‘That we won’t werewolf…’


Dr. Sally: Oh, no, no, no. No, you can’t joke about that.

Murray Franklin: Yeah, that’s not funny, Arthur. That’s not the kind of humor we do on this show.

Joker: Okay. Yeah, I’m sorry. It’s just, you know, it’s been a rough few weeks, Murray. Ever since I killed those three Wall Street guys.

[Pause.]

Murray Franklin: Okay, I’m waiting for the punchline.

Joker: There is no punchline. It’s not a joke.

Murray Franklin: You’re serious, aren’t you? You’re telling us you killed those three young men on the subway?

Joker: Mm-hmm.

Murray Franklin: And why should we believe you?

Joker: I’ve got nothing left to lose. Nothing can hurt me anymore.

[He smiles.]

Joker: My life is nothing but a comedy.

Murray Franklin: Let me get this straight, you think that killing those guys is funny?

Joker: I do. And I’m tired of pretending it’s not. Comedy is subjective, Murray. Isn’t that what they say? All of you, the System that knows so much, you decide what’s right or wrong. The same way that you decide what’s funny or not.

Audience Member: Get him off!

Murray Franklin: Okay, I think, my understanding, that you did this to start a movement to become a symbol?

Joker: Come on, Murray. Do I look like the kind of clown that could start a movement? I killed those guys because they were awful. Everybody is awful these days. It’s enough to make anyone crazy.

Murray Franklin: Okay, so that’s it. You’re crazy. That’s your defense for killing three young men?

Joker: No. They couldn’t carry a tune to save their lives.

[The audience starts booing.]

Joker: Oh, why is everybody so upset about these guys? If it was me dying on the sidewalk, you’d walk right over me. I pass you everyday and you don’t notice me! But these guys, what, because [the very wealthy] Thomas Wayne went and cried about them on TV?

Murray Franklin: Do you have a problem with Thomas Wayne?

Joker: Yes, I do. Have you seen what it’s like out there, Murray? Do you ever actually leave the studio? Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore! Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit down and take it like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!

Murray Franklin: You finished? I mean, there’s so much self-pity, Arthur, you sound like you’re making excuses for killing those young men.

Not everybody, and I’ll tell you this, not everyone is awful.

Joker: But you’re awful, Murray.

Murray Franklin: Me? I’m awful? Oh, yeah? How am I awful?

Joker: Playing my video. Inviting me on this show. You just wanted to make fun of me. You’re just like the rest of them.

Murray Franklin: You don’t know the first thing about me, pal. Look what happened because of what you did? What it led to. There are riots out there. Two policemen are in critical condition.

[Arthur starts to laugh.]

Murray Franklin: You’re laughing. You’re laughing. Someone was killed today because of what you did.

Joker: I know…

How about another joke, Murray?

Murray Franklin: No, I think we’ve had enough of your jokes.

Joker: What do you get…

Murray Franklin: I don’t think so.

Joker: …when you cross…

Murray Franklin: I think we’re done with the show. That’s it.

Joker: …a mentally ill loner with a society that abandons him and treats him like trash?!

Murray Franklin: Call the police, Gene. Call the police.

Joker: I’ll tell you what you get! You get what you fucking deserve!

[Suddenly Arthur Freck, the Joker, shoots Murray in the head and the audience starts running off in terror. After killing Murray, the Joker, goes to a camera and points it at himself.]

Joker: Goodnight. And always remember, that’s…

[He gets cut off as the show is cut. After Arthur murders Murray live on TV, as riots break out across Gotham, the Waynes leave a movie theater and a clown rioter follows them down an alley.]

Clown Rioter: Hey, Wayne. You get what you fucking deserve.

[Points his gun at Thomas…]

Thomas Wayne: No, pal!

[He shoots both Thomas and his wife, Martha, in front of young Bruce, the future Batman: protector of the System. LOL!]

Published in: on October 14, 2019 at 10:26 pm  Comments (5)  

Why the fair race will go under

by William Pierce

Big business, including those sectors of it relatively free of Jewish control, is in favor of continued non-White immigration as a means of maintaining a plentiful supply of relatively inexpensive labor.

As depressing as the situation is among the military rank and file, it is even worse among the higher military leaders. A weeding-out program during the past 30 years has virtually eliminated career officers above the rank of captain who are willing to express any disagreement with the racial program imposed on the U.S. armed services. Eliminated with them has been any realistic hope of a military solution to America’s internal political and racial problems.

Those who are working for the West’s ruin know well the psychology of mass man; they know how tenaciously materialistic he is, how he will cling to his comforts and luxuries at the expense of his honor, his freedom, and even his life, deceiving himself all the while as to his own motives. Perhaps the very best example of this fatal weakness is provided by the behavior in recent years of the Whites of Rhodesia and South Africa, a subject treated elsewhere in this [1980] issue of National Vanguard.

