Darkening Age, 19

Note of the Ed.: The main weakness that the Aryan faces before the Jew is the lack of solidarity to even recognise his martyrs. Contrast this attitude with how the Jew commemorates every single historical grievance; for example, when a Greek Seleucid king tried to destroy Judaism centuries before the Common Era.

The parabalani were Christian thugs that blindly obeyed the bishop of Alexandria. Since Aryans fail to honour their martyrs (Agora is a philo-Semitic film—not a good example of honouring an Aryan martyr of Semitic thugs), it would be helpful to imagine the parabalani as the Faith Militant in the TV series Game of Thrones. But this comparison, like the Spanish movie Agora starring non-Aryan Rachel Weisz as Hypatia, is deceiving. The historical parabalani were probably Christian Semites, as suggested in Evropa Soberana’s essay on Judea vs. Rome.

In chapter nine of The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World, Catherine Nixey wrote:


______ 卐 ______


Hypatia of Alexandria was born in the same city as the parabalani and yet a world away from them. While they spent their days toiling among the filthy and the dying, this aristocratic intellectual spent her days working with abstract mathematical theories and astrolabes. Hypatia was not only a philosopher; she was also a brilliant astronomer and the greatest mathematician of her generation. The Victorians, who became much taken with her, granted her other graces posthumously. One famous painting shows her draped naked against an altar, her nubile body shielded by little more than her tumbling tawny locks. A novel about her by the Reverend Charles Kingsley, author of the children’s novel The Water Babies, is rich in such breathless phrases as ‘the severest and grandest type of old Greek beauty’ and in musings on her ‘curved lips’ and the ‘glorious grace and beauty of every line’…

After razing Serapis the Christians had gone on vicious rampage through the city and its 2,500 shrines, temples and religious sites. Busts of Serapis previously stood in streets, wall niches and above doorways had been removed—’cleansed’. The Christians had ‘so cut and filed [them] away that not even a trace or mention of [Serapis] or any other demon remained anywhere. In their place everyone painted the sign of the Lord’s cross on door­ posts, entrances, walls and columns.’ Later, with bolder finality, crosses were carved in.

The city’s intellectual life had suffered. The final remnants of the Great Library had gone, vanishing along with the temple. Many of Alexandria’s intellectuals had gone too, fleeing to Rome, or elsewhere in Italy, or anywhere they could to get away from this frightening city’…

[For the Christian mind] Hypatia was not a philosopher: she was a creature of Hell. It was she who was turning the entire city against God with her trickery and her spells. She was ‘atheizing’ Alexandria. Naturally, she seemed appealing enough—but that was how the Evil One worked. Hypatia, they said, ‘had beguiled many people through satanic wiles’. Worst of all, she had even beguiled Orestes. Hadn’t he stopped going to church? It was clear: she had beguiled him through her magic’. This could not be allowed to continue.

One day in March AD 415, Hypatia set out from her home to go for her daily ride through the city. Suddenly; she found her way blocked by a ‘multitude of believers in God’. They ordered her to get down from her chariot. Knowing what had recently happened to her friend Orestes, she must have realized as she climbed down that her situation was a serious one. She cannot possibly have realized quite how serious.

As soon as she stood on the street, the parabalani, under the guidance of a Church magistrate called Peter—‘a perfect believer in all respects in Jesus Christ’—surged round and seized ‘the pagan woman’.

They then dragged Alexandria’s greatest living mathematician through the streets to a church. Once inside, they ripped the clothes from her body then, using broken pieces of pottery as blades, flayed her skin from her flesh. Some say that, while she still gasped for breath, they gouged out her eyes.

Once she was dead, they tore her body into pieces and threw what was left of the ‘luminous child of reason’ onto a pyre and burned her.


  1. She reminds me of Maria Callas, in many ways.

    • Hang on, you dont mean Marie Curie?

      • No, I mean Callas. In my personal opinion, Callas, like Hypatia, had beauty, talent, and intelligence.

        The funny side being that Maria Callas was a mud, while Hypatia was a pure Aryan (supposedly).

