On Spain and literature – V

retrato de soledad anaya
 
My Mac broke down again (I didn’t fix it properly the previous time for lack of funds) but I’ll use a borrowed laptop because I’ve read a classic in Spanish literature and would like to say something about it.

Quoting Julio Rodríguez-Puértolas, on page 7 of The Culture of Critique Kevin MacDonald wrote:

A prime example is The Celestina (first edition dating from 1499) by Fernando de Rojas, who wrote “with all the anguish, pessimism, and nihilism of a converso who has lost the religion of his fathers but has been unable to integrate himself within the compass of Christian belief.” Rojas subjected the Castilian society of his time to “a corrosive analysis, destroying with a spirit that has been called ‘destructive’ all the traditional values and mental schemes of the new intolerant system. Beginning with literature and proceeding to religion, passing through all the ‘values’ of institutionalized caste-ism—honor, valor, love—everything is perversely pulverized.”

I confess that I found La Celestina quite boring, but I am not sure if it would be proper to catalogue this comedy—because it is a comedy—as “destructive” in the sense that MacDonald (who doesn’t seem to have actually read it) put it.

en la estacaHowever, it is true that Fernando de Rojas felt alienated in the late 15th century Spain. Some of his biographers even claim that, when Rojas was a bachelor studying in Salamanca, he received the tragic notice that his father, a Jew converted to Catholicism, had been condemned to die at the stake by the Inquisition.

As crypto-Jews usually did, Rojas married a converso woman; i.e., an ethnic Jewess, the daughter of Álvaro de Montealbán. De Montealbán also suffered a trial by the Inquisition and, although Rojas was a very successful lawyer by profession, he was not allowed to defend his father-in-law because Rojas was also of Jewish heritage, and therefore suspicious.

La Celestina was a huge bestseller of the time, even in translations outside Spain, but Rojas was always scared for having written it in his youth and, for forty years, remained silent about his authorship.

See my recent entry about the Spanish Catholic Kings Ferdinand and Isabella, who in 1492 promulgated a law to expel those Jews who didn’t want to convert to Christianity. The Jews who had lived in Spain for centuries had to go and the conversos who stayed became second-class citizens for the next centuries. The mission of the Inquisition was to keep under close scrutiny the conversos and see if they continued to practice their religious ways in secret.

Except for the first act, which was not authored by Rojas but by a non-Jew (either Juan de Mena or Rodrigo de Cota), as I said I found the comedy boring. Whatever the influence of this searing exposé of the Neo-Platonic idealization of women, an idealization so common in popular authors those times such as Petrarch, it probably didn’t go beyond the similar exposé by Cervantes of the chivalric novels of the age. To my taste mentioning La Celestina in the first pages of The Culture of Critique is a little off the mark, especially when taking into account that the most hilarious pages against women were authored by a gentile.

Rojas died in 1541, four years after Pope Paul III granted the bachelor soldiers in America permission to mix their blood with Amerind women. Now that I’ve just read the book I’d say that, although there’s a ring of truth in what MacDonald quoted, it should be obvious that the Spaniards’ lust for gold (see my previous entry about my teacher of literature), together with Catholicism, were the main cause of their racial suicide in the Americas. In those centuries conversos rarely got—as Rojas did—positions of cultural influence in this society that seriously tried to get rid of the subversive tribe. For those knowledgeable of the history of Spain and of Spanish literature, it would be laughable to hear that the book written by Rojas was a factor in the mestization of the New World.

Isabel (TV series)

I’m relocating this paragraph, originally posted on October 30:

I’ve just watched the first season of Isabel, a 2012 Spanish-produced historical and fictional TV series about the life of Queen Isabella I of Castile, and I am afraid to say that the Spanish media is now Hollywoodesque. The Jew Andrés Cabrera (1430-1511), who in real history held a key position in the control of the royal treasury, is depicted as an innocent lamb and the anti-Semite Juan Pacheco (1419-1474), interpreted by Ginés García Millán (extreme left on the pic below), as an unscrupulous and ambitious fanatic. Long ago was that era when the Spaniards founded the first Judenfrei city in the American continent (a city where I was born and still happen to live in…).

isabel-tv

Now (December 23), that I watched the second, 2013 season of the series, I found myself making copious notes, especially how the scriptwriters handled the expulsion of the Jews from Spain by the end of the 15th century. But before that it is interesting to see that in this season the Archbishop of Toledo tells Ferdinand of Aragon, “She [Isabella I] has stolen you the right that by natural law is only of males,” the right to rule.

Feminism in the 15th century? In the first episode of this second season it is said that this couplet was sung in a Castilian tavern:

Isabelle and Ferdinand reign backwards
Governs the lady and not the Aragonese
Like Henry our former king, Ferdinand,
faced with a female gets smaller…

In Spanish it rhythms. Despite its political correctness, the series surprised me because it is the first time in my life that I see on film a reenactment of the civil war between the old Christians (ethnically non-Jews) and the new Christians of Spain (ethnically Jewish).

In Isabel the first major conflict between these two groups is located in Burgos, and it reminded me that in Separation and Its Discontents Kevin MacDonald writes specifically about this conflict. It shocked me to learn in Separation that the Jews were allies of the medieval kings, who used the subversive tribe in their conflicts against their own people. In the Isabel series, Isabelle at least is depicted as reversing this process and demanding: “Mark them all with a round, scarlet ring on their clothing to facilitate their identification wherever they are.”

The converso Andrés Cabrera shouts after such measure, “She didn’t hesitate in humiliating them! She has paid allegiance with infamy!” It is interesting that in the whole series it is the first time that this “converso” is critical of the crown (in the previous season he had always been loyal to Henry IV of Castile). But Isabelle, nonetheless, names the very respected figure of Abraham Senior, a rabbi, as her collector of taxes—still following some steps of the traitorous medieval kings.

Following the advice of her two influential advisors, the rabbi and the converso Cabrera, Isabelle commands Cabrera to destitute the mayor of Segovia, substituting him for a cousin of the converso.

isabel y judío etnico

Once in power the Jew betrays the queen’s confidence and there’s an uprising when even the queen’s daughter is on peril of being abducted by the rabble that suffered the taxes of the new mayor. But the betrayal is not depicted clearly so as not to give the impression that blame should be placed on the subversive tribe. While the converso Cabrera is sent on exile, it is a shame that the producers missed the opportunity to illustrate for the Spanish audience how the “rise of the Jews” runs parallel to the dispossession of the natives to the point that the natives react. The producers knew their history well, but were very reluctant to offend sensitivities and watered down the crude facts.

