The face of Classical Europe (II)

Were the Romans blond and blue-eyed?

 

Translated from Evropa Soberana

 

Recently I was called names on VNN forum as a result of my criticism of anti-Nordicism in my previous post. Isn’t it ironic that the signature-legend of VNN’s admin states that the Jews must be exterminated while, at the same time, some of the forum’s senior members want to grant amnesty to the mudbloods in Europe?

Hopefully this abridged translation from the Spanish blogsite Evropa Soberana, which could be read together with the first installment about the phenotype of Greeks in Classical Europe, will throw more light on why anti-Nordicists are deluding themselves.



 

Were the Romans blond and blue-eyed?

The Latin malus [“bad”] (beside which I place mélas, Greek for “black”) might designate the common man as dark, especially black-haired (hic niger est), as the pre-Aryan settler of the Italian soil, notably distinguished from the new blond conqueror race by his color.

—Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals

 
The Roman case is virtually identical to the Greek case. This YouTube clip contains the first minutes from the series Rome, where fighting between Gauls and Romans is recreated. The series had tremendous blunders, great nonsense, and several lies and BS in abundance. But the atmosphere was curious, as was the march of historical events, the legions in action, the splendor of the imperial palaces, the goings-on in the alleys of Rome, etc. One of the protagonists of the series was a centurion, the one with the whistle.

He was blond.

But how can you be so fascists so Nordicists, so Nazis so anti-Teresa-de-Calcutta, as Eurocentric and racists as these media? If you had a minimum of culture (like me) you should know that the Romans were of Mediterranean phenotype (like me)—and so on.

Things like these I have heard more times than you can imagine. And similar poppycock we continue to hear even by people who, by their admiration of Rome, obviously have read something written by these sober and tough soldiers who were the Romans, right?

In this article the testimonies from the handwriting of the real Romans are presented. Forget the movies and the illiterate pundits and let the sources explain us how Romans saw themselves.


The first Roman emperors as an example of patrician racial types

We will examine the phenotype of the first Roman emperors, who were representative of the race of patricians, the Roman nobilitas, i.e., the ruling aristocracy. What interests me is not so much to demonstrate the presence of Nordic blood in the upper Roman class (which is easy), but mainly to show that the Nordic blood in Rome was also inextricably linked to the notion of divinity and of noble descent. Some passages are originally in Greek. This is because Greek had great prestige as a cultured, poetic and philosophical language, and there were many Romans educated in that language.

• Augustus, the first Roman emperor, was “blond” (subflavum) according to Suetonius (De Vita Caesarum: Divus Augustus), and had “blue eyes” (glauci) according to Pliny (Naturalis Historia, XI, CXLIII):

roma-octavio

He had clear, bright eyes, in which he liked to have it thought that there was a kind of divine power, and it greatly pleased him, whenever he looked keenly at anyone, if he let his face fall as if before the radiance of the sun (Suetonius, De Vita Caesarum: Divus Augustus, LXXIX).

• Tiberius had “gray-blue” (caesii) eyes according to Pliny (Naturalis Historia, XI, CXLII).

• Caligula had a “blonde beard” (aurea barba) according to Suetonius (De Vita Caesarum: Caligula, LII).

• Claudius had “gray-white hair” (canitieque) according to Suetonius (De Vita Caesarum: Divus Claudius, XXX), and “gray eyes” (γλαυκόφθαλμος) according to Ioannes Malelas (Chronographia, X, CCXLVI).

• Nero was “blond or redhead” (subflavo); had “gray-blue eyes” (caesis) according to Suetonius (De Vita Caesarum: Nero, LI), and descended from a family named after their light pigmentation.

Of the Domitian family two branches have acquired distinction, the Calvini and the Ahenobarbi. The latter have as the founder of their race and the origin of their surname Lucius Domitius, to whom, as he was returning from the country, there once appeared twin youths of more than mortal majesty, so it is said, and bade him carry to the senate and people the news of a victory, which was as yet unknown. And as a token of their divinity it is said that they stroked his cheeks and turned his black beard to a ruddy hue, like that of bronze. This sign was perpetuated in his descendants, a great part of whom had red beards. (Suetonius, De Vita Caesarum: Nero, I.)

• Galba had gray-white (μιξοπόλιος) hair according to Malelas (Chronographia, X, CCLVIII) and blue eyes (caeruleis) according to Suetonius (De Vita Caesarum: Galba, XXI).

• Vitellius was “redhead” (πυρράκης) and had “gray” or “blue” eyes (γλαυκός) according to Malelas (Chronographia, X, CCLIX).

• Vespasian had “gray-white hair” (πολιός) and “wine-colored eyes” (οινοπαης τους οφθαλμούς), although it is unclear whether this refers to red wine (brown) or white wine (green) according to Malelas (Chronographia, X, CCLIX).

• Titus, according to Wilhelm Sieglin (1855-1935) in Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums, 109, was “blonde”.

• Domitian was “blond” (ξανθός) and had “gray or blue eyes” (γλαυκός) according Malelas (Chronographia, X, CCLXII).

• Nerva was “gray-haired” according to John V. Day (Indo-European Origins).

• Trajan had “golden hair” (caesaries) according to Sieglin (Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums, 109). But let us not forget that Trajan was not Roman but a Spanish with Celtic blood, and therefore we should not take this into account when trying to define the phenotype of the Roman patrician aristocracy.

• Adriano, from a noble Roman family established in Hispania, was “dark-haired” (κυανοχαιτα) according Sieglin (Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums, 112), and of “gray or blue eyes” (γλαυκόφθαλμος) according to Malelas (Chronographia XI, CCLXXVII).

Interestingly, despite being described as “dark-haired,” on his statue there are traces of gold paint on his hair and beard. Formerly, the statues were painted according to the colors of the original “model”. His facial features correspond to the Nordic type.

• Antoninus Pius had “gray-white hair” (πολιός) and eyes “the color of wine” (οινοπαης τους οφθαλμούς) according Malelas (Chronographia, XI, CCLXXX).

• Lucius Verus had “blond hair” (flaventium) according Sieglin (Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums, 110).

• Commodus had “blond hair” (ουλόξανθος) and “blue or gray eyes” (υπόγλαυκος) according Malelas (Chronographia, XII, CCLXXXIII).

Therefore, we find that:

• Of the 18 emperors from Augustus to Commodus, 9 had blond or red hair, 5 had gray or white hair, of 3 we have no way of knowing the hair color, and only one (Adriano) was described as dark-haired.

• Of the 18 emperors from Augustus to Commodus, 9 had blue or gray eyes, 2 had eyes of “the color of wine” (whatever that means, let us take it as brown), and of 7 we have no record as to the color of their eyes.

Many emperors came to power in their advanced years, with already gray or white hair. However, many were even so described with light eyes. If we had records of their appearance when they were young, it is likely that a significant proportion of them had light hair. Of the 9 Emperors with light hair, we know that at least 5 had clear eyes, and of the other 4 we know nothing about the color of their eyes. Of Tiberius, for example, we know nothing about his hair, maybe because he was bald when he came to power. And the same applies to Otto, who shaved his head and wore a wig. Nor do we know anything about the physical aspect of the “philosopher emperor” Marcus Aurelius, father of Commodus and a first-class sovereign. Many other emperors (as Julius Caesar), without being blond, were tall and had a very fair complexion, ruddy, or rosy.

From Commodus on I renounce to provide more emperor descriptions because:

1 – those individuals who began ascending to power were not of Roman origin, and therefore their phenotype cannot tell us anything about the genetic legacy of the nobilitas of Italian and patrician origin.

2 – miscegenation was already quite advanced; lineages of patrician origin having lost their meaning. At that time it was common that women of Roman high society should shave the manes of Germanic slaves to fix their blond-hair wigs.


The gods, the Italici, the patricians and the origins of Rome

Let us go back around 1200 BCE and transport ourselves to Italy. At that time, Central Europe was a buzzing propagating zone for the Indo-European stock. From what is now Germany, of a semi-barbarous proto-civilization of the iron age, flowed migrant groups in all directions. These waves were of the Celts, the Hellenes, the Illyrians and the Italici (also called italos or italiotas).

At that time, the Italici, probably with some confederate Illyrian groups as in the case of the Dorians, broke into Italy.

They were a people who, in contrast to the native inhabitants of Italy, were patriarchal rather than matriarchal; ruddy rather than swarthy; that cremated their dead instead of burying them; that brought with them a whole pantheon of gods and heroic warriors, spoke an Indo-European language, yielded a war cult and whose symbology was a lot more oriented to heavenly than earthly symbols.

Italici were the settlers of sites such as the Villanovan Culture. Subsequent “civilian” conflicts that feminist history has termed as “matriarchy vs. patriarchy,” and what is left in mythology regarding the heroic struggle of the Indo-Europeans against the native, telluric bodies (like snakes) actually refer to a spiritual confrontation triggered by the arrival of a small, aggressive and martial people that did not mix with the native population and struggled to dominate the area.

Under a rigid religious ritualism, on April 21, 753 BCE the heads of some Italic clans founded the city of Rome. For two centuries, Rome lived under the despotism and tyranny of the Etruscan kings, heads of a degenerate civilization that practiced sacrificial rituals, orgies, matriarchy, homosexuality, luxurious opulence, pedophilia, decadent entertainments, etc. The Etruscans came from Asia Minor, styling themselves as rasena (“chosen,” as the Jews) yet their legacy, which only represented the decline of something greater than themselves, meant that they were a doomed people.

The situation of the Roman tribute to Etruria lasted until, in 509 BCE, the Romans rose against the Etruscans and expelled the Etruscan king, Tarquinius Superbus, from the lands. Legends want to portray that this Italic insurrection—a “holy rebellion” against the pre-Indo-European; of patriarchy against matriarchy—was motivated by the rape of Lucretia, a beautiful and virtuous woman of Roman family at the hands of Sextus Tarquinius, son of the Etruscan king and raunchy as all his people, as opposed to the Puritan morality of the Latins.

Lucretia committed suicide by honor and, this being the straw that broke the camel of the Roman patience, the patriarchs began a rebellion against the Etruscans that led to the overthrowing of the Etruscan kings, the founding of the Roman Republic and the systematic eradication of almost all Etruscan memory. (Comparable only to the “genocide” and the complete destruction of Carthage, the mortal enemy of Rome, considered as the reincarnation of Etruscan and oriental spirit, whose fields were cast in salt so that nothing would grow there.)

decopianr

Recreation of Rome during the Republic. Pay attention to the shape of the boats, so reminiscent of the Scandinavian drakkar.

With the expulsion of the Etruscan power two praetors (later consuls) who held the vacuum of power were named. It was therefore founded the Roman Republic, marked by social struggles between patricians (nobles) and plebeians.

At that time, the original Populus Romanus was divided into 30 curiae (tribes or clans), whose origin was lost among the Italic peoples before the invasion. The curiae were headed by patres (parents) of the gens (family), that is, the founding fathers of the clan and of each family that composed it. Each gens or family was considered descendant of a genius or semi-divine patriarch, who was worshiped on the household as protector idol of the house and their descendants.

If we assimilate the fact that to the Romans a gens or family was a whole social, state, military and religious institution, we may understand the importance of the geniuses and patres as leaders of this small imperial cell, that corresponded to social, political and military leadership as well as leading positions in the characteristic Roman religious worship, where Jupiter is confused with the State, the patriarch, the Senate, the Legion and the family. No wonder, then, that they were regarded as semi-divine and of very high wisdom.

The patres were those who gave their name to the breed of the patricians, namely those belonging to the system of families and clans: the aristocracy, the first nobilitas, which differed from the plebs or plebeians—the people outside the Italic clans. At first, the male patricians were the only Roman citizens, the members of the Legion, the only ones who could be senators and enjoyed all the rights and duties traditionally associated with Roman citizenship.

Later, after the “universalization” and “cosmopolitanization” of Rome during the Empire, the patricians came to form an aristocracy over the other peoples of Italy, encompassed by the plebs. The patricians as social class, and among them the patres as heads of households, are probably the most exalted expression of patriarchy and patriotism itself of the Indo-European, in opposition to the narcotic matriarchy of the pre-Indo-European peoples of Europe, already decadents and altogether “civilized”.
 

 
We now turn to the patricians and Roman gods from the point of view of the phenotype, after seeing the first Roman emperors, mostly patrician.

• Lucius Cornelius Sulla (138-78 BCE), Roman consul and dictator, of patrician descent, had blond hair, blue eyes and a ruddy complexion:

…for his golden head of hair gave him a singular appearance, and as for bravery, he was not ashamed to testify in his own behalf, after such great and noble deeds as he had performed. So much, then, regarding his attitude towards the divine powers. (Plutarch, De Vita: Sulla.)

What was the rest of his figure appears in his statues, but that fierce and unpleasant look of his blue eyes was still more terrible to stare at because the color of his face, being noted at intervals so ruddy and red mixed with his whiteness, and it is even said that he took his name from that, coming to be a nickname for the designated color. Thus, a teller of Athens taunted him with these lines: “If you knead a blackberry with flour, you have the portrait of Sulla.”

Marcus Porcius Cato the “Censor”, better known as Cato the Elder (234-149 BCE), the pronouncer of the famous saying Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam (“Furthermore, I think Carthage must be destroyed”) in every speech, had reddish hair according to Plutarch:

As for his outward appearance, he had reddish hair, and keen grey eyes, as the author of the well-known epigram ill-naturedly gives us to understand: “Red-haired, snapper and biter, his grey eyes flashing defiance, Porcius, come to the shades, back will be thrust by their Queen.” (Plutarch, Cato the Elder.)

• Poppaea Sabina (30-65 CE), the wife of Nero, famous for her beauty all over Rome, was very white and redhead.

We note that the Romans, like the Greeks, saw light pigmentation as a sign of the “divine” or “supernatural”. Some may interpret this that light pigmentation was rare among the Romans. But considering naming conventions, it is clear that the light features were quite common among the patricians. According to Karl Earlson:

Once they had reached a certain stage in their lives, the patricians earned their additional name (cognomina), which was often based on their physical appearance. The name Albus indicated light skin; Ravilla, gray eyes; Caesar, blue eyes; Flavius, blonde hair; Rufus, red hair; Longus, tall; Macer, a slender constitution. All these names were common among the patricians.

Thus, the Latin author Quintilian, in Institutio Oratoria (I, IV, XXV), notes that a man named Rufus or Longo has that name for his body characteristics: he is high or redhead. Plutarch (Coriolanus XI) states that two men, one redhead and one swarthy, could be distinguished because the first would be called Rufus and the second Niger. Aelius Spartianus, in Historia Augusta (II, IV), suggests that the Caesars earned their name from the fact that the founder of his gens had blue eyes (oculis caesiis). The lexicographer Sextus Pompeius Festus, in De verborum significatu (CCCLXXVI ff) states that the name Ravilia derives from “gray eyes” (ravis oculis), and the name Caesulla from blue eyes (oculis caesiis). Julius Paris, in De nominibus Epitome, VII, provides examples of names of women that, he says, have their origin in the pigmentation of those who held them: Rutila (red hair), Caesellia (blue eyes), Rodacilla (pink complexion), Murrula and Burra (red hair or ruddy complexion).

I have provided all these quotations to show that these names were not purely arbitrary but were, in fact, based on physical characteristics; and that these features were not uncommon among certain strata of Roman society.

Even where the patricians had almost disappeared, the Romans had memories of the old patres as the semi-divine beings who arrived to Italy, founded Rome, “Romanized” the peninsula and bequeathed the patriarchate to those lands, together with a strong mentality and a durable and effective political system that lasted for centuries. The ancient ancestors of the patricians were still considered in Rome as a common heritage to be proud of.

Karl Earlson summarizes how he follows Sieglin’s findings as to the pigmentation of the patricians and their identity as a breed:

Wilhelm Sieglin [in Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums, 1935] compiled the list of the Roman patricians whose names indicate light hair. He provided the following list: 7 Flavi, 20 Flaviani, 10 Fulvi, 121 Fulvii, 27 Rubrii, 26 Rufi, 24 Rufii, 36 Rufini, 45 Rutilii and 13 Ahenobarbi. This completely disrupts Sergi’s claim that: “The Romans also had their Flavi, indicating that people with fair complexion were rare and required a special name, but does not indicate that the Germanic type was considered aristocratic or dominant” (Sergi: 1901, 20). In fact, such people were not scarce.

Sieglin also determined that among the families Iulii, Licinii, Lucretii, Sergii and Virginii, the name Flavius was very common; Rufi was often seen among the families Antonii, Caecilii, Coelii, Cornelii, Geminii, Iunii, Licinii families (often also the Flavii), Minucii, Octavii, Pinarii, Pompei, Rutilii, Sempronii, Trebonii, Valgii and Vibii; Rufini was common among the gens Antonia, Cornelia, Iunia, Licinian, Trebonia and Vibia. Sieglin notes that this list could certainly be increased in the light of further research.

Besides all this, Sieglin also compiled a list of 63 blond or red-haired Romans. Many of these individuals were patricians. He also found references to 27 blond divinities (including Jupiter, Venus, Mercury, Diana, etc.) and 10 blondes in heroic personalities.

Man makes the gods in their own image. These blond gods speak of the racial nature of the early Romans. (In the Aeneid, Virgil refers to Mercury, Lavinia, Turnus and Camilla as “golden-haired.”) His list of blonds includes Aeneas, the mythical ancestor of the Latins (also blond was his son Julo or Ascanius), Romulus and Remus, the twin founders of Rome; Augustus, the first Roman emperor, and even Roma: which symbolized the city of Rome.

While most of Sieglin’s historical figures of light hair were patricians, most the 17 swarthy Romans in his references were commoners or freedmen.

On the disappearance of the patricians and the mestization of the original Romans

What happened to the patricians? They faded with time. In the numerous conspiracies and intrigues of the Empire, it was common that after the formation of two opposing parties and the victory of one over the other, the winner assassinated the head of the enemy party, his family and all the families related to him. (The strong destroy each other and the weak continue to live, as George Bernard Shaw maintained.) These calamities greatly decimated the patrician class. If we add the ongoing miscegenation in the majority of plebeian population, the immigration of slaves from Syria and the provinces of Asia Minor, Egypt and Africa, as well as the bleeding of the patrician stock over the battlefield, we may realize why the patricians did not last too long during the Empire, given the dysgenic situation. John V. Day wrote:

In a journal about the West and its future, it is fitting to end this article by briefly recounting the fate of the Roman upper class. Among Indo-European peoples, the Romans offer an especially useful example because they left masses of records, enabling later historians to determine what became of them. The evidence found in ancient texts implies that this class descended largely from Indo-Europeans who had a decidedly northern European physical type, although that isn’t something one reads in modern books about Roman history [emphasis added]. In Rome, though, the upper class was always a tiny minority. Instead of protecting its interests, it allowed itself to wither away. Consider a bleak statistic. We know of about fifty patrician clans in the fifth century B.C., but by the time of Caesar, in the later first century B.C., only fourteen of these had survived. The decay continued in imperial times. We know of the families of nearly four hundred Roman senators in A.D. sixty five, but, just one generation later, all trace of half of these families had vanished.

If we in the West want to avoid a similar fate, we must learn from Indo-European history. (*)

In the time of Julius Caesar we know 45 patricians, of which only one is represented by posterity when Hadrian rises to power. The Aemilsi, Fabii, Claudii. Manlii, Valerii and everyone else, except the Comelii have disappeared. Augustus and Claudius ascended 25 families to the Patriciate, and by the reign of Nerva all but 6 have disappeared. Of the families of nearly 400 senators registered under Nero in 65 CE, trace has been lost about half of them in times of Nerva. And the records are so complete that it can be assumed that these statistics represent quite accurately the disappearance of the male lineage of the families concerned. (Cf. Tenney Frank, “Race Mixture in the Roman Empire,” American Historical Review, Vol. XI, 1916).

Conclusion

Were the Romans, then, blond?

ancient_romanIt all depends on what you mean by “Romans”. The original Romans did not descend from the original inhabitants of the Italian soil, but of the Italici (italios or italiotas or as you please to call them) and probably also of Illyrian groups, namely, Indo-European invaders who entered Italy from the North, what is now southern Germany. These early invaders—from whom the Latins descended (considered the most influential and who eventually gave their language to the Empire), the Sabines (considered by Plutarch “a colony of the Lacedaemonians,” i.e., Spartans), the Umbrians, Samnites and all patrician clans that founded Rome and the Republic—were indeed mostly Nordic, and also formed the basis of the political and military elite of the Empire.

However, in the later Rome these groups formed an aristocratic minority ruling over a mob of pre-Indo-European origin and, later, even Semites and black slaves. This ended up in interbreeding between all these groups. Over time, the numbers of the dominant Nordic caste withered, and with them their strong patriarchal, sober and authoritative influence in favor of the dissolution of the Empire: expressed in its cosmopolitanism, multiculturalism and proliferation of slaves.

The rest of the history of the post-Roman imperial splendor and their great men, we already know. It is set in a decadent agony, punctuated by binges, parties, orgies, wine snobbery, false sophistication, acrobats, gays, stupid fads, obesity, blond wigs made from hair stolen from Germanics, mongrels, pacifists, emboldened slaves, “liberated” women, Christian zealots and a corrupt bourgeois which reneged of their homeland.

The ghost of ancient Etruria, killed by the ancient Latin Patriarchs, had reborn. Before these decaying monsters, which had nothing to do with the demigod patricians or their rude peasants and patriotic soldiers, the Germanic “barbarian” was really an authentic, pure, hard, strong, noble, idealistic, simple and brave hero, in whose blood awaited the hidden forces of the Indo-European humanity, ready to give birth and germinate in the next millennia of European power.

In short, it has not been argued that all Romans were of Nordic type. It has been argued that the Nordic blood prevailed among the Italic invaders, the ancestors of the posterior dominant Roman aristocracy, the authentic Roman citizens, who imposed their ethos throughout the Empire and spread their spirit, marking the “Roman style” with a distinctly Nordic stamp.

“Are the Germanics a healthy and natural people that will overcome the decadence of the Romans?” —Tacitus, Germania.

_________________

See also a previous article about the subject of:

Saying the truth about race throws even white nationalists into fits.”

(*) John V. Day, Ph.D., is the author of Indo-European Origins: The Anthropological Evidence (The Institute for the Study of Man, 2001).

Greatest American ever

In his autobiography This Time The World, Commander George Lincoln Rockwell, who some consider “the greatest American that has ever lived,” describes his experiences dealing with pathetic conservatives in the 1950s.



By this time [in the mid-1950s], I had had plenty of opportunity to look over the activity of the “right-wing”—the conservatives—and had come to the conclusion, in my total ignorance of the real nature of the case, that all they needed to succeed was an organizational drive to get them “together,” with a businesslike plan. I had found that there were dozens and maybe hundreds of very rich men, like H. L. Hunt of Texas and Robert Welch of Boston, who felt much as I did and who, together, could pool enough money and resources to swamp the Marxist-Zionist Jews and left-wingers. There seemed to be plenty of talent and ability, and an actual majority of our people over on my side of politics, so that common sense seemed to force the conclusion that it was only a lack of determined effort to put this together which permitted the left-wing minority, sparked by the sub-minority of Jews, to keep winning victory after victory and thereby send America down the path to Marxist socialism and racial disintegration. […].

But I reckoned without any knowledge of the human content of the “right-wing.” From the millionaires to the scared little people who attend the endless, pitiful “conservative,” “100% American,” “old-fashioned,” “constitutional,” “states’ rights” meetings, I learned by bitter experience that the human material of the right-wing consists 90% of cowards, dopes, nuts, one-track minds, blabbermouths, boobs, incurable tightwads and—worst of all—hobbyists, people who have come to enjoy a perverted, masochistic pleasure in telling each other forever how we are all being raped by the “shhh—you know whos,” but who, under no condition, would risk their two cars, landscaped homes, or juicy jobs to DO something about it. Knowing nothing of this, however, and being full of my usual enthusiasm and drive, I paid for a series of radio spots before and after Fulton Lewis’ show, announcing a Washington meeting to organize the right-wing.

The response seemed to be gratifying. Hundreds of people called, and I arranged with one of them, Sam Jones, the correspondent of Bill Buckley’s National Review, to use his lovely old Virginia mansion in McLean for our first meeting.

Of the hundreds who called, only about fifty showed up at the meeting, including John Kasper and an Arab friend. I addressed the meeting in the best “conservative” style, lecturing “nicely” on the need “to get together” more than anything else, during which I received little flurries of polite applause. Ugh! How I shudder now to think of all that feeble, useless, stupid “niceness”—while Our Race and our whole world are being brutally destroyed!

From time to time somebody in the audience would ask “What about the Jews!” and there would be snickers and shifting around of feet, like grammar school kids when somebody mentions the word “sex.” Then I would scold this “bold” character for such a “disgusting display of prejudice,” making my righteous love of the “wonderful” Jews very clear, and even sharing knowing winks with some close friends in mutual appreciation of my “clever” deception.

The Jews would not have disturbed such a meeting for anything in the world. We, like a million other “conservatives,” were indulging ourselves in the illusion of “fighting” treason, subversion, communism and racemixing—in other words, the Jews—without DOING anything and without hurting the enemy himself. If we did NOT have such silly little secret meetings, we would eventually build up such a pressure of frustrated patriotism that we just might have done something forceful, and therefore effective.

My wife took up a little collection, we passed out membership cards and then stood around babbling, as is the inevitable custom after such “battles” with the enemy. Everybody congratulated everybody else at this new and terrible assault on the “Eskimos,” as John Kasper called them then, and we went home all aglow with the great “success.” […]

I poured out my time and money in an all-out effort to organize the right-wing “nicely,” under the aegis of the American Federation of Conservative Organizations, and published a national conservative paper. We held meetings in the best meeting rooms in the Statler and Mayflower hotels. I had beautiful stationery engraved in gold. I used all my skill in art, writing, organizing, promoting and leading—the same skills which are now serving the American Nazi Party so well—but my best efforts were useless. The basic premise of conservatism was wrong.

Although it is made to appear so, the battle between the “conservatives” and “liberals” is not a battle of ideas or even of political organizations. It’s is a battle of force, terror and power. The Jews and their accomplices and dupes are not running our country and its people because of the excellence of their ideas or the merit of their work or because they have the genuine backing of the majority. The Zionists are in power in spite of the lack of these things, and only because they have driven their way into power by daring minority tactics. They can stay in power only because people are afraid to oppose them, afraid they will be socially ostracized, afraid they will be smeared in the press, afraid they will lose their jobs, afraid they will not be able to run their businesses, afraid they will lose their political offices. It is fear and fear alone which keeps these filthy left-wing sneaks in power. It is NOT ignorance on the part of the American people, as the “conservatives” keep assuring each other—“ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free”—when the truth is that any slave knows the truth—that he is a slave—but he is not free in spite of knowing this truth, unless he can somehow obtain the power to force his way to freedom. It is not the truth which will make us free in America, because millions already know the truth and hate bitterly what is going on, but they are afraid even to admit they know the truth. Ten million signed the petition for Joe McCarthy and they are not all dead, although they might as well be, as long as the right-wing spends all its time and money trying to “win” another ten million instead of getting the ten million we already have to stand up! We have plenty of people, money and facilities to take America back from the traitors tomorrow morning if all the people who already know what is going on were not afraid anymore and would stand up!

As long as the right-wing confines its fighting to being “nice,” the great masses of the public will bow down like the sheep they are to the left-wing which is NOT nice—which uses smear, economic persecution, legal harassment and finally, physical terror to maintain its domination of our national life and culture by force. The force is disguised, of course, in checkbooks, judges’ robes, rigged party conventions, etc., but it is still force or the threat of it which has America down and afraid. No amount of papers and pamphlets, were they all masterpieces of propaganda, and no amount of talk and meetings can stop this growing left-wing force and power, and the fear it inspires—much less drive it back and destroy it.

But in 1955, I still imagined we could “sneak up” on the Jews, like my sissy friends. We would build a great “grass-roots” membership by not mentioning the Jews at all, or even praising them. Then, while they suspected nothing, we could become stronger and stronger and finally, one fine day, we would wipe the smiles off our faces, spin around on the surprised Hebrews and let them see just what we had in mind!

I found this coward’s dream being promoted everywhere I went. Every “conservative” I met would draw me aside and groan about the latest outrages and treason of the “you-know-whos” and describe to me the latest plans to sneak up on the tormentors. I was as much beguiled by this childish illusion as anybody else. l spent hundreds of hours discussing the methods for this super-sneaky revolution and the only thing I gained from it all was the final discovery that it was and always has been impossible to unseat the terrorists by talk. One must dislodge such evil usurpers by the same weapon which got them in: POWER! Theirs was and is secret and disguised. Ours, by nature, must be open, legal and honest, but it must still be power, not talk or pamphlets or sneaky dreams. Thus it involves risk.

I also grew to know the people my wife and I came to call the “die-hards,” for some obscure reason I can’t recall. These were the perennial “patriots,” the eternal attendees of meetings, the inexhaustible babblers, the super-clever know-it-alls who are going to “throw the election into the house this time” and the disgusting hobbyists who discharged their pent-up “patriotism” once a week or so in the masochistic orgasm they seemed to obtain by flagellating themselves with the latest outrages of the Jews. These people seemed to have been “fighting” the Jews all their lives, decade after decade. Their standard reaction to anything they didn’t think up themselves in the way of new schemes for sneaking up on the Jews was, “I was fighting this thing before you were born, son.” This was supposed to send the upstart packing, as if people who had spent forty or fifty years fighting so unsuccessfully had any business opening their mouths at all. These “die-hards” would insist on bending one’s ear endlessly and at all hours of day or night. Any attempt to escape from them was taken as a personal insult. My wife and I grew to dread the sessions with the “die-hards,” who were not interested in doing anything except talk and were World Champions at the pastime.

Our meetings were better and better attended, but there was no result at all. Nothing was accomplished. As the months wore on and we began to see our small savings diminish with no signs of any real progress, I began to come down with a case of “desperationitis” so common to the right-wing. I had begun to meet a large, unorganized, but regular circle of “patriots” which exists everywhere, with whom I discussed all kinds of tricks for “spilling the beans” about the Jews, all at once. There were endless plans for dropping “the whole story” out of airplanes on top of the public, while the helpless Jews watched in impotent rage as the millions of leaflets fluttered down, out of the sky. There was talk of a plan to raid a TV station of one of the major networks and hold the personnel at gunpoint, while one of us—nobody cared to discuss who, exactly—would present to the breathless millions the documents and facts on the jewishness of Communism, which we have in such abundance, but which mean so little as long as we reach only one another. There was even a scheme for sending aloft huge signs on balloons, tied to inaccessible places, which would “squeal” on the Jews from the sky, while they scrambled madly to get them down. These wild ideas are actually being discussed, right now, as you read this, by otherwise intelligent people somewhere, people who are simply too overwhelmed by their own timidity and ignorance to understand that even if they played these nasty tricks on the Jews, there would be no result at all.

Just two weeks ago, as I write this, the Jews used two or three minutes of one of my speeches to introduce a long program on behalf of race-mixing on a national TV network show. Mine was the only voice for the White man in that dreary hour of Jewish race-mixing propaganda. The Hebrew media-masters even used the section of one speech in which I explained that the Jew Communists were organizing the colored races of the world in a mass assault on the White Man. The Jews imagine, in their own ignorance, that my speech, delivered to a howling mob in Washington in all its naked passion and ferocity, will repel people—which is just as wrong as the “die-hards” with their silly idea that “spilling the beans” will somehow “wake up the people” and attract their support. Neither is the case. People are more inert than it is possible to believe, even after you discover their inherent inertia. It takes an incredible quantity of propaganda, repeated over and over and over to move them even a little bit. This is one of the reasons Joe McCarthy told me that he wouldn’t even attempt to tell the whole truth. “They’d simply put me away as a lunatic,” he said, “and the public would forget what it was all about.” And he was probably right.

The idea that there is anything easy that can be done which will send the Jew traitors scurrying for Israel like rats, while we walk triumphantly into the White House, is one of the worst self-delusions which has been keeping the right-wing babbling and conspiring while the Jews have been laughing at us and trampling all over our Constitution, our rights, our traditions, our dignity and our White Race.

Anybody, when he first discovers what is going on, might be forgiven a certain period of nourishing this delusion and hope, but when he sees the Jews starving the families of his fellow hopers who lose their jobs, who get railroaded into jail, shipped to “mental health centers” and are smeared and blasted for just the slightest attempt to stand up to Jewish power, he ought to get the idea in no more than a few years. Any man who spends thirty or forty years pretending to imagine there is such an easy way, while our country and our White Race go down and down is not a dreamer, nor is he ignorant. He is a coward!

“Conservatives” are the world’s champion ostriches, muttering to one another down under the sand in “secret,” while their plumed bottoms wave in the breezes for the Jews to kick at their leisure. They are fooling nobody but themselves.

I had already sold Russell Maguire, the publisher of Mercury Magazine, an article about U.S. follies in Iceland, so I now planned to propose further work for him. I called and arranged an appointment in his lavish Park Lane apartment in New York.

I had never met him and was happy and relieved to find him the opposite of my recent employer in Memphis. He was small, intelligent, unassuming and seemed utterly dedicated to the cause of America and the White Race. We talked over the “movement,” as patriotic leaders inevitably do upon meeting, and agreed that what was needed was what he called a “hard-core.” I told him I thought eventually we would need a Nazi Party, and he agreed, but said it would have to be done with extreme secrecy. At the time, I didn’t know enough about it to argue him out of that idea, as I do now, so I went along with that, too.

Then he offered to put me on the payroll in his Fifth Avenue offices as his assistant, to help promote Mercury Magazine, his beloved project, and to begin quietly setting up the “hard-core” he wanted. Even if this had not been what I dreamed of, I would have taken it at the handsome salary. Here was the opportunity praised for by many a young American I knew: getting paid for fighting treason! I reported for work almost immediately and had the trailer hauled by a moving company to a trailer park in Moonachie, New Jersey, just across the river from Manhattan.

For awhile, it seemed too good to be true. I “broke my neck” for Maguire, and he seemed to appreciate it. He was willing to listen to suggestions and accepted them. It was heaven after the office in Memphis! But then I began to get into the office intrigues, which go on in every office in the world and my position, which had no title, became difficult. Sometimes “R.M.,” as the staff called this tiny multimillionaire, would send me over to pounce on all the mail at his Mercury office on 50th Street and search through it in order to see if the staff over there—including his own daughter who was the boss at Mercury —were filching from or messing up the mail accounts! This did not endear me to that staff, nor did I gain any popularity when I discovered leftwing sympathies in some of the editors and presented the evidence as was my duty, to the boss. Part of my job was also to filter the thousands of requests for financing which plague every wealthy man and throw out the scoundrels, the fakes, the boobs and quite a few decent people with whom R.M. simply did not want to be bothered.

Meanwhile, I was busily searching out and rounding up the talent for Maguire’s “hard-core.” In the process, I came across a man named DeWest Hooker. When I met Hooker, once again, my life changed permanently. Hooker already knew Maguire and Hooker had been the nearest thing to a Nazi since the Bund. He was a graduate of Cornell, exactly my age, with the same temperament, same ideas, and infinitely more experience.

He was handsome, so handsome that he made money as a professional model, whom I still see in cigarette ads. His rugged, aristocratic face was framed by perfectly groomed hair, greying at the temples. His build was athletic and tall, and he walked with a bounce and spring in his step which is rarely seen among our beat people. He was a descendant of the Hooker who had signed the Declaration of Independence, with millionaire parents and a millionaire wife.

But, most important of all, Hooker was a Nazi! He was not a “patriot” or a “right-winger” or a “conservative,” but a fighting, tough, all-out-Nazi. He had gone into the streets of New York City and rounded up gangs of tough kids and potential juvenile delinquents, and converted them to fanatical loyalty to the United States, the White Race and Adolf Hitler. He called this gang of little hoods the Nationalist Youth League, and I was deeply impressed when I saw what leadership and guts will do to make decent, dedicated Americans out of little lost baby gangsters. Hooker had those kids worshiping him! He was an obvious aristocrat from a mansion in Greenwich, Connecticut, who wore a Homburg and a Chesterfield with supreme dignity, and he led those little New York gutter kids out of despondency to form picket lines against Jewish Communism, right in its filthy stronghold: New York City!

My first meeting with Hooker was on a Thanksgiving Day, when he was due at a family dinner, but we got so totally absorbed in our discussion that he kept his wife waiting hours, until she was very angry at him. As we talked, he told me one amazing thing after the other.

Wes explained the Jews to me more clearly than I had ever figured out before. He described, with dramatic gestures, how they operate like a snake with different skins, which they crawl out of or into as the strategic need may arise. When Jewish Communism begins to get too “hot,” as it has here in the U.S., because of the millions who saw the parade of Jew Communist spies, they slide out of that skin and become Zionists. And when this also gets too hot, then they molt and become “anti-communists” or something else. In the excitement, nobody ever seems to notice that it is always the same snake.

Even more enlightening, he gave me a sparkling clear picture of the mess I had come to know on my own as the “movement”—the cowards, the loud-mouths, the hobbyists, the ADL agents, the “prostitutes” who make money out of it—the whole depressing lot of them. […]

I discovered Hooker hated Maguire, for whom I was working. Maguire, he said, was rabid only on one thing, the Mercury, his pet project—and the hell with the cause itself. He told me that Maguire was utterly ruthless financially and would weasel out of any deal he could, if it cost him money. He even claimed that Maguire had tried to hire him, Bill Evans (for whom I had obtained the loan from Snowden) and another man to kill key Jews at $10,000 a head, but that he became so difficult to pin down on the money question, they felt he would never pay. In fact, some of the boys wanted to shoot Maguire instead. Hooker said Maguire would talk forever about his “hard-core,” but would never do anything.

Meanwhile, in our trailer in Moonachie, my wife and I were very happy, considering the restricted living-space. She was once more pregnant, but we had money in the bank and our family grew daily more loving and united. With the pay coming in steadily and Maguire promising me raises for a job I wanted very much to do, the future seemed ideal.

I spent a good deal of time with Wes at his place in Greenwich and in New York. He had been driven out of business and political activity by the Anti-Defamation League and Jacob Javitz who was at that time New York Attorney General. The Jews had even obtained a permanent injunction against him in New York, as they are trying now to do in my case. He had to move from Larchmont, New York, to Greenwich, Connecticut.

Hooker was convinced that the “movement” would never succeed in the U.S. because, he said, “The “fat-cats” are too selfish and greedy ever to support a movement the way the Jews support their boys.” He was disgusted, and I couldn’t blame him, after I heard the series of experiences he had had with the “fat-cats,” as he called them—experiences which I have since “enjoyed” myself.

These creatures would pay any amount for some little pet project they had in mind, but they would not pay any money to the human talent necessary to get a fighting, efficient organization together, as the Jews do.

I still felt then that they could be persuaded to back a responsible plan and responsible people, and talked West into holding off on his plans to quit the movement and go back into business to make money, as he had previously done in TV, for instance, where he had made $40,000 a year. I told West I was working for Maguire with specific instructions to organize such a group. He scoffed and said Maguire would welch. I felt differently and stuck up for Maguire all the way. I felt sure I could bring these two good men together eventually, in spite of the wild talk and charges.

Hooker has the genius which is desperately needed by the dead right-wing, and I felt sure I could get Maguire to back him eventually as a leader. I had to run back and forth between them, as you would between two pouting school girls who had turned their backs to one another. But little by little, I got them closer together. Finally, Maguire agreed to a secret meeting between Hooker, himself, Fred Willis (Maguire’s oldest and best friend), and myself at Maguire’s Park Lane apartment.

Hooker put his full faith into the effort and came up with complete list of all the people and “leaders” in the movement, their records, their potentials and their drawbacks. He also had an accurate list of the spies and agents of the Anti-Defamation League which had Maguire itchy-fingered. Although it irritated him and went against his nature, I even got Hooker worked up to the point where he called Maguire “Sir,” as I did.

We presented a complete plan for a slow, secret Nazi build-up under Hooker throughout the U.S.A. using the personnel and leaders already so well known to Hooker, a front group with an “almost” Nazi flavor and—financing by Maguire. Eventually, we felt that most of the other rich men would help, if they could see something first. Maguire seemed entranced with everything we presented. Hooker wanted to give him the complete list of ADL and other Jewish agents, plus the evaluations of all right-wing leaders, but I had suggested holding off until we got some kind of commitment. This tactic got results.

“All right!” said Maguire, with the air of a man suddenly decided on an immense step. “I’ll back it! The country doesn’t have five years left! We’ve simply got to do it! I’ll put in a thousand dollars for the first year!”

Hooker looked at me with his mouth open. I looked at Hooker, then we both looked at Maguire’s old friend, Willis. Here was a multimillionaire with over $80 million, sitting in an apartment which was costing him at least $1500 a month, to say nothing of his fabulous palace on the waterfront in Connecticut—and he was telling us that he was going to “back” a national political movement of gigantic proportions to save America, with $1000 a year! And he was going to do this great thing because “we only have five years left!”

Hooker and Willis were all for giving Maguire hell right there and then. Willis was worse than disgusted and said so, but Hooker kept quiet at my request.

I tried again. I knew Maguire spent hundreds of thousands of dollars per year printing Mercury and reprints from the magazine, plus all kinds of material for his four or five offices. I reasoned that if he were too stingy to contribute, perhaps we could get him at least to trade with us as printers, and thus finance the movement. We had dozens of young men who would learn the printing trade overnight and work like horses for nothing—which would make all the printing profits pure gravy for the fight.

Scrambling wildly in my mind to put this deal together while keeping peace at the meeting I made the pitch to Maguire and he accepted it. He agreed to give us the printing and the “fabulous” thousand dollars a year!

We parted at the canopied door on Park Avenue. Willis seemed too disgusted to talk any further. After hearing Maguire moan and groan year after year about the utterly desperate situation of America and the White Race, after hearing him admit that the only way to save ourselves from the Jews was with a tough, hard core, it must have been galling in the extreme to see him sitting on his money bags and offer to toss us a few-coppers for going out into the streets to have our heads bashed in by tyrants.

Hooker and I went to his club (Cornell), right around the corner and sat in the library trying to calm down and get our bearings for further action. In spite of the setback, it seemed to me at the time that I had rescued things with the printing deal. I wanted to plunge full speed ahead with arrangements. Hooker was understandably sour and predicted that Maguire would simply welch again, but I wheedled him into going along on the deal. He admitted that I had had more success than anybody so far with Maguire, just by getting on the payroll and arranging the meeting. Maguire, he pointed out, usually refused to see more than one person at a time, to avoid witnesses. So, West had a flicker of faith in my own enthusiasm and we went to work setting up a printing plant.

We got a press, a little store, started the boys frantically reading manuals on printing, held meetings, planned financing, raised money and generally did all the things necessary to be ready to handle our end of the business deal. Then I went to Maguire and said we were ready to start with some small printing orders, perhaps office forms.

It is probably an insult to the reader’s intelligence to state bluntly what happened. Men do not suddenly change their habits—Maguire welched. There was no printing to be had at any of his offices. Not only did he welch, but I now became a source of great discomfort for him. My presence was a silent, unspoken, even unconscious rebuke to him for his faithlessness. It was hard for him to go through the “we’ve only got five years left” bit with all his visitors, as he did every day, with me at his elbow. […]

Maguire’s daughter was the boss at Mercury, and it was not long before I discovered an indefinable blockage to everything I tried to do in the office. I thought at first it was his daughter, Natasha, but found out that the old man himself was behind a few louse-ups. One day he called me from his office and told me to meet him two floors below. He didn’t want us to be seen conferring. We met in the men’s room and he told me that his wife was giving him a hard time about me. She was a White Russian, he assured me, and on “our” side, but didn’t want to jeopardize the luxurious life she had attained with her husband, nor risk the security of her children. It was the old story, but I never expected to hear it from a multimillionaire. Maguire told me his wife was so upset that he was taking her on a Caribbean cruise, a pattern I have since learned that he follows whenever things get too hot, as they did recently when the New York papers blasted him at the instigation of the ADL for being “anti-Semitic,” which the sly little fox denied!

He told me his wife had heard of my efforts to organize a “hard-core” for him, and was “terrified.” He whispered on and on so disgustingly about the pressure on him, and kept referring to the possibility of “cutting the thread,” meaning my employment, that I naturally offered to resign. He accepted before I managed to get the words out, assured me that he would secretly support me with cash, instead of the salary, to keep up my work, and “soon” would give us the printing business to launch the movement. Needless to say, none of this materialized.

He did, however, buy two of the articles I did when the Marine Corps was under attack by the reds for its eliteness and aristocratic, tough traditions… But that was about the last I ever saw of Russell Maguire or his money. He is probably still telling people we have only five years before it is all over, so we must hurry and subscribe to Mercury! We are, I suppose, to beat the Jews to death with baled copies of this non-anti-Semitic journal. Since this was written, he has sold out altogether and run.

Many right-wingers are sincerely concerned, I know, about my battles with men such as Maguire, Snowden, et al. and my revelations of what they really are. “They are doing good,” I am told, “why not let them go about their business their own way. They are helping. Don’t hurt them.”

I maintain that they are only giving the appearance of helping. They are the ones who are actually hurting. Before a mass of people will rise up and do anything effective and forceful about a tyrannical situation, there must be built up a certain emotional pressure. A firecracker has not the force of a rifle bullet because it explodes harmlessly in all directions. But the gas from a rifle bullet cannot escape, except by forcing the bullet out at terrific speed,because it is confined and directed into useful channels.

As long as Maguire and all the rest of his ilk, rich and poor, can give themselves the illusion of fighting the Jews by exploding the pressure inside of them verbally and harmlessly—in all directions—without hurting a single Jew traitor, they keep the all-important pressure from building up sufficiently so that we will get mad enough to fight. The Jews know this and so permit these hundreds and hundreds of harmless little right-wing organizations to spout incessantly and unheeded, behind the Jewish “paper curtain” of silence. These organizations don’t reach any significant number of people outside their own group and when they do, their approach is so feeble and wrong-headed that they recruit only a few odd-balls. They never, never get out into the public, into the streets, in order to reach the masses with an inspiring and driving, masculine movement, which alone can win their hearts!

If just one tenth of the cold cash which has been pouring for decades into such “firecracker” movements were to be contained, directed, and channeled behind an ideological bullet in the form of fighting men with a fighting message, the Jews would stop at nothing to crush and destroy that deadly “bullet.” Even without the large amounts of this figurative gunpowder, but with force and direction, the bullets we have been firing have earned the all-out attack of the Jews—the only sure sign that we are firing something far more effective than the usual right-wing “gas” at them. The Jews know that our brand of sniping will eventually destroy their illegal, tyrannical power. […]

As long as the hordes of tricky little “patriot” societies all over America allow our oppressed and harassed people to blow off the pressure caused by this filthy tyranny once a week in harmless “wind” and “gas,” there will never appear in America that holy and awesome power of aroused masses, the raging fires of social upheaval, which alone have always toppled the greatest tyrants, and for which there is no substitute. There are plenty of people already awake in America, They are afraid and they are frustrated by their inability to do anything about the terrible evil which they see growing.

Mercury Magazine does indeed “inform” a lot of people. But we don’t need any more informed people who won’t stand up and fight to oppose tyranny. Such things as Mercury also keep the “steam pressure” of emotions down in millions of Americans who are already informed and who feel that as long as Mercury is published, “something” is being done. Such Americans are also fooled by the constant advice to “write your congressman,” as if we can somehow petition or talk our way out of tyranny. But worst of all, Mercury, and a thousand other little projects like it, are financial leaks which keep the right-wing bled to death. There simply is no money for the battle, no money for the bullets and powder, because it has all been spent on firecrackers, uniforms, the band, pictures of the enemy, exciting rallies and bed-time stories for the troops.

Why I am not a neonazi

Virtually all white males have been brainwashed about what really happened in the Second World War. To boot, they have been feminized. Characterologically they are basically the antipodes of the Spartans, the Vikings or Himmler’s SS men. Even white nationalists are reluctant to repudiate the conquests of “feminism,” and by this I don’t only have in mind allowing women to vote (keep in mind the last paragraphs of Yockey’s essay), but allowing their “right” to inherit wealth or property (also keep in mind what we said about Austen’s novels and the causes of Greco-Roman decline in Pierce’s long text).

The humiliating empowerment of white women throughout the West is directly proportionate to the cretinization of white males. Now that I reproduced my translations about the prime example of polar Yang in Aryan history, Sparta, I would like to qualify that what we need is Aristotle’s proverbial golden mean. Sparta produced the best soldiers in world history but perished because it ignored what we now know: that enslaving non-whites is fatal in the long run. What we need is the Hegelian synthesis between yang Sparta and yin Athens: a sort of modern Rome. That is exactly what National Socialism was all about. Inspired in Rome, and let us remember the virile Roman salute, the Third Reich incorporated and eliminated—Hegel’s aufheben—the contradictions in both extremes: it was highly cultured as well as a tough military state.

I consider myself a spiritual inheritor of the Nationalist Socialist legacy. But I reject neonazism. Why?

Because neonazis are basically white nationalists plus Nazi paraphernalia. We have already seen that, unlike the NS men, these groups love degenerate music, Judaized Hollywood and non-reproductive sex. Many of these décadents are also anti-Nordicists who would dismiss the command cited in the very first lesson of Stellrecht’s Faith and Action already quoted in previous pages: “But if your blood has traits that will make your children unhappy and burdens to the state, then you have the heroic duty to be the last.”

The surreal thing is that even the pure Aryans hate Nordicism. Conversely what I love about Himmler is that, precisely because he was not handsome, he admired the hyper-Nordics of a Norwegian town he visited and harbored the thought that its people could become a paradigm for the Reich. Remember Stubb’s words about white nationalists:

Not only does it [Nordicism in general and National Socialism in particular] retrigger all the anti-racist conditioning they thought they’d gotten rid of, but it makes them ask “where does it end?” “At what point can we finally stop paying attention to each others genetic (and non-genetic) flaws?”

The answer is that it doesn’t end: that all life is struggle and hierarchy and that the Aryan race will never be perfected nor entirely freed from threats. But that’s not what they want to hear. Pierce made eugenics the core of his religious outlook as a means of protecting the eugenically-selecting society. But I see little concern for the subject among modern white nationalists. Can you imagine a racial state with a comprehensive eugenic policy which didn’t consider the reversal of mongrelization to be a major objective? [Stellrecht’s “heroic” advice] That it wouldn’t make its population look more like Swedes and less like Sicilians, as time goes on? It’s hard to do so, which is why I believe “anti-Nordicism” in white nationalism has, among other things, shut down much of the discussion on the subject.

On September 2013, in Harold Covington’s Northwest Front blogsite, several commenters subscribed politically correctness by bashing Covington in order not to offend the feelings of contemporary Greeks. A saner Northwest Front commenter said, “Those among us who don’t have the ability to look at a picture of half-Turks and tell they’re not White weren’t ever going to amount to anything on behalf of the White race.” The other side, the “revolutionary” neonazis, ignored that DNA tests have even revealed nigger genes among quite a few of the Portuguese; and we have already seen El Greco’s painting of crossbreed Spaniards as well as Pierce’s statement that “a 5 percent decline in average IQ would cause our civilization to collapse,” which applies to Sicily and Greece even before the Turkish invasion.

This cowardly lack of recognition of the very Letter A in Indo-European studies is not the only thing that annoys me about the embryonic movement known as white nationalism. Over the internet boards I find it bothersome when typical neonazis demand that I dismiss the Holocaust stories as hoax; and that if I fail to do it my morals are beyond the pale.

As someone who has spent many years studying controversial subjects (the pseudoscience in both parapsychology and biological psychiatry), I know perfectly that you must spend at least a decade of your life trying to digest the scholarly literature of both sides of an academic debate. I am in my middle fifties now and don’t have the time nor the motivation to research the Holocaust claims and counter-claims. For me it is enough to point out that two former Holocaust revisionists, Mark Weber, the director of the Institute of Historical Review, and David Irving, our best historian of the Third Reich, have changed their minds over the years, both accepting now that a few millions of Jews probably died during the war. Irving’s forthcoming book on Herr Himmler quotes historical records proving that, even though the six-million figure is an invention, a couple of millions of Jews probably died as a result of harsh Nazi treatments.

irving08-12

David Irving in 2012

But I would like to go beyond Irving’s scruples. Rephrasing a passage of Peter Helmkamp in Controlled Burn, an Irish commenter stated in my blog: “The truth is that the glad stirrings of genocide lurk in the heart of every man, yet only the Nazis had the courage to acknowledge the truth.” Another commenter, a Swede, went even further:

What is certain is that the Holocaust would not have produced any debilitating psychological effect on non-Christian whites. (By Christianity I mean “Christian morality.” Most atheists in the West are still Christian, even if they don’t believe in God or Jesus.) Being emotionally affected by the Holocaust presupposes that you think:

1) Victims and losers have intrinsically more moral value than conquerors and winners
2) Killing is the most horrendous thing a human can do
3) Killing children and women is even more horrendous
4) Every human life has the same value

None of these statements ring true to a man who rejected Christian morality. In fact, even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathize with them. If you told the Vikings that they needed to accept Jews on their lands or give them gold coins because six million of them were exterminated in an obscure war, they would have laughed at you.

It must be comical for the Nietzscheans of the North that, unlike the monocausalism ubiquitously present in the neonazi and white nationalist movement, Himmler acknowledged other factors: “Our people’s thinking was misled by the forces of the Church, Liberalism, Bolshevism, and Jewry.” And let us never forget Hitler’s own words in one of his table talks: “The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity.” If neonazis were true Nazis and had transvalued Christian/Neo-Christian values they would be trying to demonstrate that Himmler’s Posen Speech in 1943 is genuine, not a hoax as they claim, and even find genocidal inspiration from the speech.

Of course: they will never do it because all of them are Neo-Christian pseudo-Nazis. Speaking with a little humor I would say that neonazis, white nationalists, and American southern nationalists subscribe what we may call the Harry Potter approach to the Jewish problem. Throughout those novels for children, the female author presents us a Harry who never uses “Avara Kadavra,” the killing spell against the bad guys; Harry only uses the disarming charm, “Expelliarmus.” But only in novels and movies for kids the good guys, who never are depicted as cold assassins, can win. In real life you have to make a transition to the dark side, to Himmler’s ways, to become a soldier.

I have read The Turner Diaries twice. When I read it for the first time, or rather listened the audio version with Pierce’s own voice, I was still struggling with the last remnants my Neo-Christian programming. I didn’t like the Breivik-like cruelties such as dispatching an entire group of pro-white warriors for not taking care of the Jewish problem in Toronto. And in the novel’s Day of the Rope I was troubled by the description that many innocent young whites also die. Then I read most of Covington’s Quintet and sensed a moral difference. Covington’s characters are not so bloodthirsty, not so genocidal exterminators. I could imagine myself doing the things in Covington’s novels but in the past some passages of the Diaries made me wonder…

But now that I have definitively left behind Christian axiology I can see that Pierce was ultimately right. As NS soldiers in the coming racial wars, altogether imbued in the martial qualities of gravitas and severitas, we must behave. The huge difference between the Quintet and the Diaries is that in Pierce’s world not only an ethno-state is born: in the final pages it is described that only the white race shall inherit the Earth. In Covington’s world that is dismissed because it would mean genocide on a scale not even performed by the Bolshevik Jews. But as Pierce said in Who We Are, already cited way above:

The hard lesson taught by the different results of the European colonization of North America, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, India, and southern Africa is that the only type of colonization with lasting significance is racial colonization; and that racial colonization can succeed only when Whites are willing and able to clear the land of non-White inhabitants and keep it clear.

This item of both Who We Are and the Diaries is so strong meat that I will elaborate on it only in Day of Wrath, and in the autobiographical books in Spanish that I’ll write after the completion of the present one.

Feminist quotas in the Northwest Front

Rockwell was assassinated in 1967; Pierce died of natural death, more than thirty years later. None of them were properly white nationalists. (“White nationalism” is a term introduced in the middle 1990s for the internet.) Their worldview was much closer to the thoroughgoing Yang reaction in National Socialism against the feminizing forces of degeneracy.

Presently in the American racialist scene Harold Covington, called “The Kid” in the times of Rockwell and Pierce, is considered the most radical (“Yang”) element as ideologically he is a revolutionary, not a mere reactionary. But Covington does not believe that millions of Jews died as a result of harsh treatment by the National Socialist Germans. Unlike us, he is stuck in Neo-Christian values. (I would dare to say that the stirrings of genocide should lurk in the heart of every transvalued white, which means accepting as grim necessity what seventy years ago happened to the subversive tribe.) In Covington’s quintet the purpose is not to reconquer the whole United States for the race, but to form an ethnostate within a few Northwestern states by means of secession; leaving the rest of the US territory to the blacks, mestizos, Jews, and white traitors. In fact, in Covington’s plan the nuclear weapons of mass destruction are left in the power of the federal government of the United States!

In thousands of pages the plots of Covington’s quintet—The Brigade, A Distant Thunder, A Mighty Fortress, The Hill of the Ravens and Freedom’s Sons—are situated in a balkanized, anti-white and dying America until freedom fighters create an independent White Republic in a corner of the territory. In 2010 I purchased copies of the first four novels of the saga and devoured them with uttermost interest (The Brigade particularly contains good advice as to how to conduct a racial war in the 21st century). While I felt uncomfortable that the last pages of A Mighty Fortress featured a female director of movies in the newly created Republic, I let it pass because National Socialist Germany also allowed the career of filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. But Riefenstahl was the exception, not the rule. In NS Germany women were generally not allowed to carry out official functions: they were excluded from positions of responsibility.

In Covington’s saga the ethnostate is clearly depicted as a self-styled National Socialist state, even during the revolutionary period before the creation of the Republic (“‘You a Nazi, sir?’ ‘I am’”—page 278 of The Hill of the Ravens; “…a lot of us are outright Nazis”—page 74 of The Brigade). And I cannot agree more with what Covington said on page 53 of A Distant Thunder, “When a race of people loses its women, it loses everything.” (This, incidentally, is what moved me to reproduce a Maxfield Parrish illustration of an ethereal nymph on the cover of this book.) On pages 187-189 of the Ravens Covington even enumerates his “Ten Principles of National Socialism,” some of them cited below:

Be Honest. A National Socialist faces a fact whether he likes it or not. Dishonesty is the mark of the enemy, who has falsified man’s conception of life, past and present. National Socialism represents the truth of life in its purest form.

Be Faithful to your Race. No one must be allowed to spoil what nature created in eons of racial evolution. Your highest purpose in life must be to carry on that evolution toward a better, stronger more beautiful mankind. The purity of the highest race is basic requirement for ever-higher evolution.

Fight for your Race. Fight for the holy ideals of National Socialism, which is the heart of our great race.

Nothing is Impossible. Where there is a will, there is a way. Everything falls before the man of indomitable will. It is necessary for us to suffer many cruel sacrifices because we must harden ourselves for the most decisive struggle in history.

Reject Decadence. Everything must be judged in relation to the survival and improvement of your race. Anything and anyone who hinders either the existence of our race or its perfection must be rooted out and destroyed.

But Covington violated this last principle by playing rock music in some of his radio podcasts. Furthermore, in his last novel, the only one that I did not purchase (Covington kindly sent me a PDF draft), he makes huge concessions to runaway feminism. Page 16 of the draft he sent me states: “A number of Nationalist soldiers wearing NDF tiger-stripes—mostly female…” On pages 18-19 a feat is described about one of these female tigresses, and on page 38 it is stated that “The new government department consisted of 342 people plus himself, about evenly split between male and female.” The most offensive line in Freedom’s Sons is found on page 50 which contains a dialogue: “A lot of Christians and general Neanderthal male chauvinist type want to go back to an all-male army.”

I confess that as a potential revolutionary I used to listen Covington’s Radio Free Northwest shows, and loved his urgent plea to invite all conscious whites to move to the Northwest corner in preparation for the civil war. However, when Covington included the voices of a couple of women in his podcasts I completely lost interest…

More than a year passed and I learnt that one of these women betrayed Covington. She flipped sides to the point of becoming anti-white, and in her website she even disclosed what happens in some “Secret Nazi Meetings” attended by the supporters of Covington: male supporters who had indeed taken the trouble to move to the Northwest in preparation of Covington’s civil war.

The Old Man had violated his first principle, “Be Honest,” because a National Socialist honestly faces the biological fact that women are simply not interchangeable with men and that, in genuine NS, positions of responsibility belong to the Boys Only Club. Covington’s big tent may have won some female adepts for his cause, but in me he lost a real soldier.

* * *

White nationalism is only a stone at the middle of the rapid-flowing waters of a dangerous river; an over-the-water large stone that can help us in our endeavor to jump to the other side. I myself used that stone during my crossing from Christianity and Liberalism to National Socialism. In fact, I could even write down such a spiritual odyssey in a text that might be titled “From St Francis to Himmler.”

But even accepting my metaphor that the stone is not meant to be a permanent residence let me say that, on a very generous estimate, the contents of this book are incomplete. Its intellectual content must be balanced with another book about what happened before, during and after the Second World War: a book that will detonate an emotional bomb in the reader’s mind: Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944–1947 by Thomas Goodrich (reviewed way above).

Only after assimilating Hellstorm, together with the present book, will the reader be ready to take the final leap across the river.