  2. Aren’t societies that let women learn science and study philosophy degenerate beyond belief? IranianForAryans was of such a belief.

    • I think it depends.

    • I wonder what does Cesar say to that…

      • Adunai’s comments are purposely provocative, sometimes unnecessarily provocative.

        In this context (Hypatia’s martyrdom), I would say it is out of place to quote this Iranian dude.

      • Christians can be good for one reason alone – just like Bolsheviks, they have preserved an older version of the mind virus, more timid than the current one.

        That’s why so many White Nationalists can in their short sightedness cling to the first-wave feminism, not seeing that the third wave is its natural conclusion.

        @César I find radical anti-feminism to be of utmost importance. Underlying it is never irrelevant as feminism is as permeating in our minds as other Christian influences are.

      • That’s why so many White Nationalists can in their short-sightedness cling to the first-wave feminism…

        True: at Occidental Dissent and elsewhere, many Xtians hate Andrew Anglin precisely because Anglin recognizes that the problem with feminism started in the 19th century with 1st wave feminism (women’s right to vote, etc.). They even use leftist Newspeak (“misogynists”) when referring to truly awakened people like us.

        That’s why Islam is conquering Europe and will continue to conquer Europe until the Xtian bug is recognized and eliminated.

  3. Saudi Arabia, today, has Religious Police, the Mutaween. Just like the Christians of Alexandria. The Bible is every bit as bad as the Qur’an. We need the help of Jung to understand why Christianity, as practised today, is not as nakedly barbaric as what Islam is.

    Good People will breath forth a good religion. Wicked People, will breathe forth a wicked religion.

    In its core doctrine, in the Bible, Christianity is every bit as obscene and anti-european as Islam is. The difference is that the European Racial Soul has tempered it some what.

    As atheists put it, Christians have been dragged kicking and screaming through the Enlightenment. They believe that the Enlightenment values that they profess have Christianity as their source, when it is paganism, atheism, deism, and heretical branches of Christianity such as Anabaptism, and Quakerism, and Unitarianism that is the source of these enlightenment values.

    Enlightenment Values, such as freedom of speech; right to privacy; exemption from cruel and unusual punishment – such as the American Constitution – are actually a conscious rejection of Christian Values, or “Judeochristian Values” as Prager U puts it.

    • to discuss beliefs versus empiricism is like discussing why oil should be like water (or vice versa). there is zero merit/ value in all belief systems. why? why do i or anyone need a belief system to live and survive. all i need to survive and thrive is to know the rules of the game and then chose to pull up a chair to the gaming table. or not go to the casino in the first place. the only merit in discussing belief systems is perhaps its recreational value. some folks like to watch movies. others, follow politics. and others, play or watch sports of their choice. regarding feminism: my mate is sovereign, just as i am. if we can hold each other in mutual respect, and non-threatening to each others self, just as we hold all of nature, fuk it all.

      • correction: “if we can’t hold each other….”

    • Gaedhal! How can you be so wrong?

      “As atheists put it, Christians have been dragged kicking and screaming through the Enlightenment.”

      Christians started and ended the Enlightenment.

      “The difference is that the European Racial Soul has tempered it some what.”

      When was it tempered? The answer is – in the Middle Ages. After Luther, however, Europeans have been becoming ever more Christian, and the tenets of Christianity have been growing ever more naked.

      “freedom of speech” – more like freedom to degeneracy.

      “right to privacy” = “don’t look, don’t see”. And my favourite, “live and let live”. Disgusting.

      “exemption from cruel and unusual punishment” – has nothing to do with it, it’s probably better explained with deMause’s psychoclasses AND with the general pussification of males.

      • Voltaire and Paine hated Christianity. However, Paine, in particular, was very Christian – as regards Meta Ethics. He praises Christ in The Age of Reason because he believed in the equality of man.

        Paine, I believe, wrote the declaration of Independence with its notorious phrase “Self Evident that all men are created equal.”

        I am just contrasting the common-sense values of our times with Christian Theocracy, where people could be abducted, tortured and murdered at the whim of a prince or a priest. As to “Right to Privacy” the Inquisition could raid one’s home at any time so as to ensure that his home life was in conformity with the gospel.

        I am not so much praising Enlightenment Values. I am merely contrasting them with Christian values, and shewing forth that the founding of America was actually a Deist/Masonic/Atheist rejection of Christian values. A conscious one at that. Thomas Jefferson used to troll the absurdities of the bible all the time. He said of Christian Theocracy that it makes half the world hypocrites, and the other half fools.

      • You should read a text that changed my worldview nine years ago, ‘The Red Giant’.

      • @gaedhal

        I like CT’s word “neo-Christian” to describe people who are Christians without knowing it. Christianity runs so deep in Western man and the acceptance of its ethics is so widespread that it’s fair to say that any belief system short of a resolute and confident atheism will be contaminated by a Christian residue. Jefferson referred to himself as a Christian and attended church despite his differences with the religion. John Locke, the father of liberalism and one of the most significant figures of the Enlightenment, was a Christian theologian. Even Hitler never said a word against Christ, only against Christianity as it had come to be practiced.

      • @RevileChrist,

        Jefferson and Paine weren’t perfect. Neither am I. I still consider it expedient to play along with Catholicism in much the same way that Jefferson played along with his Christian sect. However, for their times, the 1700s, they were at the cutting edge of trolling the bible and the sects of Christ Lunacy.

        “Lighthouses are of more use than churches.”

        Benjamin Franklin.

        “Christianity is not my religion.”

        Abraham Lincoln.

        Thomas Paine went so far as to write “I hate it” in reference to the Bible. It is a wonder that a Christian Mob didn’t Hypatia him. It is all too easy to criticise Paine and Jefferson from the comfort of our more secular times.

      • @ gaedhal

        I’m unable to find a source for your Lincoln quote, and although Lincoln was an accomplished and prolific liar, it’s so in conflict with the times and sentiments of his day that I doubt that he actually said it. However, regarding the Bible and his religious beliefs, he is on record as having said:

        “In regard to this Great Book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this book.” — September 7, 1864 – Abraham Lincoln’s Reply to Loyal Colored People of Baltimore upon Presentation of a Bible

        @ adunai:

        Modern life fascinates, to be sure. But I see that propensity of modern man to be fascinated and drawn in by modernity also as part of the evolution of the human superorganism. That is to say, anyone trying to stand outside of it (racists, for example), who manifests an inborn resistance to some of its features, is being selected against. Sometimes their demise is violent (e.g. Hypatia, or Hitler and the people of his Reich), and other times they simply aren’t allowed to reproduce (incels).

        Men such as Hitler or William Pierce are special cases in that they too were fascinated by modernity, but their mistake was in thinking they could stand at the head of it and direct it. Pierce referred to those I am calling zombies as lemmings, but he himself really wanted nothing more than to be a leader, which is to say, the head lemming. He would have taken the lemmings off a cliff at the north side of the island instead of the south where they were headed. But the superorganism, in its emergent collective consciousness, rejected this path.

        I think that life in ancient times wasn’t necessarily horrible. Socrates, and Epicurus lived well and set good examples, just to name two. Epicurus, particularly, had the right idea. The best life is lived with a tranquil mind, away from zombies! I don’t aspire to be the head zombie, and my distaste for them is such that I doubt even the possibility of a good zombie collective.

    • as long as i’m ranting on religion, i’ve repeatedly wondered how seminal sex was/ is in inventing/ growing/ holding to one’s choice of religion as a world view. why? for chicken shit abusive males who are threatened by the thought of losing control of their sex partner, religion as imposing a set of shame/ guilt/ fear based rules of behavior could be helpful to these whimp ass males, rather then working out for themselves how to compete with their fellow males in the room and win at being the top “success symbol” that attracts the heart and mind of their mates.

      • I believe that we should not be talking about “abusive males” for the next 200 years at least.

        Well, maybe you are right, maybe feminists are right. It’s just I don’t care. We should not care. Because the European race is at its lowest, and the topic of “abusive males” should be of the lowest possible priority.

        Modern males are weak, pathetic, schizophrenic, misled or evil. If anything, “abusive” should be considered a nostalgic remnant of the Faustian spirit.

        “imposing a set of shame/ guilt/ fear based rules of behavior could be helpful to these whimp ass males”

        Isn’t instilling fear a viable strategy for society?

        “how to compete with their fellow males in the room and win at being the top “success symbol””

        Isn’t it gay? Isn’t competing with your fellow men for women gay? Shouldn’t we all return to arranged marriages anyway? Shouldn’t a proper man not be allowed to talk to another man’s woman or daughter?

      • i don’t like to use the word marriage for it’s classical connotations.

        rather, a union between adult male and female humans is multi-purpose and multi-function that likely the youthful undertakers won’t be mature to grasp all the leviathan aspects at the time they strike their holy agreement. however, is seems our nature is to want and need a long term commitment to our chosen mate. with the result that both parties need/ must control their biological impulses, the males noticing the sex symbols in the room and the females similary noticing the success symbols.

        Gail Putney Fullerton does a good job in discussing the multi-faceted marriage relationship in her book, “Survival in Marriage: Introduction to family interaction, conflicts and alternatives.” worth reading at least for an intro to those serious about working on a union relations.

        and the ultimate purpose of both parents? to raise and mentor their children with the target to make their children better at life then themselves. the children are the focus. let me scream that from the housetops: THE CHILDREN ARE THE FOCUS. (decidedly and obviously not the purpose of the present states of united. rather, the dumbing down, bankrupting, destroying of the next generations. and what better strategy to dumbing down than miscegenating with mudskins? goddamit. fukers.)

        the covenant union to make children works best when both parties accept each other as sovereign entities — as they accept all of natures entities as uniquely sovereigns — striking a lifelong agreement that their union works to serve both them and their purpose of producing a stronger and fitter next generation of humans.

        and i’m all for judges ruling in favor of “justifiable homicide” (remember the dixie chick’s Earl Had to Die?) when one party in the holy union abuses the other party, and especially chronically.

      • @highrpm

        If you can look at the current state of affairs and believe that we need anything but the most brutal patriarchy that the world has ever seen, you are either in denial or blind.

      • @eso,
        pls list a few brutal partriarchies that have worked. i can reflexively list 3 that have not and do not and perhaps may be why at least the states of the [dis]united are wreaking their havoc all over the faces of the earth: old israel and its fuking disordered offsprings, islam and xtianity. i’ll go out on a limb here. only sovereignty has a remote chance. find a little group community and try it.

        i presently am a member of a co-op modelled after the corporation, with by-laws that attempted to define stockholders as having equal value — we all have equal shares — and democratic majority vote decisions, with day-to-day decisions handler by 5 board members. it don’t work.

      • Republican Rome worked with brutal patriarchy. I would recommend non-brutal patriarchy for the ethnostate: the Jane Austen world, where women could not inherit goods to force them to get married.

      • ps 2,
        our “democratic” co-op fails because the dominants among us rise to what they see is the top, board membership. acting as the co-op’s representatives, the board, defined to handle daily operational decisions, the dominants then run rough-shop over the submissive’s, i.e. the rest of us not on the board, refusing to listen to our suggestions, and it all ends up in chaos, bad emotions and finger pointing and yelling, the opposite of robert’s rule of order.

  4. These days I feel like Vincent Price in the film “The Last Man on Earth”.

    Once inside, they ripped the clothes from her body then, using broken pieces of pottery as blades, flayed her skin from her flesh. Some say that, while she still gasped for breath, they gouged out her eyes.

    Some people call them lemmings; others call them normies; still others term them NPCs. I call ’em zombies, the living dead. Hypatia was a victim of a zombie attack.

    To understand this phenomenon it’s necessary to introduce the concept of the superorganism. Humanity is evolving in the direction of becoming a superorganism, a collective like a beehive or an ant colony. Zombies are hive creatures that lack the ability to think for themselves. Christianity, with its suspicion and hatred of reason, is the perfect mind virus for turning people into zombies. By contrast, the ideal of classical man centered for the most part on the character of the individual and freedom, though even here, in such philosophers as Plato and Aristotle, we can find the beginnings of the hive mind. For example, what is Plato’s Republic but the sketch of a perfectly organized hive?

    Some say that humanity already is a superorganism, arguing that specialization among humans has reached the point that few could survive if placed alone in a natural environment. Others prefer to confine the term to such creatures as bees and ants, pointing out that in a “true” superorganism, individuals don’t compete with each other at all. It must be admitted that humans still do this, but as a behavior it’s becoming less and less significant. Families and marriage are disappearing as an institution; the races are amalgamating and hybridizing, while racism, the only force capable of keeping them apart, is under ferocious attack by the whole society. Conformity to these Christian ideals is now the order of the day. In the future, we can foresee a day when individuals have ceased to exist at all. There will be the collective, and only the collective.

    In the East, there’s a saying: When the student is ready, the master appears. Likewise, in European history, Jesus appeared just as classical man became ready; ready to accept the mind virus of Christianity and move on to the next phase of human evolution, the superorganism, the society of zombies.

    • That would be an elegant idea, but don’t Mongoloid societies have more hivemind features without being less racist?

      “Zombie” is the term also used to refer to healthy collectivists instincts by Christians, see the famous song about Irish nationalists, and see how Russians talk about Ukrainian nationalists (in both cases, it is the healthy parts of the schizophrenic ideologies that are under attack).

      You seem to be attacking the entire concept of the collective. Healthy attitudes would look like zombie attacks, too – the difference being that their reasons are pro-life (while the reasons of zombies are pro-death).

      If Merkel were torn to shreds, I would only congratulate the German people. See? What would Karellen say?

      • Karellen!

        Visitors would have to read Childhood’s End to understand your comment.

  5. @RevileChrist Our brains might have shrunk since 20 millennia ago, and yet with our communal efforts we can now create such marvels as rockets flying into the aether of space.

    I myself have a deep “fascist” yearning that wouldn’t be satisfied with the primitive freedom you advocate for. One of the biggest struggles I see (aside from the Aryan vs the Jew story) is the fight between order and chaos, between the Faustian spirit and the rot of the Beatles, between the chanters of Vive Henri IV and those who renamed the city of Dnepropetrovsk to Dnipro.

    @César Completely off topic, but shouldn’t a good guy National Socialist be as repulsed by mountain skiing as he is by the most violent of pornography?

    Skiing is an activity of the same kind as that of a maniac murdering people to receive sexual gratification – destroying forests so that humans can do useless and dangerous sports.

    @gaedhal “Lighthouses are of more use than churches.”

    That’s because in their view, Christian clerics were not Christian enough.

    @highrpm I will concede that I’m mostly focused on the negative aspects of the hypothetical pro-life ideology, that is on removing the features we currently have (such as females attaining higher education). I believe it to be both vital and enough to form the basis. The positive traits, both good and degenerate, will emerge later.

    • One of the biggest struggles I see (aside from the Aryan vs. the Jew story) is the fight between order and chaos, between the Faustian spirit and the rot of the Beatles, between…

      Indeed. In today’s article, I mentioned Guillermo del Toro. In a 2007 interview, del Toro described his political position as “a little too liberal”. He pointed out that the villains in most of his films, such as the industrialist in Cronos, the Nazis in Hellboy, and the Francoists in Pan’s Labyrinth, are united by the common attribute of authoritarianism. “I hate structure. I’m completely anti-structural in terms of believing in institutions. I hate them. I hate any institutionalised social, religious, or economic holding.”

      César Completely off topic, but shouldn’t a good National Socialist guy be as repulsed by mountain skiing as he is by the most violent of pornography?

      Yesterday it bothered me that Richard Spencer mentioned, in the latest YouTube podcast featuring him, that he planned to do some mountain skiing this Winter (curiously, he talked about porn too).

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: