Nietzsche on Christianity

Last pages of The Antichrist, which Nietzsche finished on September 30, 1888 but was not published until 1895. Though ellipsis are in the original, I omitted adding more of them between unquoted sentences:




The order of castes, the highest, the dominating law, is merely the ratification of an order of nature, of a natural law of the first rank, over which no arbitrary fiat, no “modern idea,” can exert any influence.

The order of castes, the order of rank, simply formulates the supreme law of life itself; the separation of the three types is necessary to the maintenance of society, and to the evolution of higher types, and the highest types—the inequality of rights is essential to the existence of any rights at all. A right is a privilege. Every one enjoys the privileges that accord with his state of existence. Let us not underestimate the privileges of the mediocre. Life is always harder as one mounts the heights—the cold increases, responsibility increases. A high civilization is a pyramid: it can stand only on a broad base; its primary prerequisite is a strong and soundly consolidated mediocrity.

Whom do I hate most heartily among the rabbles of today? The rabble of Socialists, the apostles to the Chandala, who undermine the workingman’s instincts, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his petty existence—who make him envious and teach him revenge…. Wrong never lies in unequal rights; it lies in the assertion of “equal” rights…. What is bad? But I have already answered: all that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revenge. The anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry…

The harvest is blighted overnight… That which stood there aere perennis, the imperium Romanum, the most magnificent form of organization under difficult conditions that has ever been achieved, and compared to which everything before it and after it appears as patchwork, bungling, dilletantism—those holy anarchists made it a matter of “piety” to destroy “the world,” which is to say, the imperium Romanum, so that in the end not a stone stood upon another. The Christian and the anarchist: both are décadents; both are incapable of any act that is not disintegrating, poisonous, degenerating, blood-sucking; both have an instinct of mortal hatred of everything that stands up, and is great, and has durability, and promises life a future… Christianity was the vampire of the imperium Romanum—overnight it destroyed the vast achievement of the Romans: the conquest of the soil for a great culture that could await its time. Can it be that this fact is not yet understood?

The imperium Romanum that we know, and that the history of the Roman provinces teaches us to know better and better—this most admirable of all works of art in the grand manner was merely the beginning, and the structure to follow was to prove its worth for thousands of years. To this day, nothing on a like scale sub specie aeterni has been brought into being, or even dreamed of! This organization was strong enough to withstand bad emperors: the accident of personality has nothing to do with such things—the first principle of all genuinely great architecture. But it was not strong enough to stand up against the corruptest of all forms of corruption—against Christians… These stealthy worms, which under the cover of night, mist and duplicity, crept upon every individual, sucking him dry of all earnest interest in real things, of all instinct for reality—this cowardly, effeminate and sugar-coated gang gradually alienated all “souls,” step by step, from that colossal edifice, turning against it all the meritorious, manly and noble natures that had found in the cause of Rome their own cause, their own serious purpose, their own pride.

One has but to read Lucretius to know what Epicurus made war upon—not paganism, but “Christianity,” which is to say, the corruption of souls by means of the concepts of guilt, punishment and immortality. He combatted the subterranean cults, the whole of latent Christianity—to deny immortality was already a form of genuine salvation. Epicurus had triumphed, and every respectable intellect in Rome was Epicurean—when Paul appeared… Paul, the Chandala hatred of Rome, of “the world,” in the flesh and inspired by genius—the Jew, the eternal Jew par excellence… What he saw was how, with the aid of the small sectarian Christian movement that stood apart from Judaism, a “world conflagration” might be kindled; how, with the symbol of “God on the cross,” all secret seditions, all the fruits of anarchistic intrigues in the empire, might be amalgamated into one immense power. “Salvation is of the Jews.” Christianity is the formula for exceeding and summing up the subterranean cults of all varieties, that of Osiris, that of the Great Mother, that of Mithras, for instance: in his discernment of this fact the genius of Paul showed itself.

This was his revelation at Damascus: he grasped the fact that he needed the belief in immortality in order to rob “the world” of its value, that the concept of “hell” would master Rome—that the notion of a “beyond” is the death of life… Nihilist and Christian: they rhyme in German, and they do more than rhyme…

The whole labour of the ancient world gone for naught: I have no word to describe the feelings that such an enormity arouses in me. And, considering the fact that its labour was merely preparatory, that with adamantine self-consciousness it laid only the foundations for a work to go on for thousands of years, the whole meaning of antiquity disappears!… To what end the Greeks? to what end the Romans? All the prerequisites to a learned culture, all the methods of science, were already there and had been there for two thousand years! All gone for naught! All overwhelmed in a night, but not by a convulsion of nature! But brought to shame by crafty, sneaking, invisible, anæmic vampires! Not conquered,—only sucked dry!… Hidden vengefulness, petty envy, became master! Everything wretched, intrinsically ailing, and invaded by bad feelings, the whole ghetto-world of the soul was at once on top! One needs but read any of the Christian agitators, for example, St. Augustine, in order to realize, in order to smell, what filthy fellows came to the top.

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.

With this I come to a conclusion and pronounce my judgment. I condemn Christianity; I bring against the Christian church the most terrible of all the accusations that an accuser has ever had in his mouth. It is, to me, the greatest of all imaginable corruptions; it seeks to work the ultimate corruption, the worst possible corruption. The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its depravity; it has turned every value into worthlessness, and every truth into a lie, and every integrity into baseness of soul.

This eternal accusation against Christianity I shall write upon all walls, wherever walls are to be found—I have letters that even the blind will be able to see… I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough,—I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race…

And mankind reckons time from the dies nefastus when this fatality befell—from the first day of Christianity!—Why not rather from its last?—From today?—

Umwertung aller Werte!…

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://chechar.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/nietzsche-on-christianity/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

18 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. You fail to take into account Nietzsche’s polarised world view, a (polarised world view) continues to afflict humanity to this day, nowhere more so than America where practically every American either has their own personal psycho-analyst or have at sometime or other sought the services of a psycho-analyst.
    The polarisation of the mind represents the separation of mind and spirit which leads to the detachment of man/woman from the divine, and is characterised by a condition, the name of which is virtually unknown in the West, but has been known to traditional Japanese doctors and healers for centuries as: “Sankapu.”
    No equivalent word exists in Western medical texts, but this condition is quite prevalent in America and the West.
    In medical parlance, there are two kinds of Sankapu, physical and spiritual, and the spiritual variant of Sankapu is all but impossible to cure because a symptom of this condition is arrogance, which again, afflicts virtually the whole planet. Arrogance is also a symptom of mental and spiritual psychosis.
    The most cogent expression of arrogance as a symptom of Sankapu is spiritual anihilation expressed as atheism, which was a seminal feature of Bolshevik Communism which is/was the brainchild of the: “Patrons of The Synagogue,” the most virulent of whom was Karl Marx and associates, whose handiwork is blood soaked in the pages of history.
    The polarised mind and spiritual anihilation of Nietzsche is perfectly expressed in his own words:

    “This eternal accusation against Christianity I shall write upon all walls, where ever walls are to be found – I have letters that even the blind will be able to see…I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough, – I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race…”

    The polarised mind of Nietzsche as the expression of spiritual anihilation is an irrational human attempt at the anihilation of the Divine. Nietzsche’s spiritual anihilation is the spiritual anihilation of God- Creator – Divinity.
    I have no trouble in recognising the clear influence of the: “Patrons of The Synagogue” in Nietzsche’s writings. Why?
    Because Nietzsche is singular in his attack on Christianity and the influence of Christianity which has and continues to be the ideological nemesis of: “The Patrons of The Synagogue,”
    and especially Talmudic Zionism, the political manifestation and manifesto of Bolshevik Communism, which invented, in communist ideology, the slogan: “God is Dead.”
    Nietzsche’s de-construct of Christianity serves only to prove that Nietzsche could not grasp the fundamental fact that the philosophy of Christianity was not the cause of either the social, political or religious problems that have confronted history.
    The fundamental problem lay with those people who have abused the philosophy of Christianity and the abuse of power and influence together with the psychological nature of the Western psyche which has been and remains predominantly imperialistic and socio-psychopathic, with or without the influence of: “The Patrons of The Synagogue.”
    Accusing the philosophy of Christianity for all of the problems of humanity is to identify the symptom and to completely ignore the cause.
    What Nietzsche sought to achieve in his condemnation of Christianity could easily have applied to all religious/spiritual beliefs including witchcraft and devil worship, and as such, Nietzsche can only ever be a de-construct of: “The Patrons of The Synagogue.”
    In other words, remove the mask of Nietzsche and you will find:”The Patrons of The Synagogue.”
    This is why Nietzsche was so vocal in his hatred and criticism of Christianity and so completely silent in his criticism of Talmudic Zionism, unless someone can prove me wrong.
    Some historians say that Nietzsche suffered from insanity, and it should come as no surprise to know that insanity and spiritual anihilation are the: “Front and Back of the same coin.”
    This is why it is so easy to understand why 6 million Americans fester in corporate prisons while the lunatics (politicians) have completely taken over the asylum, America. So as to avoid any bias,
    the same applies to Britain, by the way, and almost certainly much of the world.

    Saintclair

    • You fail to take into account Nietzsche’s polarised world view

      Nope. I’m just quoting him, not endorsing everything of what he says in The Antichrist.

      Those who are familiar with this blog easily notice that most of my entries are excerpts, long quotations or republished articles written by someone else. When I speak out my mind seriously, I sign the entry with a “by Cesar Tort” hatnote. Search thru this blog and you’ll see in my signed entries what do I think about Christianity. (By the way, my next entries will be excerpts of the best minds I know who have blasted Christianity, a religion and an accompanying axiology which I believe must be totally overcome to save the white race from extinction.)

      I have no trouble in recognising the clear influence of the: “Patrons of The Synagogue” in Nietzsche’s writings… In other words, remove the mask of Nietzsche and you will find: “The Patrons of The Synagogue”.

      With all due respect, this is nonsense. Nietzsche is the philosopher I’ve studied the most and his sources, mostly classical philology, are well established. He got his hatred of Christianity as a result of what his family—a family of severe Protestant theologians and pastors—did to him as a small child. His biography is well documented and I’ve read hundreds of pages about his tragic live.

      Some historians say that Nietzsche suffered from insanity.

      Absolutely true. And I’ve written about it at some threads in Counter Currents. But Nietzsche’s psychotic breakdown happened after he finished all of his work (something similar happened to his father albeit at a younger age).

      • Chechar,
        You have completely glossed over one of your more salient comments:”Nietzsche is the philosopher I’ve studied the most and his sources, mostly classical philology, are well established.
        He got his hatred of Christianity as a result of what his family – a family of severe Protestant theologians and pastors – did to him as a small child. His biography is well documented and I’ve read hundreds of pages about his tragic life.”
        This reinforces what I said: “Accusing the philosophy of Christianity
        for all of the problems of humanity is to identify (attack) the symptom and to completely ignore the cause.”
        This is the reason why Nietzsche’s hatred of Christianity is so symptomatic of psychotic dualism which attacks the perceived symptom and completely ignores the cause which you cite as his parents psychotic? religious fanaticism.
        I do not deny that religious fanaticism can seriously impair the psychological function – 50 million Americans are afflicted with this condition – but can this be a casus belli alone for such an extreme reaction and hatred to and of Christianity?
        I had Roman Catholic (Biblical) dogma rammed down my throat as a very young boy but I did not develop a psychotic hatred of or for Christianity.
        Whilst the influence of:”The Patrons of The Synagogue” may not be overtly admitted to in Nietzsche’s works, Nietzsche’s hatred of Christianity certainly served the interests of: “The Patrons of The Synagogue,” and as such, dare I say, a bond of “spiritual anihilation” exists between the two.
        Nietzsche’s hatred of Christianity: “This eternal accusation against Christianity I shall write upon all walls…..” was the mirror image of his own spiritual anihilation which he reinforced by his usage of the word: “ETERNAL.” Eternal accusation, eternal hatred, which not only goes beyond the irrational, but is ETERNAL condemnation and hatred of God -Creator -Divinity if you accept that all religions are an expression of the Divine and a flawed human attempt to understand and rationalise the Creative Principle in Nature as the Eternal Order of The Universe – The Creator Made Manifest.
        Why not just accept a lifetime of accusation and hatred?

        Saintclair

      • Saintclair,

        At the risk of hurting your feelings, I must ask if you have read the entry “Fuck Christianity!” linked almost at the top of this blog. In this very minute, there’s a Papal Mass here in backward Mexico: with an Aryan, German Pope being watched, literally, by millions of brown, devout Untermenschen—whose mass production started half a millennia ago when another Pope OKed the bachelor, white conquerors to marry the Amerindians.

        Although Nietzsche did not talk about race, Christianity, and particularly Catholicism, is directly responsible for the mestization of the whole American subcontinent.

        Let me put it this way: The prize for saving the white race from extinction is apostasy. And by this I don’t only mean apostasy from Church dogma, but from its axiology as well.

