographical book that starts with my impressions of what I saw the first day I visited Madrid: most Spaniards are clearly not Aryans. That’s the whole point. parrish-1927 And since my mind starts to build his thoughts and motivations after the 14 words (see: here) it goes without saying that quite a few Iberians are of no use for my ultimate goal (see also the last pages of Day of Wrath)—racial purity is paramount.

Tu put it in extremely brutal terms, do you honestly believe that in the coming racial wars I would risk my life for the hairy balls (i.e., genetic material) of that brown Italian player you claim to be white? Gimme a break. Those testicles are of no interest for our higher goals. I would fight only for those whose sperm carries the info to create the “girls on the rocks” that Max Parrish was so fond of painting in times when the Americans still treasured their Nordish blood.
 

________________

(For the context of this brutal response see the ongoing
exchange in the previous thread: here.)

See you at the Leaky Cauldron?

Harry-Potter_Leaky_Cauldron_signSoon I will pay a visit to London and other towns in the U.K.

Anyone interested in joining me with a beer in a pub?

Cheers!

Published in: on June 17, 2014 at 12:22 pm  Comments (18)  

An apology…

is in order for those who have been trying to obtain a copy of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour from the print-on-delivery distributor Lulu. On purpose I have failed to fix a Lulu PDF page-size problem on that specific book precisely because I am awaiting that it becomes available from a more respected publishing house for racialist subjects: Ostara Publications.

ostara-publications-logo2

At last I got some travel money to escape the Third World metropolis where I was born long time ago, the subject of some entries last year. If something happens to me during the flight (hope not, though I really hate flying) visitors will know where to request printed copies of The Fair Race.

Published in: on June 13, 2014 at 9:41 am  Comments (5)  

Not even one…

If I remember correctly, it was Mister Deutsch the one who commented in this blog that no single wealthy white, or any head of a Western state, is doing absolutely anything to defend his race from extinction.

If you scroll down some posts here you’ll see that a few months ago I was complaining that my Mac broke down, and that I could only resume blogging through the permanent loan of a laptop (not by a pro-white advocate by the way).

Well, since I could not afford the thousand dollars that a Mac store was charging me, I allowed the Mexican technician who for years has worked with my family to deliver my Mac to a friend of him who purportedly promised to fix it for half the price.

That was three months ago… It is now clear that the guy stole my money, my broken Mac and the information in it! This happened because I could not afford the fees of a proper repairing shop.

More than blaming the Mexicans who swindled me I blame wealthy whites. I don’t have in mind those who have made contributions to the WDH, only the really wealthy whites reluctant to sponsor the movement.

But forget my blog, my books (presently I am working on a PDF of my personal essays) or this catastrophe in Mexico. Think instead of one of the best minds in the United States, Michael O’Meara, whom I have quoted extensively in this site. How is it possible that he found himself doing blue-collar jobs in the US simply because nobody was sponsoring him after he was fired by the academia (for maintaining politically-incorrect views)?

And Michael is not alone. It really seems that there is in fact no single rich man on the entire Earth who substantially sponsors the best minds in the movement. That’s precisely why I don’t believe that Jews are the primary cause of Western malaise—it is the whites themselves the ones who have lost an elemental lust for life.

rockwell_with_pipe

For those who don’t visit the addenda of this site, I urge them to do a careful reading this Sunday of my March post, “Greatest American ever,” in which hatnote I said: “In his autobiography This Time The World, Commander George Lincoln Rockwell, who some consider ‘the greatest American that has ever lived,’ describes his experiences dealing with pathetic conservatives in the 1950s.”

The article shows that the difference between a National Socialist and a conservative is that a NS man is genuinely concerned about his race, while a conservative is only concerned about his money. The anecdotes that Rockwell uses in his autobiography are fascinating, a real treat: a must read to understand our present tragedy.

On pre-Hispanic Amerinds, 7

SunStoneColored-NG

 

Standing in a bookstore when I was much younger I read a passage from a book by an out-closet homosexual, the Mexican poet Salvador Novo analyzing the term “pecado nefando” (heinous sin). Novo mentioned Nezahualcoyotl, a 15th-century king and member of the Aztec Triple Alliance, who promulgated a law code that included that those who had engaged in the passive role of homosexual anal intercourse had their intestines pulled out, then their bodies were filled with ash, and finally, were burnt (the active or penetrating partner was simply suffocated in a heap of ash): a punishment more severe than a mere capital punishment against sodomy in the Muslim world. Novo included an illustration of a dead male Amerind with his intestines pulled out, but now that I looked if that image was available in the internet I didn’t find it.

I mention this because one of the reasons why the behavior of pre-Hispanic Amerinds is unknown lies in the fact that the deranged Christians and liberals who are obsessed with out-group altruism have been most reluctant to speak about the level of cruelties in the American continent before the white people arrived. In the latest threads I have spoken about some members in the pro-white movement that get mad when I dare to challenge their dogmas. For instance, in an article at Majority Rights I was once called “Jew” because I dismissed 9/11 conspiracy theories. But in my long life I have had similar experiences with this sort of fanatics.

In my book for example I mention that I have taken issue with my father about Nezahualcoyotl. He has enormously idealized this Indian, to the extent that he even composed a short musical piece for one of the poems that some attribute to Nezahualcoyotl. From time to time I have tried to transmit to my father the fact that the historical Nezahualcoyotl ordered his son to be killed, and that that must be enough to stop idealizing him.

In his uttermost dishonesty, my father has not tried even to respond. He simply continues to idealize Nezahualcoyotl during family meetings and even before visitors from Europe; he continues to flatly claim that figure of Nezahualcoyotl proves that the Aztecs were highly civilized. (Incidentally, in my discussions I never mentioned that Amerind fags were disemboweled in such horrible way after Nezahualcoyotl’s laws; only that he ordered his grown-up first born to be killed.)

Another personal vignette. Back in 2008 I was in a taxi with my father and my six-year-old nephew. Those days I had been discussing with him about the fact that according to my sources the pre-Hispanic Amerinds were cannibals. I even photocopied Mexican newspapers notes saying that such anthropophagy had been corroborated by archeological evidence. Keep in mind that virtually all Mexican press side the Amerinds against the Spanish conquerors, but even the indigenista press has to acknowledge the facts.

My father simply stopped talking to me in the taxi, changed the subject of conversation and started to talk with my six-year-old nephew…

Of course: people like my father, completely unconcerned with the facts, exist by the millions. But I find it healthy that presently the top cultural institutions of Mexico have been corroborating the facts (not my psychohistorical theories) that I cited in The Return of Quetzalcoatl. That’s why I have been reviewing the academic treatise El Sacrificio Humano in these series about pre-Hispanic Amerinds. So let’s now continue to refute my father’s intellectual cowardice with another chapter of El Sacrificio Humano.

The Aztecs and the Mayas were not the only sons of bitches in Mesoamerica (see the previous entries of these series). In the opening paragraph of “El Sacrificio Humano en el Michoacán Antiguo” Grégory Pereira says that Tariácuri, the founder of the empire of the Purépecha culture which developed in the Mesoamerican Postclassic period, congratulates destiny when learning that his own son would be sacrificed (page 247). This of course reminds me what my father’s “civilized” Nezahualcoyotl did. Pereira cites the Spanish Relación de Michoacán as a reliable source about how the Michoaque people behaved before the arrival of the Spaniards.

The Relación states that part of the captives such as old people and children were sacrificed by extraction of the heart right on the spot of the battle, and that (my translation) “the bodies of these victims were cooked and consumed at the same place.” I mention this only to show how my father, who has a good library in his study including books about the pre-Hispanic Amerinds, simply doesn’t want to face what’s right in front of his nose.

Q3

On page 254 Pereira includes a diagram showing a skeleton with points that show the impact of the rib cut to reach the heart during those sacrifices, and he adds that those who performed the ritual were called opítiecha or “holders” who grabbed the extremities of the victim. He adds: “Once slaughtered and decapitated, the dismembered body was in the house of the priests and the various parts offered up to the gods and eaten by the priests and lords. Those who were killed at the scene of the conflict were eaten by the victors… After the cannibal feast, the bones of the slaughtered apparently were gathered and preserved in the house of the priests.”

On the next page Pereira includes an illustration of the Relación depicting the consumption of human flesh. Later, on page 262, the author reveals that Tariácuri also ordered the killing of another of his sons, Tamapucheca, as punishment for having escaped being sacrificed.

Then Pereira recounts that on the day following the sacrifice, they “wore the skin of the slaughtered in a dance, and for five days got drunk.” That is, the cadavers were skinned so that the priests could wear the skin as clothes.

I just wonder… How would an American leftist react before such information. Like my father did in the taxi?

Xipe, Veracruz

A figurine at the Museo Nacional de Antropología
showing an Amerind covered with a human skin.

On Spain and literature – III

retrato de soledad anaya

The reason I almost never include poetry in this blog is simple. Very, very rarely a poem reaches the innermost of my soul. The first poem that reached me was one by Luis de Góngora, which I read in the textbook of Miss Anaya (photo) in my middle teens.

Góngora was a Baroque poet of the golden age of Spain. He, and his contemporary Francisco de Quevedo (about whom I have to quote something in the future), are considered the most prominent Spanish poets of all time. Góngora flourished by the end of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th centuries, when the Spanish language reached its maximum degree of perfection. Anaya, my former school teacher, tells us in Literatura Española that later in his life Góngora became a priest and lived in a chaplaincy of honor in Madrid in the palace of King Philip III.

Góngora composed his Sonnet LCXVI when he was twenty-one years old:

Mientras por competir con tu cabello
Oro bruñido el sol relumbra en vano,
Mientras con menosprecio en medio el llano
Mira tu blanca frente al lilio bello;

Mientras a cada labio, por cogello,
Siguen más ojos que al clavel temprano,
Y mientras triunfa con desdén lozano
Del luciente cristal tu gentil cuello,

Goza cuello, cabello, labio y frente,
Antes que lo que fue en tu edad dorada
Oro, lilio, clavel, cristal luciente,

No sólo en plata o vïola troncada
Se vuelva, más tú y ello juntamente
En tierra, en humo, en polvo, en sombra, en nada.

 

Following is Edward Churton’s translation. Góngora’s urgent appeal to a young blonde nymph to enjoy her youth before time destroys her made a huge impression in the lad I was:
 

While to contend in brightness with thy hair
Sunlight on burnished gold may strive in vain,
While thy proud forehead’s whiteness may disdain
The lilies of the field, which bloom less fair,
While each red lip at once more eyes will snare
Than the perfumed carnation bud new born,
And while thy graceful neck with queenly scorn
Outshines bright crystal on the morning air:

Enjoy thy hour, neck, ringlets, lips, and brow;
Before the glories of this age of gold:
Earth’s precious ore, sweet flowers, and crystal bright
Turn pale and dim; and Time with fingers cold
Rifle the bud and bloom; and they, and thou
Become but ash, smoke, shadow, dust and night.

Civilisation’s “Romance and Reality”

For an introduction to these series, see here.

Below, some indented excerpts of “Romance and Reality,” the third chapter of Civilisation by Kenneth Clark, after which I offer my comments.

Originally I posted this entry on April 15 of the last year, but now that I posted another entry about Spain’s Teresa of Ávila I would like to see some feedback in the comments section about my thoughts on St. Francis from those interested in child abuse as a subject.

Ellipsis omitted between unquoted passages:

I am in the Gothic world, the world of chivalry, courtesy and romance; a world in which serious things were done with a sense of play—where even war and theology could become a sort of game; and when architecture reached a point of extravagance unequalled in history. After all the great unifying convictions of the twelfth century, High Gothic art can look fantastic and luxurious—what Marxists call conspicuous waste. And yet these centuries produced some of the greatest spirits in the human history of man, amongst them St Francis and Dante.

A couple of pages later, Clark says:

Several of the stories depicted in the [Chartres Cathedral] arches concern Old Testament heroines; and at the corner of the portico is one of the first consciously graceful women in western art. Only a very few years before, women were thought of as the squat, bad-tempered viragos that we see on the front of Winchester Cathedral: these were the women who accompanied the Norsemen to Iceland.

Now look at this embodiment of chastity, lifting her mantle, raising her hand, turning her head with a movement of self-conscious refinement that was to become mannered but here is genuinely modest. She might be Dante’s Beatrice.

There, for almost the first time in visual art, one gets a sense of human rapport between man and woman.

About the sentiment of courtly love, on the next page Clark adds that it was entirely unknown to antiquity, and that to the Romans and the Vikings it would have seemed not only absurd but unbelievable.

A ‘love match’ is almost an invention of the late eighteenth century. Medieval marriages were entirely a matter of property, and, as everybody knows, marriage without love means love without marriage.

Then I suppose one must admit that the cult of the Virgin had something to do with it. In this context it sounds rather blasphemous, but the fact remains that one often hardly knows if a medieval love lyric is addresses to the poet’s mistress or to the Virgin Mary.

For all these reasons I think it is permissible to associate the cult of ideal love with the ravishing beauty and delicacy that one finds in the madonnas of the thirteenth century. Were there ever more delicate creatures than the ladies on Gothic ivories? How gross, compared to them, are the great beauties of other woman-worshiping epochs.

When I read these pages for the first time I was surprised to discover that my tastes of women have always been, literally, medieval; especially when I studied closely the face of the woman at the right in the tapestry known as The Lady with the Unicorn, reproduced on a whole page in Clark’s book with more detail than the illustration I’ve just downloaded. I have never fancied the aggressive, Hollywood females whose images are bombarded everywhere through our degenerate media. In fact, what moves me to write are precisely David Lane’s 14 words to preserve the beauty and delicacy of the most spiritual females of the white race.

Alas, it seems that the parents did not treat their delicate daughters well enough during the Middle Ages. Clark said:

So it is all the more surprising to learn that these exquisite creatures got terribly knocked about. It must be true, because there is a manual of how to treat women—actually how to bring up daughters—by a character called the Knight of the Tower of Landry, written in 1370 and so successful that it went on being read as a sort of textbook right up to the sixteenth century—in fact and edition was published with illustrations by Dürer. In it the knight, who is known to have been an exceptionally kind man, describes how disobedient women must be beaten and starved and dragged around by the hair of the head.

And six pages later Clark speaks about the most famous Saint in the High Middle Ages, whose live I would also consider the result of parental abuse:

In the years when the portal of Chartres was being built, a rich young man named Francesco Bernadone suffered a change of heart.

One day when he had fitted himself up in his best clothes in preparation for some chivalrous campaign, he met a poor gentleman whose need seemed to be greater than his own, and gave him his cloak. That night he dreamed that he should rebuild the Celestial City. Later he gave away his possessions so liberally that his father, who was a rich businessman in the Italian town of Assisi, was moved to disown him; whereupon Francesco took off his remaining clothes and said he would possess nothing, absolutely nothing. The Bishop of Assisi hid his nakedness, and afterwards gave him a cloak; and Francesco went off the woods, singing a French song.

The next three years he spent in abject poverty, looking after lepers, who were very much in evidence in the Middle Ages, and rebuilding with his own hands (for he had taken his dream literally) abandoned churches.

He threw away his staff and his sandals and went out bare-foot onto the hills. He said that he had taken poverty for his Lady, partly because he felt that it was discourteous to be in company of anyone poorer than oneself.

From the first everyone recognised that St Francis (as we may now call him) was a religious genius—the greatest, I believe, that Europe has ever produced.

Francis died in 1226 at the age of forty-three worn out by his austerities. On his deathbed he asked forgiveness of ‘poor brother donkey, my body’ for the hardships he had made it suffer.

Those of Francis’s disciples, called Fraticelli, who clung to his doctrine of poverty were denounced as heretics and burnt at the stake. And for seven hundred years capitalism has continued to grow to its present monstrous proportions. It may seem that St Francis has had no influence at all, because even the humane reformers of the nineteenth century who sometimes invoked him did not wish to exalt or sanctify poverty but to abolish it.

St Francis is a figure of the pure Gothic time—the time of crusades and castles and of the great cathedrals. But already during the lifetime of St Francis another world was growing up, which, for better or worse, is the ancestor of our own, the world of trade and of banking, of cities full of hard-headed men whose aim in life was to grow rich without ceasing to appear respectable.

Of course, Clark could not say that Francesco’s life was a classic case of battered child. Profound studies about child abuse would only start years after the Civilisation series. Today I would say that, since Francesco never wrote a vindictive text—something unthinkable in the Middle Ages that would not appear until Kafka’s letter to his father—, he internalized the parental abuse with such violence that his asceticism took his life prematurely.

What is missing in Clark’s account is that Francesco’s father whipped him in front of all the town people after Francesco stole from his shop several rolls of cloth. After the scourging inflicted by his father, with his own hands, and public humiliation, a citizen of Assisi reminded him that the town statutes allowed the father to incarcerate the rebellious son at home. Pedro shut Francesco in a sweltering, dark warehouse where “Francesco languished without seeing the light except when his father opened the door for Pica [the mother] taking a bowl of soup and a piece of bread.” After several weeks of being locked Francesco escaped and, always fearful of his father, hid in a cave. The earliest texts add that in the cave he often wept with great fear.

Francesco then embarked on a spectacular acting out of his emotional issues with his father. He made a big scene by returning to Assisi, undressing in the town’s square in front of Bishop Guido and addressing the crowd: “Hear all ye, and understand. Until now have I called Pedro Bernadone ‘my father’. But I now give back unto him the money, over which he was vexed, and all the clothes that I have had of him, desiring to say only, ‘Our Father, which art in Heaven,’ instead of ‘My father, Pedro Bernadone.’”

To everyone’s surprise Francesco broke with his wealthy parents forever, thus renouncing any possible reconciliation. So resolute was his parental repudiation, writes a Catholic biographer, that from that day on Pedro and Pica disappear from all the biographies of their son. There is no historical evidence of reconciliation, and no information about his parents or the circumstances of their death.

But I don’t want to diminish the figure of St Francis. Quite the contrary: in my middle teens I wanted to emulate him—and precisely as a result of the abuse inflicted by my father on me. And nowadays our world that has Mammon as its real God—trade, banking and dehumanized cities that are rapidly destroying the white race—, this will always remind me what Clark said about St Francis.

Nevertheless, despite my teenage infatuation with the saintly young man of Assisi, I doubt that poor Francesco’s defence mechanism to protect his mind against his father’s betrayal could be of any help now…

Are Spaniards Aryans?

Visigoth_warrior_dressThis piece has been chosen for my collection Day of Wrath. It was slightly modified and presently can only be read as a PDF within the book, ready for printing in your home for a truly comfortable reading. Cheers. The author

Animal hell & White sin

cute-bunnies
 

I am shocked. Tonight I went to the grocery store to buy some milk and saw a couple of typical Mexican kids, one with a rabbit in his arms. After talking about bunnies, the smaller kid of about eight years old told me a horror story.

At school his group was taken to a farm in Mexico to see all the farm animals. Unexpectedly, at some place he saw little bunnies, alive, strung up by their ears on wire. They were in excruciating pain, trying to escape by desperately moving, over the air, their little limbs. The older kid, while still carrying the female rabbit, his pet, told me that his brother came back traumatized for what he saw. The owner of the grocery, an old woman, commented that animal cruelty was so common, and that the farm landlords probably didn’t expect that the kids would pass through that specific place.

Exterminable monsters as the Mexican perpetrators of such animal torture may be, Whites are even worse. They are the ones who, like the kids I interviewed today, have exactly the right feelings of compassion that potentially could stop the crime. But they do nothing out of political correctness. With their WMD they could easily conquer Latin America, Africa, etc., and save the animals from hell. Alas, liberal Whites are so sinfully blind that they willfully ignore that, if their race goes extinct, that means hell—literally hell: thousands upon thousands of years of hell!—for the bunnies and the other farm animals that the colored people treat so bad.

Evil is described by Scott Peck as “militant ignorance.” Liberal Whites militantly like to ignore that the radical Other is not just like oneself. Paraphrasing Peck I would say that while most people are conscious of self-delusion at least on some level, evil liberals—i.e., most Whites—actively and militantly refuse elemental consciousness about the radical Other or non-white cultures.

If someone has any doubts about my ultimate dream—as written down in “Dies Irae”—, that billions of humans must die to make the world less hellish, please picture in your mind what these poor creatures are passing through this very moment here in Mexico and in other colored countries.

Liberals have been so astronomically idiotic, so evil; they so desperately want to believe that the colored are just like them, that they are under the impression that non-whites simply treat our brother animals as they do. If I were God I would punish the ones whom I gave most talents—Whites. Instead of making good use of their talents (e.g., conquering á la William Pierce all non-white lands), the white peoples just “went and hid their talents in the ground.”

This day, by the way, I linked “A Postscript to Dies Irae” on the sidebar as “On the morality of dispatching 500 million of degenerate whites.” I believe that such cruelty on lovely creatures should awaken, among the most emergent specimens of Homo sapiens, the same level of hate that I feel.

Ben-Hur

clasicos-de-oro-ilustrados-ben-hur

Appalled by the ongoing racial suicide throughout the West, and by the fact that men with honor are practically nonexistent even in the pro-white movement, yesterday I tried to find some refuge in one of my readings as a kid. I revisited my decades-old illustrated books and booklets and picked up exactly the same translated copy of Ben-Hur that I read as a child.

Alas, once you are unplugged from the Matrix you cannot take the bluepill and enjoy another moment of blissful, childhood ignorance again! Yesterday I was immediately confronted by the fact that even on the first pages of this abridged version the author put a Manichean dialogue between Messala and Judah Ben-Hur, where it is clear that the Roman will be the bad guy of the story and the Jew the good guy.

I then searched in the internet for an exposé of the American general who wrote and published the novel in 1880, Lew Wallace. At Stormfront I found Christians blaming the 1959 movie adaptation of Ben-Hur, directed by Jew Willy Wyler, instead of blaming the Christian author himself! After all, Ben-Hur was considered “the most influential Christian book of the nineteenth century” with book sales surpassing Gone with the Wind. Long before the famous adaptation was filmed starring Charlton Heston, in the late 19th century Pope Leo XIII had said that Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ was the first work of fiction to be honored! You can imagine how such an influential work of fiction could have been a contributing factor in the runaway American philo-Semitism of the following century…

My poor white nationalist Christians: Why beholdest thou the mote that is in the Jude’s eye but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

The fact that there are lots of mentally-blinded Christians in White Nationalism is one of the reasons why I have now completely abandoned it and presently only favor National Socialism.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 228 other followers