Julian, 69

Julian Augustus

It is not easy to understand the Gauls. Their ways are strange to us, despite their many years as Roman subjects. I think they are the handsomest of the world’s people. Both men and women are tall and fair-skinned, often with blue eyes and blond hair. They are forever washing their clothes and bodies. One can go from one end of the province to the other without seeing a man or woman in soiled or ragged clothes. Laundry hangs drying beside every hovel, no matter how poor.

But despite their beauty, they are remarkably quarrelsome. Both men and women speak with curiously loud voices, braying their vowels and sounding hard their consonants. Whenever I gave justice, I used to be deafened by the rival lawyers and claimants, all bellowing like wounded bulls.

They boast that in a fight one Gaul is worth ten Italians. I’m afraid this is true.

They love battle. They have both the strength and heart for it. And their women love fighting, too. It is not at all unusual for a Gaul in the heat of battle to call to his wife to aid him. When she does, his strength increases tenfold. With my own eyes I have seen Gallic women attack the enemy, teeth gnashing, necks corded with veins, large white arms revolving like the cross-piece of a windmill, while their feet kick like shots discharged by catapult. They are formidable.

The Gallic men take pride in military service, unlike the Italians, who think nothing of cutting off their own thumbs to thwart the state’s recruiting officers. Gauls, however, delight in blood-letting, and they would be the greatest of all soldiers but for two reasons: they do not take well to military discipline, and they are drunks. At the most inconvenient moments a commander of Gallic troops is apt to find his soldiers mad with drink, under the excuse that such and such a day is holy and must be marked with a little wine or one of those powerful drinks they brew from grain and vegetables.

I shall not describe my campaigns in Gaul, for I have already published an account of them which flatterers declare is the equal of Julius Caesar’s Commentaries. I will say that I put more care into writing about the Gallic wars than I did in fighting them! But I shall record some of the things which I could not reveal at the time.

Published in: on June 30, 2019 at 12:16 pm  Comments (1)  

Morgan on Jared Taylor


Editor’s note: My most recent comment on this site has inspired me to reproduce the latest exchange of Robert Morgan with silly racialists on Unz Review:

Jared Taylor: “Whites were never asked if [becoming a minority] was what they wanted.”

Robert Morgan: They show they wanted it by their past and continued support of actions that inevitably lead to it. They support the churches who bring in non-whites to dwell among them; they elect and re-elect the politicians who put into place anti-white policies.

The argument that the racial eclipse of white America is somehow illegitimate because there was never a referendum on it is transparently false, unworthy of a man like Taylor, or at least his public persona, since he likes to present himself as the intellectual face of white nationalism. If he really doesn’t know this, he’s not as smart as he likes to pretend; if he does know his argument is false but uses it anyway, he’s dishonest and just another grifter making his living from “white nationalism”.

Rosie: “Nonsense. The two-party system is a two-headed monster, and no real choice has been offered for decades.”

Robert Morgan: Yet white people keep participating in it, voting mostly for the two parties. They have always had the option of starting their own, racially-oriented white peoples’ party, but recoil in horror from such a prospect. They could have demanded a referendum on immigration such as Taylor pines for, but haven’t and won’t, because they don’t want to be “haters”.

In short, the people have the politicians they deserve.

As an aside, I will add that I’ve just been reviewing night two of the Democratic debate. Eight of the ten candidates appear to be white, and yet all were trying to outdo each other to see who could be the most anti-white. This has also been the case “for decades”, as you put it. The vast majority of politicians who put anti-white policies into place were white themselves, as were the people that voted them into office.

This should tell us the problem is primarily cultural, not political. Two thousand years of Christian thinking has softened the white man’s brains. Politicians must go with the cultural flow, and despite a nominal secularization, that flow is still guided by Christian morality. So long as that morality prevails, even if there were a referendum, whites would probably vote to become a minority. They’d do it “for the children”, just as their Bible tells them to do, or to “welcome the stranger”, as it also tells them to do.

Bardon Kaldian: “Especially your crusade against Christianity is both comic and primitive…”

Robert Morgan: I get a laugh out of you, Kaldian. You could be a poster boy for the brain-softening effect of Christianity. Too bad you can’t answer my arguments, and instead are reduced to invective. Rabbi Jesus was counting on you…

AaronB: “While whites were Christian, they were self-respecting.”

Robert Morgan: It’s precisely because they are still Christian that they are not self-respecting. Whites are so indelibly imbued with Christianity that even white atheists accept the Christian “brotherhood of man” nonsense. Christianity was the Bolshevism of the ancient world, and as Spengler observed, Christian theology is its source in the modern world too. (“All Communist systems in the West are in fact derived from Christian theological thought… Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism.” – Oswald Spengler, in The Hour of Decision.)

Robert Dolan: “Just a few decades ago whites were a confident race, proud of their achievements, convinced of their fitness to dominate the globe.”

Robert Morgan: Just a few decades ago meaning say, in 1945, when they had just finished defeating white supremacism in Europe, at the cost of millions of white lives?

Or did you mean by “a few decades ago” to go all the way back to 1865, when American whites had just concluded their first big war against white supremacy, and were in haste to make negroes citizens of their country fully equal to themselves, and grant them voting rights?

The idea that the white race as a whole has ever been explicitly united in a belief in its own racial superiority is just an hallucination; a lie. If they had been, neither of the above wars would ever have been fought, let alone won by the anti-white-supremacy side.

Robert Dolan: “Christianity is universal, while Judaism is particularist.”

Robert Morgan: That’s right. To a Christian, it’s more important that a man is a Christian than that he is any particular race. A Christian would rather his daughter marry another Christian who is non-white than marry a white who isn’t Christian. Not so with a Jew. They stick with their own, and stick together.

AaronB: “And yes, God is greater than race or biological family, and must be your ultimate loyalty.”

Robert Morgan: God is an adult version of a child’s imaginary friend, perfectly explainable in psychological terms as a coping mechanism, something weak people need to avoid the existential terror that would otherwise overwhelm them at their fate of being utterly alone in a hostile universe. The allied Christian project of trying to figure out what the probably fictional character called Jesus “really” meant is a vain one, exactly like trying to decide what your imaginary friend “really” meant or wants you to do.

Published in: on June 30, 2019 at 10:31 am  Comments (5)  

Holy wrath, 8

by Evropa Soberana

The Danelaw and the main areas of Viking settlement in Great Britain. Apart from the designated areas, the entire coast was strongly influenced by Scandinavia.

For a time, the Vikings made England a Danish kingdom. The Anglo-Saxons under King Alfred the Great, Germanics like the Vikings, engaged with them in a war in which the Vikings were confined to the north of England, in a kingdom called Danelaw (‘Danish law’), where Nordic paganism ruled and where there was a wide colonisation by Viking families, to such an extent that they left many words in the English vocabulary. Some historians have called it the ‘other England’ parallel, the ‘Scandinavian England’. Here, the Vikings established capital in Jorvik (York) and devoted themselves to rooting rather than looting, establishing farms, fields and trading centres.

Both the Vikings and the Normans fought over England. The war broke out when King Harold of England, Anglo-Saxon, had to face first with King Harald of Norway and then with King William the Conqueror of Normandy, who fought for the throne. The Anglo-Saxons of Harold confronted the Norwegians of Harald Hardrada (the last Viking king ‘of the old school’) at the Battle of the Stamford Bridge. Having defeated Harald, the battered Anglo-Saxon troops of Harold moved some 360 kilometers from Yorkshire (north of England) to Sussex (south of England), where William awaited them with fresh Norman troops. Exhausted Anglo-Saxon troops clashed with the Normans in the famous Battle of Hastings (1066). For the lack of a good cavalry and because many left the security of the wall of shields and spears to persecute the Norman knights who retired to reload, the Anglo-Saxons lost. Harold died with his skull pierced by an arrow that entered his eye. It was a tragedy for England.

The ‘Normans’ (really Frenchified Danish) imported the French language, polluting the Anglo-Saxon and stripping it of its most Germanic resonances. French became the language of the new Norman court, and the Anglo-Saxon—that is, Old English—the language of the commoners and the dispossessed aristocracy.

England was also infected with the Eastern mentality. Its focus of attention and cultural relations went from Denmark, northern Germany and Scandinavia, to France and the Vatican, and in this sense there is no doubt that even a Viking triumph would have been better.

The Normans imported, in addition, a feudal serfdom of Christian type (that had sense in places where the Germans constituted a minority aristocracy, but not in England, where most of the population was of Germanic origin), sweeping the old Saxon law, so hated by the Church, and that only remained in the county of Kent, which had been the place where the first Anglo-Saxons landed (specifically the Jutes, from Denmark) in the 5th century, and where the Anglo-Saxon Germanic tradition was perhaps stronger and more rooted. However, the Normans undoubtedly brought beneficial innovations: large stone castles with moats and the spirit of the new cavalry.

The Anglo-Saxons, in any case, were not going to resign themselves to that situation, and many of their aristocrats, leading their people, took part in a hidden resistance against the ‘Norman invasion’, which was nothing but a French invasion. The very legend of Robin Hood refers to the struggle between Anglo-Saxons and Normans, in which an Anglo-Saxon männerbund, headed by a Saxon nobleman, retires to the forest and carries out ‘guerrilla warfare’ against the occupation.

The Viking expansion was so immense that they have even found Buddha statuettes in Scandinavian tombs. Not without well-founded reasons, some authors, such as the Frenchman Jacques de Mahieu, have placed the Vikings at the base of aristocracies in places as distant as Peru and Mexico, and hence strange cases such as Quetzalcoatl, Kukulkan, Ullman or Viracocha, pre-Columbian gods with European features (such as the beard, white skin, light hair or blue eyes).

Of the Scandinavian nationalities, the Norwegians tended to explore Iceland, Greenland and America; the Danes were concentrated in England, Scotland, Germany, France and Ireland, and the Swedes devoted themselves above all to their adventures in the East, including Finland, Russia, wars against Khazars and Tartars and their exploits in the Islamic and Byzantine world.

Non-Vikings considered the berserkers as the ultimate expression of the northern rage that spread like wildfire across Europe.

The same archetypal image of the bloodthirsty Viking that fights half-naked and kills indiscriminately, corresponds more to the berserker than to the ordinary Viking warrior. The fame and prestige of the berserkers in the North were enormous. They were bodyguards in many royal courts, including that of King Harald ‘Beautiful Hair’ of Norway. King Hrolf Kaki of Denmark sent his twelve berserkers to Adils of Sweden to help him in his war against Norway. After the Viking military campaigns, when casualties were counted, the military captains did not even bother to count the berserkers, since they assumed they were invincible after uttering spells that made them invulnerable to iron and fire, or that they were capable to disable the enemy’s weapons with their eyes.

Such fame came to the East, in such a way that the Emperor Constantine of Byzantium—a powerful man with many means, and who wanted the best—hired a select personal guard that was composed exclusively of Swedish berserkers. They were known as the ‘Varangian Guard’. (Over time, the guard would be so full of Anglo-Saxon warriors that it would become known as ‘English guard’.) As Constantine wrote, these men sometimes performed the ‘Gothic dance’, dressed in animal skins and totemic masks.

(Left, the Varangian Guard, known as pelekiphoroi phrouroi, ‘guardians armed with axes’, stood out gloriously in Constantinople or Miklagard for the Scandinavians.) Scandinavian paganism had preserved a healthy shamanism, deeply related to Nature and Asgard, the heaven of the gods. According to Germanic mythology, fallen berserkers formed in the Valhala Odin’s honour guard, so in their earthly life they tried to reflect and ‘train’ that vocation by protecting numerous kings whose power figure was associated with Odin.

The Varangian Guard became famous in a series of campaigns against the Muslims, in one of which the Varangians destroyed nothing more and nothing less than eighty cities. In each Viking army, the berserkers formed a group of twelve men. The other warriors had great respect and fear, and tried to stay well away from them, because they saw them as dangerous, unstable and unpredictable. The berserkers themselves were kept separate from the rest of the corresponding army, cultivating the ‘pathos of distance’.

Published in: on June 29, 2019 at 11:54 am  Comments Off on Holy wrath, 8  

The Antichrist § 19

Padua’s version of the Sistine Chapel, the Scrovegni Chapel, houses one of Italy’s great Gothic/Proto-Renaissance masterpieces: a cycle of Giotto frescoes. This specific fresco shows Jesus before Caiaphas. In his book The Antichrist, Nietzsche said:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
The fact that the stronger races of northern Europe failed to reject the Christian God does not say very much for their skill in religion, not to mention their taste. They really should have been able to cope with this sort of diseased and decrepit monster of decadence. But they were damned for their failure: they brought sickness, age, and contradiction into all of their instincts, – they have not created any more gods since then.

Almost two thousand years and not one new god! And all the while, this pathetic God of Christian monotono-theism (*) instead, acting as if it had any right to exist, like an ultimatum and maximum of god­ creating energy, of the human creator spiritus!, this hybrid creature of ruin, made from nullity, concept, and contradiction, who sanctions all the instincts of decadence, all the cowardices and exhaustions of the soul! – –

__________

(*) The verbal mockery of monotonous-theism had already been used by Nietzsche in Twilight of the Idols.

Published in: on June 29, 2019 at 12:01 am  Comments Off on The Antichrist § 19  

Costello on Christianity

Sometimes I wonder if some white nationalists who get their stuff published in mainstream nationalist webzines read this site but never admit they do (like those who never admit watching porn once in a while). This month for example, Jef Costello, a regular essayist of Counter Currents, said this in the comments section:

It doesn’t matter to me what most Americans think about Christianity. We have to wake up to the fact that that religion is the source of all the Leftist poison.

Emphasis added. In the very article itself, Costello had written:

It is really this that I was referring to when I said earlier that we are witnessing the climax of historical processes that have been spiraling downward for more than a thousand years.

This sounds exactly like the thesis of ‘The Red Giant’, a text originally written ten years ago.

It began with the importation into the West of the Jewish bacillus of Christianity. The Reformation began the process of denuding that religion of the supernatural and moving it toward a pure and simple moral fanaticism set against life and human nature. Leftism is just Protestant Christianity secularized and radicalized, made truer to its poisonous essence.

And this sounds like the essay by Ferdinand Bardamu, an original for this site, that has been included in the current edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour.

And in the twisted, soy-fueled faces of today’s Leftists, the horror of the whole thing is finally unmasked: the great, yawning maw of the volcanic demon Yahweh, whose foul spirit devours healthy men and nations from the inside out. This is the horror’s final stage. This is the significance of the time we are living in.

Even if Costello has not visited this site, what he says above is identical to what we have been saying here.

Published in: on June 28, 2019 at 9:34 am  Comments (9)  

We demand…

arrest and criminal prosecution
of western leaders responsible for
genocidal Third World immigration

by Ferdinand Bardamu

 

I: The Massacre at Christchurch

The massacre of 50 Moslem worshipers, in Christchurch, New Zealand on Friday, March 15th, has been energetically denounced as a “terrible tragedy” the world over. If the attack had been carried out by a Moslem against Christians or Shi’ite sectarians, the media would have excused the perpetrator as not representative of the general Moslem population, despite the common occurrence of such massacres in the Middle East; however, because 28 year-old Australian national Brent Tarrant is the alleged gunman, whites are collectively to blame for a “system of state-sanctioned white supremacy that manifests itself daily.” Whatever the Christchurch massacre was, we must not join hands with the forces of political correctness in denouncing it as a “terrible tragedy”; we must not agree with VDARE columnist Patrick Buchanan that the massacre was “[a]n atrocity and act of pure evil by a man with a dead soul.” Moslems kill fellow Moslems, Christians and other religionists on an industrial scale, but the Western lugenpresse pays scant attention to these “terrible tragedies,” nor have any of them ever received the same amount of press coverage as the rare massacre perpetrated by the lone race-conscious white, in defense of his civilization from non-white invasion and conquest. Either we denounce all such occurrences as “terrible tragedies” whenever they occur or we pass over them in silence.

Christchurch is one of a growing number of incidents in a larger racial and ideological struggle, one that will have far-reaching political ramifications for the entire Western world. Today, whites find themselves in the midst of a demographic war being waged against them by their own “post-national” governments. Since the post-national state itself is an ideological pipe-dream, the main determinant of national belonging within the state is ethno-racial identity. In fact, because of mass migration, Samuel P. Huntington’s 9 major civilizations, and the inevitable conflicts they will engender being in such close quarters, are already present, in embryonic form, within the larger post-national states of the Western world. The internal dynamics of the new post-national world order are best described as “anarcho-tyrannical.” Non-whites take whatever they want from the white man in a Darwinian free-for-all, but the white man must be tyrannized over and compelled by an impersonal managerial bureaucracy to surrender everything he has. The post-national state’s multiparty dictatorship imposes its will upon whites through physical, but not moral force, which means that the conflict of interest between the hostile elite and indigenous whites cannot be resolved by appeal to some higher or independent authority.

Christchurch is an act of war within the chaotic multicultural environment of the post-national state. If Tarrant’s actions are the catalyst of a much larger conflict, they must be analyzed with the dispassionate objectivity of the military historian, from the vantage-point of strategy and logistics. The elites imported Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations into our own backyards and neighborhoods, but disingenuously excused this unprecedented act of belligerence as innocent “cultural enrichment.” Although white nationalists should eschew violence whenever possible, more radical fringe elements may believe that when white racial survival is at stake, no logical or ethical limit can be imposed on the force needed for the complete destruction of those who would threaten whites with racial extinction; in the most objectively desperate situations, it remains a truism that survival always necessitates war. Nevertheless, for white nationalists in formerly white countries, violence is generally counterproductive; if leftists were able to infiltrate the main institutions of Western civilization over the course of decades, white nationalists should be able to do the same. Ethical considerations are indeed peripheral to the white nationalist struggle against multicultural hegemony, but this is only because there is a political goal that must be achieved at all costs (which means that violence cannot be completely ruled out if the situation demands it). For us, this goal is twofold: the repatriation of all non-whites in the Western Hemisphere and the criminal prosecution of hostile elites.

We must not dismiss Tarrant as, to quote various sensationalistic media accounts, a “lunatic right-wing extremist,” a “working class madman,” or a “crazed gunman.” Such tactics are reminiscent of Soviet psychiatry, used to publicly humiliate dissidents and marginalize legitimate criticism of government policy. In the former USSR, dissidents who publicly challenged official Marxist-Leninist dogma were diagnosed as schizophrenic, locked away in mental hospitals and force-fed anti-psychotic pills until they were reduced to mindless, drooling zombies barely able to dress and feed themselves. Communist regimes around the world embraced political psychiatry as a means of enforcing conformity to state policies and the orthodox ideological interpretation of Marxism-Leninism favored by communist officials. Using the scientific-sounding jargon of psychiatry to associate political dissidence with mental illness was a highly effective tactic; if anti-communism was a sign of serious mental illness, the public would pay no attention to it.

Labeling dissidents and their theories “insane” or “crazy” isn’t only confined to communist nations. In 1989, the Ontario attorney-general famously denounced the late J. Philippe Rushton’s research on race and intelligence as “loony.” To this day, anti-racist academics continue to respond viscerally to Rushton’s r/K selection theory and life history approach to human differences, summarily dismissing both as “weird” and “bizarre,” without seriously engaging his body of work on an academic or intellectual level. By attributing Brent Tarrant’s actions and message to some simplistic individual-level mental pathology, critics want to dismiss whites who complain about being ethnically dispossessed in their own homelands as mentally ill. Smearing someone with the mental illness label because you disagree with what they say or do is a common left-wing tactic.
 

II: The Reality Behind “The Great Replacement”

Tarrant’s manifesto, entitled “The Great Replacement,” is the work of a rational and lucid mind. He makes a great deal of the fact that hostile elites all around the Western world are flooding formerly white nations with millions upon millions of culturally and racially unassimilable non-white foreigners; in consequence, whites will become minorities in their own countries before 2100.

No one, except the most indoctrinated multiculturalists, can deny the reality of the “Great Replacement,” the demographic transformation of the West into Los Estados Unidos de América, Eurafrica and Eurabia. This is an act of self-immolation that has lowered Western standards of living. Only our mostly dim-witted elites would see this as cause for celebration, while hiding behind armed bodyguards in heavily fortified compounds; better to be insulated from the corrosive effects of imported diversity than engage the electorate in serious debate as to its merits.

Whether the elite wishes to acknowledge it or not, exposure to diversity opens eyes, sometimes giving sight to the most hardened liberals and cultural Marxists. Tarrant, originally a communist, then an anarchist, was “radicalized” by Moslem terrorism in Western Europe. This lead to the realization of certain factual and statistical realities; unlike other racial or religious groups, Moslems came close to invading the cradle of the Occident and exterminating its indigenous white civilization and culture. By 732, the Moslems had conquered the entire Iberian peninsula and would have subjugated all Europe, but for Charles Martel, who defeated them at the Battle of Tours; in 1683, they invaded Europe again, only to be defeated by John III Sobieski and his Christian coalition at Vienna.

The Koran, which calls for the indiscriminate killing of infidels, is best described as a blueprint for world domination. Because violent jihad is a religious obligation, Moslems are far more likely to commit acts of terrorism than any other ethno-racial or religious group; in the United States alone. Moslems are 1% of the population, but have been responsible for 27% of all violent extremist incidents from 2001 to 2016; this means that they are 27 times more likely to commit terrorist offenses than the general population. Moslem animus towards the West has forced some whites to resort to violence to drive out the Islamist plague, which is understandable; Moslems are hostile invaders who wish to kill all unbelievers or force them to pay the jizya tax and submit to dhimmitude under a Moslem Caliphate based on Shariah law.

The hostile elites have granted the West’s historic enemies a free hand in Western Europe and North America to rape, murder, pillage, colonize and enforce Shariah law in a land that neither belongs to them nor wants them. This is a depraved and vicious act that cries out for some kind of judicial punishment.
 

III: Your Fundamental Right to Freedom of Association

In the language of natural law, which has unfortunately been distorted beyond recognition by liberal demagogues, marrying one’s own race and living among one’s own kind are the most fundamental negative rights. Freedom of association lies at the heart of any truly free and democratic society; only the vigorous preservation of this freedom can maintain the racial homogeneity necessary for the flourishing of free institutions. With freedom of association comes the freedom to discriminate. Individual liberty and moral autonomy historically necessitated anti-miscegenation laws, the Supreme Court’s “separate, but equal” doctrine, racial restrictions on citizenship and immigration, literacy tests for voting and rejection of women’s suffrage; paradoxically, the repeal of this legislation was an attack on individual liberty in the name of leftist mob tyranny.

If all non-whites have the right to freedom of association in their own countries, which they freely exercise because they have not unilaterally disarmed themselves by extinguishing their own racial consciousness, then whites must also have the same right. It should come as no surprise that the liberal totalitarian has long ago discarded negative rights; this is because they constitute a significant impediment to the implementation of multicultural policies. Liberal managerialism and Lockean natural rights are mutually incompatible.

To the race-conscious white man, the loss of freedom of association is a fate worse than death. Can you imagine not being able to voice your own opinions on the matter because of elite totalitarian control of the mass media? Can you imagine being shouted down and harassed at every moment as a racist and a bigot, for demanding something taken for granted by non-whites? The non-white invaders are not nearly as empathetic or compassionate as whites; they cannot even begin to fathom white suffering in the face of genocidal Third World immigration. Tarrant’s hatred is the Saxon’s hatred in its purest and holiest form, the kind of hatred that Rudyard Kipling spoke so highly of in his own poetry, although misplaced and channeled towards counterproductive ends (in other words, he should have targeted members of the globalist ruling class instead). In a world where all non-whites have a right to live in their own nations, with members of their own race, language, culture and religion, why shouldn’t Tarrant, as a member of the white race, not have these same rights to the kind of things non-whites take for granted?
 

IV: Senator Anning’s Common Sense on Third World Immigration

On March 15, in the aftermath of the Christchurch massacre, Queensland senator Fraser Anning said in the following statement to the press: “The real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place.”

This was one of the few times that a Western politician had dissented from elite consensus. Moslems have been allowed to emigrate to Europe since the 1960s. For decades, their colonization of the cradle of Western civilization has been an orgy of murder, pillage, widespread rioting, brutal acts of terror and gang rape. So far, our mostly dim-witted, but hostile elites have callously turned a blind eye to this terrible rampage instigated by their own inept multicultural policies. Instead, they call for more immigration from the Third World. The belief that immigrant social pathologies exist because, to quote Barbara Lerner Spectre, “Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural” is accepted as an article of faith by members of the hostile elite.

How was Senator Anning rewarded for speaking truth to power?

The following day, during a press conference in Melbourne, he was egged by a 17-year-old named William Connolly. This was a vicious act of assault with a potentially dangerous weapon. Anning retaliated by punching Connolly in the head. The boy was subsequently arrested, but later released from police custody without charges. Despite video evidence of the assault, Victoria police chose to hypocritically stand by and do nothing. Prime Minister Scott Morrison inexplicably demanded that criminal charges be filed against Anning. Connolly was lionized as a hero; in just four days, “Egg Boy” was able to raise $57,000 in donations. This was a shocking miscarriage of justice, in a world where lives are routinely destroyed and reputations ruined for much, much less by intrusive, tyrannical governments and brutal, low-IQ Neanderthals masquerading as police officers.

The message sent was clear:

If you publicly speak out against Third World immigration, but are violently assaulted or otherwise criminally victimized as a result, you deserve it and no one will come to your defense, not even the police.

On March 18th, a petition calling for Anning’s expulsion from the Australian parliament was being circulated, with 1.2 million signatures, although no laws exist that would allow the Senate to expel one of its own members.

On March 27th, Anning scathingly rebuked the Australian government’s immigration policies in an open letter to the Prime Minister:

It is a matter of fact that in recent times, these kinds of deadly attacks have proliferated in Western countries. Initially, these attacks were mostly committed by Muslims but more recently, have been committed against them.

It is a matter of causation, not moral blame, that until recently we were largely immune to this problem because until the 1970s Western populations were, for the most part, ethnically, culturally and religiously homogenous.

I believe that these changes were initiated by governments, not requested by the people, who generally wished to retain their way of life, as did others around the world.

This is one of the few times on record that an MP has publicly rebuked the national government—of any globalist-occupied Western country—for its incredibly stupid multiculturalist policies.

On April 2nd, Australian lawmakers unanimously voted on a bipartisan motion to officially censure Anning for his remarks on Christchurch. Fellow senators denounced Anning as an “absolute disgrace,” as “pathetic” and “shameful”; his comments were derided as “inflammatory and divisive.” Senator Anning rightly dismissed the bipartisan motion as an attack on freedom of speech and “an exercise in left-wing virtue signaling of the worst kind.”
 

V: Why Our Hostile Elites Deserve Criminal Punishment

Senator Anning should be applauded for standing up to the leftist totalitarians of the Australian parliament, who remain intent on using non-white invasion as a battering ram against the white working class. Morrison, the Australian parliament, and most Western government officials certainly deserve blame for their reckless and utterly stupid multiculturalist policies. However, Anning does not go far enough. He calls for the criminalization of multiculturalist policies, but stops short of calling for the arrest and criminal prosecution of those Western government officials who are busily reducing whites to minorities in their own countries.

If a dog fatally mauls a child or a woman, the owner is charged with murder. This is especially true in cases involving negligence and reckless disregard for public safety. Of course, the dog is not responsible for mauling the child; millions of years of canine evolution have genetically predisposed the animal to aggression directed at unfamiliar humans and dogs. The same goes for Moslem immigrants who gang rape, murder or commit acts of terrorism in Western Europe and the Anglosphere. These foreigners do not deserve most of the blame for gang-raping or terrorizing whites, or even dispossessing them of their schools, hospitals and cities; their low IQ, high rate of inbreeding, strong ethnocentric tendencies and penchant for testosterone-fueled aggression mean that they, like animals, are largely under the control of instinct. The Moslem invaders have less autonomy than whites, which significantly diminishes their capacity to accept responsibility for their actions. The proper course of action is to look at who let the non-whites into the country, just as the proper course of action in the case of the killer dog is to find out who the owner is.

We must ask ourselves:

Who gave this foreigner affirmative action or welfare payments so he could dispossess whites in their own neighborhoods and cities?

Who naturalized this foreigner as a “new citizen” of our country?

Who approved this foreigner’s application for residency?

Why did this foreigner decide to get on a plane and fly to our country? Did someone tell this foreigner to come to our country? If so, who?

We must keep asking ourselves these questions until we come to the real culprits behind genocidal Third World immigration: the “democratically elected” politicians of the various multi-party dictatorships in the West that supposedly represent the will of the common people.

When immigrants gang rape or terrorize whites, the real gang rapists and terrorists are not the unwanted non-whites, but the politicians of Western Europe and the Anglosphere. In France, if a group of non-whites gang rape and then murder a white woman or girl, it is not the non-whites who are primarily responsible; on the contrary, the real gang rapists and murderers are Emmanuel Macron, his Council of Ministers and the French parliament. In Germany, if a group of non-whites carry out a terrorist attack that maims or kills dozens of innocent civilians, it is Angela Merkel and the entire Bundestag who are the real terrorists and murderers. They let those non-white foreigners in and forced whites to live around them, well aware of the many dangers Third World immigration poses to unwary or unsuspecting whites.

For every immigrant who is charged with gang rape, murder or terrorism, the politicians, immigration officials and others responsible for allowing non-whites into the country, should also face charges of rape, murder or terrorism. As custodians of the state, the hostile elite should be intelligent enough to know that ceaseless, massive and indiscriminate importation of racially incompatible and unassimilable foreigners will cause significant problems for the host society. Indeed, Western leaders and immigration officials would think twice before importing Africans, Moslems and other scum into their own countries if they were held accountable for their actions by the criminal courts. If such had always been the case, the demographic transformation of the West would not have proceeded with such rapidity and it would have remained overwhelmingly white. Even in cases where the foreigners neither rape, murder or commit acts of terrorism, Western leaders are still not absolved of their actions; for every historic white community that has been ethnically cleansed by mass immigration, those leaders and immigration officials behind it should be hunted down and prosecuted for crimes against humanity, namely genocide.

If a race-conscious white patriot opens fire on non-white invaders imported by the nation’s hostile elite, such as what Tarrant did at Christchurch, the elite must not only be held fully responsible for the massacre, they must also be arrested and prosecuted for it. The laws of evolutionary biology dictate that two subspecies of the same species do not occupy the same geographical area without risking passive genocide through miscegenation, domination of one subspecies by the other and, eventually, the physical extermination of the weaker of the two subspecies. As Senator Anning has pointed out, if the non-white foreigners gunned down at Christchurch had stayed in their own countries where they belong and had not ventured where they were not wanted, they would still be alive today.
 

VI: Nuremberg-Style Justice for Globalist War Criminals

After WWII, the leading Nazi war criminals were rounded up and tried at the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg. The city was chosen by the victorious allies for its symbolic significance; the birth of the Third Reich was accompanied by the pomp and pageantry of the massive propaganda rallies that had been annually staged in the city; if Nuremberg witnessed the birth of Nazism, the city would also witness its death throes. Just as Nuremberg was selected to be the final act in the Wagnerian tragedy of Nazism, the Götterdämmerung of the Nazi leadership, so the main airports in all globalist-occupied Western nations should be reserved for the trial of the globalist elite. These airports imported the great mass of non-whites into the West, so they were of instrumental significance in the establishment of official multicultural policy in all globalist-occupied Western countries. Special prisons and courthouses near all of the main airports, surrounded by moats, walls, pillboxes and military checkpoints, would have to be constructed to feed, house and medicate the globalist leaders as they await trial for treason and crimes against humanity.

The globalist traitors merit Nuremberg-style justice far more than the Nazis, whose crimes were comparatively innocuous; at least they didn’t ethnically cleanse their own people and destroy their own nations through mass invasion, miscegenation and race war. Since 1948, when the hostile elites inaugurated their program of genocidal mass non-white immigration, there have been a seemingly endless series of gang rapes, murders, riots and terrorist attacks across Western Europe and the Anglosphere; in addition, the mass invasion of non-whites has been used by elites to ethnically cleanse whites from their own schools, colleges and universities, hospitals, neighborhoods, towns and cities. As long as the white man remains asleep, this process of destruction will continue until there is nothing left to demolish.

But what should happen if there is a resurgence of white racial consciousness before the multiculturalist destruction of all Western societies has been completed? This is why the elites have now embraced a policy of “multicultural accelerationism”; they must do everything in their power to speed up the pace of mass non-white immigration by making it as indiscriminate and as massive as possible; in Canada, for example, mass immigration has increased from 150,000 annually in the early 1990s to over 300,000 in 2018; this will increase to over 400,000 in the near future.

Like all governments throughout history, the globalist elite will not be in power forever. Because their time is limited, Western Europe and the Anglosphere must be destroyed as quickly as possible before anyone is able to stop them and reverse their destructive mass immigration policies.
 

Additional Resource:

The full text of Senator Anning’s open letter to PM Morrison is available: here.

Osha lying under the tree

Further to my previous post today. ‘The Pointy End’ is the eighth episode of the first season of Game of Thrones. It is the eighth episode of the series overall among the 73 episodes aired over eight seasons from 2011 to 2019. This episode premiered on June 5, 2011 when I didn’t even know that Game of Thrones existed. It was written by George R.R. Martin and directed by Daniel Minahan, who is not classified as ‘Jew’ at least in his Wikipedia article (the series changed directors several times).

Bran the Broken, still a boy, prays by the Heart Tree when he is approached by Osha, a woman of the Free Folk or ‘Wildlings’ (in this pic, Osha is barely visible because she’s laying on the ground). Osha tells Bran about hearing the Old Gods of the Forest and that the Wildlings also worship the Old Gods. She laments that the South has lost touch with the past, and that the southern Weirwood trees were cut down long ago and, therefore, the Southerners have no idea what’s awakening in the north.

I have just watched again the scene in ‘The Pointy End’ when the above photograph was taken and must add something to what I said four days ago in the article ‘New subtitle’. In the scene, a couple of times Osha calls the attention of Bran about the hidden message that could be heard from the gods by listening to the whispering leaves of the Heart Tree.

When four days ago I wrote ‘I will leave the image of Bran in the sticky post unless I can think of a better one that symbolises this site’ I had not re-watched the scene with due attention. Now I see that it resonates not only with my editorial note in my previous article today, but with the heart of my own life (cf. my book Whispering Leaves).

This day I make official the above photo as the ‘logo’ of this site.

Published in: on June 27, 2019 at 9:01 pm  Comments (1)  

Holy wrath, 7

by Evropa Soberana

Editor’s note: The White Man does not know his Story. In an ethnostate far from Judeo-Christianity, the study of the Vikings would be obligatory since grammar school.

In this section the author mentions the sacred trees in pre-Christian, Germanic religion.

Left, St. Boniface cutting a sacred tree. The only thing that reaches the public about this tragedy are literary fantasies which plot is a mere echo of the real events. In the bestseller A Song of Ice and Fire for example, it is mentioned how the invaders destroyed the sacred trees. In the television interpretation of the saga of George R.R. Martin’s novels, the Children of the Forest took revenge by creating the Night King to exterminate the human invader.

The common fan of the literary saga or the HBO series ignores that these symbols denote a very real past that even today continues to affect the West. In Game of Thrones the only one who saw the origin of the tragedy was the Three-Eyed Raven, whose last incarnation is the lad Bran the Broken.

I am not asking visitors of this site to buy Martin’s novels or the audiovisual adaptation in DVDs. As we know, Martin is a silly liberal; and the two filmmakers, Jews. But it is fundamental to point out that the enormous success of both the novels and the HBO series means that, unknowingly, Martin and these Jews have touched a fibre of the Aryan collective unconscious.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
The expansion of northern fury

This map shows the Nordic expansion in Europe. Red corresponds to areas of Scandinavian colonisation, and green to areas subject to incursions and Viking influence. The Vikings were particularly prolific in France, the British Isles, and the basins of the great Russian rivers. Greenland and Vinland (the Viking settlement in North America) are not included on the map.

At a certain time in the High Middle Ages, at the end of the 8th century, the Scandinavian peoples embarked on a series of prolific expeditions. Some argue that this sudden blitzkrieg of the Vikings was due to overpopulation motivated by polygamy in a little fertile land.

Others, such as Varg Vikernes, maintain that the Viking raids were a revenge against the Christian world, after Bishop Boniface cut, in Saxony, in the year 772, sacred forests and, particularly, the oak that the Saxons had consecrated to Donnar Oak—an ancient tree venerated by all the Germanic peoples of the world, considered the terrestrial version of the Irminsul, the Axis of the World.

The image that folklore and Christian propaganda has given us of the Vikings must be corrected. The Church demonised the Vikings, depicting them as dirty barbarians with horns on their helmets, when according to Chronica Joannis Wallingford by a monk, ‘The Danes, thanks to their habit of combing their hair every day, of bathing every Saturday and regularly changing their clothes, were able to undermine the virtue of married women and even seduce the daughters of nobles to be their mistresses’.

We are talking about a time when Christianity had stigmatised hygiene as something sensual and ‘pagan’. The Arab historian Ibn Fadlan, ambassador of Baghdad to the Bulgarians of the Volga, says of the Vikings: ‘I have never seen physical specimens so perfect, tall as palm trees, blond and ruddy-skinned’. He adds that often they wore tattoos of vegetable designs from foot to neck, and that they were always armed with an axe, a sword and a knife.

The Vikings ended up being famous throughout Christendom, in the non-Christian East and in much of the Islamic world. The Arabs called them Mayus and the Khazars Rus (hence ‘Russia’). In most of Western Europe they were known as Normans: that is, men of the North.

Generally their way of acting was to set sail in large fleets, sack the coastal towns, establish coastal ‘operations centres’ to plan other incursions and navigate the great rivers to reach other inland cities (such as Pamplona, Seville or Paris). Their many feats are known, from the colonisation of Iceland, Greenland and America to the takeover of Seville from the Moors (year 844), its looting and residence for a whole week, including the founding of Russian cities such as Novgorod (862) and Kiev (864), as well as the first Russian state (Kievan Rus) and the site of Paris in 885.

Left: The ray of the sea: for centuries, a fleet of longships ‘going shopping’ was the most frightening coastal vision for the medieval European.

911 was the year that the Danish Rollo received from the French king Charles the Simple the Duchy of Normandy, to appease the Viking pillage to which the whole of northern France was being subjected. (The Danish name of the king was Gang Hrolf, or ‘Ralph the Wayfarer’, as it was said to be too big for a horse to carry its weight.)

In a solemn act of homage to King Carlos, Rollo was informed that he should bow before him and kiss his feet. Scandalised and offended in his pride, he refused to humiliate himself in such a way, saying that ‘I will never bow down to anyone and I will never kiss anyone’s foot’. The adulatory bishops, however, insisted that ‘whoever receives such a gift has to kiss the king’s foot’.

Thus cornered, Rollo ordered one of his warriors to carry out the act. He took the king’s foot and, standing erect, brought it to his mouth and kissed it, causing the king to fall backward, so that the whole present court laughed loudly. This anecdote shows the arrogant and proud side of the Vikings, still innocent and uncontaminated men by the servile mentality of civilised society.

But eventually these Vikings from Normandy were Christianised. They took root in France and ended up forgetting their Scandinavian roots. Their subsequent expansion took them to England, the Mediterranean, southern Italy (the Norman kingdom of Sicily) and even the East during the Crusades. Many Normans played an important role in the cavalry orders.

The Antichrist § 18

In my post yesterday we saw the prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane according to the poetic imagery of Fra Angelico. In this arid interpretation of Bellini (National Gallery, London), we see the same apostles not as blond as in Fra Angelico’s painting, but at least they are still white.

In this new series about Christian art that I started with these posts, we will see that in other representations of Jesus and the apostles, the characters were painted as mudbloods.

In his book The Antichrist, Nietzsche said (the ‘beyond’ refers to the lie about the post-mortem survival of the human soul):
 

______ 卐 ______

 
The Christian idea of God—God as a god of the sick, God as spider, God as spirit—is one of the most corrupt conceptions of God the world has ever seen; this may even represent a new low in the declining development of the types of god. God having degenerated into a contradiction of life instead of its transfiguration and eternal yes! God as declared aversion to life, to nature, to the will to life! God as the formula for every slander against ‘the here and now’, for every lie about the ‘beyond’!

Published in: on June 27, 2019 at 11:20 am  Comments Off on The Antichrist § 18  

Holy wrath, 6

As for the clothing of symbolic animal skins, it obeys a shamanic, totemic and pagan tradition to the core, and we pay attention to this because it expresses a very important idea.

The wolf and the bear are signs of free masculinity—pure, wild, fertile and unrestrained. The skin of the bear or the wolf was achieved by fighting the animal in body-to-body combat and killing it. An initiatory test of the berserkers as well as among some Celts was killing a boar.

The berserkers were thus suggested that they seized the totemic qualities inherent in the animal in question—bear or wolf—acquiring their strength and ferocity, possessing their qualities as if they had conquered for themselves, and adopting the skin of the vanquished beast as symbol of this transformation. As a sign of prestige, many berserkers added the word björn (bear) to their names, resulting in names such as Arinbjörn, Esbjörn, Gerbjörn, Gunbjörn or Thorbjörn. The wolf (proto-Germanic ulf) resulted in names like Adolf, Rudolf, Hrolf or Ingolf.

Mircea Eliade said regarding the appropriation of animal skins that the man became a berserkr after an initiation that specifically involved warrior tests. Thus, for example, among the Chatti, Tacitus tells us, the applicant did not cut his hair or his beard before killing an enemy. Among the Taifali, the young man had to shoot down a boar or a bear and among the Heruli it was necessary to fight without weapons. Through these tests, the applicant appropriated the form of being of the beast: he became a fearsome warrior insofar as he behaved like a beast of prey. He transformed himself into a overman because he managed to assimilate the magical-religious force shared by the butchers.

Once again, this will be seen as primitive and barbaric, but the Romans did it as well, as we can see in the standard bearers of the legions, which were covered with skins of wolves, bears or wild cats (as a Barbarian Indo-European people, the ancient peoples of the Italian peninsula, ancestors of Latins, should have had their own version of the ‘possessed warrior’).

Also the Greek hero Heracles, after fighting a monstrous lion and killing him with his bare hands, put on his skin. The Irish Cú Chulainn killed a monstrous mastiff and took his place as guardian of Ulster. Siegfried, the hero of Germanism, bathed in the blood of the dragon Fafnir, killed by him, and with it he became almost invincible.

In the mysteries of Mithras, a restricted military cult only for men and practiced by the legions of Rome, the initiates were covered in the blood of the sacrificed bull in a ceremony of high suggestive power.

In the same line of related examples, we have other cases that refer to ‘second skins’ and hardening baths: Achilles was bathed by his mother in the waters of the dark Styx River, which made him invulnerable.

The Celtic goddess Ceridwen possessed a magical cauldron that gave health, strength and wisdom to all who bathed in it. Spartan mothers bathed their newborns in wine, because they thought that it hardened the hard and finished off the soft.

The waters of the Ganges, even today, are considered healthy for the Hindus. The idea behind all these myths was that exposing oneself to destructive, telluric and dark forces would help to harden the ‘envelope’ of the initiate and protect him in the future against similar experiences in the field of death and suffering.

All this symbolised, in addition, the struggle of the spirit to take control of the telluric beast, after which it was covered with the conquered; it entered the empty shell, possessed it, transformed it in its image and likeness and, at the same time, changed his personality for a different one, entering a new phase and also symbolising the transition to a new way of perceiving the environment and seeing things—a new skin, a new shell, a new shield—; the perception of the world through the senses of the beast; to take possession of matter and, from within, transform it into the image and likeness of the spirit.

This philosophy of possession is a characteristic feature of all initiatory warrior societies. In certain elite units of the Nazi SS, one of the tests was to fight, unarmed and bare-chested, against a wolfhound or a raging mastiff. As reminiscent of all these issues in the middle of the 19th century, the Imperial Hussars of the II Reich, heirs of the elite warrior units of Germanism, sang: ‘We dressed in black / blood we bathed / with the Totenkopf in the helmet / Heil! / We are invincible!’

Those Berserkers who fought naked were related to the behaviour of the early Celts, who also did it (in fact, the figure of the ‘possessed warrior’ was also recurrent among the Celts). Their bodies, tanned from childhood, did not feel cold even if they were naked on the snow. As we have said, some of them also painted themselves in black, vindicating the dark and fiery side, typical of the ages in which light is harassed.

We have already seen how the Roman Tacitus described the Harii who, painted and with black shields, launched themselves into combat with superhuman ferocity. For the ancient Indo-Iranians, the god Vishnu in the dark ages was dressed in dark armour to fight the demons, hiding to the world his luminous appearance. But at the dawn of the new golden age, he would strip off his black breastplate and the world would know his luminous inner aspect.

In Iran, the männerbund of the Mairya wore black armour and carried black flags. Symbolically, it was said that they killed the dragon, and usually they acted at night. The Cathars were dressed in long black robes, and their religious banners were black (some with a white Celtic cross inside). Also the SS dressed in black and wore black flags, in addition to the macabre Totenkopf which symbolised the domain of the darkness; of what belongs to the left hand, to the sinister side, fear, death and horror.

To dominate and to know the enemy is to dominate and know the bear, the wolf, the dragon, the bull or the totemic animal that the fighting man discovers in himself. To cover oneself with black is to cover oneself with the skin of the enemy beast, because darkness is the enemy—until it is dominated.

Published in: on June 26, 2019 at 5:15 pm  Comments Off on Holy wrath, 6