The influential and most respected rabbi Abraham Senior, in addition of being very white, is depicted as noble, temperate, compassionate and wise. In contrast, a Christian rabble is shown throwing a stone on his head. The inhabitants of Burgos “have thrown false accusations against my own,” claims the rabbi. However, even in this politically-correct series once in a while the point of view of the Old Christians is heard. A Dominican monk says vehemently:

“Your Grace: The Christian converts have only costume. Their mission is to infect our religion from within to destroy it. May God have mercy with a benevolent Castile with heretics.”

But the series had to immediately amend the rant somehow. Fray Hernando, a Hieronymite monk and confessor of the queen, asks in private the Dominican why he is full of hate. The Dominican refutes him with proof that the conversos in fact “Judaize” in private, the word in vogue in those times to mean that the conversos continue to circumcise their children and maintain food restrictions. “The rage of the old Christians is righteous” he says.

Then a great conflict explodes between the Jews and the Christians of Seville. “This Dominican slandered us!,” says a Jew (pic above beside the queen). Unfortunately, instead of representing the conflict fairly, the episode puts a bigoted woman saying that a medicine of a Jewish physician could invoke demons: a typical inversion of the Spanish theatre of yore when the Jews were depicted as wicked and the Christians noble. After a scene the king Ferdinand congratulates the Jew physician for having made fertile Isabelle again. He is overjoyed.

Reyes

The actors chosen for the emir of Granada in the Alhambra and his heir are good-looking, which means that they are not to be seen as the “bad guys” of the series. The emir is also a good lover who treats the white Christian woman who was abducted as a westerner would treat his wife (nothing of the sort of how abducted white women were treated in the harem).

Back in Seville, a cardinal suggests Isabelle to found a tribunal for the faith, the Inquisition, in Spain. But just as the old emir and young heir are depicted almost as good, the conversos of Seville are depicted as innocent and noble. Nonetheless, “the tribunal of which you speak, that still does not exist, would condemn only those who claim to be Christians but lie,” says Fray Hernando once he opened his eyes that some conversos were, indeed, “Judaizing” privately.

A home of conversos, depicted almost as pure doves, is assaulted by a mob of enraged Christians who cut the throat of a child and write on the wall the word “MARRANOS” with the child’s blood before leaving.

“Look to what those dogs that call themselves Christians are capable to do to a child,” with a close-up on the dead child, says the father. “Do you believe,” the converso tells his daughter, “that one of these good Christians we have as servants lifted a finger?”

Then the extended Jewish family of the converso arrives to wash the body of the assassinated child and the converso puts a crucifix inside a box, while all present recite something in Hebrew. The daughter, however, who is a maid of the queen, knows that this is highly dangerous business and suffers inwardly.

Fray Hernando, the queen’s confessor tells Isabelle: “Purifying the faith of converts will be a mission full of obstacles,” and the Inquisition starts its first activities in Spain. In Seville’s square Tomás de Torquemada warns: “There will be no pity. Every Christian who suspects of someone who Judaizes should report it.”

After these first actions Fray Hernando warns Torquemada that the dungeons are filled, even with innocents, though he concedes that some of them “Judaize.” Burning at the stake is still forbidden, and Torquemada’s first action was the confiscation of goods and mandate the use a penitential garment, the sanbenito, for a Judaizer woman who still celebrated the Sabbath and other Jewish ceremonies.

Then a tragedy occurs. The whitest dove of the series, the candid teenage Jewess who worked as the queen’s maid, is caught when trying to conceal evidence in the royal palace: evidence incriminating her father. She is sent to the torture chamber.

en potro

The visual details of her torment are shown to the naïve Spanish viewers in this episode that was aired recently. Under torture the candid Jewess confesses that she was only trying to save her father’s skin and is released. Isabella finally permits capital punishment. The converso father is caught and, unwilling to repent publicly by means of kissing the cross while he is tied on the stake, is burned alive.

en la estaca

The episode ends with a voice in off shouting: “The Jewish plague that ravages Christendom! The plague!”

In the next episode something is missing. In real history the Alhambra musicians had been blinded so that they did not see the naked women dancing. In this sanitized Alhambra none of these barbarities is shown when filming the musicians.

“El Cordobés,” the queen’s best friend and a soldier under the command of Ferdinand (second form left to right in the first pic at the beginning of this entry), one of the non-whites of the series, is shown as militarily wiser compared to Ferdinand after a humiliating defeat inflicted by the Moors.

The converso problem is introduced again but this time in the kingdom of Aragon. In the whole series of Isabel it is shown the conflict between the Christians and Jews and between the Christians and the Moors, but not between the Jews and the Moors. In Aragon a meeting is celebrated with the representatives from the three groups. A converso makes an oath of obedience to king Ferdinand. But other furious conversos assassinate the Dominican monk who would preside the Inquisition in Aragon. The Jewish conspirators are caught, decapitated and their heads shown on stakes.

In the next episode non-Christians are about to be expelled from Malaga. It shows the Iberian blunder in a nutshell: to believe that sprinkling drops of water on Moors or Jews will solve the problem once and for all. (Remember that a thousand years earlier the Iberian Goths fell into the Galilean cult, thus abandoning their healthy anti-miscegenation laws.) Instead of using the race standard, a powerful Spaniard says that they must “expel from Malaga all those who don’t believe in our lord Jesus Christ.” The converso Cabrera and Abraham Senior are worried about the fate of hundreds of Jews in the Alhambra, that will be invaded soon. Here we go again with the non-racial standard in the words of Isabelle about a boy, the heir of the emir who had fallen under her power:

“Today Juan de Granada has been baptized. He was born under the yoke of Islam but thank God he has escaped its clutches. He has reached our faith and as our brother in Christ we welcome him with joy.”

“Our brother in Christ”… This reminds me the words of how American Christians speak about the Negro. In this film shot, just when pronouncing those solemn words in court before the noblemen, a very dark Christian woman is seen beside the mother of the baptized boy.

Ferdinand gets sick during the military campsite and Isabella takes her Jewish physician to the war zone. Later it is told that 450 Jews of Malaga are now slaves: most of them women who talk Arabic or Hebrew and dress like Morisco women. Cabrera and Abraham speak of the huge quantities of gold that they must gather to free them.

Then the episode takes a nasty turn: blood libel. An innocent Jew is taken before Torquemada accused of kidnapping and ritually murdering a Christian kid. (Incidentally, on this subject I disagree with both Andrew Hamilton and Harold Covington. Like MacDonald, I believe that those kind of charges were spurious, although they reflected the legit rage of the old Christians.) On the rack of torture the accused Jew is, once more, depicted as an innocent sacrificial lamb. You have to watch the series and see the face of the man while the Inquisitor wants to extract a confession about “the abduction and murder of that innocent creature.” Alas for the Jew they continue the torture as he cannot confess a crime that he didn’t commit. Torquemada doesn’t want to hear that those who owed money to the Jew invented the accusation and the influential Abraham Senior is allowed to visit the accused in the dungeon.

I must say here that the physiognomic distinction between Christians and Jews is erased in the series. Any viewer would only see two Iberian whites talking to each other in the above scene between Abraham and the accused. This differs from the iconography of the peninsula of those centuries when the races were painted together (e.g., here).

Later Abraham Senior speaks with Torquemada and, naturally, the scriptwriters put Abraham as noble and Torquemada as wicked—black and white. Says Abraham when talking to the accused:

“You know that from time to time the Gentile rage is unleashed against us.”

After another discussion between Abraham and the accused, the latter is left crying with a little face that makes most viewers feel pity.

Christopher Columbus appears many times in these later episodes. The scriptwriter and director make him say, “…a Granada that agonizes under the yoke of Castile.” Soon after Ferdinand and Isabelle tell her physician, “Remember that in your hands is the life of the heir of Castile and Aragon,” the ill son of the kings whom then Jew saves.

More tortures are shown on the poor thing until he claims something that a Mesoamerican would have said in real life, “I was. I murdered that boy. I opened his chest to pull out and eat his heart…” Then Torquemada makes him confess who are his “accomplices” and the poor thing has no other choice but to incriminate other ethnic Jews to end the torture.

A little later in the episode the words of Columbus expose, once more, European idiocy in a nutshell: “…to extend the Catholic faith into unknown lands.” A Spartan, a Visigoth or a NS German would have said instead, “to extend our race into unknown lands.” Extermination or expulsion of non-whites into a corner of the continent was well beyond the Christian sensibilities of those times. Thus the blunder of baptizing Moors in the Iberian Peninsula would be committed again, at the other side of the Atlantic, but this time in a whole continent and on a massive scale. (What was the point of allowing such measures against the kikes if Iberian whites could not protect their own ethnicity in America? Shouldn’t a solution to the kike problem automatically mean a solution to further Iberian white decline? Food for thought for those who still stick to their monocausal monologues in their echo chambers.)

In the following scene Torquemada (left on the pic) launches a speech against the accused, two Jews and six conversos that, in his mind, murdered the Christian child ritually. They are to be burned alive at the stake in addition to confiscating their goods. The Grand Inquisitor even humiliates them further by making them know that the confiscated funds would be used in a newly founded Christian monastery.

torquemada

The whole script of this second season that started in September and finished this month follows the lachrymose, now mandatory version of the history of Jewry. Overall, the reviews of Isabel have welcomed the series, given the number of nominations and awards, both national and international.

Intellectually, traditional Spaniards have been completely disarmed to talk back that the actions of the Inquisition are understandable, and even positive, when viewed from the viewpoint of the clash between two ethnic groups. Within their current, postconciliar Catholic paradigm they will never be able to prevent further demoralization. On the other hand, if Separation and Its Discontents was translated and became a bestseller in Spain, they could understand this historical conflict.

The final episode depicts the peaceful takeover of the Alhambra and has Isabelle hesitating about establishing the Inquisition in Granada. The queen also says, “It is a great opportunity to bring our faith to the Indies.”

It may seem incredible but with the benefit of hindsight—having read MacDonald’s book, which PDF is linked above—the pro-Western reader has to conclude that, leaving all PC BS propaganda aside, Torquemada was the real hero of this story. He is shown as telling the queen:

“The Jews are the real danger to our faith, the source of all heresies. You must remove the evil from our kingdoms. Once Islam has been defeated they know it is their turn. Teach them a lesson! It’s time!”

Words that have to be pronounced again in Europe once the Eurabian problem is solved later in this century! Ferdinand discusses with Isabelle for the first time the final solution to the Jewish problem: expelling them all, and reminds the queen that they have already been expelled from France and other kingdoms. Torquemada wants to expel every ethnic Jew; Isabelle wants to spare those who would embrace Christianity. For Torquemada it is clear that it is impossible to really convert a Jew.

On 31 March of 1492 the expulsion starts with a public declamation by Torquemada: “We demand that all Jews get out from our kingdom” while sad Jews listen. Later in this last episode king Ferdinand says, “The Jews will never disown their faith.” Then the exile is visually depicted.

expulsion judas

“I need you. Who will heal my family now?” tells a concerned Isabelle to her parting physician.

The season ends with this episode #26, with a stunning image of the three caravels of the first of Columbus’ expeditions parting into the Atlantic ocean. Those who know Spanish can watch the entire series for free: here.

Empty-headed Spaniards

Toledo-Cruce-De-Destinos-hd

Further to my post “Empty-headed Britons.” Of the television series I have been reviewing, I have found the first season of the Spanish-produced Toledo: Cruce de Destinos, premiered the last year, as the most offensive to date. It starts with a stunning scene in a Spanish garden of a wealthy family of whites in the 13th century. After some idyllic moments the family is attacked by the Moors with women, adolescents and children being assassinated in cold blood. One would expect that when the men return and see their families butchered the plot of the entire series would be revenge and expulsion of the Moors, right?

Nope! The whole series is an attempt to demonize the patriot Spaniards of such century, some of them real historical figures, that tried to expel the enemies by force. No kidding: that is exactly the ethos behind the script.

King Alfonso X of Castile is filmed as talking about “el sueño de la convivencia de las tres culturas” (“the dream of the coexistence between the three cultures”), meaning the Christian, the Muslim and the Jewish cultures as his ultimate dream for Castile. The series are perfectly Manichean: the hawks who crave for a war against the Moors and the Semites are absolutely evil; and the multicultural doves are the goods guys of the films. The first season actually ends with King Alfonso saying that his son Sancho, the hawk, is going into exile for life while the dove, his son Fernando, will inherit the crown to pursue his dream.

The whole series can be sketched thus:

• The Moors are revealed as the cruel invaders that they were in real history

• The Christian patriots who hate them are depicted as intolerant bigots throughout all episodes

• No single piece of mischief—nothing at all!—is ever committed by the Jews, who are always depicted as innocent doves

In a heated discussion in the first episode, the very one that depicts realistically the butchery of a white family, the Queen Violant of Aragon gives a speech to the main hawks of the story, the Archbishop of Toledo and the Count Miranda. The Queen says that Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek. Most surrealist of all is that the central character of these Spanish series, Rodrigo Pérez de Ayala whose eldest son and wife were among the victims of the butchery in first scene, sides the pacifist monarchs against the hawks!

Then Rodrigo returns to his home after not seeing for ten years what was left of his family. Who is the first guest to share Rodrigo’s table? Abraham Rubini, a Jew: his best friend throughout the series in fact. So much so that Rodrigo has a conversation with Abraham almost ignoring his surviving family who had been entranced to see that his father had finally came home after a decade…

Toledo serie estreno I

The hawks Sancho and the Count Miranda are depicted as almost rapists or as rationalizing or excusing the rape of an innocent commoner girl. And—typical—the casting directors chose a very stunning actress to interpret the role of a Moorish woman: the one who speaks for the Muslim side (in the pic, sat at the front center).

In another scene, Abraham (extreme left in the pic) tells Rodrigo that Rodrigo’s role in the Castilian government must be “to defend the weak” of Toledo against the hawks. And in a discussion between Abraham and the Archbishop (standing at the right with his hands together) inside the royal court, the Christian is depicted as pig-headed and the Jew as wise. The richest Muslim of Toledo is also depicted as wise and concerned about the inexcusable intolerance of the Archbishop. It’s the Archbishop the one who incited a mob of fanatic Christians to attack the candid scholars working in Toledo’s school of translators, a school headed by Abraham. Afterwards there’s a scene where the hawk Sancho cowardly tries to stab the dove Fernando in the back, also in the royal court.

It is unnecessary continuing to recount more outrageous scenes, except adding that the series also contain typical scenes of soft-porn that have become so fashionable in recent TV series.

What alarms me is that Spaniards are largely clueless about what is happening to their media. Yes: it is true that in the blogosphere some Spanish critics have pointed out that the historical King Alfonso, also called The Wise, did not participate in such alliance of civilizations between Christians, Muslims and Jews, and that the series puts Toledo as a mainly Muslim city when really at the time they were a distinct minority in the city, surpassed even by the Jewish quarter. The TV story “invents a conspiracy of radical anti-Muslim Christians against King Alfonso, when in fact there was no such company.” But what made me laugh was a comment in “La serie Toledo” stating (my translation) that “the series could have been called ‘Zapatero in the country of the Alliance of Civilizations’.”

Even these critics don’t see the obvious: that patriot Christians have been painted with black; warrior Muslims with grey, and the Jews of Toledo with white! (In contrast to these fictional white doves, those interested to learn how the Jews behaved in historical Spain are advised to read the pertinent sections on the subject in Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents.)

The Bible in a nutshell

Kevin MacDonald’s first book of his trilogy opened the doors to my understanding of what the Christians call the “Old Testament,” the sacred book of the Jews. In a nutshell, the Old Testament message promises a strictly racial ethno-state for a Semitic tribe: a message by Semitic writers for a specific Semitic people.

In contrast, the New Testament message for the gentiles seems to say, also in a nutshell, An ethno-state for me but not for thee; your reign is not of this world.

Jesus (and by this I don’t mean the historical Jesus—whoever the hell he was, if he did exist after all—but the Jesus of the gospel) is presented to us as an universalist. At least that’s how the Jew Saul (the most influential author of the New Testament as far as the extent of his writing compared to the other apostles), called “Saint Paul” by the Christians, preached his good news. In Galatians for example he says: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

In other words, throughout the OT the Jews teach ethno-centricity for the Jewish people, but in the NT the Jew teaches universalism for us gentiles. Right? That’s the Holy Bible in a fucking little nutshell.

Below, a recent exchange on Christianity in a non-American, racialist blog:

saint-paul-preaching-in-athens


Saint Paul delivering the Areopagus Sermon in Athens, by Raphael, 1515.






aijahlon68 says…

I was banned for life from Stormfront.org by a Christian Identity zealot / moderator, for having the audacity to write a post saying that Yeshua was a Jew.

Christian Identity, and Christianity as a whole, represents the biggest disadvantage the white race has in overcoming the Jewish problem. Christianity (in any form) is nothing more than self-inflicted Jewish Supremacy. As a race, we will never overcome the Jewish problem, until the Christian problem is solved first. How does one battle against emotions fueled by religious devotion, which is the most dangerous kind of devotion, because it leaves no room for questions or common sense, and is devoid of truth.

Waking a race of people up from a deep dream state based on Jewish lies would truly be a miracle, but impossible as it seems, there must be a way, and those of us who are fully awake need to find it.


mk8 says…

Attacking Christianity is a bad idea before every other problem has been dealt with. Even Hitler said so, and we all like Hitler, don’t we? There would just be some form of spiritual vacuum which would soon be filled by Islam and various other dangerous cults. As it stands now Christianity is actually the least of all evils.

Varg Vikernes says…

No it is not a bad idea at all. Christianity is the problem we have today. Christianity is not the least of all evils; it is the indirect cause of all evils. The Christians allow their “chosen people” special rights to destroy us all. If it hadn’t been for the Christians the Jews would not have been able to do anything to us at all. Go to Thulean Perspective for more on that, and search for posts about Christianity.

Christians even revolted against the NS regime, in 1942, causing instability and many other problems too, so maybe Hitler should have dealt with them first?

If Europe had been Pagan we would not have had any of the serious problems we have today in the first place.

mk8 says…

Varg, you are right that much of the resistance against the Third Reich was by Christians, and their grip on the churches was not tight enough. Hitler was not that wrong about leaving Christianity alone though, as he saw what happened to the Alldeutsche Vereinigung in Austria-Hungary (a political party supporting the Anschluss of the German part of Austria to Germany). The movement fell apart soon after they started to openly attack the church, failing to reach the common people and losing most of their followers. Even if it was the right thing to do, it was a very bad strategic move in hindsight.

On a smaller scale, I’ll just assume the same thing happens in places like Stormfront.org. It’s an American site after all, it must reek of Christians. Confronting them with the truth about their religion is like a cold shower for them. Maybe it’s not so bad to be banned from there after all…

Criminal History of Christianity – IV

Below, a few excerpts from the first chapter by Karlheinz Deschner of his maximum opus, the ten-volume Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (in English, “Criminal History of Christianity”):


Deschners maximus opus

Once obtained the high priesthood, Jason established in Jerusalem a gymnasium or ephebeión, and raised the possibility of bringing the political and religious situation in the capital with the numerous Hellenistic cities of the country, turning Jerusalem into a Greek polis.

This provoked a reaction from the traditionalists, who saw a menace for the old Jewish laws and beliefs. Unrest, riots and street altercations grew, all of which triggered strong repressive measures by the energetic Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV, who was trying to consolidate his shaky kingdom by introducing a syncretic religion that unified the peoples.

He also desecrated the Temple in Jerusalem (in 168 he reformed the great altar of burnt offering and laid right there an altar to Olympian Zeus); banned the Jewish religion and burned the city, but not before looting the treasury of the Temple and taking 1,800 talents from it. (Centuries later, the painter Raphael was commissioned by Pope Leo X to solemnize such a significant episode in one of the walls of the Vatican.)

According to Elias Bickermann, if the stringent measures against the Jews by Antiochus IV had taken effect, it would not only have meant the end of Judaism, but also “would have prevented the rise of Christianity and Islam.” Our imagination almost fails to conceive a world so different…

____________

My two cents:

Pope Leo’s action reminds me a passage of Nietzsche:

Here it becomes necessary to call up a memory that must be a hundred times more painful to Germans. The Germans have destroyed for Europe the last great harvest of civilization that Europe was ever to reap—the Renaissance. Is it understood at last, will it ever be understood, what the Renaissance was? The transvaluation of Christian values: an attempt with all available means, all instincts and all the resources of genius to bring about a triumph of the opposite values, the more noble values…

To attack at the critical place, at the very seat of Christianity, and there enthrone the more noble values—that is to say, to insinuate them into the instincts, into the most fundamental needs and appetites of those sitting there… I see before me the possibility of a perfectly heavenly enchantment and spectacle: it seems to me to scintillate with all the vibrations of a fine and delicate beauty, and within it there is an art so divine, so infernally divine, that one might search in vain for thousands of years for another such possibility; I see a spectacle so rich in significance and at the same time so wonderfully full of paradox that it should arouse all the gods on Olympus to immortal laughter: Cæsar Borgia as pope!… Am I understood?… Well then, that would have been the sort of triumph that I alone am longing for today: by it Christianity would have been swept away!

What happened? A German monk, Luther, came to Rome. This monk, with all the vengeful instincts of an unsuccessful priest in him, raised a rebellion against the Renaissance in Rome… Instead of grasping, with profound thanksgiving, the miracle that had taken place: the conquest of Christianity at its capital—instead of this, his hatred was stimulated by the spectacle. A religious man thinks only of himself. Luther saw only the depravity of the papacy at the very moment when the opposite was becoming apparent: the old corruption, the peccatum originale, Christianity itself, no longer occupied the papal chair! Instead there was life! Instead there was the triumph of life! Instead there was a great yea to all lofty, beautiful and daring things!… And Luther restored the church.

Also, in my review of one of Kevin MacDonald trilogy books, I said this about Antiochus IV’s actions:

We cannot celebrate these victories precisely for the reason that both Kemp and Pierce explained so well: neither the Greeks nor the Romans exist today. (And incidentally, what about celebrating the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492?) What we call contemporary Greeks or Romans are the product of centuries of blood mixing that devalued not only the genotype of the original Indo-European population, but their extended phenotype as well: the Greco-Roman ethos and the pagan, classical mythology. Those Greeks and Romans who embraced Christianity were a totally different breed compared to the pure Aryans of Sparta or the austere Romans of the pre-imperial Republic.

Antiokhos_IV

Bust of Antiochus IV

MacDonald himself acknowledges on page 190 that “the Jews have continued as a creative race into the present, while the Greeks gradually merged with the barbarians and lost their distinctiveness—a point remarkably similar to Chamberlain’s ‘chaos of peoples’ in which the decline of the ancient world is attributed to loss of racial purity.” Conversely, I would say that since the Jews have conserved their genotype almost intact throughout the millennia they are able to celebrate their Maccabean revolt… in New York as if it was yesterday! In other words, had we Meditarraneans preserved our genes intact, we might still be celebrating Antiochus’ victories over the tribe. Or at least if we knew our history with the same passion that Jews know theirs, we might still be celebrating the fall of the temple of Jerusalem in 70 AD, or the more recent expulsion of the tribe from the Iberian peninsula.

Hadn’t the Anglos behaved as they did in the decade before I was born, presently we could be celebrating all those historical events thanks to Uncle Adolf’s transvaluating lead…

Pinocchio, 2

Spanish version of this article: here, an article originally written on November 2012. Why I am starting this new series is explained: here.

>Pinocho y Alice Miller


Mankind sees things in photographic negative about childrearing: it’s all backwards, and only those who have deeply assimilated Alice Miller’s legacy have noticed it. Perhaps the most splendid paradigm, in stories, of what Miller called poisonous pedagogy or adult-child projection is precisely the original story by Carlo Collodi.

Pinocchio is nothing more than the transformation of the pure feelings of a child into adult madness; for example, by going to schools where children’s souls are murdered and the child is socialized so that he finally sacrifices his sanity in search for the affection of parental figures, symbolized by the carpenter and the Blue Fairy.

Let’s see. The heading of Chapter IV states: “The story of Pinocchio and the Talking Cricket, in which one sees that bad children do not like to be corrected by those who know more than they do.”

Head over heels—everything in photographic negative! How I wish that my Whispering Leaves were sold out so that I could, by now, be writing the book I had dreamt since the beginning: pure narrative without using hundreds of pages to introduce the reader to the legacy of Miller, deMause and the critics of psychiatry.

Here is a passage of the Collodi tale, poisonous pedagogy in its purest form:

“Woe to boys who refuse to obey their parents and run away from home!” [Chapter IV]

The passage obviously presupposes that the parents (who beat their children or torment them emotionally and ocassionally even rape them) are always right and benign with their children: the opposite of what we saw in the previous entry showing the dark side of Geppetto, a side only noticed by the neighbors who knew him in the story. And what is worse, the domestic abuse is often supported by the abuse at school, so Pinocchio says to the cricket:

“If I stay here the same thing will happen to me which happens to all other boys and girls. They are sent to school, and whether they want to or not, they must study…” [Ibid]

To which the voice of the system, symbolized by the cricket who wants to instill a consciousness of black pedagogy into the child, responds:

“If you do not like going to school, why don’t you at least learn a trade…?” [Ibid]

That is a great insult; not bona fide council as adults often utter these sort of words not out of genuine empathy for the kids.

When I was a child I wanted to be a filmmaker. Kubrick, who dropped out from school, was my idol. Alas, in my late teens my parents put me in a medieval school system and I could not become either (1) a filmmaker or (2) get what they wanted: a college degree either. The mandatory school system was the barrier that destroyed my professional life. Unlike Kubrick, no “Uncle Jacob” appeared in my life to sponsor my filming career since Christian families don’t help their relatives as much as kike families do (cf. MacDonald’s first book of his trilogy).

More recently, this year in fact, I heard my brother angrily telling his child that if my nephew did not want to study at a conventional school, he should seek a trade, and mentioned a supermarket boy (something similar to what the Cricket proposed). My brother’s advice was not directed in an empathic way: it was an obvious act of psychological aggression as no one in his right mind wants to be an errand kid that only earns a few cents.

Going back to my life, if my parents had any empathy with the potential filmmaker I was as a kid, they would have supported my immigration to the US, and instead of spending money at a Mexican school, send me those scarce funds to complete my expenses near Hollywood. But no: the unconscious desire of my mother was to destroy the individualistic mind of her firstborn, as I recount in my Leaves.

Disney’s film is nonsense intended to beautify the crudeness of the Italian text. In Collodi’s original story the cricket’s advice was so insulting that Pinocchio grabbed a hammer of Geppetto’s workshop and threw it toward the damned bug, who “stayed stiff and flat against the wall”: precisely what I did as an adolescent.

Parrott’s article: a clarification

I don’t claim to have studied carefully Matt Parrott’s, “The Causes of Causes, a Subterranean Perspective,” published yesterday at Youth Network. But after posting this reply here at WDH, which only deals with a few paragraphs where Matt mentions me, I’ll do it. Parrott said:

I believe that Chechar’s mistaken in identifying Christianity as the root cause, and I believe the examples from Byzantium and Medieval Europe, examples where the church’s true interests and influences could actually be observed, confirm that Nietzschean models of suicidal ressentiment and exegeses of multicultural humanist globalism are fundamentally flawed.

Two different places: Constantinople and Europe.

Byzantium cannot be fairly compared to Medieval Europe insofar as, by the time it fell in the 15th century, the city had already suffered a great deal of mongrelization—a mongrelization that undoubtedly contributed to its decline and eventual fall. (That Parrott puts the two together corroborates my view that white nationalists should read the two histories, by William Pierce and Arthur Kemp, that have been written about the white race.)

Medieval Europe is a more complex subject because, unlike Constantinople, it was not a mongrel empire. But even here Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents shows that the broadly positive role that the Church played by elaborating a collectivist defense mechanism to counter Jewish influence was not exactly the best way to do it. In that book MacDonald also says that National Socialism (a movement which left Christianity behind) was the most dangerous enemy that Judaism has confronted in its entire existence. In other words, from the point of view of ethno-preservation the German movement was an improvement over the defense mechanism elaborated by the Roman Catholic Church against Jewry. (See my review of MacDonald’s book here.)

I mention MacDonald’s second book of his trilogy because, even though I agree with him that Christendom more or less protected Europe from alien influence, the protection was not enough, not nearly enough, as shown in the fate of post-Christendom Europe and precisely because of the universalist ideals proclaimed by the Church.

Chechar’s also unconvinced by the Jews as Primary Cause model. Being a White Mexican, he perceives the problem from the vantage point of a White civilization which choked and died on introgression and decadence, largely devoid of Jewish influence. He’s settled on a Christianity as Primary Cause model, answering the question of suicide affirmatively.

I don’t say “Christianity as Primary Cause,” and my analysis goes beyond Mexico. Let’s talk about Europe and remind my readers that, during my previous debates with Pat Hannagan, he conceded that while the Iberian whites committed suicidal mestization in the Americas they remained genetically pure in the Iberian Peninsula itself. But my friend Pat was misinformed. The peninsular Portuguese violated the “One-drop Rule” to the point that contemporary genetic studies reveal a Negro gene in their blood absent in other Europeans (see e.g., the first comment after this post). In other words, even leaving Mexico and Latin America aside, many Iberian whites committed racial suicide within their homelands, and both Christianity and the “One Ring” (see below) are the culprits.

The Catholic Church that Chechar envisions destroying Latin America and the Protestant Yankees Hunter Wallace envisions destroying Dixie are merely the zombie carcasses of Christianity, spearheads of the capitalist impulse to expand into their respective societies and steamroll over all the institutional and ideological obstacles to the profit which feeds the power structure.

I agree with Parrot that the “economics over race policies” are a gigantic factor of white decline, perhaps as big as the axiological meme that’s killing both Mediterraneans and Nordics. Therefore, I am not a Christian reductionist so to speak. Yes: I blame the egalitarian software that we may call the Christian / Secular Christian problem (liberalism run amok after the French Revolution) and, as I just said, the One Ring of greed and power (economics over race—again, see both Pierce’s and Kemp’s magnificent histories of the white race for an explanation of the “Ring”). These factors constitute part of the ingredients of the formula that’s killing us—plus the Jewish ingredient.

From this point of view the Jewish problem would be a very strong catalyst that has accelerated the process in the last centuries since the emancipation of Jewry, but certainly not the only “active ingredient” of the brew (what monocausalists believe).

So you can see that my position goes far beyond both Christian reductionism and Jewish reductionism. I believe that individualism, universalism, weak ethnocentrism (“hardwired” characteristics in the White psyche since prehistoric times) + egalitarianism, liberalism, capitalism (cultural “software” after the Revolution which ironically strengthened Christian axiology) + the Jewish culture of critique in the 20th century = a truly lethal brew for the White peoples.

By the way, Hunter Wallace has also responded to Parrott’s article, but he naturally focuses on other issues.

Judeo reductionism – why?

In a recent comment Sebastian Ernst Ronin commented on one of my phrases: “Re Although many white nationalists abhor the phrase ‘We are doing it to ourselves,’ it is nonetheless us who have a loose screw that needs a little tightening up.” And he added: “You are preaching to the wind.”

Although Ronin is right that I am preaching to the deaf, it is still a pity that not even those white nationalists who are very conscious of the Jewish Question have studied carefully the whole trilogy of Kevin MacDonald on Judaism.

Why? I discovered the pro-white movement in 2009 and have already read the trilogy together with some of the most important books authored by those who advocate white interests (and, incidentally, a couple of days ago I ordered Tom Sunic’s latest book).

I would recommend the Judeo reductionists, those who still are under the impression that the subversive tribe is behind all our woes, to study carefully MacDonald’s trilogy. You will find out that he is not a “monocausalist.” First, obtain a hard copy of MacDonald’s first trilogy book, A People that Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples, and read it from cover to cover, making copious notes, starting with the 2002 preface.

That whites are whites’ deadliest enemy—“No Jews, no Arabs, no communists have done so much damage to the White gene pool as Whites themselves” (Sunic)—is also suggested on pages xliv-xlix of MacDonald’s preface to A People that Shall Dwell Alone, of which I’ll cite a few passages:

OldShipWindowPuritans forbade the worship of Christmas, both in England and in Massachusetts, and whipped, burned, and exiled those they found to be heretics, all the while believing themselves to be the beleaguered defenders of liberty…

At that time certain religious non-conformists, especially Anabaptists and Quakers, were still prevented from settling in New England and imprisoned, tortured and even executed if they returned there.

The above image, a window from Old Ship Church, a Puritan meetinghouse in Hingham, Massachusetts doesn’t appear in MacDonald’s book; I added it.

MacDonald reaches similar conclusions to what Brad Griffin, the admin of Occidental Dissent, has been saying for a couple of years: that the Yankees and the Jews have long been on the same page. MacDonald wrote:

Whatever the political and economic complexities that led to the Civil War, it was the Yankee moral condemnation of slavery that inspired the rhetoric and rendered the massive carnage of closely related Anglo-Americans on behalf of slaves from Africa justifiable in the minds of Puritans. Militarily, the war with the Confederacy rendered the heaviest sacrifice in lives and property ever made by Americans (Phillips 1989, 477). Puritan moral fervor and its tendency to justify draconian punishment of evil doers can also be seen in the comments of “the Congregationalist minister at Henry Ward Beecher’s Old Plymouth Church in New York [who] went so far as to call for ‘exterminating the German people… the sterilization of 10,000,000 German soldiers and the segregation of the woman’” (in Phillips 1999, 556).

If this is not whites having a pretty loose screw, what is it? Keep in mind that the American Civil War happened before the Jews took over the American media.

Kevin MacDonald’s trilogy

The second book of Kevin MacDonald’s study on Jewry, Separation and its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (1994/2002), the first of his trilogy to be translated to German, is my favorite of MacDonald’s three academic works that I read in more than two years. Professor MacDonald is the foremost scholar on the Jewish question. In Separation and its Discontents (hereafter SAID) he wrote:

Western societies, unlike prototypical Jewish cultures, do not have a primitive concern with racial purity. Rather, concern about racial purity emerges only in the late stages of Jewish-gentile group conflict…

Despite a great deal of commonality among Western anti-Semitic movements, there was a great difference between the universalistic, assimilatory tendencies of traditional Western Christianity and the exclusivistic, racialist program of National Socialism. Indeed, we have seen that beginning in the 19th century an important aspect of German anti-Semitic ideology was a criticism of Western universalism and the development of peculiarly German conceptions of Christianity. A critical component of official National Socialist ideology, as represented in the thought of Alfred Rosenberg, was the idea that “the twin forces of disintegration, namely universalism and individualism, act in perpetual conflict with the Germanic concept of race.” In this regard, National Socialism was indeed profoundly anti-Western. In rejecting both universalism and individualism, National Socialism resembled, much more closely than did medieval Western collectivist Christianity, its mirror image rival, Judaism. [page 196]

In a previous chapter MacDonald had written:

We shall see that with the rise of the National Socialist movement in Germany, the universalist themes of Western Christianity were completely overthrown in favor of a full-blown racialist ideology of the ingroup. In Chapter Five I will argue that National Socialism is a true mirror-image of Judaism. Not surprisingly, it was also the most dangerous enemy that Judaism has confronted in its entire existence. [page 133]

One of the hypothesis advanced in SAID provides food for thought. MacDonald wrote, “I propose that the Christian church in late antiquity was in its very essence the embodiment of a powerful anti-Semitic movement…” (page 112). This is something I had never heard of, and reminds me my first readings of psychohistory and Lloyd deMause’s insights on why the Christ archetype galvanized the population of the ancient world, although MacDonald’s hypothesis is totally distinct and is presented from an altogether distant point of view. But after digesting what both deMause and MacDonald say, for the first time I feel I am starting to comprehend facets of Christianity that would have never occurred to me from a conventional reading to history. If MacDonald is right, the Roman Catholic Church was the earliest attempt toward a type of society that we may call collectivism for European-derived peoples.

Although Christianity always held universalist ideals at its core, it nonetheless fulfilled its role of impeding, as did the Muslim nations, that Judaism became a destructive force for the indigenous culture of the Late Roman Empire and the Early Middle Ages. One of the facts that I learnt in SAID is that most restrictions enacted against Jewry, initiated in the period from Eusebius to Justinian, were still active throughout Christendom until the French Revolution hit the continent with its egalitarian fury. It was precisely the so-called Enlightenment (that presently some Western dissidents are starting to call “the Dark Enlightenment”) what inspired the founding fathers of the United States of America. And contrary to those white nationalists who still insult the memory of Adolf Hitler and the movement he created, I would claim that the mortal sin of the French Revolution, the emancipation of Jewry, was not properly atoned in Europe until the arrival of a specifically racial ideology: National Socialism.

But not only Nazi Germany has been demonized in the public mind. The Inquisition is widely regarded as a black page in the history of the Church even by the most Catholic individuals that I know. In contrast to such view MacDonald presents us with a radical reevaluation of what was precisely the role of the Inquisition. On page 147 he states: “I here develop the view that the Spanish Inquisition was fundamentally an authoritarian, collectivist, and exclusionary movement that resulted from resource and reproductive competition with Jews, and particularly crypto-Jews posing as Christians.” One could even argue that, thanks to the Inquisition, for three-hundred years before the movement of independence that gave birth to Mexico, New Spain (1521-1821) was Judenfrei.

While reading SAID I could not escape the thought that whites are un-insightful because, unlike the Jews and with the exception of William Pierce and Arthur Kemp (see the long chapters in this book quoting them), very few have knowledge of the history of their race. If we take into account that, in one of their holydays, New York Hassidic Jews celebrate their victory over the ancient Greeks who tried to assimilate them millennia ago, a basic question comes to mind: Why don’t we celebrate the victory of Antiochus IV over the Jews, or Titus’ conquest of Jerusalem?

Bust of Antiochus IV

We do not celebrate these victories precisely for the reason that both Kemp and Pierce explain so well: neither the Greeks nor the Romans exist today. What we call contemporary Greeks or Romans are the product of centuries of blood mixing that devalued not only the genotype of the original Indo-European population, but their extended phenotype as well: the Greco-Roman hard ethos and their galvanizing mythos mostly reflected in the Homeric tales. The Greeks and Romans who embraced Christianity were a totally different breed of the pure Aryans of Sparta or the austere Latins of the Roman Republic (see e.g., the essays that I translated from Evropa Soberana in later chapters of this book).

MacDonald himself acknowledges on page 190 that “the Jews have continued as a creative race into the present, while the Greeks gradually merged with the barbarians and lost their distinctiveness—a point remarkably similar to Chamberlain’s ‘chaos of peoples’ in which the decline of the ancient world is attributed to loss of racial purity.” Conversely, I would say that since the Jews have conserved their genotype almost intact throughout the millennia they are able to celebrate their Maccabean revolt as if it was yesterday. In other words, had whites preserved their genes intact, some of us might still be celebrating Antiochus’ victories over the subversive tribe; or, if we knew our history with the same passion that Jews know theirs, we might still be celebrating the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem in 70 AD, or the more recent expulsion of the tribe from the Iberian peninsula.

What conventional historians ignore is that, once the Church lost its power to sell a worldview after the late 18th and early 19th centuries, our genetic individualism placed us at the mercy of a collectivist tribe.

Fortunately, the ethno-traitorous West has committed financial blunders in the 20th and 21st centuries. The dollar and all fiat currencies of the West will crash probably in this decade (I am reviewing this essay in 2014), which means that there is hope that some of us will start to understand the Jewish problem in a post-crashed world. On page 10 of SAID MacDonald says that “in congruence with the results of social identity research, anti-Semitism is expected to be most prominent among those most in competition with the Jews and during times of economic crisis.”

Although most readers of MacDonald treasure The Culture of Critique, the third and last of his trilogy on Jewry as their favorite book of this collection, I believe that MacDonald’s work should be read from the beginning. A People that Shall Dwell Alone, Separation and its Discontents and The Culture of Critique can help us, using William Pierce’s metaphor, to “see the forest” with crystal-clear vision.

Remember Pierce’s words? If we don’t try to understand the Jews we can never really understand what is happening to our race and our civilization. Professor MacDonald’s voluminous texts have done the hard work for us—both the trilogy and his webzine The Occidental Observer—in a scholarly and yet entertaining way.

Chechar’s ten must-reads




1. Hellstorm (excerpts here)

Hellstorm is the first book in my list for the reasons explained below this post. Whites will not regain a proper self-esteem unless and until the big lies of omission about the Second World War are exposed with all our heart and being. If the Allied crime is not understood, assimilated and atoned for, my prediction is that the white people will perish.

2. Who We Are (excerpts here)

3. March of the Titans (excerpts here)

It is not enough to know the real history of the century when we were born, as well as the astronomic lies of omission of the academia and the media about the wars. The fact is that, unlike the other races—brown, black and yellow—in the last millennia whites have managed to find themselves as an endangered species more than once, and this has paramount importance to understand our times. I find it incredible that only a few white nationalists have been interested in the history of their race; proof of it is that these two splendid books by Arthur Kemp and William Pierce are not the main bestsellers in the community. (Unlike Kemp’s 2011 edition of March of the Titans, Pierce’s Who We Are is not available in book form—he died before sending the manuscript to the printers.)


4. A People that Shall Dwell Alone

5. Separation and its Discontents

6. The Culture of Critique (prologue here)

The Jewish problem is one of the greatest problems in the western world, and, pace counter-jihadists and other naïve conservatives, no man can be considered mature until he has striven to face it. Therefore, besides readable and very entertaining histories of the white race, a specific study on the Jewish question is fundamental. The above books comprise Kevin MacDonald’s magnum opus on Jewry.

MacDonald’s preface to The Culture of Critique (see link above), which he wrote four years after finishing the trilogy, can be read as a didactic introduction to the whole trilogy.

Presently I am reading the sections of the second book on how otherwise individualist whites elaborated collectivist group strategies in the form of the Early Medieval Church and, more recently, the (aborted) National Socialist movement in Germany. These are mirror images of Judaism as a reaction to a perceived group conflict, precisely what the blogger Svigor has been calling “towards white Zionism.” Although MacDonald’s study is academic, what I am reading now in Separation and its Discontents is pretty captivating. It seems to me that a future movement of white collectivism inspired in these precedents is the only way to racial preservation.



7. The Turner Diaries (excerpts here)

8. The Brigade (excerpts here)

Objective scholarship is not enough to get the picture of what white nationalism is. We also need a thoroughgoing subjective vision, what I call soul-building. We need novels depicting future reactions or group conflicts against the tribe, other non-white invaders and the white traitors. William Pierce’s Turner Diaries inaugurated a literary genre that fills the gap. For those who have no stomach for Pierce’s extermination fantasies I would recommend the best novel of Harold Covington’s quintet, The Brigade, an absolute treat.


9. Toward the White Republic (excerpts here)

This collection of essays authored by Michael O’Meara is the best pamphlet to date on white nationalism. Like the Hellstorm book, we can even send gifts of this slim book to our friends and acquaintances. Unlike most white nationalists, O’Meara is a genuine revolutionary, not a mere reactionary. It is a shame that after being fired by the academia for political incorrectness, as far as I know Professor O’Meara has not found a sponsor within the white movement.


10. Collected essays by F.R. Devlin (example here)

The last “book” of my list has not been published all together, not even online. It’s an imaginary book in my mind containing the best essays of F. Roger Devlin on how feminism has been destroying our morals, our white genotype, phenotype and even our extended phenotype in the latest decades. (Yes: I am old enough to remember the times when the institution of marriage was rock-solid among my relatives.) Those editors in the white movement who are promoting homosexuality ought to mend their ways and, instead of publishing books claiming that “homophobia” is part of the Jewish culture of critique, they should be collecting Devlin’s essays under a single cover. (I confess that hetero-sexual family values are exactly the conscious and unconscious force that drives my mind into the white movement.)

I wish that Devlin’s Collected essays as well as Pierce’s Who We Are be published in hardcovers before the currency crash (coming under Obama’s second term) makes unaffordable any gathering of the best pro-white literature in the market.

Enjoy the reading! After the dollar crashes and the internet is censored you will regret not having a home library!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 240 other followers