It is true that the world—including the rest of the West—ganged up on them; it is true that they are saddled with twice as many Jews, per capita, as the people of the United States; it is true that they were stabbed in the back by the Christian churches, in which they had foolishly placed their trust; it is true that their news media are controlled by the same gang which controls ours. But the fact remains that the Whites of southern Africa have, with their eyes wide open, chosen prosperity over racial integrity. As a consequence, in the long run they shall have neither.

The same shopkeeper mentality which made them fear an economic boycott more than the mongrelizing of their posterity prevails throughout the West. It is the mentality of what historian Brooks Adams has called “economic man”; men of this type have wielded power in the West since the Industrial Revolution, and their values are shared as well by most of the powerless.

The values and way of thinking of economic man may be tolerable for a while in an all-White world, but they are lethal in a world which also includes Jews. In the very near future they will be just as lethal for America and Europe as they have been for White Rhodesia.

In view of these trends—trends which transcend party politics and the short-term fluctuations of changing government administrations, trends which show every promise of remaining unchanged in the years ahead, indeed, of becoming increasingly worse—there can be little room for debate as to whether the West will go under. It has already passed the point of no return in its descent. The water is up to our necks, and the only question is, when will it reach our noses.

The ship, in other words, is going down, and it is going down not just because the captain doesn’t know how to sail and because there is a gang of saboteurs aboard who have opened the sea cocks, but also because it has become irreparably unseaworthy.

Now, this is a very important conclusion. It separates the National Alliance from the right wingers, who believe there’s still time to save the ship (or, if there isn’t, all is lost and so there’s no point in doing anything); from the liberals, who believe that the more water the ship takes on the better it will sail; and from the mass of voters, who, although they have a dark suspicion that something is seriously wrong and a nagging fear that the captain doesn’t know what he’s doing, are much more concerned that their feet are getting wet than that the ship is going down.

The most important distinction for the Alliance is the first one. The right wingers see the value of the West in its outward forms: its governments, its economic systems, its life-styles. When those are broken up—when the ship of state goes down—there is, for them, nothing left.

But the National Alliance sees the value of the West in its biological essence, in the human genetic material which was responsible for the building of Western civilization—and which has the capability of building another civilization to replace it. When the ship goes down, there will be lots of passengers in the water, and they will drown. What is important is to make certain that some passengers—the right ones—are in lifeboats, with a compass, oars, and directions to the nearest land.

The events of recent years must be depressing in the extreme for intelligent conservatives and right wingers. Unless they are blind to what is happening in the world, they must feel utterly overwhelmed by the prospect of trying to patch the old tub up and keep it afloat. For those of them who are racially conscious, the realization that each passing year brings us a population that is more mongrelized, an electorate that is more degraded in its sensibilities, must be terribly discouraging. How can one salvage such a mess?

To be sure, after accepting the view that the mess can’t be salvaged and that one shouldn’t even try, the prospect is no less grim. The breakdown of order, the unleashing of anarchy, is destructive of true human progress even under the mildest of conditions. In the racially mixed urban jungle of America it will be indescribably terrible. There will be a grisly justice in that most Whites who have collaborated with the enemies of the West in sinking it will themselves be drowned. It is almost amusing to contemplate the fate of the White gun-control advocates in America’s cities in the days to come, when they will be even more at the mercy of roving gangs of Black thugs than they are today.

And the rich White liberals in their exclusive suburbs—the fashionable writers, the ACLU lawyers, the pulpit prostitutes, the organizers of fund-raising dinners for trendy causes, the socially conscious coupon clippers who won’t own stocks in corporations doing business in South Africa, the news editors who conscientiously excise any mention of race from crime stories, the school board members who pretend that all is well in the racially integrated hells they supervise, the overpaid bureaucrats, the coke-snorting sophisticates who party with the new non-White elite and plan to ride high while their race goes down—will fare no better when the pets they have so long boosted as the “equals” of working-class Whites come surging out of the cities in their multihued millions. The ravages of these pampered non-White hordes in the years ahead will make the sadistic butchery of the Manson gang of the last decade seem like good, clean fun in comparison.

Unfortunately, the innocent and the wholesome will perish along with the guilty and the degenerate; the racially conscious and the racially valuable will go down with the deracinated egoists and the half-breeds. Nature’s justice operates at the species and subspecies levels.

Nor will anyone evade the suffering ahead, neither those who perish by it nor those who survive it, neither the grasshoppers nor the ants. It is said that suffering is good for the soul; if this is true, Westerners can look forward to a great deal of spiritual improvement.

But whether the maxim is true or not, the suffering is necessary. As long as he is moderately comfortable, the average man will not change his ways. Only when existence becomes utterly intolerable and there is no alternative can he be persuaded to do what he should have done from foresight and through self-discipline at the beginning. That is his unalterable nature, and it is why democracy is such a catastrophe.

And who will survive to be the founders of a New Order? No one can say, on a person-by-person basis. But if one understands the nature of the tragedy that is upon us, one can state some general guidelines.

The first thing to understand about the going under of the West is that its more dramatic elements, the violence and the bloodshed, are not the really essential elements. The essential aspect of what is happening to the West is spiritual. It is decadence which has sealed the fate of the West, not the birthrate in the Third World. It is the absence of a common purpose which has sapped the West’s viability, not just the scheming of the Jews. It is the loss of racial consciousness which has left the West defenseless, not the growing strength of our enemies.

What is important is that the corruption of the West’s spirit will continue in the years ahead—perhaps for decades—while the increasing anarchy, the more frequent breakdowns of order and flareups of violence, the economic disintegration, will be only incidental. There undoubtedly will come a great bloodletting, a time of mass throat-cutting and mass rape, when the West’s internal enemies will have free rein for a while. But the West will already have sunk before then.

And most of the inhabitants of the West will have sunk too, to the point where little of value will be left to be lost in the bloodletting. This is a point worth emphasizing again: the majority will perish with the civilization to which they are inseparably bound.

The problem is not to cull out the mongrels, the Judaized, the degenerates, the moral prostitutes from a healthy mass, so that the cull can be destroyed and the mass saved. The problem is to pick the few who embody the best of what the West once was and to take the necessary measures to see that that which they embody does not perish with the mass.

Those who would survive—more correctly, those who would have a hand in determining which genes and which values survive, for the time scale of the West’s sinking is such that no individual now alive can be sure of living to see the new age dawn—must have these qualities:

They must be both willing and able to fight for the right to determine the shape of the future; the meek and the disarmed will vanish without a trace.

They must be free of the superstitions and prejudices of this age; those who are mentally bound to this age will go down with it.

They must be pure in spirit and strong in will; this is the age of egoism and materialism, of self-indulgence and permissiveness, but the passage into the new age demands both selflessness and self-discipline.

They must be united in an organization which combines their strengths and focuses their wills; in this age of atomized individuals, where each person is submerged in the mass, without identity and without power, only those who are united can prevail.

They must be motivated by a single purpose, the overwhelming importance of which is always foremost in their minds; it has been the purposelessness of this age on which the West has foundered, but the new age will be illuminated and shaped by a common purpose transcending all other considerations: namely, the purpose of bringing forth a higher type of man and attaining thereby a higher level of consciousness in the universe.

__________________

Note of the Ed. This is an abridged version of ‘Why the West Will Go Under’ published at National Vanguard (no. 74, 1980).

Seven years ago I had reproduced the entire article on this site, but what I now put in red is worth remembering.

Hitler in your living room

Pages 528-532 of the forthcoming edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour:

When I read Hitler’s Table Talk, what impressed me most was to discover that uncle Adolf was a very cultured man who talked about ancient history (including Julian the Apostate), architecture, painting, music and even criticised Christianity more than Jewry. He also predicted that the future of the Reich would be vegetarian. Alas, in the pro-white forums neo-Nazi Christians cannot believe that Hitler’s after-dinner conversations are genuine. For this reason, I would like to quote a commenter who used to sign under the pseudonym of Jack Frost in the webzine of Kevin MacDonald. This is what Frost said in a discussion thread of The Occidental Observer on August 4, 2015:

David Irving has considerable expertise in this matter, and he says they’re genuine. Likewise Albert Speer, who was present at some of these dinner talks, attests to them in his memoirs. But also, perhaps even more convincing, the talks are the blindingly original insights of a true master.

These views [critical] of Christianity are not derivative of anyone else’s opinions, certainly not Schopenhauer’s, and while at odds with certain of his public statements, are quite consistent with other things known about Hitler, particularly his anti-Semitism. Surely a forger wouldn’t have gone this route. In the first place, he would have had to do original thinking that is quite uncharacteristic of forgers, and in the second place an ordinary forger would have been careful not to make any statements that were inconsistent with other things known to have been said or written by Hitler. Their very originality speaks to their veracity. Of course, this can be turned around. People who want to believe Hitler was actually a Christian disingenuously ask why, if this was his real opinion, didn’t he put it in Mein Kampf or mention it in any of his public speeches?

But the answer is obvious. Hitler was a politician, and had to be all things to all people. No politician with such views could have been open about them in a Christian nation. Accordingly, to Christians of his day, he appeared to be a Christian. Such hypocrisy was more or less built into the task he had set for himself.

David Irving, with whom I came to exchange some correspondence, has been the foremost historian about Hitler and the Third Reich. Unlike the PC historians about WW2, Irving can see the ‘historical Hitler’ in contrast to the fictional ‘Hitler of dogma’ that the System advertises. Below I quote his opinion on the book in question. It appeared in David Irving’s website, posted on January 1, 2004:

Hitler’s Table Talk is the product of his lunch- and supper-time conversations in his private circle from 1941 to 1944. The transcripts are genuine. (Ignore the 1945 “transcripts” published by Trevor-Roper in the 1950s as Hitler’s Last Testament—they are fake.)

The table talk notes were originally taken by Heinrich Heim, the adjutant of Martin Bormann, who attended these meals at an adjacent table and took notes. (Later Henry Picker took over the job.) Afterwards Heim immediately typed up these records, which Bormann signed as accurate.

François Genoud purchased the files of transcripts from Bormann’s widow just after the war, along with the handwritten letters which she and the Reichsleiter had exchanged.

For forty thousand pounds—paid half to Genoud and half to Hitler’s sister Paula—George Weidenfeld, an Austrian Jewish publisher who had emigrated to London, bought the rights and issued an English translation in about 1949.

For forty years or more no German original was published, as Genoud told me that he feared losing the copyright control that he exercised on them. I have seen the original pages, and they are signed by Bormann.

They were expertly, and literately, translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, though with a few (a very few) odd interpolations of short sentences which don’t exist in the original—the translator evidently felt justified in such insertions, to make the context plain… Weidenfeld’s translator also took liberties with translating words like Schrecken, which he translated as “rumour” in the sense of “scare-story”.

The Table Talks’ content is more important in my view than Hitler’s Mein Kampf, and possibly even more than his Zweites Buch (1928). It is unadulterated Hitler. He expatiates on virtually every subject under the sun, while his generals and private staff sit patiently and listen, or pretend to listen, to the monologues.

Hitler’s Table Talk is better than Mein Kamp as, according to Irving, with the consent of Hitler some editors added to Mein Kamp several chapters that the Führer never wrote. While Mein Kamp was a bestseller for the German people, the unadulterated Hitler will not be discovered in it.

George Lincoln Rockwell was a man of a generation infinitely less sick than ours. When he was killed I had just turned nine. Three decades later, when a new term, ‘white nationalism’ began to be heard on the internet, the typical American racist had already deviated from the path of Commander Rockwell to a more politically correct one.

Remember, the history of the white man carries enormous inertia. In addition to the MacDonald webzine, there is another that is considered one of the pillars of alt-right publishing, Greg Johnson’s Counter-Currents. Although Johnson promotes the creation of an ethnostate his webzine exemplifies what we say about the historical inertia that, once Rockwell and William Pierce died, reversed back white conscience to neo-Christian paths. Johnson, who in 2010 still taught homilies in a church in San Francisco, rejects Nordicism and has come to say: ‘I am interested in European preservationism, and “white” to me just means “European,” which includes a whole range of skin tones, from the whitest white to brown’ (posted as a comment in his webzine on the thread about ‘Racial Purity, Ethnic Genetic Interests, and the Cobb Case’ on November 18, 2013 at 4:14 pm). As we shall see in the next section, this is exactly the sort of flawed worldview that moves me to say that white nationalists are committing ethnosuicide. The following is what Guillaume Durocher, one of the writers who contribute to Counter-Currents, wrote in ‘Understanding Hitler and the Third Reich’ published on April 20, 2016:

Hitler’s Table Talk. This big book, as far as I am concerned, is the ultimate Hitler book. Of course, we have the usual caveats: We have no guarantee that these recordings of Hitler’s private conversations, primarily taken between the invasion of Russia and the end of 1942, are completely accurate. The translation edited by Hugh-Trevor Roper is uncertain: David Irving claims it is good, mainstream historians have said it is actually artlessly translated from a previous French translation (!), which is actually an impression I distinctly had reading the book. Nonetheless, themes of these private conversations recur enough that the gist is clear and accepted by both mainstream and revisionist historians.

I cannot summarize such a book here, but suffice to say that Hitler had an awesome scientific and elitist vision, a truly epic conception of history and politics in which he was a leading character, and a grandiose and terrible project against decadence and for excellence (as he saw it). All this merits real engagement rather than crude caricature. Hitler’s ruthless utilitarianism (his relations with other peoples can be summed up as following: Either fighting-comrades or expendable subjects) and his absurd exclusion of Slavdom from “Europe” in effect make him politically untouchable, above and beyond Allied or Hollywoodian propaganda.

With this book, everyone can reach in to find the Hitler behind the myth. For added effect, imagine Hitler speaking as he does in our only known recording of his private conversations, with Marshal of Finland Carl Gustav Mannerheim. And now you’ve Hitler in your living room…

This quote by Durocher portrays not only the importance of the book of shorthand transcripts of Hitler’s monologues: it also portrays the typical intellectual of white nationalism. They are de facto conservatives with racialised tones: fellows that bear no resemblance to the man we saw in Sparta, Republican Rome, the Berserkers or the Third Reich. Like MacDonald’s The Occidental Observer, Counter-Currents exemplifies the feminisation of racialism since the times when Rockwell tried to apply the National Socialist model in America.

Hitler’s ‘absurd exclusion of Slavdom from Europe’? As we saw in the history of the white race of Pierce, originally, Celt, German, Balt, and Slav were indistinguishably Nordic. But the Slavs became mongrelised after the genocidal Asian invasions: one of the darkest hours for the fair race. We must also remember what the SS pamphlet pointed out regarding the differences between a Russian village in fertile Ukraine compared to a German farm on land wrested from the sea. Neither Durocher nor his editor or the alt-right folks would ever make such distinctions! A fanatic form of egalitarianism reigns among them as to Caucasian peoples. Nor would they say that a country that succumbs to Jewish Bolshevism deserves to be conquered by a nation, in every sense of the word, more Aryan: a nation where the archetype of the eternal masculine was still active!

The following quotes from Hitler’s first two after-dinner conversations in Hitler’s Table Talk are an invitation for the reader to acquire a copy of the book to know the real Hitler. The book is also an invitation to see how Aryan men who resurrect the archetype of the eternal masculine in our age should think.

Lycanthropy is in our nature

The conventional, chivalrous warriors tried to dominate the torrent of reactions and sensations that caused the combat so that, keeping their will above them, retained their cold blood and consciousness intact.

The Berserkers, on the other hand, seemed to do the opposite: they let themselves be carried away by the physical reactions to the fight, so that they took possession of them and ended up into beasts that ‘saw everything red’.

Out of them came a totally independent will of consciousness. Only the best were tough enough to really let themselves be carried away by the torrent of ferocity to release their impulses savagely, to lose control, to break all ties in order to allow the beast to ride free, to savour the deep and primitive pleasure of the butchery, bloodletting, slaughter, domination, possession and destruction; submerging all their being in absolute chaos and surviving to be able to tell about it—although it is very probable that afterwards they did not even clearly remember what happened.

Is all this a wild barbarism? Yes, but it is part of human nature, whether you like it or not. Turning our backs on those issues only serves to catch us off guard later. To ignore that we have an animal side is like mutilating the spirit and sabotaging the body. Conversely, to accept this and to master it is to reconcile ourselves with ourselves.

(Passages from one of Evropa Soberana’s essays in The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour.)

Published in: on September 15, 2019 at 12:01 am  Comments (3)  

What happened to our werewolves?

The ‘berserkergang’ or possession

Before combat, the Berserkers entered together in a trance called berserksgangr or berserkergang. This trance was the process of possession, for which not everyone was prepared, because their energy could destroy the body of the profane. According to the Scandinavian tradition, such a state of ecstasy began with a sinister chill that ran through the body of the possessed and made his hair rise on end and produce Goosebumps.

This was followed by contraction of the muscles, a premonitory tremor, increased blood pressure and tension, and a series of nervous tics in the face and neck. Body temperature began to rise. The nasal fins dilated. The jaw tightened and the mouth contracted in a psychotic grimace revealing the teeth. Then came disturbing gnashing of teeth. The face inflated and changed colour, ending in a purple tone.

They began to foam through the mouth, to growl, to shake, to roar and scream like wild animals, to bite the edges of their shields, to beat their helmets and shields with their weapons and to tear their clothes, invaded by a fever that took possession of them and turned them into a beast, their blind instrument.

Witnessing such a transformation must have been something alarming and anguishing, reminiscent of the most urgent panic. It was a full-fledged initiation transformation, and some have seen in it the origin of the legends of werewolves.

After this process, the Berserkers received the Od or Odr (called Wut in Germania and Wod in England), the inspiration that Odin granted to some warriors, initiates and poets, touching them with the tip of his spear Gugnir (‘shuddering’). With it they became a furious whirlwind of blood and metal.

The physical strength of the ‘inspired’ by Od fever increased in a superhuman and inexplicable way, and also increased their resistance, aggressiveness and combative fanaticism. The pain, the fear or the fatigue disappeared, and what replaced them was an intoxicating sensation of will, unstoppable power and desire to destroy, devastate, kill, annihilate and overthrow…

If we imagine the appearance of those men laden with muscles, veins, nerves and tendons, with their face twitching under the skin of the beast, the fanatical clear eyes opened like plates and shining with that acies oculorum that Julius Caesar and Tacitus noticed among the German warriors; the teeth clenched with fury and foaming, splashed with enemy blood, we will instantly understand that those warriors had nothing to do with modern Western man.

These Berserkers were of the same blood as many modern Europeans, but they were men who lived for war, while the middle Westerner of today is a soft effeminate who lives for peace and, in his nearsightedness, persists in believing that he knows everything about the world and life.

The Wut, Wod, Od or berserkergang was a terribly intense and violent trance, in which one completely lost control and reason, and in which the beast freed itself of its iron chains to vent its claustrophobia and to ride in glorious and unbridled freedom through the dark and blurred forest, without responsibilities, without ties, without limits and without laws. It was not just about letting the inner beast emerge, but letting itself be possessed by the absolute, external divinity…

Some Berserkers, without receiving any injury, fell dead after the battle for their superhuman effort: their bodies were not prepared to be instruments of divine fury—at least for such a long time. Life expectancy was probably shortened for many years after each ‘session’ of berserkergang.

(Passages from one of Evropa Soberana’s essays in The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour.)

Published in: on September 13, 2019 at 3:49 pm  Comments (2)  

On ‘Private Hudson’ commenters

Vig once asked me how I endured answering so patiently what the commenters were telling me. Indeed: since I modified the comments options, and now every comment has to be approved, I’ve been saving good time since I’m not approving every comment.

I must say that there are issues that have bothered me greatly about the character of even the most intelligent commenters. One of them who used to comment here, a ‘Stubbs’ (‘Vance Stubbs’ at VNN Forum) suddenly stopped doing so in 2015 without giving any explanation, and he did not even answer my personal message.

Other commenters are intelligent on many issues but cease to be so when it comes up, be it conspiracy theories (9/11 or JFK), or a psychotic admiration for Charles Mason: as can be seen in a loonie Unz Review article. In many respects, the racialists who post in the alt-right forums are still normies. They are clueless about the logical fallacies inherent in conspiracy theories because, unlike me, they have not studied magical thinking. (*)

But what I like most about the fact that all the comments are now on moderation is that I no longer let the pessimists pass so easily. I refer to those who claim, almost dogmatically, that everything is lost for the white race. They remind me of Private Hudson in the movie Aliens that I watched in a Marin County theatre in 1987:

The spirit of the true soldier is to fight even against all odds, as did those who survived in the movie. That is not the spirit of the defeatists who used to comment here, and I’m glad they can no longer do it.

________

(*) From November 1989 I began to familiarise myself with the CSI’s magazines and books: research that culminated in 1997 when I lived in Houston. I will never forget a JFK conference by CSI in Seattle, which I attended in 1994. Many years before Vincent Bugliosi published his 2007 book debunking the conspiracy theories about the murder of JFK it was already known that they were as crazy as Fake Moon Landing theories.

________

Update: On August 7 commenter Stubbs replied thus:

[…] Also I apologize for leaving so abruptly, that was rude of me. There wasn’t much to it, I just got busy and didn’t have nearly so much time to read or write. I think I just deleted your PM because it was old by the time I read it, but I still should have sent something back. I didn’t mean to come off as derisive or anything.

Holy wrath, 11

by Evropa Soberana

 
Germanism and the advent of Ragnarök

According to the concept of the ancient German pagans, the final storm, at the apex of the Ragnarök, will be a hunt against the forces of evil. Odin, brandishing his spear and riding his eight-legged horse, will descend on Earth. Thor, wielding his war hammer and mounted on his chariot pulled by goats, will appear in the sky roaring furious and surrounded by lightning, causing an overwhelming roar. The Wildes Heer (furious horde), the Oskorei (army of thunder), the army of the fallen, will overwhelm the enemies of the gods, making the ground rumble with the hooves of their horses and the air with their battle cries.

The shadowy Valkyries will ride serenely, paying attention to the development of the battles to choose the new fallen. The crows of Odin, their wolves and all kinds of supernatural beings, will proliferate in the thick of the sorcerous storm, shaking the forces of materialistic slavery, agonisingly shaking the souls of the enemies of the gods, and ominously collapsing the walls that separate the Earth from the Hereafter.

All that was a metaphorical, symbolic and poetic explanation of the end of an era, when heaven finally becomes enraged and falls on Earth, and the apocalyptic combat of the superior against the inferior, the good against evil, is freed.

Perhaps one day, the forgetful apostles of financial civilisation and usury will once again know with horror the thirst for battle of European man, the foaming and anguished rage of the inspired warrior, the instinct of the worker, the conqueror, the pioneer, the explorer, the artist, the soldier, the lord and the destroyer that Europe carries in itself, and whose last example was perhaps, in distant days, the Scandinavian berserker.

Below, a passage from Heinrich Heine in Heine’s prose writings (Walter Scott, London, 1887):

Christianity—and this is its fairest service—has to a certain degree moderated that brutal lust of battle, such as we find it among the ancient Germanic races, who fought, not to destroy, not yet to conquer, but merely from a fierce, demoniac love of battle itself; but it could not altogether eradicate it.

And when once that restraining talisman, the cross, is broken, then the smouldering ferocity of those ancient warriors will again blaze up; then will again be heard the deadly clang of that frantic Berserkir wrath, of which the Norse poets say and sing so much. The talisman is rotten with decay, and the day will surely come when it will crumble and fall. Then the ancient stone gods will arise from out the ashes of dismantled ruins, and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes; and finally Thor, with his colossal hammer, will leap up, and with it shatter into fragments the Gothic Cathedrals.

And when ye hear the rumbling and the crumbling, take heed, ye neighbours of France, and meddle not with what we do in Germany. It might bring harm on you. Take heed not to kindle the fire; take heed not to quench it. Ye might easily burn your fingers in the flame.

Smile not at my advice as the counsel of a visionary warning you against Kantians, Fichteans, and natural philosophers. Scoff not at the dreamer who expects in the material world a revolution similar to that which has already taken place in the domains of thought. The thought goes before the deed, as the lightning precedes the thunder.

German thunder is certainly German, and is rather awkward, and it comes rolling along tardily; but come it surely will, and when ye once hear a crash the like of which in the world’s history was never heard before, then know that the German thunderbolt has reached its mark.

At this crash the eagles will fall dead in mid air, and the lions in Afric’s most distant deserts will cower and sneak into their royal dens. A drama will be enacted in Germany in comparison with which the French Revolution will appear a harmless idyl. To be sure, matters are at present rather quiet, and if occasionally this one or the other rants and gesticulates somewhat violently, do not believe that these are the real actors. These are only little puppies, that run around in the empty arena, barking and snarling at one another, until the hour shall arrive when appear the gladiators, who are to battle unto death.

And that hour will come.

Holy wrath, 9

by Evropa Soberana

Window with portrait of Harald in a cathedral

 
The twilight of the berserkers

The berserkers, like all paganism, ended up falling into decay. At a given moment, probably with the advent of Christianity, the esoteric religious leadership of Scandinavia received the coup de grace: it disappeared and submerged itself in the dominant culture (see footnote of pic above). All the Germanic religiosity and its external traditions fell without impulse or direction, divided and weak, functioning only by inertia.

Since then, we have tried to distinguish between two types of berserkers: the heroic berserker, brave and loyal elite warrior in the service of a great king; and the decadent berserker, a wandering bandit given to theft, pillage, indiscriminate killings and rapes. This later figure corresponds to gangs of criminals in Scandinavia, and its signs denote what happens when male impulses—which originate on the dark side and tend, in principle, to destruction—fall outside the control granted by discipline, asceticism and will.

This type of ‘berserkers’ was described as terribly ugly, with deformed features, with only one eyebrow, dark eyes and black hair, having manic and psychopathic tendencies. Such criminals, coming from the lowest social strata of Scandinavia, wandered through the villages challenging little men to a duel.

Since by rejecting the duel they would be considered cowards, the peasants accepted for honour and self-love, and generally fell dead under the arms of the bandit. He, who was not a combatant of honour or a soldier was left with the lands of the unfortunate, his possessions, his house and his wife. In the sagas, often a noble warrior ended up killing the impostor, freeing the woman and marrying her.

In the 11th century, duels and berserkers were placed outside the law. In 1015, King Erik I ‘Bloody Axe’ of Norway made them illegal. Gragas, the medieval code of Icelandic laws, also condemned them to ostracism. In the 12th century these decadent berserkers disappeared. Henceforth, the Church cultivated the belief that they were possessed by the Devil.
 

A case worthy of study: King Harald Hardrada of Norway (the one who appears above in St. Magnus Cathedral at Kirkwall) as an example of the Viking world and the importance of berserkers in battles

Unfairly, Harald Hardrada usually appears in history only as a Norwegian king who failed to conquer England. Harald, a blond giant over 2.10 m., lived at a time when the Scandinavian kings were polishing the political and court arts to match their European counterparts, but he was still more in tune with the free Viking warriors of previous centuries. To this day, it seems a mystery to me why nobody has made a film about this man.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

Editor’s interpolated note: No white has made a film about this Norwegian king because the Weirwood trees were cut down long ago, so to speak. The Aryans have been worshiping a Semitic god.

 

______ 卐 ______

 
Harald Sigurdson was born in Norway in 1015. With fifteen years he participated in favour of King Olaf II in the battle of Stiklestad, against King Canute of Denmark (later also king of England and Norway). In this battle, which coincided with a solar eclipse, Olaf’s army lost. Wounded, Harald managed to escape from Norway with warriors loyal to his lineage and, in exile, formed a gang of loyalists who had escaped from Norway after Olaf’s death. A year later, having Harald sixteen years old, he and his Norwegians crossed Finland and entered Russia, where they served the great Prince Yaroslav I the Wise as stormtroopers, where Harald was made general of Yaroslav’s armies.

Two years later, the young Viking general was maintaining a loving relationship with Elisif (Isabel), the daughter of Yaroslav. When the prince, enraged, surprised the couple, Harald was forced to escape from Russia with his loyal gang, according to gossips, even raising his pants on the road.

Harald crossed with his men the Ukraine and the Black Sea and arrived at Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire, where he enlisted in the Varangian Guard—the elite mercenary unit composed exclusively of Scandinavians. He became famous throughout the Mediterranean, earned the nickname Bolgara brennir (‘Bulgar-burner’); triumphed in North Africa, Syria, Palestine, Jerusalem and Sicily, and amassed an immense personal fortune from looted booty.

Over time, Harald was made head of the Varangian Guard, admiral of the Byzantine fleet (the most powerful of the Mediterranean) and was given great autonomy to independently carry out attacks against the enemies of Byzantium. Far from his native Norway, Harald and his men had become the spoiled children of a great Mediterranean empire. In his day, the Byzantine chronicles referred to Harald as ‘son of a Varangian emperor’. He was in the service of the Byzantines until 1042, that is, until his of twenty-seven years.

Harald left the Byzantine Empire with the promptness that had been usual in his travels. Crossing the Black Sea and the Ukraine, he again passed through the Kiev court and took away his old love, the daughter of Yaroslav, with whom he married as they travelled north through Russia.

In 1045, having thirty years, Harald, supported by his experienced warriors and as a military-political veteran with impressive wealth and extensive network of contacts, re-conquered the Norwegian throne as Harald III Sigurdson, reigning it for twenty years and earning the nickname of Hardrada (‘tough sovereign’). However, it seems that all this life of great deeds had not satisfied the Viking.

In 1066, Harald set his sights on England, the land that had been the fate of numerous Nordic migrations since the 5th century. He claimed the English throne, taking advantage of the fact that a Danish-English-Norwegian kingdom had existed in the past, and brought together 300 longships to face the Anglo-Saxon troops of King Harold. It was in this framework that the battle of the Stamford Bridge, in the north of England, took place.

Harald died with his throat pierced by an arrow. When one of his men asked him if he was seriously injured, he replied, ‘It’s just a small arrow, but it’s doing its job’. He was fifty-one years old. Only ten percent of Norwegian soldiers survived the Battle of Stamford Bridge. The Anglo-Saxons allowed the last Vikings to set sail in their longships and return to Norway.

The year of Harald’s death in 1066 coincides with the advent of Christianity in the North, and is considered the end date of the Viking Age.

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  

The Rite of Spring

Or: a response to Bratok

You completely missed the point of Soberana’s essay, although I still have to translate the other half. To put it in philosophical terms, whites are dying because they fell prey of ‘the Empire of the yin’. What whites need is that the pendulum strikes back all the way toward the savage Yang.

Why? For the simple reason that the yin inertia has moved the West so far to the Left that the pendulum must return with vengeance to the other extreme of the pendulum’s arc: the ultra-Right.

To put it in musical terms I’ll rephrase Pierre Boulez, who conducted The Rite of Spring when I was much younger. In a very astute review of Stravinsky’s most famous opus, Boulez said that it represented an explosive return to the barbaric invasions of yore, if compared to classical music.

You also have to read what Pierce says about the Vikings in Who We Are, which is about the same that Soberana says. On this site I have complained a lot that those whites who fancy themselves as protectors of their race haven’t read Pierce’s only non-fiction book. Sometimes I caress the idea of not bothering to reply to commenters who have failed to read it.

I would recommend listening to The Rite of Spring and compare it to, say, the classic music of Hayden or Mozart. Tell me which spirit contemporary Aryans will need in the coming Revolutionary times: classicism or a return to horned barbarism?

Published in: on June 26, 2019 at 2:18 pm  Comments (4)