  2. “By the way, my next entries will be excerpts of the best minds I know who have blasted Christianity”

    Then it’ll be interesting to hear what you have to say about Christopher Hitchens.

    • The late Hitchens is not a heavy weight according to my standards. Mark Steyn put it beautifully on TV. When referring to Hitchens, Steyn said ironically that Nietzsche at least respected God, and mentioned sacred music and Christian art that Hitchens did not seem to fully appreciate. With the exception of a couple of sentences by the late Alice Miller, I cannot see “profound critics” of Christianity in this superficial, silly century.

  3. Christopher spoke a few times of his respect for devotional music, the transcendence of the cathedral and religious art and poetry — and remarked that it would be a pity to be without them, that we would be less of a civilization to be without them. He also said that their was no reasonable evidence for a supervising supreme being, that this argument was over at least a hundred years ago, going on to add that we already know what unceasing invigilation and praise is like .. it would be like living in North Korea except at least you can die in North Korea. You should read more Hitchens.

    • What I dislike about Hitchens is that he never really broke away from leftism, and he said that it would be a good idea for his native country, the UK, to massively import Indians from India instead of Muslims (enough to consider him my enemy). However, I liked his book about Mother Teresa and that he was one of the very few to defend David Irving.

      • Chechar

        I am at a loss as to why you reference a Papal Mass taking place in
        Mexico with an Aryan, German Pope being watched literally, by millions of brown, devout Untermenschen?
        I was always under the impression that the people of Mexico have populated Mexico for centuries, with a little interbreeding here and there as a consequence of imperialist conquest.
        Is Mexico the corporate property of imperialists?
        Believe me when I say that there are more biologically and spiritually degenerate Aryan Untermenschen in America and other
        countries I could mention than there are “Untermenschen” of the variety you describe in Mexico or anywhere else.
        Biological and spiritual degeneration are the twin cancers of SYPHILISATION as the complete degeneration of humanity, and
        the prize for saving (what you imply as the “exclusive” white race)
        is the biological and spiritual regeneration of humanity according to the philosophy and biological principles that were well established by our ancestors thousands of years ago.
        I can only say that your comment that:” Christianity, and particularly
        Catholicism, is directly responsible for the mestization of the whole American subcontinent,” is well and truly spoken like a true patron of the synagogue.
        It is an established fact of SYPHILISATION that the joos are the foremost advocates of the very thing you describe: mestization, which, strangely enough, I cannot find in Wikipedia or my dictionary,
        but I take to imply the mixing of races.
        Who are the leading pornographers in America and the word?
        The joos. Who are the leading advocates of mixed marriage?
        The joos. Who are the leading advocates of coloured immigration?
        The joos. Why? Because the joos are responsible for the SYPHILISATION of the planet.
        Our ancient ancestors bestowed the arts of civilisation to the world, and it is apparent to me that you are sufficiently myopic as to utterly fail to recognise the difference between: CIVILISATION and SYPHILISATION because America is the most joo SYPHILISED country on the planet.
        The Catholic Church is the absolute ideological enemy of the joos and has been for two thousand years, and the physical or spiritual destruction of the Catholic Church is the ultimate agenda of the joos. If you have anything between your ears, read the book:”Behind The Dictators,” by L.H. Lehman (a joo) who reveals the full extent of the relationship between German National Socialism and the Vatican. This book is a free PDF.The joos have given SYPHILISATION to the white races who have taken the bait, and this is what will destroy the white race.

        Saintclair

  4. “Christianity, and particularly
    Catholicism, is directly responsible for the mestization of the whole American subcontinent,”
    is well and truly spoken like a true patron of the synagogue.

    Saintclair, I am losing patience. You seem to be completely ignorant of the history of Latin America. You ask me to read whole books (“If you have anything between your ears, read…”) when at the same time you don’t even become familiar with short, key entries in this blog.

    It is well know history that the Counter-Reformation ethos allowed mestization (mestization = the mixing of Spaniard with Indian blood) throughout the regions conquered by the Spanish and the Portuguese. The Jews had nothing to do with that. Fortunately, we had a vigorous Inquisition for no less than three centuries here. It was universalist Christian and Catholic values what messed up this part of the continent. (By “Untermenschen” I don’t mean spiritually deracinated people like the WASP Americans, but ugly mestizos with low IQs: genotypic and phenotypic trash.)

    That’s a fact: no Jew had power under Spain’s viceroyalties in the 16th, 17th, 18th and even early 19th centuries, when the wars of independence started. Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians “had souls” and declared “fit” to receive all sacraments, including marrying the numerous, bachelor conquerors, was the basic etiology of the thoroughgoing degradation of the gene pool of the white people here. If instead of becoming familiar with Latin America history you continue to say that because speaking out these historical facts I speak “like a true patron of the synagogue” I’ll have to start deleting your comments.

    The Catholic Church is the absolute ideological enemy of the joos and has been for two thousand years, and the physical or spiritual destruction of the Catholic Church is the ultimate agenda of the joos.

    The Catholic Church was the absolute ideological enemy of the joos. Not anymore (after Vatican Council II Paul VI made peace with them and this has continued and will continue until the Church finally dies). But the real root of evil lies long before. Nietzsche was right: Caesar Borgia as pope would have been a sort of triumph against suicidal Christian values such as universalism and egalitarianism. Alas, this never happened.

  5. Cherchar,
    I am sorry to see that you are losing patience!!!!!
    My writings appear to have hit a very sore nerve!!!!!
    Short key entries are just short key entries. They do not prove anything except for what I have already stated in my comments of Nietzsche: “Accusing the philosophy of Christianity for all of the problems of humanity is to identify and attack the perceived symptom and completely ignore the cause.”
    You may very well be more familiar with the Catholic history of Latin America than I am, but I am sufficiently familiar with the influence of the patrons of the synagogue to know that according to historical accounts, the joos effectively controlled the slave trade before the 16th century, and I can tell you that in Elizabethan England, at least, joos and Blackamoors (negroes) were expelled, and it was not until the Cromwellian English civil war that joos were permitted, under Cromwell, to return back to England.
    England has been the debt slave to joosury ever since.
    It was a joo from Holland, I believe, ( I have the detailed account, but not to hand) who bribed (financed) Cromwell to wage a civil war against King Charles1st because he refused to allow the joos back into England and he would not allow joosury in England.
    This little fact of English history, proves that the joos were sufficiently powerful in Europe to influence and finance a civil war in England.
    Did the joos finance the Catholic Church in Europe?
    I cannot answer this question sufficiently to offer evidence, but the fact that the joos were sufficiently financially powerful in Europe, allows me sufficient scope to suggest that the Catholic colonisation of Latin America may have been accompanied by joo finance, especially where the slave trade was concerned.
    I will answer your quote: “It is well known in history that the Counter-Reformation ethos (ethos, a Greek word meaning “character”) allowed mestization – the mixing of Spanish with Indian blood…..”
    Ethos, a Greek word meaning “character,” is not a Papal Edict enforcing racial mixing.
    I cite two obvious reasons for the ethos of mestization: 1, to breed out what was considered a “savage nobility” and to encourage
    “relations” with native females for obvious “other” reasons.
    I challenge your assumption that:”Pope Paul 111 recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians “had souls” and were declared “fit” to receive all sacraments, including marrying the numerous, bachelor conquerors….” by what I have already said:”Ethos, a Greek word meaning “character” was not a Papal Edict of enforcement.”
    If anything, the Catholic Church was more concerned in spreading Catholic influence around the world and “saving souls” than it was about the moral or biological proclivities of Spanish conquerors, which is evidenced by an obviously more relaxed approach to the mixing of blood. No Spanish conqueror was ever forced to marry or
    have sexual relations with female Amerindians – the prime modus operandi of Catholic “Ethos” was the conviction that primitive “noble savage” instincts and biological traits could be “bred out” and replaced with, (dare I say) Catholic European genes.
    Finally, my response to your suggestion that:”The Catholic Church WAS the absolute ideological enemy of the joos.
    Not any more (after Vatican Council 11 Pope Paul V1made peace with them and this has continued and will continue until the Church finally dies). Your point of view, not mine.The above has not stopped vicious joo propaganda attacks against the Vatican and especially Pope Pius X11.You cannot make peace with lying Talmudic joos, (they are bound by Kol Nedrei). The Church will never die, it will transmute into something new.
    MY view is that Pope Paul made (ideological) peace with the joos because the joos, having failed to destroy the Church during WW2, (Stalin’s plans for the invasion and conquest of Western Europe, included the complete anihilation of the Vatican and Christianity in Western Europe – read “Icebreaker” by Viktor Surovov, who states without hesitation that:” If Germany had not launched a pre-emptive attack against Soviet Communist Russia, the consequences for Western Europe would have been unimaginable) were perfectly well aware that the Vatican and global Catholic influence is simply too powerful to be destroyed by the joos – this is the reason I suggested that you read the book: “Behind the Dictators” by L.H. Lehman, he, at least, was fully aware of the enormous wealth, power and influence of the Vatican, and especially the Jesuits which he openly admitted were the only effective rival to International jooery, and the relationship between the Vatican and National Socialist Germany.
    I care not a jot if you delete my comments, for the simple reason that I have dedicated virtually my entire life defending National
    Socialism and vindicating the heroic struggle of the German people and National Socialist Europe against the sewage of joo communist war mongers and joo lies,which, I am sure you will know, includes the most grotesque and vicious joo construct – the hollow hoax.
    I add to this the British and American contribution(as the dupes of judah) to the destruction of Germany and Western Europe.
    If your brand of American National Socialism has nothing in common with Western European National Socialism, I won’t cry into my cornflakes over it.

    Saintclair

    • Accusing the philosophy of Christianity for all of the problems of humanity…

      That’s Nietzsche, not me.

      that the Catholic colonisation of Latin America may have been accompanied by joo finance

      Prove it. And your lengthy and sloppy reply (I won’t fix your quotations this time within your comment as I took the trouble to do in other threads), still unresponsive to the central issue: that Catholicism created a milieu favorable to the thoroughgoing mestization that fucked up the continent.

      • Chechar
        This is my last response to your reply since I cannot add any more to what I have said other than to say what I said previous:” That the Catholic colonisation of Latin America (may) have been accompanied by joo finance, I offer no evidence either way because any such association, if it existed, the evidence of which would be secreted in the secret vaults of the Vatican.
        I gave you my response to your suggestion that Catholic (ethos) allowed mestization – “the mixing of Spanish with Indian blood…..”
        by saying that the Catholic ethos in Latin America in 1537 and beyond did not constitute a Papal Edict of enforcement.
        The Spanish Conquistadors were more Catholic in enforcing what you described as:”A vigorous Inquisition for no less than three centuries,” which amounted to a policy of pacification which has been the instrument par excellence of Western European Imperialists for centuries.
        I note that you have avoided the word “ethos” in your response and you now resort to the word “milieu,” the French word for “environment,” to justify your argument of the thoroughgoing mestization that fucked up the continent.
        Again, your argument is as logical as a square peg in a round hole.
        The Spanish Conquistadors did not have a Divine Mandate to decimate Latin America and white European Americans did not have a Divine Mandate to decimate the American Indians who had populated the American continent for thousands of years.
        It was the influence of European imperialist colonial policy that “fucked up” the continent just as it has across the globe which I state is, to a greater or lesser degree, the cause of joo SYPHILIZATION, certainly more so over the last 100 years.
        American imperialist policy across the globe is causing the very same consequences by “fucking up” the planet on a grand scale just because those lunatics, the politicians who have taken over asylum seek to impose Pax Americana as the express will of the lunatics who have taken over the asylum.
        I will repeat what I stated previous that:”Biological and spiritual degeneration are the twin cancers of SYPHILIZATION, and the joos have inflicted SYPHILIZATION onto the white races who have taken the bait, and this is what will destroy the white races.”

        Saintclair

      • If you knew history you would see that Jews could not have financed the Spanish conquering of the Americas for the simple reason that they were expelled in 1492 from the kingdom after the Reconquista, the very year when Columbus reached the shores of the continent.

        I am not saying that Catholicism was the sole cause of mestization. The lust of gold was a factor too. But it certainly created the conditions that made marrying the Indian women favorable: and it’s a little retarded and paranoid trying to blame joos for what the Spanish crown did here in the 16th century.

  6. I noticed in your arguments you are using over and over the word philosophy of religion. I understand many words have lost their original meaning and I hope this position will bring back to pragmatism a few of you.

    Philosophy and religion don’t settle well in the same sentence.

    Philosophy is based on “reason”.
    Religion is based on “belief”
    The 2 are not merging well except in a hypocritical world.

  7. We need to restore and reinforce healthy values, how can this be done without Christianity? Can Paganism offer a philosophy of healthy decency and integrity?

    • Take a look to my forthcoming PDF; it will soon appear here.

  8. […] is a concept from the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. With it, the German philosopher signed the last page of The Antichrist as his manifesto in a nutshell. This is how we should convey Nietzsche’s message to […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: