Commissary to the Gentiles, 1

Note of the Editor: Why I am reproducing another text from Marcus Eli Ravage is inferred from this important article.

Amazingly, unlike Friedrich Nietzsche who in 1887 wrote these passages of On the Genealogy of Morality, a year before my paternal grandmother was born, white nationalists still refuse to see the extent of the JQ. My prediction is that unless whites recognise that the Jewish Question and the Christian Question are two sides of the same coin, they will continue to suffer racial decline to the point of extinction.

Recently, a regular commenter told me that he is uninterested in re-launching the WDH radio show because what we need is revolutionary action.

I disagree.

There can be no revolutionary action until Western values are transvalued back to the pre-Christian values of Greece and Rome. Why white nationalists are so incapable of seeing something so obvious is easily explained by pointing out the fact that they had Christian parents, and unless they become autobiographers like me they will be incapable to see that religion is but a parental introject, including the moral grammar of the current Era.

In his article ‘Commissary to the Gentiles’ published in The Century Magazine of February 1928, the Jew Marcus Eli Ravage, who saw a light that white nationalists are still incapable to see, wrote (bold-type added by me):
 

______ 卐 ______

 

The first to see the possibilities of war by propaganda

You Christians worry and complain about the Jew’s influence in your civilization. We are, you say, an international people, a compact minority in your midst, with traditions, interests, aspirations and objectives distinct from your own. And you declare that this state of affairs is a menace to your orderly development; it confuses your impulses; it defeats your purposes; it muddles up your destiny. I do not altogether see the danger. Your world has always been ruled by minorities; and it seems to me a matter of indifference what the remote origin and professed creed of the governing clique is. The influence, on the other hand, is certainly there, and it is vastly greater and more insidious than you appear to realize.

That is what puzzles and amuses and sometimes exasperates us about your game of Jew-baiting. It sounds so portentous. You go about whispering terrifyingly of the hand of the Jew in this and that and the other thing. It makes us quake. We are conscious of the injury we did you when we imposed upon you our alien faith and traditions. Suppose, we say tremblingly, you should wake up to the fact that your religion, your education, your morals, your social, governmental and legal systems, are fundamentally of our making! And then you specify, and talk vaguely of Jewish financiers and Jewish motion-picture promoters, and our terror dissolves in laughter. The goi, we see with relief, will never know the real blackness of our crimes.

We cannot make it out. Either you do not know or you have not the courage to charge us with those deeds for which there is at least a shadow of evidence and which an intelligent judge and jury could examine without impatience. Why bandy about unconvincing trifles when you might so easily indict us for serious and provable offenses? Why throw up to us a patent and clumsy forgery such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion when you might as well confront us with the Revelation of St. John? Why talk about Marx and Trotski when you have Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus to confound us with?

You call us subverters, agitators, revolution-mongers. It is the truth, and I cower at your discovery. It could be shown with only the slightest straining and juggling of the facts that we have been at the bottom of all the major revolutions in your history. We undoubtedly had a sizable finger in the Lutheran Rebellion, and it is simply a fact that we were the prime movers in the bourgeois democratic revolutions of the century before the last, both in France and America.

If we were not, we did not know our own interests. But do you point your accusing finger at us and charge us with these heinous and recorded crimes? Not at all! You fantastically lay at our door the recent great War and the upheaval in Russia, which have done not only the most injury to the Jews themselves but which a school-boy could have foreseen would have that result.

14 Comments

  1. “There can be no revolutionary action until Western values are transvalued back to the pre-Christian values of Greece and Rome.”

    How do you explain many of our revolutionaries so far like von Brunn, Breivik, Roof, Bowers etc. being Christians then? Also The Order were (except for Bob Mathews) all CI when they carried out their action. Our race adhered to Christianity for centuries yet continued to kill its enemies and even conquered 9/10ths of the globe so by your logic that would mean we were adhering primarily to the pre-Christian morality despite being Christians in name. If that is the case I do agree with you that’s why I believe that it is only since 1945 and the defeat of NS Germany that Christianity FULLY triumphed over Aryan Man and completely subverted his native morality for one in which ‘racism’ is taboo.

    Also how do you explain that there has been anti-Christian white males in the West since 1945 yet hardly any of them engage in revolutionary action? They have transvaluated their Xtian values. What’s stopping them?

