Christian moral vision

The following paragraphs are recent comments from Robert Morgan in Unz Review (italics added):

______ 卐 ______

 
Riots, pulling down or defacing statues, mass censorship, and re-writing history were all features of the first Christian religious upheaval too, during the fall of the Roman Empire. All were techniques pioneered by Christians, just business as usual for these fanatics. The only thing different in modern times is that belief in Jesus as God has become optional for both sides. The quintessentially Christian moral vision of a single humanity united in equality under a single, universal code of ethics remains, burning stronger than ever.

* * *

Sounds like you are trying to blame Jewish “brainwashing” for white behavior, which essentially is Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s thesis too. I’m sure you’d enjoy his work if you’re not already a disciple of his. But neither you nor MacDonald can explain why the negro made his greatest stride toward equality when he was granted citizenship and the vote in America shortly after the Civil War. This occurred at a time when there was no mass media as we know it today, no Jewish educational establishment, and before mass immigration of Jews even began. More, at that time the USA was virtually 100 percent Christian, yet that is what white people decided to do, of their own accord. Worse, they’ve had now a century and a half to reverse course, and they’ve not made a single move in that direction. To all appearances, they’re not being coerced. They’re just doing what they believe is right.

* * *

The vast majority are hell bent on their own racial obliteration. We see this everywhere, from whites kneeling in the presence of negroes during the current unrest, to the ever-rising numbers of non-white immigrants to white lands… This American movement to mix races and accept negroes as fully the equals of whites in every way has been going on since at least the Civil War era, and was at that time spearheaded by fanatic Christians abolitionists. Now it has been exported everywhere. Your mistake is to think this is all being directed from the central headquarters of shadowy, unnamed ‘elites’. It’s not. It’s a broad social movement that has spanned centuries.

* * *

While white people’s actions don’t seem to make any sense, they aren’t designed to make sense. They aren’t designed at all, but just emerge as a form of spontaneous order, a product of the collective mind, much like the schooling of fish, or the swarming of bees. Looking for hidden conspirators serves the purpose of diverting white people’s attention from the fact that they’ve always been their own worst racial enemy, and that no cultural change happens or can happen without their full cooperation.

Festival of neochristian guilt

These are just a few of the thousands of comments about the embedded video below on the new religion of Negrolatry (Black is the substitute for Jesus in this secular age):

• This is a new religion.

• The most disgusting display in American history.

• That worshipping scene in the street is scary as hell.

• No amount of self -abasement will ever be enough. This is a cult with no possibility of redemption for Whites.

• The worst kind of racist is the one who hates his own race.

• Remember kids, no one is coming to save us—we have to save ourselves.

• In a few years, the genocide of white farmers in South Africa will be common place in most western countries…

• I agree that voting won’t change anything, only revolution will.

• A full-blown race war is now inevitable, logical and preferable.

• This time is the turning point in history where whites need to come together, and rise up against this unequivocal assault on our race.

See Jared Taylor’s latest video about the Guilt Festival: here.

Published in: on June 13, 2020 at 2:31 pm  Comments (6)  

Good Christians must forgive blacks

Since Jared Taylor’s parents were fanatical missionaries who migrated to Japan to convert the Heathen, Jared will never dare point to Christianity as being responsible for whites having gone bananas. In their article today, American Renaissance reminds us of what happened to Amy Biehl, and most of the following paragraphs come from that article:

A pretty American girl Amy Biehl (1967-1993) went to high school in Santa Fe, New Mexico, where her father ran an art gallery of modern American Indian art. ‘I attended a large public high school’, she later wrote, ‘where as an “Anglo” I represented a small minority. My attempts to do well in school and to win the acceptance of my Hispanic classmates often met with resentment’.

She felt none in return, however, and as a student at Stanford became passionately committed to ending white rule in South Africa. She went to Cape Town on a Fulbright scholarship, and spent much of her time in black slums, studying the sins of apartheid and sex discrimination.

On August 25, 1993, just a few days before she was to return to the United States, she drove three black friends back to their homes. Young blacks stopped the car, pulled her out, and hit her in the face with a brick. She broke away but they caught her and beat her to death as they shouted the anti-white slogan ‘one settler, one bullet’. The 26-year-old died on the sidewalk pleading for mercy.

Seven blacks were charged in the killing, but one disappeared and three others were released because the main witness against them refused to testify for fear he would be killed. Exultant supporters left the courthouse carrying the three men on their shoulders. At a hearing for the remaining defendants, blacks in the audience taunted whites, and giggled when Miss Biehl’s wounds were described.

None of this mattered to Miss Biehl’s parents, who attended court hearings. They publicly forgave the killers and expressed sympathy for their families… When their daughter’s killers got out of jail in just a few years, they offered them jobs at the foundation. According to Wikipedia, her father shook their hands and stated:

‘The most important vehicle of reconciliation is open and honest dialogue… we are here to reconcile a human life [that] was taken without an opportunity for dialogue. When we are finished with this process we must move forward with linked arms’.

A commenter of Jared’s webzine quoted Jewess Ayn Rand: ‘What is the moral code of altruism? The basic principle of altruism is that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value. Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice—which means; self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction—which means: the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good’.

Like the father, Amy Biehl’s mom was also a good Christians who forgave blacks: ‘We were raised in a Congregational Church when Peter and I were growing up in Illinois, and he taught Christian ethics to junior high kids. If people are really living their Christian values—or their Muslim values or Jewish values—there is always the element of forgiveness, but often people aren’t able to live up to that value’.

I hate to say it but the Jewess Ayn Rand was sane. Amy Biehl’s mom (photo of 2002 above, with daughter’s killers) was insane, courtesy of Christianity. Incidentally, haven’t new visitors read part I of The Fair Race or at least one of my latest posts? (Inspired in the psychotic Christian doctrine about post-mortem survival, someone just tried to post a comment today, asking me the stupid question ‘Are you still of the belief that there is no “life after death”? Because that is…’)

Published in: on June 9, 2020 at 5:34 pm  Comments (10)  

Whites have gone bananas

The folie en masse that the West is currently suffering, triggered by the recent events of the black man who died on the asphalt in the United States, has its historical precedents.

The first devilish psychotic breakdown suffered by the white man, as old readers of this site know, was the folie en masse of the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries when the Roman Empire empowered a cult of Levantine origin to destroy all the temples, the libraries and the sculptures that showed the magnificence of the Aryan beauty. What is tragic about this destruction of the classical world by a Semitic ideology is that many whites participated in the destruction of the white world, as can be seen in books whose PDFs are available on the sidebar of this site.

The white race is similar to the Targaryens of A Song of Ice and Fire. Of inconceivable beauty in the prose of George R.R. Martin, these great conquerors suffered psychotic outbursts from time to time. One of those happened in the penultimate episode of Game of Thrones, when Daenerys Targaryen burned the capital of the seven kingdoms.

In real history, whites have done similar things. Not only did they burn, or tolerate non-white people burning, almost the entire legacy of classical knowledge, but, centuries later, they suffered another massive breakdown such as being hypnotised by a pope to the extent of organising a children’s crusade, with the quixotic aim of recapturing Jerusalem. We can imagine what happened to those poor white children when they fell into the hands of the Muslims.

These recurring mass psychotic breakdowns of the white race occur, as in the Targaryen family, after a few centuries. We are currently witnessing the last of these folies en masse. There cannot be another breakdown after the present one as the stakes are that whites must become extinct.

The pro-black protests on both sides of the Atlantic wouldn’t worry me if they weren’t packed with whites. What blacks, media Jews, and white women say is of no concern to me (women always follow the alpha male who provides them). What concerns me is what the Aryan men say, as it is up to them to reclaim their civilisation during this anti-white war.

I insist that in order to understand what is happening one must become familiar with the real history of the white race: something impossible to find in the forums of the alt-right or white nationalism, as they ignore that Christianity apparently, and irreversibly, damaged the Aryan psyche. (To new visitors to this site, I suggest you read Part I of The Fair Race that appears in the sidebar.)

That we are experiencing the last mass psychotic breakdown of the white race, which we could call Genuflect to the New Church of Antiracism, is guessed in the following tweets and texts by racially conscious whites that could be multiplied by hundreds, but that below I collect only a few:

• Not even sure what to say anymore. It’s like 90 percent of the population have joined a cult without telling the rest of us and now we’re watching bewildered.

• Racial hierarchy hasn’t gone anywhere. It has been inverted. Blackness is celebrated now. Whiteness is demonized and deconstructed.

• Today, The New York Times ran an op-ed telling people to withhold affection from their relatives unless they protest or give money to anti-racism organizations: “Text to your relatives and loved ones telling them you will not be visiting them or answering phone calls until they take significant action in supporting black lives either through protest or financial contributions”.

