The transvaluation explained

Stefan Molyneux was recently expelled from YouTube and his thousands of videos, deleted. Yesterday, they also kicked him out of Twitter. For one thing, that’s fine, as Moly, whose mother was Jewish, was always a gate-keeper on the Jewish question. And it is impossible to understand what happens to the West unless someone expands the JQ into what we have been calling CQ, the Christian Question.

However, the day before yesterday, before being expelled from Twitter, Moly was interviewed by a Christian who still has his YouTube channel. Moly said something in the context of parent-child abuse, a topic that I consider my forte: ‘People used to have their fathers’ wounds heal with their relationship with God’.

Very true! And what is happening now in the Aryan collective unconscious is that, since they took away their (((god))), now they have no choice but to imitate, albeit secularly, Jesus through their own self-immolation as in the recent negrolatric events.

Speaking of Twitter, Will Westcott has been a white advocate who uses that platform and says very sharp things. Yesterday for example he said: ‘Liberalism is a state backed religion. Dissent and freedom of speech is not allowed. Heretics will be dox’d, fired from their job, arrested, and charged with a hate crime’.

I don’t mind the word liberalism, but I would have said it this way: Neochristianity, or following Jesus through secular self-immolation, is a state-backed religion. Dissent and freedom of speech are not allowed. Apostates of neochristianity will be dox’d, fired from their job, arrested, and charged with a hate crime.

Westcott recently also tweeted, putting up an image of the Constantine statue, ‘Constantine at York statue is incredibly powerful. The authority, the glamour, the supremacy of the Imperator is so far beyond any leader of our current age who would be worthy of such representation’.

I strongly called Westcott’s attention, leaving him a link to the PDF of The Fair Race and suggesting that he read the first part of the book, which is about how Constantine should be considered the greatest imaginable villain in the history of the ancient world.

Unlike Westcott, Robert Morgan does have a clear notion of the damage that Christianity did to the white race. In his most recent comment he wrote:

The fish doesn’t perceive the water he swims in; or as Ellul put it, when a propaganda has triumphed completely, it disappears from view as propaganda. Then it becomes the normal, replacing whatever existed before with itself. Christianity conquered the West so completely and uprooted paganism so thoroughly that nothing remains in the culture that opposes it. There are only various Christian heresies, some of which, like Marxism, accept the Christian moral outlook on the so-called “brotherhood of man”, but relegate belief in Jesus to an optional accessory, or even oppose it. Gone with paganism is the white man’s primeval joyousness, his celebration of himself as depicted in the sculptures of ancient Rome and Greece. Gone is his sensuality and love of life; gone his love of victory; gone his pride. He learned from Christianity to despise himself, be ashamed of sex, and look forward to death.

And in another comment he added:

A prominent feature of today’s totalitarianism is a 1984-style Anti-Sex League. This operates synergistically with the Puritanical view of sex fostered by Christianity, and now persists as Christianity’s cultural residue even among those who aren’t religious, or even consider themselves anti-Christian.

This is very true and we must analyse it.

Almost without exception, all white advocates ignore, like Westcott, that the anti-white zeitgeist in the collective unconscious of the white man was born in the times of Constantine. That is why it is so important to read Evropa Soberana’s essay in that first part of the book that I compiled. However, reading it is only the beginning to amend our ways, as we shall see in this post.

An individual who truly transvalues all values detects reminiscences of the Christian ethos even in the harshest novel a white advocate has written. I have already talked about this but it is worth repeating. The Turner Diaries contains a passage in which it is said that the Order would take a freedom fighter to the firing squad if he rapes a woman who also belongs to that liberation movement.

The first thing to consider here is that Pierce wrote his novel before the movement of frustrated men emerged on the internet analysing women’s psychology to the point of understanding it. In short, women only become bad if they don’t have many children, just as men become bad if we fail to kill the enemy.

In the context of war, the life of a man is worth infinitely more than the life of a woman, and this is where Pierce erred. One of the toughest episodes during Julius Caesar’s war in Gaul happened when those on Vercingetorix’s side had to expel Gallic women and children from a besieged fortress, as the food was scarce, and it was understood that without the precious life of the male warriors the war would be lost.

Unlike the above anecdote, which shows how precious the male life is during wartime, in the reader’s mind that passage from Pierce’s novel which is very brief, only demoralises the would-be soldier. In total war what counts is to kill, genocide, exterminate, and not leave stone upon stone of the enemy culture as the Romans did in Carthage. Occasionally, this Blond Beast is allowed to rape even the women in his tribe. Although the Vikings TV series is as flawed as Game of Thrones to describe the spirit of yesteryear, I remember in one of the episodes of the first season that Rollo raped a woman from his village simply because he fancied her.

For the white advocate who wants to do something for his race, and even for the Pierce who wrote that passage, it would be absolutely inconceivable if you carried that barbarism into the world today. True, once there is a social contract in a pure white society (think of the Jane Austen or Downton Abbey worlds), rape should not be allowed. But in those societies the institution of marriage (every Jack had his Jill) was rock solid.

The point is that we do not live in times of early or late Victorianism. We live in the time when Christianity (cf. once again Soberana’s essay) has been axiologically transformed into a neochristianity whose goal is that whites immolate themselves.

In these times, the only thing that matters is to disabuse the Aryan man from the lie of millennia as Nietzsche would say. (Hence the priest of the 14 words’ first guideline: ‘Speak only to Aryan males’.) What Morgan says in his second quote could be illustrated not only with the case of the Viking Rollo raping a woman from his village, but with the siege of the Vercingetorix warriors, although now seen from the Roman side.

Homer describes Ganymede as the most beautiful of mortals, and in one version of the myth, Zeus falls in love with his beauty and abducts him to serve as cup-bearer in Olympus. Although Zeus was basically hetero and always had countless affaires with goddesses and human women, he wanted to know what the cute brat tasted like (Lol!). Imagine that one of Julius Caesar’s centurions, a married man with children in a distant village, as most soldiers was sexually starved in the camp. Following the example of Zeus-Jupiter, he fancied a teenager as androgynous as Giton, whom I alluded to recently in this comment, and adopted him as the cup-bearer of his tent.

Who in the Roman world would care, in times of war, that this centurion felt that infatuation for the ephebe? Who the hell would tear their clothes like even racist ‘anti-Christians’ would do today, so loaded on their backs with the ogre of the Xtian superego?

These two examples illustrate what Morgan says in the quote above. Just as Westcott apparently had no inkling of the role Constantine played in the destruction of the ancient world, contemporary racists, even so-called anti-Christians, remain slaves to the moralism dictated by Moses rather than the morality of Homer.

Many people, even those who have congratulated me on this site for the texts I have translated unmasking Christianity, have no idea what the phrase ‘transvaluation of all values’ means.

It means: Be humble!

Be humble enough to recognise that we committed a blunder seventeen hundred years ago. Constantine’s mistake that may cost the race its very existence meant exchanging the beautiful Aryan Gods and the mores accompanying them for the nefarious god of the Jews.

If the white race is heading towards extinction it is due to the pride of refusing to see something so obvious.

Greek vs. Christian

‘If we ask ourselves what is the main difference between the Greek and the medieval outlook we might well say that the former lacked a sense of sin’ said Bertrand Russell on page 168 of my old, 1959 edition of Wisdom of the West, an introduction to philosophy.

Today, Richard Spencer’s group talked again about how the new Negrolatric cult among whites is basically a Christian awakening of the 21st century, starting: here.

Published in: on June 28, 2020 at 8:03 pm  Comments (4)  

On Robert S. Hartman

Update of 4 April, 2020: It now looks like
this guy was Jewish on his father’s side!

 

______ 卐 ______

 

I learned the word axiology after I met Dr. Robert Hartman when he got along with my father. I even got to play a game of chess with Hartman at his home in Cuernavaca, a game that ended in a draw by the way. His book El conocimiento del bien, published in Spanish by FCE in 1965 (The Knowledge of Good: Critique of Axiological Reason, 2002 Rodopi Press), is still in the library that my father left.

I recall that when we played in Cuernavaca, Hartman opined that the machine would never beat man in chess, and he argued citing philosophers who said that, as man programmed computers, they could never beat him. Since Hartman died not long after we played that game, he didn’t see Kasparov losing a match with a computer.

There’s no need to read Hartman’s very dense axiological work The Knowledge of Good because the man was a typical neo-Christian idiot, as we can see from his words: ‘I had seen Hitler organize evil, and I had determined to try to organize good…’

I remember Hartman’s gestures. He was a very good-natured German, always smiling, married to a Swedish woman. Hartman liked to take naps after lunch and was wealthy enough to take taxis from Mexico City to Cuernavaca when he visited our home. Using metaphor, on one occasion he told my father that as a young man he had escaped from Nazi Germany, ‘¡Me salí por la ventana!’ (‘I went out the window!’). How was it possible for a well-educated German to be completely blind that the greatest Aryan revival in history happened in his native country (he was born in Berlin)?

White nationalists focus on Jewry ignoring that it is much more serious for Aryan Christians to honour the god of the Jews. See for example this pious stupidity that a well-known American racialist said yesterday about the coronavirus. I can say the same about Hartman.

I have complained that the root cause of the darkest hour in the West has been the reversal of values that has occurred since the time of Constantine. Hartman’s case exemplifies this reversal perfectly, although like the German philosophers Hartman wrote The Knowledge of Good in an altogether secular way. However, in Freedom to Live he openly said:

We can almost see our spiritual history as a struggle between Jesus and Aristotle. It was Aristotle who, 300 years before Christ, channelled human thought into the dangerous current in which Christian love was to drown—the overvaluation of systems or thought patterns and the undervaluation of human life.

So far so good? In that same book Hartman said that it bothered him that church services are more social events than spiritual experiences, and that Jesus was relegated to the role of an almost legendary figure. He also complained that Jesus didn’t live with us; that we forget that we don’t become Christians merely by being members of churches, and that Christianity is not a collective but an individual issue (the opposite of what the subversive tribe believes!).

I remember the times Hartman visited our house on Palenque Street—the same house I refer to in the great Cathedral’s dream with which I open Whispering Leaves. I was fifteen when Hartman died, which makes me think I played that game of chess with him when I was fourteen.

Hartman’s axiological tragedy is the tragedy of whites in general including the nationalists who, like the German philosopher, continue to cling to the ethics bequeathed to us by the Semitic authors who wrote the Gospels.

Published in: on March 29, 2020 at 1:42 pm  Comments (9)  

Quotable quote

‘It was Nietzsche’s merit to be the first to grasp that all our current political concepts, all abnormalities in the liberal system are just secular derivatives of Christian thought’.

Tomislav Sunić.

Published in: on March 26, 2020 at 11:42 am  Comments (1)  

Nietzsche

by Tom Sunic

Note of the Editor: Of the intellectuals of contemporary white nationalism, I only have respect for Tom Sunic, who like me is aware of the Christian problem and how capitalism is poison for the fourteen words. The difference is that he speaks in a very polite manner and I in a very rude manner.

For example, I am delighted these days because Murka, which has been the greatest promoter of both capitalism and Judeo-Christianity, is going to die thanks to the crisis unleashed by the coronavirus (the pin) and the Fed (the bubble), as can be seen in my most recent posts.

On the other hand, in an article published today on The Occidental Observer the Croatian Sunic focuses on Europe:
 

______ 卐 ______

 

To each his own Nietzsche. With this sentence one could start yet another discussion on this famous and famed thinker. Given the staggering number of works about him it is essential to raise the question: which Nietzsche should one read first? Should one read Nietzsche’s own prose first, or should one first read works by other authors who have written about him? And which work and by which author? The problem is all the more serious as there are no two works, no two authors among tens of thousands that are in agreement on the same interpretation of Nietzsche’s ideas. Of course, the same remark could be leveled against my own interpretations of Nietzsche. My understanding, interpretation and choice of words regarding Nietzsche’s thoughts may be different from those of other authors who claim to be his best interpreters. Consequently, I may be accused of using interpretations that may not be shared by Nietzsche or his countless interpreters.

What needs to be highlighted, however, is the link established by Nietzsche between Christian values and their secular offshoots used now by the ruling class in the West as a legal and psychological basis for the arrival of non-European migrants into Europe. The System, through its sermons about human rights, whose ideological origins go back to early Christianity, is quite successful in destroying European peoples and cultures.

Aside from being an influential philosopher Nietzsche was also a philologist who understood well the subtleties of political language. Therefore, one should first single out some of his words and find out their conceptual equivalents in the French and in the English languages today, especially in the realm of higher education and high-level political rhetoric. One must keep in mind that his denunciations of Christian morality are contrasted with his praise of combative virtues of the old Greco-Roman “virtù” stripped of any modern moralinfreie Tugend. Nietzsche invented the word “moraline” in order to combat the excessive moralizing of the Church and the ruling class of this time. Strangely enough the word “moraline” is never used today in the modern German language, having also no adequate substitute in the English language. The great German-American connoisseur and translator of Nietzsche, H.L. Mencken translated moralinfreie Tugend as “free of moral acid.” By contrast, modern French nationalists, when deriding the fake news of the modern System, often resort to the original German “moraline.” In the USA, however, this word could be substituted by its conceptual equivalent of “virtue-signalling.”

When transposed into our own language Nietzsche’s words read like a harsh condemnation of the modern System with its invocations of words such as “humanity,” “peace” and “tolerance.” The goal of the System is to force citizens of European extraction to become prey to perpetual feelings of guilt. This is how Nietzsche predicted the modern unfolding of the System hundred and thirty years ago:

Almost everywhere in Europe today, there is a morbid over-sensitivity and susceptibility to pain, as well as an excessive amount of complaining and an increased tenderness that wants to dress itself up as something higher, using religion as well as bits and pieces of philosophy—there is a real cult of suffering.

In addition to his denunciation of Christian morality Nietzsche levels harsh criticism against Christian providentialism which manifests itself today in the gregarious spirit of mass democracy. Of course, the System needs to sugarcoat modern, secularized versions of Christian teachings in the mystique of human rights, in the myth of multiculturalism, in the decrees on race-mixing, and in the usage of politically correct verbiage. Pity for those who failed, for lowlifes, for criminals, including illegal Third World migrants in search of a better life in Europe, has become a mandatory vogue in political and media outlets. Professor Pierre Chassard, who could be ranked as first among French “New Right” interpreters of Nietzsche, defines Nietzsche’s criticism of Christian providentialism: “The wretched of the Earth, who are nailed to the cross, may be the only fortune tellers. Life misfits may be the elect of heaven. Only they are the good guys and others are the bad guys.” The list of self-engineered misfits could grow longer if one were to add numerous White politicians and academics burdened by self-hate and choosing therefore to become purveyors of the dogma of interchangeability of peoples, races, and genders. Such a self-hating behavior, of which Nietzsche was the first critic, is today the trademark of the System.

One could start with the expression “the great replacement.” This wording, coined by the writer Renaud Camus, is deemed unworthy by the System. Nonetheless, although Camus’ book is very useful, its title may be subject to misunderstanding. Instead of the expression “the great replacement,” one is tempted to use a more specific expression: “the great invasion.” However, even the term “invasion” harks back to the notion of the political of the previous centuries when its use was generally accompanied by an armed conflict—which is not the case for the time being with the floods of non-Europeans who are being adorned by the Western media with the sentimental title “refugees.” Understandably, the System and its scribes must avoid the usage of the terms “invasion” or “replacement,” preferring instead the romantic expressions such as “cultural enrichment” or “diversity”—terms which went global after having first appeared in the American language in the 80s of the previous century. Moreover, even if one were to agree on the label “invasion” when describing Afro-Asian migrants on their way to Europe, the choice of this word would take us far off into the field of polemology, a subject that can be tackled only in passing.

According to Nietzsche the moralization of politics leads to chaos which he labels with the word “democracy.” It is incumbent therefore upon his readers to study the effects of democracy peddled globally by the System if one was to grasp the incoming tide of chaos. To that effect it suffices to listen to the hypermoralistic language of the ruling class in order to realize that the true goal of their political experiments—dubbed “democracy” and “diversity”—is nothing else but a gigantic hoax. The outpouring of hypermoralistic narratives among Euro-American leaders, other than serving as a legal smokescreen for humanitarian actions on behalf of non-European migrants, also functions as a grand cover up for the repression against independent thinkers.

In Bismarck’s Germany at the end of the nineteenth century, Nietzsche did not need to confront mass migratory inflows of non-Europeans. Much earlier, however, he had grasped the origins and the global dynamics of the hypermoralistic mindset that had already taken root among politicians and intellectuals of his time—either in its liberal version or in its crypto-communist form. That early bourgeoning hypermoralistic endeavor, whose goal was the creation of the best of all worlds, or the shining communist futures, was bound to lead, a hundred years after Nietzsche’s death, to multicultural chaos observed today.

It is pointless to scorn migrants, the majority of whom are Muslim non-Europeans, without however deciphering moralistic, globalist, altruistic and ecumenical ideas that have been peddled around by the Church over the last two thousand years. It was Nietzsche’s merit to be the first to grasp that all our current political concepts, all abnormalities in the liberal system are just secular derivatives of Christian thought, “whereby this morality is increasingly apparent in every political and social institution; the democratic movement is the heir to Christianity.”

In the System today, which claims to be the best, any criticism of parliamentary democracy, or multiculturalism, let alone of miscegenation, is bound to enter the framework of the penal code or the demonology of its mainstream media executioners. While on the one hand the System prides itself on being tolerant, claiming to extend unrestricted voice even to its critics, while hiding behind the words of tolerance, diversity and humanism, on the other, it exerts total control of its population—a phenomenon hitherto unseen in the entire history of the West. From the point of view of modern languages, from the point of view of the notion of the political, the System is succeeding in reversing real European values and replacing them with surreal ones. Within the framework of these new moralizing and ecumenical values, described by Nietzsche and transposed now into the modern System, it can be expected that non-European masses entering Europe, will describe themselves as “poor refugees.” Incidentally, the term “refugees” is not of their choice; it is being bestowed on them by the System and its sycophant media.

This is how professor Alfred Baeumler, one of Nietzsche’s disciples in the first part of the twentieth century and later to become a high-ranking academic in National Socialist Germany, depicts the nihilistic message inherent in the language of liberal democracy in Europe between the two wars.

Nihilism, chaos, is the inevitable consequence of the belief in harmony without struggle, a belief in indiscriminate (gegensatzlos) order. True order only arises from the power relationship spawned by the will to power… Only chaos is inhumane. The rule of tolerance and moral ideas, of reason and of compassion, in short of “humanity,” always leads to inhumanity.

 
Doubling down on his exotic doppelganger

As a follow-up to such hypermoralistic endeavors conducted by the System one can observe its politicians being more and more inclined toward splitting their own selves—a process which they subsequently project on non-European migrants who are cherished now as the beacon of progress and innocence. Such a process of White self-denial is especially visible in Germany, a country which in 1945 was forced to remake its identity. As an illustration of German split-mindedness or dopplengaegertum, one could mention several authors of fantastic tales at the beginning of the nineteenth century who, by indirection, best predicted the fractured identity of Europeans and especially the German people two hundred years later. A good example is the famous horror story writer E. T. A. Hoffmann and his novella The Sand Man. The main character of his tale falls in love with a machine which resembles an attractive woman he had previously fabricated in his self-delusional mind. Toward the end of the tale the imaginary woman-automaton pushes the unfortunate hero to suicide. Today, we are witnessing a similar mechanical and suicidal fixation by great many German and European politicians, who, as a rule, must pretend to be enamored with fictitious and exotic Third World migrant imagery, and who are overjoyed at the thought of demolishing their own identity and replacing it with the newly borrowed make-believe Afro-Asian identity. This time around, however, men of the System are not only being themselves physically replaced by real Afro-Asian migrants; they themselves yearn to replace their original White identity by non-White surreal supra-identity.

One can provide some crass examples of such a mimetic Double while studying European politicians and their penitential pilgrimages to the holy places of world politics, namely Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv. The Germans, however, must perform an additional station of the cross by paying a penitential visit to Israel and recite a diplomatic chorus of mea culpa sermons. Two years ago, when German Chancellor Merkel visited Israel, she declared that “being aware of this responsibility (the Nazi crimes against the Jews, N.A.) is part of our national identity.” Without its Double, that is, without the forceful embrace of the Other, who was once either denied or colonized, the System and its do-gooders could not survive.

In the same vein, European politicians and intellectuals imagine themselves to be morally obliged to double down on their moralizing fervor on behalf of non-Europeans, assuming that they will thus better eliminate any external suspicion of their alleged neo-fascist or right-wing feelings, or better shed the label of their post-colonial crypto-nostalgia. Naturally, one could argue a lot about the benefits of this new doppelgangertum of European politicians, which has resulted in increased self-hatred, self-censorship and hypertrophy of false morals toward exotic strangers. Nietzsche grasped well this self-castrating mindset which has become today the main guideline of the System.

With respect to this entire kind of priestly medication, the “guilty” kind, any word of criticism is too much… One should at least be clear about the expression “be of use.” If by this one intends to express that such a system of treatment has improved man, then I will not contradict: I only add what “improve” means for me—the same as tamed, weakened, discouraged, sophisticated, pampered, emasculated (hence always the same as injured).

The search for the mimicked Double, observed among Western rulers, has reached by now pathological proportions. EU politicians must double down on their benevolence towards Afro-Asian migrants in order to better rid themselves of possible charges of would-be anti-Semitism or of being guilt-free for their colonialist and racialist past. In the majority of cases, however, such mimetic behavior is the natural consequence of the Allied re-education since 1945, the aim of which was and still is the creation of new European species.

In this essay on Nietzsche one cannot dispense with the name of the German anthropologist Arnold Gehlen who wrote that “the hypertrophy of morality occurs when we accept each human being in his humaneness only, and provide him in this capacity with the highest rank of existence.” Gehlen was perhaps the best connoisseur of Nietzsche during the cold war era, despite the fact that his analyses of the pathology of self-induced hypermoralism of German politicians had earned him lots of enemies on the Left and a great deal of ire among Frankfurt School reeducators. The moral hypertrophy of the early postwar System he describes is now being duplicated by European and US rulers and their “fake news” servicemen, both attempting to silence any voice of White dissent.

Neither is the Catholic Church and the papists the world over lagging behind. The most recent in the line of the moraline combat is Pope Francis with his sermons on the rights of immigrants and with his homilies that “migrants are the symbol of all those excluded from the globalized society.” When listening to Pope’s urbi and orbi, it is worth studying the reaction of would-be Afro-Asian migrants. Despite their modest IQ, they are not stupid. They know that they have powerful allies, not only in anti-fascist circles but also among the high Catholic clergy, both in the United States and in Europe.

Surely, George Soros and a host of left-leaning NGOs can be criticized for facilitating the flooding of the West by African and Asian migrants. However, the fact remains that African and Asian migrants follow only the unilateral welcoming calls from European politicians whose words had the prior blessing of the Pope and the high Catholic clergy. The latter is always diligent when mobilizing for migrants shelters or “sanctuary cities”—a gesture which only redoubles migrants’ appetite. In fact, the Church operates today as a sort of a counter-power vis-à-vis the actual legal power in place, which in any case is very lax with regard to migrants’ arrivals.

Beyond the moralizing phrases about the benefits of multiculturalism and miscegenation propagated by the System and the Church, the iron laws of biology and heredity cannot be ignored. In the years to come the states of the European Union will be exposed to multireligious and multiracial conflicts among and between new non-European migrants, conflicts of great magnitude and long duration. By their obsessive politics of self-denial, European countries, with Germany at the helm, will hardly be able to cope not just with the great replacement, but also with internal conflicts between diverse ingroups of non-European migrants themselves. Contrary to a wide misconception among EU leaders and many academics, racial intolerance and xenophobia is by no means the privilege of White nationalists. Racial pride and racial exclusiveness are by no means the monopoly of the White European stock. Low-level conflicts between and among nationals of Asian origin and nationals of sub-Saharan origin now residing in the West, will have a bright future. Worse, side by side with various moralizing social justice warriors and anti-fascist squads, the System won’t be able to persuade migrants to embrace the same liberal ukases, the same legal standards, the same scholastic tests, nor the same Western political concepts. Liberal rules and regulations, when forced upon non-White migrants, will always remain unacceptable to them. Thus, in the name of “diversity” the System keeps destroying not only the identity of European peoples, but also the identity of non-European newcomers.

Sooner or later multicultural states break up and terminate their trajectory in civil wars. Also, within the great replacement overhaul underway now, interracial wars among non-European migrants will be aggravated by large demographic changes. In addition, these hybrid civil wars looming large in the West now, will be accompanied by an increase in victimhood narratives by different tribes and ethnicities residing in Europe, each claiming, of course, the first place on the victimhood list. Mutual distrust, followed by the decline in civic solidarity and the dissolution of political order will become the order of the day. The hypermoralizing and masochistic antics of White politicians, among whom the German politicians are doing the surplus overbidding, are the logical outcome of the culture of guilt inherited from the fascist, colonial, Ustasha or National Socialist past. Following the incessant incantations by the System of mea culpa, mea maxima culpa—what would Nietzsche now say about our fatality? Long ago his answer was clear enough: “There will come a day when my name will recall the memory of something formidable—a crisis the like of which has never been known on earth.”

__________

To see the endnotes click: here.

Possessed whites

Jordan Peterson may be a sophist but he does well to remind us, quoting Jung, that the human being in general has no ideas: he is possessed by ideas.

Since the Imperial Church destroyed the Greco-Roman world, whites literally became possessed by Jewish ideas. Think about how many centuries the possessed ones bent their knees to deities like Yahweh and his son Yeshu.

Whites are so possessed that even the souls of the supposed rebels of the anti-white zeitgeist continue to be possessed by this idea. And I mean not only white nationalists who remain Christians. Every time I see more clearly that the fact that books like Who We Are remain unpublished, even by secular racialists, is because Pierce breaks away from Christian ethics by advising ‘extermination or expulsion’ of non-whites throughout his book.

Understand me well: like the normies, all racialists in today’s world are possessed by an unhealthy idea. And like the normies they will remain possessed until the day of their deaths, as Thomas Kuhn saw. There are exceptions of course, including some commenters who have visited this site. But in general what Jung said remains: human beings have no ideas; they are possessed by ideas. And the idea that in this age governs westerners, including secular white nationalists, remains Christian ethics.

It is true that white nationalists are not normies. But since they are unable to break openly with Christian ethics they are in no man’s land. The metaphor I have been using is that, although they left Normieland, while crossing the psychological Rubicon they stayed in the middle of the river. They are unable to continue crossing into the lands of National Socialism, and will remain unable to cross it until the day of their deaths. The magnet exercised by the precepts of Yahweh and his son Yeshu from the side of the river they left behind is irresistible.

Our only hope is to appeal to the very young generations, perhaps teenagers or children, who in the future will read The Fair Race: a compilation that, as I promised yesterday, in the 2020 edition I added a paragraph in the introduction (and deleted the PDF of 2019).

Above, Catherine gets a woman released from her pact with the devil before dying, a painting by Girolamo di Benvenutto (1470-1524). What Girolamo ignored is that Christianity itself is the devil, and that we must get whites released from their devilish pact before their race goes extinct.

Britain is gone!

Probably you have already watched Jared Taylor’s latest video…

Most horrifying is that not even after the recent murder of his own son by the Muslim terrorist the English father questioned his neo-Franciscan ideology about those who are raping English girls and killing English boys.

Postscript of 11:00 am. I am cutting and pasting my response to one of the comments below:

This situation is horrifying indeed, something is biologically wrong with the brains of White leftists.

I would blame the ‘software’ rather than the ‘hardware’, although if I remember correctly Richard Dawkins once said that memes could be as biological as genes.

Since I lived with my two grandmas in the 1970s and 80s, I have told myself many times that when they were young the meme ‘racist’ didn’t exist, as it was coined in the 1920s. That’s why my grandmas never used the word—never—, as their minds were wired up before the 20s.

Later generations are doomed. We live in a meme society where, for most folks, it’s impossible to see that they’re trapped in a matrix of memes, of which ‘racist’ is the central one that, like a virus of the mind, is destroying the white race.

It would be possible to try to transvalue the value, claiming that ‘racism’ is a badge of honour and invoke NS Germany. But that would mean rejecting Christian ethics and the ethics of Christianity’s bastard son, the secular liberalism imposed throughout the West after the French Revolution, something that most whites are unprepared to do.

In my opinion, only the facts presented in sites like The West’s Darkest Hour could potentially disabuse whites from their ethno-suicidal memes: the real history of Christianity and the real history of WW2 (which is why I’ve chosen Bran under the Heart Tree as the symbol of this site). But reading real history is something that the overwhelming majority of white nationalists are uninterested. Not even Kevin MacDonald or Greg Johnson are interested, in spite of the fact that both have published book reviews of Hellstorm some years ago. Jews would be hammering on such lachrymose story day and night, but most white advocates don’t even want to ponder about a brief summary of the book Demolish Them by Vlassis Rassias.

Even in today’s article, Hunter Wallace claims that his religion is compatible with racialism. Like other white advocates, he continues to fail to address what we can read in Rassias’ book: that, while destroying the statues, temples and burning the libraries, these Semitic or philo-Semitic terminators used the word ‘gentiles’ to refer to the advocates of Greco-Roman civilisation.

Pseudoapostates

Or:

It all starts at Level 6

Hitler said that National Socialism could not be exported. If technically we cannot call ourselves ‘National Socialists’, this explains that a few years ago I started using another expression, ‘priests of the fourteen words’.

The priest of the 14 words does not even have to be pure Aryan as were the members of the SS. By the expression I mean a man devoted to fulfilling the words of Hitler and Lane, which on the internet are represented with the numbers 14/88 (eighty-eight being some 88 words of the Führer in Mein Kampf). About the time when I coined the expression ‘priest of the 14 words’ I began to talk of a first guideline for such priest: ‘Speak only with Aryan males’. You can avoid ninety-seven percent of pointless discussions if you follow this simple guideline. Furthermore, only Aryan men are potentially capable of initiating an armed revolution in pursuit of the sacred words.

But a guideline is not compulsory and sometimes I still try, unsuccessfully, to communicate with non-whites. On the other hand, on page 563 of The Fair Race, writing about the new tablets of stone, I do speak of imperatives: ‘First commandment: “You will keep your blood pure”. Second commandment: “Never use non-whites in any type of work”’ (listen to the interview of Arthur Kemp by Lana Lokteff to learn why using non-white labour is ultimately ethnosuicidal).

Since together with modern civilisation Christian ethics are the mortal enemy of the sacred words, I would like to expand our understanding of the priesthood of the 14 words with four signs of genuine apostasy from Judeo-Christianity. Despite the last line of this article, the priests of the fourteen words (1) do not believe that the god of the Jews exists and therefore (2) do not believe that a Jew was resurrected from the dead in the first century of the Common Era. Nor do they believe in (3) the Christian vision of the human soul or the existence of disembodied entities in the hereafter. Finally, (4) they have transvalued Christian values to Aryan normality (this is central to what I’ll say in this article about the so-called day of the rope).

One might think that with this criterion the people of the ‘Alt-Right’, exemplified in the secular case of he who coined the term, Richard Spencer, could be candidates for this new ecclesia. Actually, Spencer is not a candidate to the extent that he fails at the fourth sign, and it is not entirely clear what his pals think about the third one (see my recent entries on the hereafter). I would like to exemplify why they cannot be priests with the most recent talk of Spencer and his friends who, using the metric of Mauricio, I’d say they are psychogenically trapped between levels four and five while our priesthood starts at Level 6.

While we want to transvalue some American values to NS values; other values to the England of Jane Austen (the laws of the Victorian world virtually forced women to get properly married), and others to Greco-Roman values, the Alt-Right continues to promote Murkan values (even though Spencer said that ‘there is something profoundly wicked in the origins’ of his nation). For example, in their recent YouTube talk, ‘The Self-Defeating Drive for De-Radicalization’, Spencer okayed getting laid during his criticism of the more puritanical incels. When I heard Spencer and his friends I wondered what happened to the sacred institution of marriage in their minds, which even precedes Christianity? Are they so dense that cannot understand that some men simply don’t want to get laid occasionally but marry a decent woman and form a family? Have they not heard what Anglin or Linder say about MGTOW (see for example my own text on the subject: here)?

I also wondered if Spencer & Co. had considered the more conservative texts by Roger Devlin, and now I think the answer is negative. The liberal position of the Alt-Right on sexual maters reminds me of the last novel by the late Harold Covington, which is also his longest novel about the creation of an only-whites republic. Covington’s novel describes an ethnostate in which the most spoiled women, even feminist warriors, coexist with ladies who behave like Austen’s lovely girls—as if that were possible under the laws and mores of a healthy nation!

But it was not Spencer who surprised me the most, but the guy whose face does not appear in the NPI/Radix videos, only his voice (the moment of his speech begins: here). Spencer’s colleague strongly criticised a fan of William Pierce’s The Turner’s Diaries and the day of the rope. The dude did not explain why it was so primitive to like the most popular novel authored by an American racist, even more popular than Covington’s revolutionary novels. He even used strong words: ‘That’s an immature fucking movement. Those idiots…’ Spencer intervened and, commenting about ‘punching right’, he used the word ‘toxic’ without explaining why the day of the rope should be considered toxic for alt-righters.

This is my proposal to the genuine priests of the 14 words: Not only the friend of Spencer who does not show his face, but on every racially conscious white who is frightened by Pierce the label ‘PSEUDOAPOSTATE’ must be stamped.

As we have seen countless times on this site, there is a chasm between apostasy and pseudo-apostasy of Christianity, between Level 5 and Level 6 in the Mauricio metric. Complete apostasy implies the rejection of those Christian standards of morality that prevent Alt-Right folk from thinking in revolutionary terms. And exactly the same happens in White Nationalism, exemplified in how ‘secular’ Greg Johnson experiences hair raising with both Pierce’s fiction and his non-fiction alike. I could be told that what I say is nonsense in the sense that Christians have been slaughtering for centuries without remorse. But remember what we have been saying on this site: it was not until 1945 when, confused by racial warfare, the white man’s moral compass changed orientation toward gospel-inspired values, even among secularists.

In their video, Spencer and his pals talked about the stage they classify as ‘1.0’ of the movement. In reality, compared to National Socialism their movement is a grotesque regression to the most progressive mentality of the 19th century (remember H.G. Wells’ famous essay on ‘free love’, that is, promiscuous sex). It will give me great pleasure when the economic crash that lies ahead hits the bourgeois lifestyle of these four Radix characters…

After the crash of the dollar Americans will psychogenically transit from ‘happy mode’ to ‘angry mode’. If things get worse over the months, and you must watch John Mark’s videos, whites could even go on a defensive state against invaders at home that I’ve been calling ‘combat mode’. And if the government sides the coloured ‘zombie’ invaders looking for food a revolutionary ‘killing mode’, which includes the day of the rope for traitors, could arise.

History might begin to vindicate us priests of the 14 words while lukewarm voices like Spencer’s and his group will barely be taken seriously. To those who are still sceptical that a collapse is coming I would like to change the subject and say the following:

J. M. W. Turner: The Fall of an Avalanche.

I’ve been watching some of the latest videos by economist Jim Rickards, author of Aftermath: Seven Secrets of Wealth Preservation in the Coming Chaos (2019). In one of his last interviews, they told Rickards that for years he had been predicting a financial collapse and that it still doesn’t happen.

Rickards replied with the perfect metaphor: the exact hour of an avalanche cannot be predicted. Although the accumulated snow layers are a sign that sooner or later it will collapse, it is impossible to know when the temperature will rise among factors such as wind, the additional weight of other layers, snowstorms and rainstorms. But the sure thing is that the avalanche will occur sooner or later. This is from a recent article where Rickards says that the world is unprepared for the currency crash:

Previous crises. According to Mr Rickards, the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis could’ve brought the world to its knees if Wall Street banks hadn’t pulled together to bail out US hedge fund Long-Term Capital, which was about to collapse. The crisis spread throughout the world and hit the US causing Dow Jones industrial average to record its biggest point fall in history by October 1997—triggering a trading suspension. However, disaster was averted after Long-Term Capital received a US$3.75 billion bail-out. Had it not been bailed-out, a cascade of secondary bank bankruptcies would’ve ensued with numerous majors around the world including Deutsche Bank, UBS, and HSBC reporting they had either contributed to the bail-out or written off hundreds of millions in losses.

The following 2007-2008 global financial crisis was triggered by the US subprime mortgage market and excessive risk taking by banks with their lending practices. Falling prey to the crisis was Lehman Brothers which went bankrupt and caused the Dow Jones to topple to its lowest in seven years. In this bail-out, it was left to central banks to prevent financial Armageddon, with the US Federal Reserve taking its balance sheet from US$800 billion to over US$4.2 trillion. The US Government took over flailing banks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while others including Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America received hundreds of billions in US Government bail-outs.

Who’s going to bail out the central banks? With another financial crisis imminent, Mr Rickards posed the question: who is going to bail out the central banks? […] “They’ll close exchanges, close banks, close ATMs, freeze accounts.” When people say that will “never happen”, Mr Rickards explained it has happened many times before including Cypress, Greece and Argentina. He added it also happened in the US in 1933, when US President Franklin D Roosevelt ordered every bank to close. The bank shutdown lasted eight days, but Mr Rickards said no-one knew how long the closure would be and it could easily have been a month-to-two months. He pointed out another financial shutdown occurred in the US in 1914 when World War One broke out. “The New York Stock Exchange was closed for five months—from July 1914 to December 1914.”

What does the future look like in the next crisis? Mr Rickards was quick to point out he doesn’t foresee a dystopian future or an end of the world scenario. However, he said he did expect the crisis will begin with “enormous social unrest”. Elaborating on this statement, Mr Rickards noted the veneer of civilisation is “paper thin”.

“We saw this in August 2005 with Hurricane Katrina in the US where the city of New Orleans was cut off and order broke down within days. By the second day, people were becoming desperate for food and water. By the third day, violence had broken out. You have vigilantes, looters, and the national guard moving in. Civilised behaviour only lasts about three days in the absence of reliable water, food, electricity and all the things we take for granted.”

In a situation where banks are closed and people can’t access their money, Mr Rickards said social disorder will break out “quite quickly”. This will be followed by a breakdown of internal systems. “This is how complex civilisations collapse. It isn’t a barbarian invasion, but an internal collapse, because of too much bureaucracy, too much taxation, and complexity.”

He said the social disorder will be most acute in major metropolitan areas. To survive this new system, Mr Rickards anticipates communities will shift to a semi-barter system where skills are traded and silver, or gold if you have it, can be used to buy food and other essentials. As the crisis unfolds, the US dollar is expected to become worthless—with gold the primary valuable commodity.

Using the metaphor, in 1998 and in 2008 the economic avalanche had started but was stopped twice with a man-made wall. But sheer size matters. Since the cure was altogether artificial, from 2008 until now many more snowpacks have been accumulated, which means that in the next crisis the central banks won’t be able to stop the increasingly accumulated energy of the fall of the avalanche. That the central banks won’t be able to stop the avalanche is recognised also by other economists who don’t buy the economic nonsense promoted by the System (watch for example the crash courses by Martenson and Maloney so many times cited on this site).

Rickards usually has wealthy people as an audience whom he recommends investing their savings in real estate and tangible commodities (including art) and 10 percent of their capital in gold. But those who visit The West’s Darkest Hour are not so rich, some are even relatively poor. To you I would recommend using 90 percent of your capital to obtain ounces of silver. If you don’t even have capital in the bank, I would suggest working to be able to obtain such coins. Living in the third world this is complicated for me but in the first world it is possible.

Among the sceptics some ask us to give them the exact date of the financial collapse, as if that was possible (cf. how the exact timing of the physical, non-metaphorical avalanche is impossible). They behave like children with such irrational demand while they continue skiing in high-risk places. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, not the angels of heaven, but the Father only.

Loneliness explained

Imagine that you have to argue with people that
some kike didn’t actually come back from the dead.

—Alex Linder

After rereading Mauricio’s List, this morning I got the eureka! moment regarding the reason for the reduction of visitors and donations of which I spoke on Wednesday.

It’s as simple as that, thanks to William Pierce, I’m already at Level 10 of the List while the majority of racialist folk are at Level 4 (‘White Nationalism is good. Jews are evil. Christianity is a White religion’). A few are permanently stuck at Level 5 (‘National Socialism is good. America is evil. Christianity has been corrupted by Jews’).

Once one abandons Christian ethics (‘The leap from 5 to 6 is astronomical’ in the words of Mauricio) the next steps to finish crossing the psychological Rubicon can be taken, such as the exterminationist position of Charles Darwin (see what I said about Darwin yesterday).

Mauricio’s full sentence in that entry last year is: ‘Personally I’m a Level 9, verging on Level 10. I’ve met some Level 4, and only a few Level 5. The leap from 5 to 6 is astronomical due to the Xtian malware rejection. Feels lonely sometimes…’

Bingo. And sometimes I wonder if I should reduce my entries on this site to a minimum, in the sense of saying only the essential. What is the point of speaking from Level 10 when most visitors are stuck at Levels 4 and 5?

Published in: on October 25, 2019 at 9:31 am  Comments (10)  

What ‘The Turner Diaries’ is all about

by William Pierce

It is important for us to understand that one person is not a Methodist and another a Catholic and a third a Marxist as the result of any rational process—at least, not in the vast majority of cases, although there are individual exceptions.

That is, one is not a Methodist because one sat down and studied the Methodist doctrine, compared it with other doctrines, and decided that Methodism was what made the most sense. One is a Methodist, generally, because one’s parents and neighbors were—that is, out of an entirely unreasoning desire to conform, to believe what one perceives that one is expected to believe. John Wesley undoubtedly was an exception to this rule, but very few other Methodists have been.

There has been strong resistance to accepting the implications of this important facet of human behavior. People seem to want to believe that we are all quite rational, when most of us aren’t. For our purposes, the implication of the fact that most people are governed far more by herd instinct than by reason is this: Insofar as the general public is concerned, truth cannot fight its own battles. As long as Norman Lear, the Jewish television producer, has more kilowatts for reaching the public than we do, it will be his view of history and, more important, his view of what is moral rather than ours which will be generally accepted and which will govern the political process.

This means that we can realistically expect our educational efforts to be effective with only a rather small minority of our fellow citizens. We cannot expect to make a partisan for our cause out of the average man or woman who perceives, even unconsciously, that our cause is not popular, no matter how many books or leaflets we may coax that person into reading. We win only two types of people: One is the person who is already alienated to a certain extent from Mr. Lear’s world and does not fully feel himself a part of the herd to which Mr. Lear is preaching with his cleverly designed television sermons. Unfortunately, in many cases people are alienated for reasons which are entirely or partly wrong from our point of view. That is why protest movements and revolutionary movements always pick up lots of defective people. On the other hand, alienation is certain to remain a growth industry, as they say, and one can hope to see many more essentially healthy people becoming alienated from the mainstream in the years ahead.

The second type of person we are able to win with an educational effort at this time is the person who is one of those rare exceptions to the general rule, a person who is strongly motivated by ideas as well as by instinct, and who has already been groping in our direction. Our effect with such a person is primarily to help him clarify his ideas and to lead him more rapidly to their logical conclusions.

This contrast between idealistic motivation and herd instinct tell us only part of the story as to why people behave the way they do. The rest of the story takes us into the realm of values. Consider your average man or woman, your ordinary White American: what, other than herd instinct, determines his behavior—in particular, the way he votes?

Well, he generally likes to be warm, dry, and comfortable. He likes to eat. He likes sex. He likes to feel secure. He likes to be entertained. He likes to own shiny things, such as automobiles, boats, houses, new golf clubs, and jewelry. And that’s about it. If these desires of his are gratified, then he is satisfied. If he thinks a politician will satisfy him, he’ll vote for the man.

Now, if this average citizen hears that Blacks are rioting and killing Whites somewhere 1,000 miles away he will be annoyed—if Norman Lear hasn’t already affected his mind too much and he still has healthy instincts. When he hears that hundreds of thousands of non-White aliens are pouring into the country, again he’ll be annoyed. All these things are, to a greater or lesser extent, perceived as threats at the instinctual level. They trigger his normal territorial or xenophobic reflexes. But unless the threat becomes very direct and very personal—unless the riot is in his neighborhood, unless a member of his immediate family marries a non-White, or unless he receives a special tax bill in the mail to provide welfare payment for more immigrants—the annoyance remains minor. It does not override his desire to be satisfied.

When it comes time to vote, if one candidate is in favor of forced busing or more boat people and a second candidate is against these things—and if all other factors are equal—then he’ll vote for the second man. But all the other factors are never equal. And if the pro-busing man has a nice smile and a warm personality that makes the voter feel more secure, while the anti-busing man wants to raise the charge for fishing licenses, say, and the voter likes to fish, then he’ll vote for the pro-busing candidate nine times out of ten.

That is why a state like Minnesota, which has one of the racially healthiest populations in the country, could keep sending a piece of filth like the late Hubert Humphrey back to the U.S. Senate term after term. Old Hubert could stand up in the Senate and support forced busing, forced housing, forced hiring, and everything else that most Minnesotans didn’t favor—except, of course, those Minnesotans already convinced by Norman Lear that they should favor those things—and then Hubert could make up for it all by going for bigger farm price supports than his opponent and by being, as they say in New York, a mensch. And the good folks of Minnesota would re-elect him.

Many people don’t like the view of human behavior I am presenting to you, because it is mechanistic; it reduces man to no more than another animal. And I’ll admit that it is an oversimplified view. But it is nevertheless a fact that man is an animal, and that fact accounts for 99 per cent of his behavior. In particular, it accounts for the way he votes. That’s why democracy is such a catastrophe.

I said the fact that man is an animal explains 99 per cent of his behavior, and anyone who wants to change the world in any way must take that fact into account. But it is the other one per cent of human motivation that I’m more interested in and that the Alliance is more interested in. It’s the other one per cent that explains why Earl Turner, the hero of The Turner Diaries, did the things he did.

Earl Turner was a man whose priorities were different from those of your average American voter. Earl Turner liked to be warm and dry and to have a full belly, just like everyone else. He enjoyed sex. And, presumably, he liked to own shiny things. But when Blacks killed Whites 1,000 miles away, it wasn’t just a minor annoyance to him. He had a larger view of the world and of his race and of his relationship to them. He could abstract what was a minor, personal threat to your average voter, and he could relate that abstraction to his view of the world.

When Earl Turner saw a racially mixed couple on the street, the sight did more than arouse a twinge of xenophobia or offend his sense of beauty. Unlike your average voter, he saw all the implications of that mixed couple. He saw mongrel children and mongrel grandchildren; he saw a race defiled. He saw a threat not just to himself, but to the whole upward course of life; a threat not just to his race, but to what his race could become.

And it was this that was important to Earl Turner: it was this that counted more than being satisfied, more than owning shiny things. And that’s why he didn’t behave like your average voter. His priorities were different.

Actually, there are two concepts here. First, Earl Turner had the capacity for abstraction, for taking an idea out of a specific set of circumstances and putting it into a more general context: for converting an idea into an ideal. That is a capacity which distinguishes our race from Blacks, in general, but it is still a capacity which relatively few Whites have to any significant degree.

And, second, there are values, the choice of which things count most. For most people the things that come first, even if they have the capacity for abstraction, are entirely personal. It is only for a minority within a minority that the long-range things are the ones that count. Only the very few can feel that it is more important that strength and beauty and wisdom prevail and become stronger and more beautiful and wiser with each succeeding generation than it is that any individual—or a million individuals—have full bellies.

In The Turner Diaries the real struggle was not so much one of a revolutionary band against the government as it was of one set of values against another set. Earl Turner and his Organization were the champions of a life-centered set of values, a set of values in which the central reality is not the individual, but all of Life: the Cosmos, in its entire temporal extension. Opposed to them were not only the values of the government and the media and the plutocrats, but also the individual-centered set of values of mass man, of the average voter. And in The Turner Diaries the life-centered values won, and those values then ruled. And the whole world was changed: its government, its racial composition, its art and industry, it life-styles, and all its priorities.

Human nature didn’t change—that is, the mentality and the values of the average White person didn’t change, because those are things which can only be changed over the course of generations, through the evolutionary process. But a different set of values, the values of an elite minority, gained precedence over the values of man. That’s what The Turner Diaries is all about.

And as I said earlier, it’s not a plan or a blueprint. The details—the bombings and assassinations, the nuclear war and its aftermath—are all fiction. But the struggle for dominance between the two sets of values portrayed in the book is not fiction. That’s real. And it is in this regard that Earl Turner’s Organization is the model for the National Alliance.

We are concerned, then, not only with education, with helping people clarify their thoughts and reach the proper conclusions, but also with embodying and institutionalizing a set of fundamental values and a view of the world. We are convinced that, unless our values prevail and rule, unless it is our world view which determines the shape of the future by setting men’s priorities and guiding them in their decisions, then there will be no future—that is, no future worth mentioning, because it will be a retrograde future, and our race will not be a part of it. And, in fact, the only valid reason why our race should survive is that it is the bearer of the values that we are determined shall prevail. For life loses its intrinsic value when its only motive is to increase its quantity, when its only goal is satiety.

The value of every form of life—of every race—of every individual—is not that it is an end in itself but that it is a means to a higher end. The value of a man’s life is not to be found in the degree to which he enjoys himself or in the amount of wealth or power he accumulates—and it especially is not to be found in the so-called good he does by making life more comfortable for others. It is to be found only in the extent to which he helps prepare the way for a higher, a more fully conscious life than his own.

Earl Turner understood that and acted accordingly and we must do the same.

____________

The above material has been excerpted from a portion of Pierce’s address at the Estonian House in New York City. The original title was ‘Whose Values Shall Rule?’ which appeared in the National Alliance Bulletin of June, 1980.

Published in: on October 18, 2019 at 6:15 am  Comments (20)