    A transvaluation of Christian values is useless without violent action in the real world to back it up. Having a minority of white males who all adhere to an anti-Christian morality will not enable the white race to survive unless they also kill their enemies as our forefathers did during every century, for millennia in fact, before the modern era (1945-present). So I would say the survival of the white race depends on a minority of white males transvaluating their Judeo-Christian values AND at the same time engaging in revolutionary action. One demonstrates they’ve overcome Christian programming by killing of Jews and other enemies. It’s no good sitting in one’s house having overcome the Christian virus mentally. That does not save the race. Our race, like any species, survives through reproduction and killing of hostile enemies. There already exists a significant minority of white males in the movement who have overcome Christianity. But without demostrating that fact in the real world nothing will change.

    If you’re saying that the survival of the white race in the immediate short-term (say the next 150 years or so) depends on whites overcoming Christianity I would say that the white masses are not likely to transvaluate their Xtian values back to pre-Christian Aryan values. Only a minority of whites are capable of that. But that minority who would form an anti-Christian revolutionary vanguard must fight in the real world also. So far they/we are not doing so which means either a.) things have to get even worse before more white males crack and actually fight back or b.) our race has become unfit to survive. I think all Aryans could become de-Christianized in the long-term but only after the anti-Christian elite has siezed power from the Jews and can de-program the Aryan masses. In the short-term there is not enough time to de-Christianize every white.

    • How do you explain many of our revolutionaries so far like von Brunn, Breivik, Roof, Bowers etc. being Christians then?

      Because, as you say below, their minds were Christian only in the superficial sense: but they were operating within pre-1945 mores.

      Also how do you explain that there has been anti-Christian white males in the West since 1945 yet hardly any of them engage in revolutionary action? They have transvalue their Xtian values. What’s stopping them?

      Any concrete examples? As far as I know, secular WNsts still subscribe Xtian ethics, even those who criticize Christianity (e.g., Greggy and Franklin Ryckaert). Xtian ethics lingers upon all with the exception of the likes of William Pierce.

      A transvaluation of Christian values is useless without violent action in the real world to back it up.

      No. If transvaluation has already occurred, violence would be automatic even though transvalued men still don’t go out of the trenches because you need at least 3% of white males for a revolution (per Norman Spear).

      One demonstrates they’ve overcome Christian programming by killing of Jews and other enemies. It’s no good sitting in one’s house having overcome the Christian virus mentally.

      Again, with no 3% it makes little sense to do a lone wolf thing. Better try to get that percent while plan things in the trenches (a percent that will be easier to reach after the dollar tanks).

      In the short-term there is not enough time to de-Christianize every white.

      I am not asking for a general apostasy from Christianity in the short term, only getting back to the mores before 1945. And that can only be accomplished through a complete revision of history showing that the System lied to us as to who the real villains were in WW2.

      No revision of WW2 history + transvaluation, no revolution: as whites have become too demoralised by fake history + fake moral values.

      • “they (von Brunn, Breivik, Roof, Bowers etc.) were operating within pre-1945 mores.”

        Yes, a second ‘transvaluation of values’ took place in 1945 in which Christian ethics triumphed completely. The first transvaluation of values was when Christianity triumphed over the Roman Empire and Classical civilization. However this second relapse into Christ-insanity directly threatens the survival of the Aryan race itself. IF Aryans do go extinct Christianity will have succeeded in the purpose that early Christian Jews like Saul designed it for. Perhaps I should write that only if Aryans go extinct can Judeo-Christianity be said to have completely triumphed over the Aryan race. While Christianity has always had a negative effect on the white race (witness its abominable history) it was not until 1945 that Christianity seriously threatened the very survival of the white race itself.

        “No. If transvaluation has already occurred, violence would be automatic even though transvalued men still don’t go out of the trenches because you need at least 3% of white males for a revolution (per Norman Spear).”

        I disagree that every White Man who carries out violence against internal or external enemies of the white race has made a conscious transvaluation of Christian values. It takes breaking with society’s social programming to carry out violence but I don’t think it requires a personal transvaluation. Ultimately, it’s basic survival instinct. If white males wish for their race to survive they have to kill enemies of their race. Whether each White Man who engages in violence has had a personal mental cleansing of Christian mores or not is secondary-I’m sure if more and more White Men do fight back there will be a number of those who think of themselves as Christians. Securing the survival of the race is the important thing-such efforts as destroying the Vatican, burning down Christian churches (as well as synagogues and mosques) and eliminating all traces of monotheistic Abrahamism wherever the white race exists (and hopefully around the globe as a whole one day) and reprogramming of the white masses away from Christianity will have to take place after the fight for survival has taken place.

        In effect you say there is not going to be revolutionary action from 3% of white males until they have all personally transvaluated Christian ethics and become anti-Christians, if I understand you correctly. This is in line with your view that it is Christianity (the Christian Problem) that is the greatest hindrance to the survival of the white race. I think the 3% have to break with not just Christian morals but all societal morals becoming predatory beings.

        “Again, with no 3% it makes little sense to do a lone wolf thing. Better try to get that percent while plan things in the trenches (a percent that will be easier to reach after the dollar tanks).”

        Since 1945 there have only been lone wolf attacks not organized resistance from groups of White Men (with the notable exception of The Order). I suspect that as the situation for our race continues to worsen (as it can only do if white males don’t fight) then eventually organized paramilitary resistance may become a reality as more and more White Men crack under the pressure of what is being inflicted on them and their race and finally break with the social programming that prevents them from breaking society’s laws. The lack of organized group resistance as opposed to lone wolf attacks demonstrates that things have to get worse for white males to fight back. Either that or our race has become unfit to survive in which case it is on the way to extinction since 1945 and there will be hardly any violent resistance in the future at all.

        “I am not asking for a general apostasy from Christianity in the short term, only getting back to the mores before 1945. And that can only be accomplished through a complete revision of history showing that the System lied to us as to who the real villains were in WW2.

        No revision of WW2 history + transvaluation, no revolution: as whites have become too demoralised by fake history + fake moral values.”

        Fair enough. No argument from me there. That’s why I say either Hitler’s spirit will triumph or the white race will go extinct.

      • In effect you say there is not going to be revolutionary action from 3% of white males until they have all personally transvaluated Christian ethics and become anti-Christians…

        What I am saying is that we need a minimum mass of freedom fighters before getting out of the trenches. Even Covington used to say that he needed at least 2,000 active warriors before going after ZOG. I don’t care if some of them are Christians (if they fight, those Christians will be my comrades anyway). But I am positive that Xtianity has emasculated the Aryan.

  2. I was still a bible-literalist face-value orthodox preconciliar catholic, when I first heard Urban Jungle Girl read this. I said to myself, and partly to Marcus Eli Ravage “Yep you got us with Christianity, bro.”

    This and “The Myth of the Twentieth Century” were just too compelling for me.

  3. “Our race adhered to Christianity for centuries yet continued to kill its enemies …”

    But killed them only as enemies, not as racial enemies. And how could it have been otherwise, since clear ideas about race and its significance only arise after Linnaeus and Darwin? In point of fact, racelessness and obsessive concern about the afterlife, even to the exclusion of one’s own (and one’s race’s) survival in this life, is built into the Christian worldview; in Christianity such attitudes are considered to be a virtue.

    Generally though, I think whites will only abandon the slave morality once there has ceased to be a need for slaves. In the hunter-gatherer societies that preceded the establishment of civilization, slavery was not possible on the grand scale. But because of its hierarchical organization, civilization requires slaves, whether they be the wage slaves of today, or nominal slaves (i.e., helots) such as made up the bulk of the population of Sparta, and a fair percentage of the Roman Empire.

    Also, this article by Ravage contains a rather remarkable admission in its subject line. By using the word “commissary” in its little-used sense of “a person to whom some responsibility or role is delegated by a superior power; a deputy,” Ravage is admitting what should be obviously true to anyone, but seems to have eluded most the right: that the Jews are the white man’s deputy; that their authority and actions are delegated; that they have only as much power as the white man gives them, and retain it only so long as he wants them to. Thus, the answer to the question “Why don’t whites organize a revolution?” is “Because they like their civilization, which depends on order, and the smoothing over of racial differences.” They prefer it even to their own racial survival, as they made abundantly clear in WWII.

  4. This story is getting only a little coverage, but people here might be interested to know about it. Roof’s exploit has inspired some emulators.

    LINK

    These two kids, Lecron and her boyfriend Armstrong, are suffering now for their naïveté and inexperience, and will probably have to spend many years in the hell of the system’s prisons merely for talking about doing something. The moral of this story is clear. Anyone considering direct action should discuss it with NO ONE. Do not ask for approval from anyone, or try to get them to help you, or make social media posts praising mass murderers to broadcast what a badass you are. And for fuck’s sake, DON’T write Dylann Roof as Elizabeth Lecron did, even if you think he’s a great guy and want to tell him so. Just keep in mind that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

    • Are you a new commenter here? Your posts are a joy to read!

      That story is fascinating. So, incels and Muslims are not the only terrorists in the West? And a female terrorist (a “goth GF” with body modifications)? A terrorist couple? So weird!