• So I may have to revise my model of a Cold Civil War. Right now, we look more like an occupied nation, dominated by this bizarre cult of anti-white totalitarianism, dissenters from which have no organization, no leadership, and almost no public voice.

• In the 1940s, this county began fighting “racism.” By 2020, this obsession has completely and utterly destroyed this country. It has absolutely consumed it.

Again, see an article in Part I of The Fair Race, dealing with how the white psyche was modified during the 1940s propaganda.

The trumpet of the Apocalypse heralding the end of the Christian Era was covid-19, but the first droplets from the goblets of wrath began to spill this month. If my understanding of the world economy is adequate, I predict that the liquid residue from the cups will be poured over the mad West once the US dollar collapses.

Today’s American blacks still have bread and TV circuses. After the collapse, you can imagine a chimpout with hunger and the government, the media and the mad whites who are protesting supporting them. In addition to the text I recommended above to newbies, it’s time to listen to The Turner Diaries

Published in: on June 7, 2020 at 12:39 pm  Comments (12)  

On poor Anakin Skywalker

I just found out that Jake Lloyd, who portrayed Anakin Skywalker, the future Darth Vader, in The Phantom Menace—one of those silly movies of the Star Wars series (the good one appears in my list of 51 recommended movies)—was diagnosed as schizophrenic and interned in both prisons and psychiatric wards for a season of his life.

Note that in the mainstream media Lloyd’s version of the events of his adolescence is completely absent. We only have the opinion of the mother, the police and the psychiatrists: something typical in those diagnosed with schizophrenia.

I have already said on this site why those Aryans of noble soul should drop the term ‘schizophrenic’ (here, and with a specific case here) and don’t want to repeat myself.

Published in: on April 27, 2020 at 11:15 am  Comments (7)  

Mental health matters

Before the Christians destroyed everything
the ancient Greek aphorism ‘Know thyself’ was
one of the Delphic maxims. It was inscribed in
the forecourt of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi.

On my statistics page I have been seeing that my recent post, ‘Very important subject’, has been popular with visitors, a post that ends by saying that mental health matters.

By the poor mental health of our time I not only mean classic disorders such as alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, delusions of persecution or greatness, but all ideological deviancies. As I see the West, most have been in a state of psychosis since Constantine, either honouring the god of the Jews Yahweh, which is also Jesus and the divine dove (a psychosis that many American anti-Semites share) or more recently the psychosis of believing the dogma of equality in issues of race, gender and sexual orientation: the new Holy Trinity of the white race.

The vast majority of whites suffer, or at least don’t openly rebel, against one of these two psychoses. But there are many other ideologies as psychotic as these two major psychoses that many minority groups share.

I mean beliefs like UFOs, conspiracy theories, magical thinking, all sorts of beliefs in the paranormal and the many cults. When I lived in California I found out that there was a myriad of cults in that state, and it bothered me greatly that all that mind-rotting beliefs were considered ‘spiritual’ by Americans. The common white only hears of the largest new religions such as Scientology, but there are many more, as harmful as Dianetics, which are hardly spoken of because they have few followers. I myself fell into a New Age cult in my twenties, Eschatology, which is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Decades ago, I was unaware that it had been my Catholic father’s abusive behaviour that led me to the mental catastrophe of entering the world of Eschatology, something that I explain in the fifth book of my autobiographical series. But the problem with the vast majority of Westerners is that they do not have the faintest idea that similar catastrophes, such as falling into other sects or ‘spiritual’ systems, may have the same causes.

In the comment section of this site, for example, various types of Christians have wanted to argue with me completely clueless that their faith in the Bible is simply a parental introject. That is why I have told them more than once that they don’t know how to distinguish between the empirical world and the structure of their inner selves.

Europeans are not far behind. This day I received an email from a German who wants to promote his recently translated books into English (here and here). If Europeans in general were not crazy like goats what they would write would be, above all, historical reviews of what happened not only since Constantine, but the Second World War, as it is these two lies that destroy their race. The German who wrote to me today, on the other hand, in his books talks about the Illuminati, the attacks of 9/11 and even the aliens… The German system allows this type of controlled opposition because it does not represent any danger to the System. But what I’m after is something deeper.

What cured me of the mental virus of Eschatology was a kind of double helix so to speak: something we could call cognitive self-therapy (as I have confessed on this site) and writing my spiritual odyssey. Without the second the cure would not have been profound, as only when I realised that the parental introjects were at the core of my being, I understood that everything I believed about Jesus was not data from the empirical world, but malware from my inner self.

The subject is obviously huge, and that’s why I decided to write so many pages about it in my native language. But what hurts me is that many people who want to do something for the white race cannot do it because they continue to be slaves of their introjects, and will continue to be until they follow the mandate of the oracle of Delphi.

Published in: on March 31, 2020 at 1:27 pm  Comments (7)  

On the ‘Atomwaffen Division’

‘Satanism is alright. Depends on how you go about it. But then again, I’m more well read on the subject than most people. Most people get scared away and only go into the crust, rather than down to the core’. —Rape [penname], AWD Discord server, November 9, 2017.

Using a negative Christian symbol (Satan) to scare Christians, as the so-called Atomwaffen Division (AWD) does, should trigger the alarm signal in anyone wishing to recover the West. It is the reverse of using a positive Christian symbol (the hymn that Martin Luther composed) to please Christians, as in the case of another failed revolutionary, Harold Covington.

AWD with James Mason at the centre

When I see someone using satanic symbols the first thing that comes to my mind is: ‘A mental infant…!’

It should be obvious that if someone wants to start distancing himself from the religion of our parents, the distancing mustn’t be done childishly but maturely: assimilating books like that of the Spaniard Evropa Soberana about the psychological warfare that Judea fought against Rome after the destruction of Jerusalem; what I translated from the German Karlheinz Deschner, or even a book written by a liberal English, like Catherine Nixey’s.

But no: these neochristian Americans, unlike the Europeans mentioned above, make a teenage tantrum with Christian symbols that only denote their inability to reach adulthood.

If a revolutionary man wants to do something against Christianity, adulthood begins by reading, say, Uncle Adolf’s table talks. On this site I still have to collect the remaining of Hitler’s anti-Christian pronouncements in my cited quotations (I am missing another seven citations).

The tragedy I see with these groups who aspire to revolutionaries is that they don’t seem to realise that, given that the ethnosuicide of the West has to do with Semitic psyops, it’s more urgent to imitate Athens than Sparta at the moment; more important to philosophically understand the psyop than to do a military career. Otherwise one ends up playing with unassimilated forms of Christianity either with Satanism (which circumscribes an Abrahamic religion although negatively) or with the Luther hymn.

What kind of ‘anti-Semitic’ revolutionaries are these who cannot encapsulate the virus of Judeo-Christianity in their minds? Why don’t they follow the commandment of the Oracle of Delphi, an Apollonian oracle uncontaminated by Abrahamic religions (cf. my forthcoming translated autobiographical book)?

A Satanist would not scare the educated Christians of the racialist movement in the US. He would only inspire pity, as if he were a mentally ill person, a schizo individual. However, when I discuss with a Christian, as I recently did in Unz Review, he resorts to wanting to psychoanalyse me with my father because the objective information I represent he cannot answer.

Published in: on March 4, 2020 at 11:58 am  Comments (17)  

Joker, Molyneux and CC

Or:

An opportunity to present the trauma model
 

In recent years I don’t usually go to the movies. If there is something I say to my nephews when I see them it is that, in the media and the cinema, all the messages are bad. But yesterday I broke my habit after watching Stefan Molyneux’s video about the Joker movie.

I am glad that, as Molyneux confessed in one of his latest videos, eighty percent of his audience dropped last year. Is it because of his dishonesty about the JQ? Whatever caused the drop, from alt-lite to neo-Nazism, passing through white nationalism, Molyneux is the only notable personality in our underworld who has consistently talked about child abuse.

As the visitors of this blogsite know, I spent more decades investigating child abuse than the single decade I’ve dedicated to investigating the darkest hour in the West: whose report, The Fair Race, now appears as a free PDF. Since my oldest specialty is the subject of child abuse I must say that what Molyneux tells us in his one-hour video is, in general terms, correct.

The video revolves around the character Arthur Fleck / Joker, a mentally-ill man who dreams to become a stand-up comedian but so disregarded by a hellish and diverse Gotham City that decides to become a criminal. Curiously, the actor Joaquin Phoenix did not look to previous Joker actors for inspiration: he simply read some reports about political assassinations.

Hollywood movies usually lack psychological realism. For example, in the 1989 Jack Nicholson movie the Joker origin story simply falls into a vat of acid. The 2019 movie, on the other hand, gives its central character a plausible origin. So plausible that the film has been described as reminiscent of mass shootings in the US, and the incel community loved it. What’s more, some people from the establishment have expressed concern that Joker could inspire real-world violence.

In a moment of the first minutes of his video, Molyneux confesses that he has received horrific verbal abuse just for mentioning the naked facts of his own childhood, and that hostility toward those who were abused as children or teenagers is not uncommon if the adult victim dares to open his mouth.

At this point I would like to distinguish between dysfunctional parents and schizogenic parents, that is, parents who literally murder their children’s souls. While almost everyone I know comes from family dysfunction in one way or another, the category of schizogenic parents simply does not exist in our society. Since the 1950s the Big Pharma has ensured that civil society does not find out that there is a trauma model to understand the mental disorder that competes with its profitable medical model.

But what does all this have to do with the recent film Joker? As can be deduced from Molyneux’s video, and regardless of the sinister motivation of its Jewish creators, the film could be used, by us, to present the trauma model to the public. I was the one who started this Wikipedia article on the trauma model, an academic text that appeals to the left hemisphere of our brains. He who wants to delve deeper into this research line, and in a more literary way, can read my book Day of Wrath. On the other hand, he who prefers a personal testimony that presents the trauma model appealing to our right hemisphere could read John Modrow’s touching autobiography, How to Become a Schizophrenic.

Furthermore, he who is unwilling even to read any the above literature, but willing to educate himself on the subject having some fun, could see the films Shine (1996), Monster (2003), The Piano Teacher (2001) and even Artificial Intelligence by Spielberg, which can be used to grasp what proponents of the trauma model call ‘the problem of attachment to the perpetrator’.

Although it may seem incredible, sometimes fairy tales portray the destructive interaction of parents with their children. In almost all fairy tales, including modern fairy tales like Kubrick/Spielberg’s A.I. or Harry Potter, the parental figure is substituted so as not to touch it directly. In the case of the Potter series the abusers are Harry’s uncle and aunt. As to David, the child robot in A.I., obviously he had no biological parents but Monica functions like a substitute mother. But sometimes the storyteller sneaks parents directly into the story as the villains who abandon their children (for example in Tom Thumb).

But there are more serious forms of abuse than abandoning your child in the woods, what also happened to David. What Molyneux says about not forgiving schizogenic parents is true. I would go as far as to claim that to forgive such parents is the most toxic thing for the mental health of the victim. Mine is an opposed claim to what the establishment wants us to believe.

Why is the forgiveness that religionists and therapists preach so toxic? Because it is the abusive parents and society the ones who are currently murdering young souls. As the Armenian lawyer said in Spotlight, which won the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2015: ‘This city, these people [Boston people] are making the rest of us feel like we don’t belong. But they’re no better than us. Look at how they treat their children. Mark my words, Mr. Rezendes [another Armenian]: If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a village to abuse one’ (emphasis added).

For the victim, unilaterally forgiving the perpetrator or a society that never accepts its soul-murdering sins is simply a betrayal of oneself and the other adult victims, now suffering from mental stress and even disorders.

In addition to the first minutes of Molyneux’s video, using as a paradigm the Joker’s abusive interaction with his mother Penny in Gotham City, Molyneux advances ideas analogous to what I have known for a long time. Watch also the segments after minute 35 of his video: how female evil is still taboo in the film industry.

It is curious to note the chasm between those who, like Molyneux and I, have investigated child abuse due to our past, and those who did not have such destructive parenting.

Greg Johnson for example is a Batfan. In his recent review of Joker, which he writes under the penname of Trevor Lynch, Johnson prefers Heath Ledger’s Joker in the 2008 The Dark Knight than the Joker of the movie released this month. Johnson expresses very derogatory of this latest Joker: ‘You’d want to squash him like a bug’. ‘Ledger’s Joker launched a million memes, both because of his character and his lines. Phoenix’s Joker will have no such influence. He’s a pathetic nobody with nothing to say’. ‘Arthur [the Joker] is entirely absorbed in self-pity’. ‘Joker is a boring movie about a disgusting loser’.

Well, it didn’t look boring to me… But the commenters on Counter-Currents who opined about Johnson’s review said very similar things: ‘People like him deserve to get left behind by society, and the true tragedy of this movie is that successful, well-adjusted men like Thomas Wayne insist on trying to love the Arthur Flecks of the world and take care of them’. Really? The conservative commenter also said: ‘The defects like Arthur would be put in mental asylums and [eugenically] sterilized’. [1]

Such commenters remind me that, in the movie, Thomas Wayne, the billionaire father of the future Batman, labels those Gotham residents envious of the wealthy as ‘clowns’, not only the Joker. I don’t know how many viewers enjoyed the moment when, by the end of the movie, a rioter corners the Wayne family in an alley and murders Thomas and his wife sparing the child Bruce. Another commenter said: ‘One of the great things about Heath Ledger’s Joker in Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight is that he does not have an origin story’.

I dare not judge the Marvel universe as I feel deeply revolted by it. But in the real world, isn’t it good to know, say, the psychopathological motivations of those women in the Charles Manson family? But the commenters’ lack of elemental compassion is even noticeable about the previous Joker represented by Heath Ledger, an actor that incidentally has already passed away. In one of the dialogues the now dead Joker explains his scars. He said that his father ‘comes at me with a knife. “Why so serious?” He sticks a blade in my mouth. “Let’s put a smile on that face”.’

This father strikes me as ‘soul murderer’. Note this other phrase from the CC commenter: ‘Arthur [the Joker who’s alive] is far too damaged for any regular person to identify with him’.

How will a normie commenter identify with him if only one percent (or less) of Westerners have endured schizogenic parents?

Incidentally, last night, as I watched the psychological thriller, there were times when I laughed (as the character does in the film) when the audience was serious and nobody laughed. That happened to me, yesterday, in the climax of the film when the Joker kills the establishment character that Robert de Niro represented.

As I said, I usually don’t go to the movies now. But decades ago the same phenomenon occurred to me with some films by Luis Buñuel, whom I met personally, in which nobody laughed. It also happened to me when I watched Dr. Strangelove by Kubrick on the big screen. I laughed at the black humour in which the nuclear extermination of humanity was at stake while the hundreds of people watching the movie with me were quiet in the theatre. Only when I read a Kubrick biography by Vincent Lobrutto did I find out that Kubrick had a very black sense of humour. Then did I understand me and the non-laugher spectators of Dr. Strangelove!

Joker ends when Arthur laughs and tells a psychiatrist that she would not understand the joke…

_____________

[1] In the comments section on Joker in Counter-Currents Johnson shows how ignorant he is about psychiatry: a supposed branch of medicine with as little scientific basis as parapsychology or the study of UFOs, as shown in my writings (for example: here). Johnson wrote ‘If Arthur is adopted then his mental illness cannot be inherited from this mother’. This is a credulity stance regarding the psychiatric allegations that mental illness is genetic. Apparently, Johnson forgot what I said in one of my articles in which he himself corrected my syntax (see this piece which appears in my Hojas Susurrantes).

Darkening Age, 25

Bosch, The Last Judgement
(detail) 1500-05

Editor’s note: Regarding the view of Robert Morgan in the previous post, I disagree in the sense that it is unclear what would have happened to technology if the Third Reich had emerged triumphant. As the bad guys won the war, the use of technology in the West is self-destructing for the fair race.

It is true what Arthur Kemp says: that the use of non-whites after the Aryan conquests has been the primary cause of the decline of empires, due to the eventual miscegenation. But we live in a time when whites have become passionately ethno-suicidal, and that can only be explained by the texts linked in the sticky post. The history of Christianity, one of the two DNA axes of Aryan suicide according to the POV of this site, should be analysed with the same eagerness as white nationalists analyse the Jewish question.

When I talk to the white people, say, with whom I have spoken in England, I see an injured self-image to the degree that it evokes the mass psychosis, in a sector of the population, right after the triumph of Constantine. I refer to the Christian hermits and ascetics whose movement would eventually evolve into monastic orders. The mass psychosis, so well depicted by Hieronymus Bosch, had to do with the introduction of a fear that did not exist in the Greco-Roman world. I refer to the fear of eternal torment: something that, occasionally, persists even on the internet sites of southern nationalists in the US.

To understand what is happening to the white man it is necessary to realise that Kevin MacDonald and his followers fail to diagnose the origin of this tremendous collective guilt. Jews only thrive because of it. That’s why it is essential to tell what really happened to the Aryan psyche after the crushing triumph of Constantine. In chapter 14 of The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World, Catherine Nixey wrote:

 

______ 卐 ______

 

If you had travelled to the great cities in the eastern empire, to Alexandria and to Antioch, in the fourth and fifth centuries, then long before you came to a city itself you would have seen them. At dawn, they emerged from caves in the hills and holes in the ground, their dark robes flapping; their faces gaunt and pale from hunger, their eyes hollow from lack of sleep. As the cocks began to crow, while the city beyond was still slumbering, they gathered in the monasteries and hills beyond and, ‘forming themselves into a holy choir, they stand, and lifting up their hands all at once sing the sacred hymns’. An impressive sight – and an eerie one, their filthy, emaciated figures a living rebuke to the opulence and bustle of urban life below: a new, and newly strange, power in the world.

This was the great age of the monk. Ever since Antony had set out to the desert to do battle with demons, men had flocked after him in imitation. These men were the ideal Christians; the perfect renouncers of all those sinful pleasures of the flesh. And their way of life was thriving: so many had gone out since Antony that the desert was described as a city. And what a strange city this was. You wouldn’t find bathhouses and banquets and theatres here. The habits of these men were infamously ascetic. In Syria, St Simeon Stylites (‘of the pillar’) stood on a stone column for decades, until his feet burst open from the continual pressure. Other monks lived in caves, or holes, or hollows or shacks. In the eighteenth century, a traveller to Egypt had looked up into the cliffs above the Nile and seen thousands of cells in the rock above. It was in these burrows, he realized, that monks had lived out lives of unimaginable austerity, surviving on almost no food and only able to drink by letting down buckets on ropes to draw water from the river when it was in flood.

What was a monk at this time? In the fourth and fifth centuries, the now-ancient tradition of monasticism was only in its infancy and its ways were still being formed. In this odd and as yet uncodified existence, monks turned to the wisdom of their famous predecessors to know how to live. Collections of monkish sayings proliferated. Self-help guides of a sort – but a world away from Ovid. What is a monk? ‘He is a monk,’ wrote one, ‘who does violence to himself in everything.’ A monk was toil, said another. All toil. How should a monk live? ‘Eat straw, wear straw, sleep on straw,’ advised another revered saying. ‘Despise everything.’ Athletes of austerity, these men mortified their flesh in a hundred ways on a thousand days. One monk, it was said, had stood upright in thorn bushes for a fortnight. Another lived with a stone in his mouth for three years, to teach himself to be silent. Some, nostalgic for the tortures of past persecutions, draped themselves in chains and clanked round in them for years…

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that many of the empire’s urban, urbane men found this new breed of men who shunned the civilized life baffling to the point of repellent. To the Greek orator Libanius, monks were madmen, ‘that crew who pack themselves tight into the caves’ and who then ‘claim to converse with the creator of the universe in the mountains’. Their fasts were fiction, he said. These men weren’t starving themselves: they didn’t not eat; they just didn’t grow or buy their own food. When no one was looking, he said, they scuttled into the temples of the loathed pagans, stole those sinful sacrifices and ate them instead. Far from being ascetics they were ‘models of sobriety, only as far as their dress is concerned’. Their vicious and thuggish attacks on the temples weren’t done out of piety, said Libanius. They committed them out of pure greed…

The modern mind would tend towards a more clinical (albeit anachronistic) conclusion: many of these men must have been profoundly depressed.

Starvation was one of the most popular of monkish mortifications – no special equipment was required – but it was also one of the hardest to bear. One monk fasted all day then ate only two hard biscuits. Another lived from the age of twenty-seven to thirty on just roots and wild herbs, then for the next four years on half a pound of barley bread a day and some herbs. Eventually he felt his eyes going dim while his skin became ‘as rough as a pumice stone’. He added a little oil to his diet, then went on as before until he was sixty, to the awe and admiration of his fellow monks. There had been asceticism before – but this went further. Others, like ruminants, lived on all fours, browsing for their food like animals. In some ways hunger helped: a famished monk would be less beset by the demons of fornication or anger than one with a full belly. ‘A needy body,’ as one put it, ‘is a tame horse.’ But thoughts of food became an obsession with these men. In their reading of the Fall, the apple that Eve gives to Adam is not seen as a symbolic representation of sex; it is seen as nothing more, or less, than an apple. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs made monkish flesh.

The monks tormented themselves by what they put on their bodies as much as what they put in them. Some chose to dress in woven palm fronds instead of any softer fabric. To wear the usual coarse monkish habit was regarded, in this extreme world, as being ‘foppishly dressed’. Others, under the desert sun, tortured their skin with abrasive hair shirts. Another dressed in an extraordinary leather costume (that would in a later era have different connotations) that left only his mouth and nose exposed. To be pleasing to the Lord, a monk’s clothes must, it was said, be an offence against aestheticism: a habit should be tatty rather than smart, old rather than new, mended and re-mended and mended again. Anything less was vanity. A monk’s clothes should be such that, if he threw his habit out of his cell for three days, no one would steal it. The monks’ self-sacrifice was unquestionable; their smell must have been unspeakable.

If this sounds like a life lived on the edge of sanity, it was. In the searing heat of the desert day, reality shimmered, flickered and thinned. One monk saw a dragon in a lake; another slew a basilisk. Another saw the Devil himself sitting at his window. Demons appeared then vanished like smoke; meditating monks turned into flames. Watch one monk as he prayed and you would see his fingers turn into lamps of fire. Pray well and you might yourself become all flame. Demons teemed around monks like flies around food. One monk was beset by visions of rotting corpses, bursting open as they decayed. Alone for weeks, months on end in their cells, with nothing more than ageing hard bread to eat and an oil lamp to look at, monks were plagued by more tempting visions of sex, and food, and youth. Some monks lost their minds – if they had ever been in full possession of them. When Apollo of Scetis, a shepherd who later became a monk, spotted a pregnant woman in a field, he said to himself: ‘I should like to see how the child lies in her womb.’ He ripped the woman open and saw the foetus. The child and the mother died.

The reasons for these peculiar practices are hard to fathom. One theory is that Christian domination of the empire had brought many gains; but one of its great losses was that it had become considerably harder to be made a martyr by unsympathetic Roman governors. Deprived of the chance to die in one terrible, glorious, sin-erasing show, these men instead martyred themselves slowly, agonizingly, tormenting their flesh a little more every hour, thwarting their desires a little more every year. These practices would become known as ‘white martyrdom’. The monks died daily in the hope that, one day, after they died, they might live. ‘Remember the day of your death,’ advised one monk. ‘Remember also what happens in hell and think about the state of the souls down there, their painful silence, their most bitter groanings, their fear, their strife, their waiting…’ A terrible enough plight, but the monk had not finished yet; he concluded his cheering list with: ‘the punishments, the eternal fire, worms that rest not, the darkness, gnashing of teeth, fear and supplications…’

Carpe diem, Horace had said. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you will be dead for eternity. The monks offered an alternative to this view: die today and you might live for eternity. This was a life lived in terror of its end. ‘Always keep your death in mind,’ was a common piece of advice: do not forget the eternal judgement. When one brother started to laugh during a meal, he was immediately reproached by a fellow monk: ‘What does this brother have in his heart, that he should laugh, when he ought to weep?’ How should one live well in this new and austere world? By constantly accusing yourself, said another monk, by ‘constantly reproaching myself to myself.’ Sit in your cell all day, advised another, weeping for your sins.

A hint of desert isolationism started to find its way into pious city life, too. In John Chrysostom’s writings, contact with women of all kinds was something to be feared and, if possible, avoided altogether. ‘If we meet a woman in the market-place,’ Chrysostom told his congregation, herding his listeners into complicity with that first-person plural, then we are ‘disturbed’. Desire was dangerously easy to inflame. Women who inflamed it were not to be relished as Ovid had relished them, but eschewed, scorned and denigrated in writings that made it abundantly clear that the fault of the man’s desire lay with them. In this atmosphere a group of fashionable women with their low-cut necklines were not praised as beauties but excoriated as a ‘parade of whores’.

Eventually, clerical disapproval was reinforced by law. Pagan festivals, with their exuberant merriment and dancing, were banned… If anyone declared themselves an official in charge of pagan festivals then, the law said, they would be executed. John Chrysostom jubilantly observed their decline. ‘The tradition of the forefathers has been destroyed, the deep rooted custom has been torn out, the tyranny of joy [and] the accursed festivals have been obliterated just like smoke.’

Schizo American WN

This discussion between Tom Robb and Matt Heimbach illustrates the split personality of American racists who, at the same time, try to be good Christians.

Pay special attention to what Robb and Heimbach say in the highlighted red boxes.

Friday postscript: It seems that this exchange happened in ca. July 2017 (before the scandal with Matt Parrott’s wife).

Published in: on May 1, 2019 at 2:58 pm  Comments (3)