  5. So, what are the ravings of a psychotic Jew meant to prove? The basic lie is that Jews created Christianity. They may have infiltrated and subverted the institutions created around that movement, but they did not create it. Anyway, what’s so special about Rome that it should have lasted to present day? Good riddance to bad rubbish is all I have to say about the Roman Empire. Rome was really a glorified protection racket that collapsed because it ran out of clients to shakedown. That’s all.

    As for Martin Luther, he turned against the Jews when he learned enough Hebrew to read the Old Testament for himself and he realised that Jews he hired to translate it into German had mistranslated it, and so, led him into doctrinal error. An abuse he couldn’t forgive them for. Before that he was quite the kikelover.

    • Wait, what? Of course, Jews created Christianity – both Jesus (if he existed) and Paul were Jews.

      What’s so special about Rome? The fact that it was an Aryan powerhouse that in the fairest 1v1 combat proved that child burning does not make your society stronger. Considering that I don’t fully buy César and deMause’s idea of psychoclasses, I would literally suggest child burning as a strategy – but I DON’T. Because Carthage lost. And it does place me before a dilemma, a catch 22 (I blame modern anti-fascist mores on the advanced psychoclasses aside from GOD/JEW).

      Also, Rome is one of the few Aryan societies a lot of whose customs we know of (the others being Greece, Iceland, Ireland and Vedic India). That’s incredibly precious for the future.

      People like Martin Luther hate Jews literally because the Jews are racist. See aryanism dot net, a beautiful anti-semitic website, so hilariously insane I want to cry.

    • What you’ve gotten yourself is a perfect circle of logic – A Jew literally tells you that his kind has tricked you with the bible, then it is only because he is a psychotic. Christianity murdered thousands of innocents, then it is justified simply because it was Christianity. The OT is translated confirming that it is in fact a Jewish supremacist book and Yahweh is their God and not yours, then it is only proof that it is mistranslated. Luther turned against the Jews and even admits it is due to their Racism, then you just ignore that and say he did it because he was an antisemite on the Racial basis.

      This is a prime example of an unfalsifiable hypothesis. Let’s say Yahweh came up to you and told you he was the God of the Jews, then I bet you would strive to rationalise that away, as well.

      It is honestly Irishmen like you who make me rack my brains why your kin were murdering each other in the 70’s and 80’s. What’s more, what did all those English die for? Was it so the IRA could breed more worthy citizens who, despite having evidence for why their religion is unhealthy, filthy, and philosemitic held up in front of their faces, actually become more steadfast in their beliefs and still call themselves kike haters?

      • The troubles were a war(unfinished) over allegiances. The British Army soldiers swore an oath to stop IRA bullets for the Crown. The IRA made them live up to that oath. As far as the Irish Republic is concerned; Britain has a greater claim to dominion over the eastern seaboard of the United States than it does to single square inch of the island of Ireland.

    • Yes, always the noble Irish soldier just trying to protect his homeland from the evil British ogres who seek to eat all of his potatoes.

      But what of the dead children that lay at the feet of the IRA, or those ordinary Irishmen that were blown up or shot down due to being Catholic, or protestant? What was that for? Was it so Ireland could kick out a “foreign” Government so it could institute a native one that adhered to the exact same ideological principles of the former, those being democracy and multiculturalism? Was it so they could swarm their country with drugs then bitch about it later? Was it so they could have abusive priests at every corner creating little schizophrenics so they can, for whatever reason, infest sites like The West’s Darkest Hour despite the fact that said sites have made clear they are not wanted time and time again?

      But what requires a Nation to have more claim over one than the other? Do you have to occupy an area for one hundred years, one million? Does the leader of the occupying Nation have to be related to those of the Nation they occupy? For example, as I am an Irish descendant, does that mean I can invade your precious country without a problem? Does that mean Whites don’t belong in Rhodesia? I would like an actual thought-out explanation here rather than some patriotic pontificating where your angelic soldiers of the IRA dindu nuffin.

      • Ireland is probably as weird and archaic as Ukraine. Both are about agriculture and famines. Both are about being oppressed. Both are dying out, and at the same time don’t give two shits about it, preferring to quarrel with their neighbour. And yet, neither will ever be able to see he position they’re in, and jump over some stupid stage in this suicide (like the third stage feminism).

        It’s incredible to have real men die over trivial matters while “their” (?) women at home have the right to attain education, own property and work.

        Cases such as this have made me despise the very word “nationalism”. Where this phenomenon survives, it is synonymous with blindness and adherence to Christianity.

        Patriotism is a great scourge for the mind. You can’t talk to people infected with patriotism. They’re as dishonest and delusional as believers in the supernatural. “But don’t you love Ukraine?” = “The IRA made them live up to that oath.” As if anything out of these squabbles matters…


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: