For God So Loved

Dore_ResurrectionOfLazarusOne grave to me was given–
To guard till Judgment Day–
But God looked down from Heaven
And rolled the Stone away!

One day of all my years–
One hour of that one day–
His Angel saw my tears
And rolled the stone away!

-Rudyard Kipling


In the past year I’ve read several liberal attacks on my hero, Walt Disney, and on the film director, Alfred Hitchcock. And it struck me, when reading the attackers, that it is indeed true that, “The children of this world, are in their generation wiser than the children of light.” The liberals seem to have an unerring instinct that helps them to know their enemies. And their enemies are the men and women whose view of existence conflicts with liberalism. In Disney’s case — he is the Hans Christian Anderson of the 20th century – it is his moral imagination, rooted in the life blood of the antique Europeans, that fuels the liberals’ attacks on him. Disney’s Christian view of existence is incompatible with liberalism; therefore, Disney is racist and sexist. So it is written in Liberaldom and so it shall be.

Hitchcock’s films have a darker tint than Disney’s; he dwells much more in the dungeons of the human heart than Disney. But what the liberals hate about Hitchcock (they camouflage their hatred with accusations of sexism, which makes it completely legitimate to demonize him) is his belief in original sin. In picture after picture, Hitchcock tells us that men and women are terribly, sinfully flawed, and their sinfulness has nothing to do with social conditions; hence, they can’t be redeemed by denouncing racism and becoming liberals. They need redemption from some power that is more than nature. In his best films, Hitchcock makes it clear who that power is. His films are an antidote to the Marxist, liberal, Grapes-of-Wrath view of existence. Which is why Hitchcock, along with Walt Disney and the older Westerns, were hated by the communists. The children of this world are wiser than the children of light; they know who they must demonize.

Why are the children of this world wiser than the children of light? If we look to the dramatic arts, we can extract a clue to that puzzle. Actors always tell us that it is much easier to play a villainous character than a virtuous one, because villains, who might be subtle in their villainy, are not complex in character. They pursue their evil intentions with a single-minded intensity, while the man of virtue is often confused and uncertain, like Edgar in King Lear, “who is so far from doing harms that he suspects none.” Is that not the merely virtuous man’s great flaw, that he cannot recognize evil?

The children of this world, the liberals, the Muslims, the Jews, and the colored tribesmen, are in the ascendancy, while the white Europeans are in suspended animation, because the evil that men do requires only a sick, distorted mind connected to Satan, while the good that men should do requires a heart connected to the Son of God. Satan has always sought to block those channels of grace that flow from God to the hearts of men, so that men will hear only Satan’s voice in their distorted minds. God’s grace is more complex than Satan’s persistent urging, but Europeans once prevailed over Satan, not through thinking, but through vision, the vision of men and women with hearts of flesh connected to His sacred Heart.

In the Garden of Eden, Satan got Adam and Eve to look on God as the end product of a syllogism. To eat or not to eat the apple became a problem in philosophy rather than a commandment from a loving, benevolent God. When a man seeks to know God with the mind alone, he will always end up doing Satan’s will, not God’s. “Yet what can I give Him, give Him my heart,” shall always be the bred-in-the-bone wisdom that defeats the mind-forged, satanically-inspired ideologies of the children of this world.

It seems unfair, from a purely intellectual viewpoint, that God should allow a demonic being, vastly superior in intelligence to humans, to prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. The Grand Inquisitor in Dostoyevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov certainly thought God was unfair (“He thought too much of men”), so he decided to eliminate Christ and replace Him with a man-made Church of Christ without Christ. Did the Grand Inquisitor and all his heirs, the managerial conservatives in church and state, get it right? Are think tanks and systems that come from the minds of the best and the brightest more efficient and practical than a circumcised heart? It seems to me that the Inquisitors are wrong. Mere virtue, derived from an intellectual commitment to the good, will always finish second best to Satan and his minions, who are armed with one truth: “We must destroy what we hate, and what we hate is Christian Europeans.” The virtuous conservatives are focused on affirming an abstract good, which they are always in the process of defining and are never totally sure what it is. So while the men of “virtue” debate the truth, the liberals and the colored hordes act on their truth: “White Christians and their culture must be destroyed.”

The “unfair” battle that the white man seems destined to lose does not have to be lost. It is only lost so long as the white man believes that all of life is lived second-hand through the intellect. The antique Europeans did not believe in a second-hand life:

Life is real! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

The tragedy of the Cross was first-hand: our Savior died for His people so that our personal tragedies could be redeemed and turned into personal triumphs. Melville cried out from the depths of despair, “Is all this striving in vain?” No, it is not if we stay true to the bardic Europeans who lived life first-hand. In storybook Europe, which is the real Europe, white people loved and hated with all their hearts. They loved God and hated Satan and his minions. “What can I give Him, give Him my heart,” is the bardic European’s clarion call from out of the dark night of Europe. It will, if acted upon, be the equivalent of Gideon’s trumpet that shall bring down Liberaldom and turn back the blood red tide of the colored barbarians.

The European is currently acted upon by the liberals and the colored heathens. He does not take action against the liberals and the colored heathens, because he has only a second-hand faith. He can’t see a vision of Christ in his heart, and say, “This is truth.” Instead he turns the vision into a Socratic dialogue and in doing so turns himself into a second-hand human being. He will remain so until he stops believing Satan’s lie that disembodied thought, not Christ, is the Alpha and Omega of human existence.

The intellectual Christian tries to attach himself to virtue, but it is a virtue incapable of seeing evil and of passionately defending the good, whereas the liberal attaches himself to an inverted Christianity that is the complete antithesis of Christianity. Both faiths are second-hand, but the liberal’s intellectual faith is connected to Satan so he has the support of the angelic demon, while the intellectual Christian has only the support of his own intellect. Hence the liberal has the clarity of satanic hate and will never renounce an anti-Christian religion such as Islam, while the intellectual Christian has a mish-mosh, muddled faith that makes him unable to identify evil and support the good. He sees no evil in Islam as Islam; there are only bad Moslems. And conversely he sees nothing good in the white race as a race; white people are road blocks in the way of his abstract Christian utopia.

The moment the white man realizes that tragedy is first-hand, that he has a people whose lives matter, the reconquest of Europe will begin. Yeats was right when he said that the best lacked all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. But he knew this because he was one of those who lacked all conviction. He sought a return to pagan Ireland in order to escape from a second-hand life of the intellect. Can a European still be a man if he is not a Christian? I do not think he can; the European can never return to paganism without destroying something within that makes him an integral man. But a European becomes something worse than a pagan if he is only an intellectual Christian. What is an intellectual Christian? An intellectual Christian is Pope John tendering his “loving forgiveness” to the black savages who raped, tortured, and murdered his people. It is John Paul II condemning abortion with one breath and then praising feminism with the next breath. It is all the white “Christians” who talk about “ecumenical jihads” and the dangers of a white, Euro-centered Christianity. If intellectual Christianity is the only Christianity, then Christ be not risen, because intellectual Christianity is a false, man-made faith.

Off this modern stage, which belongs to Satan, our people lived life first-hand. They saw life as a tragedy that was redeemed by a God who did not conquer by virtue of a Gnostic philosophy or by a detached oriental mysticism, but by the strength of His love, a divinely human love that brought Him to the Cross. What a vision our people bequeathed to us, to live, love, and die in the benevolent shadow of the Cross! But as time passed, the shadow of the Cross became something sinister to the European people. They fled from it and took refuge in an intellectual Christianity that left them defenseless against the wickedness and snares of the devil. We cannot make such people our visionary companions. They would have us blend Christ with other faiths such as Judaism, Islam, and negro-worshipping liberalism. Europeans with hearts of fire do not need such false pagan faiths. They seek the God of the European hearth fire. Our people wait for us there. Their faith is our faith; it is a faith that gives us the strength and the wisdom to defeat the children of this world.

I don’t know that the modern Europeans will avail themselves of the vision of their ancestors, but if they do, things that now seem impossible, such as a white Christian Europe, will become a reality. The pride of intellect, which kills the vision of the heart, is the hurdle that the European must overcome. But if he does overcome it then – “Ah, what larks!” If you tell me that such marvelous transformations only occur in storybooks, I will agree with you. But old Europe was storybook Europe, not because it was utopia, but because He was truly incarnate in old Europe. The antique Europeans saw Christ through a glass darkly. The liberal has joined with the intellectual Christian to heap burning coals on storybook Europe, but what is their vision compared to the antique Europeans’ vision? All I see in Liberaldom is darkness. Abortion is legal, Islam is on the march, and the black savage has been deified. Intellectual Christianity has only aided Satan’s merciless onslaught; it has done nothing to stop it, because there is no heart, no soul, no vision in intellectual Christianity. At the hour of our death and at the hour of our civilization’s death, we need a miracle. Neither liberalism, intellectual Christianity, nor the nature religions can provide one. Our visionary companions, the antique Europeans, bore witness to the God of miracles. Storybook Europe is rooted in His Kingdom come. If we remain faithful unto death to that Europe, we will see miracles occur once again – “And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.” +

Posted in Christianity is neither a theory nor a philosophy, fairy tale of European civilization, Propositional faith | Tagged

The Outlaws of Europe

Wyeth_RobinHoodAmbushWe declare war upon all of those thieves, robbers, extortioners and men evil whom we find among the nobles, the clergy, and burgesses of town – in particular those who follow or accompany Prince John; false abbots, monks, bishops and archbishops, whom we will beat and bind like sheaves of corn… Then, in that wild and lonely glade, while the owls screamed over the dark forest, and an occasional wolf howled in the distance, they all knelt down together and swore their oath – a pledge as high and as sacred, though they were but outlaws, as that sworn by the noblest knights of the round table. – The Adventures of Robin Hood by Roger Lancelyn Green


The liberals, in loving adoration of the father of all lies, have built Liberaldom upon one lie after another. Their relationship to the truth is much like Dracula’s relationship to the light: they can’t bear it. The more thoroughly liberal the West becomes, the further the West slides into the abyss with the father of all lies. My own anti-nation is well on its way to the finish line in the race to achieve the liar’s laurel wreath. For instance, the Obama administration recently announced their opposition to terrorism without mentioning Islam, while the liberals’ conservative cousins confined their condemnations of terrorism to condemnations of “bad Muslims” and “radical Muslims.” None of the above, liberal or conservative, condemned Islam as a violent, anti-white, anti-Christian religion.
And along the same lines: Did you know that there are no black criminals in the United States? The mainstream media no longer report black crimes, so that must mean that black people do not commit any crimes. How wonderful! It is indeed fitting then that the negroes have become our gods. An entire race that does no wrong is surely worthy of our reverence and adoration.

We could go on to tell of the liberals’ truly wonderful efforts to reverse the previously distorted roles of men and women and their equally wonderful efforts to make sure that Aztecs are able to take over the once European dominated land mass called the United States. This would certainly please Pope Francis, who has expressed his support for the heirs of Montezuma. Perhaps the Pope would like to bring back the same fine dining that Montezuma enjoyed, once the Aztecs set up their new kingdom?

Need I go on with tedious examples of the liberals’ “truth”? We all have lived in Liberaldom our entire lives, and we all, on a daily basis, feel the giant coils of the liberal anaconda squeezing the life from our bodies. Despite what our leaders in church and state tell us, that liberalism is good for us, we know we are about to die. Should we who are about to die merely salute the liberal leviathan and die? Or should we fight back and just once, before we die, feel like men instead of wretched vermin destined to live for only a moment in the coils of the serpent, and then be crushed in its coils?

In the novel Farewell My Lovely, the main character, private detective Phillip Marlowe, says that whenever someone tells him he won’t need a gun, he knows definitely that he will need a gun. We should follow Marlowe’s basic precept. When the liberals and the conservative church men tell us that faith and race should not be mixed, that we should not put on the armor of the white race and pick up the sword of Christianity in order to do battle with the colored heathens and the liberals, then we know we should do precisely that: we should unsheathe our Christian swords and put on our white armor and go into battle for Harry, England, and St. George! If white people would once again join together what never should have been rent asunder, their race and their faith, they could actually start to break free from the serpent’s coils and become Europeans again.

I remember reading when I was boy, a book called Retreat to Glory, about Sam Houston’s victory over Santa Anna at the battle of San Jacinto. The author described how Houston’s men, who had signed on to avenge the Alamo, were becoming restless. Why wouldn’t their commander fight instead of constantly retreating and retreating? But when Houston thought the time was right, he turned on Santa Anna; no doubt he felt as Macduff did when he faced Macbeth: “Turn, hellhound, turn!” Cries of “Remember the Alamo!” rang out, and Houston and his men routed Santa Anna and his Aztec warriors. The white man has, like Houston, been engaged for the last one hundred years in a series of retreats. He has retreated from Africa, he has retreated from India, from South America, and now he is in retreat in the white nations. But unlike Houston, the modern white man does not plan on turning on his enemies and sending them back to the dark corners of the earth from whence they came. Far from it, the white man plans to turn over his family and his people to the colored heathens.

This retreat and surrender of the white man to the colored minions of Satan is the great story of the 20th century and the early 21st century. Will the Europeans’ reconquest of Europe and the other white nations be the story of the next one hundred years? It will be if the white Christian remnant takes the advice offered in the first verse of The Book of Psalms: “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.” Who is more ungodly and scornful of all things white and Christian than the liberals and the colored heathens? But it is not enough to oppose just the secular liberals and the colored hordes. We must go after the ungodly clergy men who scorn all things white and Christian. At present all a clergy man has to say is, “That sounds racist,” and the white man runs and hides under his bed, vowing never to sound racist again. We have been hearing nothing but anti-white anathemas from the pulpit for too long. It is time to state unequivocally that our whiteness is an integral part of our soul; we will not become soulless zombies in order to please the spiritual eunuchs of the organized churches.

The liberals and their allies in the clergy invoke race for everything. It gives them the moral high ground. But why should it? What is higher, in the moral sense, about race mixing and all its Babylonian children, such as legalized abortion, legalized sodomy, and negro worship? While playing the race card every chance they get, the liberals still insist, when they speak to whites, that there is no such thing as race. Then they should stop demonizing the white race and deifying the colored races, shouldn’t they? They will have it both ways so long as whites allow them to have it both ways. Nothing good will ever happen in the European arena until the white man recovers his white soul and confronts the liberals as a white man and not as a cringing, fawning caricature of a man begging to be given a third class ticket on the liberals’ multicultural express train to Babylon. In point of fact the white man cannot cringe or fawn enough to get on the liberal express. His whiteness, even if he tries to deny it, makes him unfit for the liberals’ “paradise.”

Even the “conservatives” of the 20th century, such as James Burham and Russell Kirk, considered white racists outside the ken of civilization. How can the people who constituted the heart and soul of Western civilization prior to the 20th century suddenly be considered outside the ken of civilization in the 20th century? “We have evolved beyond whiteness,” the conservatives told us. Which indicates to me that the 20th century conservatives were wolves in sheep’s clothing. They were conserving liberalism, not the European people. There is no escaping the reality that the religious and secular conservatives of the 20th and now the 21st century are not conservatives as Burke was conservative. Burke wanted to conserve a very particular people, his people, and a very particular faith, the European Christian faith. The modern liberal-conservatives, despite differing with the liberals on such issues as gay rights and legalized abortion, will always side with the multi-cultural liberals against the conservative, racist white man, because the race issue trumps all other issues. The conservatives will break bread with the liberals and the colored barbarians, but not with the white “racists.” Maybe it’s time to stop looking on the people who hate us as our friends.

When Obama attacks the Christian faith and defends Islam it is not because he is a Muslim, it is because he is a puppet for the liberals. And the liberals will always side with the non-Christian, nature religions against the Christian faith. Their first preference is the outright destruction of the Christian faith, and their second preference is the blending of the Christian faith with other religions, which is not as exciting to the liberals as the outright destruction of the Christian faith, but it accomplishes the same thing and does it much more efficiently. All non-Christian religions are nature religions, differing in degree but not in kind. It was and it is the destiny of the white race to champion the one true faith which is “something more than nature.” The fact that the white man is currently afraid to go to Nineveh does not change what he is meant to be. He cannot blend with the nature religions without losing his moral essence, which is what liberalism is all about, Charlie Brown: destroying the white man’s racial hearth fire and leaving him a nameless, soulless creature who wanders the earth, trying to find a nature religion that will give him a home. The liberals of the 60’s and 70’s had a fascination for the eastern religions, and many still do. Islam is now getting more white converts and sympathizers than ever before, but the great bulk of liberals still prefer negro worship, because it gives them a savior, the noble black savage who is nature’s god.

The current conflict between Islam and liberalism, a conflict the liberals refuse to acknowledge, is a conflict between a nature religion that fuses Judaism and paganism and a nature religion that fuses Christianity and paganism. It is not a question of which one is better. The white man whose Christian faith is bred in the bone shuns them both and all the other nature religions, whose names are legion. If a white man looks at existence with the exterior eye of the colored heathens and the white scientists and theologians, he will try to cling to one of the nature religions for support. And if he does not find support in the nature religions, which many of our white youth do not, he will despair and die. The seeming strength of the nature religions is a mirage. The spirit alone giveth life. But we must circumcise our hearts if we want to see the spiritual realm that exists over and above the nature religions. A divinely human God showed us that the spirit of the living God, the God who enters human hearts, is the only true source of hope on earth. How can a white man, a man whose people saw a great light, find comfort in the nature religions, which are all creations of the father of lies?

The most colossal lie, the lie that Satania is built on, is the liberals’ assertion that the white Christian culture of the antique Europeans was evil. That lie robs the Europeans and all mankind of the hope that He came and dwelt with His people so that we could know the divine love. “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know Him, and have seen Him.” We Europeans believe that we have seen Him and know Him through our people. If Christian Europe was a lie, as the liberals tell us, then we are of all men most to be pitied. But it was not a lie! The spiritual separation of the European’s white soul from his Christian faith must end. That charity of honor bids us rise and ride: one faith, one race, one purpose, to love Him in and through our people. +

Posted in Christian counter-attack, defense of the white race | Tagged

The Miracle Culture of the European People

Richter_Genoveva_in_the_forest_seclusion“In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.”

John 7:37-8


In 1979, a man named Cedric Messina convinced the BBC that it was possible to put all of Shakespeare’s plays on film and show the films on British television. Despite many naysayers, the project was undertaken and then completed three years later. And it was a success! There were still enough Britons and non-British Europeans willing to view the uncensored, uncut works of the Gentle Bard. The BBC even made money on their daring scheme to bring Shakespeare to the masses. There were some hostile academics (there always are) who complained that the various directors of the plays were too faithful to the original texts of Shakespeare. Those academics wanted innovation and change. But that is the beauty of the productions: the various directors did not try to touch up a Rembrandt. I’ve managed to see all of the plays over the years, and I am in awe of the work and creative effort that went into their production. There are no bad productions, and most of them are superb.

Why do I bring up the BBC’s Shakespearean triumph of what has now become, to many of my readers, long ago? I bring it up because it relates directly to the issue of liberalism, race, and faith. The BBC’s success with the Shakespeare plays was made possible because the Britain of the late 1970s and early 1980s was still white. There were still enough people of the white race left in Britain to appreciate the dramatic works of William Shakespeare, thus affirming the assessment of his contemporary Ben Jonson: “He was not for an age, but for all time.” But Ben Jonson’s assessment of the eternal and enduring value of Shakespeare only applies to a white Britain. Once Britain becomes the multicultural paradise of Hindus, Muslims, and blacks that Tony Blair (“Britain must become multicultural”) and others of his ilk dream of, there will be no more performances of Shakespeare’s plays nor will there be any other remnant of white culture left in Britain.

All the nations of European origin are taking the Tony-Blair, multicultural path to white oblivion. The European nations have more of a Muslim problem than a black problem, and the U.S. has more of a black problem than a Muslim problem (the black and the Muslim problem are often one and the same), but all of the once white nations have decided to make white people extinct. The liberals all think that only the racist whites will be exterminated, but of course that will not be the case. A few white technocrats might be kept alive to operate the machines for the colored heathens, but the type of liberals who occupy the high places of Liberaldom, the politicians, the pundits, the academics, and the clergy, will all perish with the grazers whom they sold down the river of blood.

While every liberal wants multiculturalism, they do not all have the same vision of what a multicultural society will be. A good deal of the aging liberals from the sixties envision a world in which European culture survives and thrives in a new colorized form. They see themselves taking hordes of adoring darkies to view European art museums and European dramatic works with all black and brown casts. Younger liberals envision a blending of colored barbarian culture and white culture, and those liberals who are younger still envision a colored barbarian world devoid of whiteness. But no liberal, not one, comprehends the utter desolation that will be the result of the colorization of the European nations. Those whites who are still left alive will find life unbearable, because even the lowest, most degraded white, a white that has blended with a black or Muslim culture, will not be able to live in a world completely devoid of the charity and mercy that was never entirely extinguished until Europe became non-white.

The utter desolation scenario is not ‘written.’ It will occur if liberalism remains the ruling ideology of the European people. But there is life and hope in the miracle culture of the European people. Currently, the only opposition to liberalism comes from conservatives who are half-liberal. They propose 11th hour democratic solutions when the 11th hour is already long past. Is it hopeless then? Yes, it is if you do not believe in miracles. But why would a white man set himself against his own race by believing in democracy and science instead of miracles? No one seemed more desolate than Shakespeare’s Pericles, but at the last trump, at the twinkling of an eye, his beloved daughter came to life again.

PERICLES: Now, blessing on thee! rise; thou art my child.
Give me fresh garments. Mine own, Helicanus;
She is not dead at Tarsus, as she should have been,
By savage Cleon: she shall tell thee all;
When thou shalt kneel, and justify in knowledge
She is thy very princess. Who is this?       
HELICANUS: Sir, ’tis the governor of Mytilene,             
Who, hearing of your melancholy state,              
Did come to see you.
PERICLES: I embrace you.              
Give me my robes. I am wild in my beholding.                     
O heavens bless my girl! But, hark, what music?              
Tell Helicanus, my Marina, tell him              
O’er, point by point, for yet he seems to doubt,              
How sure you are my daughter. But, what music?
HELICANUS: My lord, I hear none.           
PERICLES: None! The music of the spheres!

Our people heard His music because they saw beauty on the Cross. In contrast, liberalism is grounded in a rejection of the Cross. How can the miracle culture of the antique Europeans be blended with its antithesis? It can’t. No true opposition to death-in-life liberalism can occur until the blending of liberalism and Christianity ceases. The federal government represents one of the divine branches of Liberaldom. They have adopted a total dependence policy. If a low income person wants their assistance, he must have no savings. The government wants their poorer citizens to be totally dependent on them. Our Lord is more benevolent than the federal government. He sends us comforters, angelic and human, but He does want us to depend on Him more than on the rationalist opiates of modernity, such as science and democracy. If we look to such pathetic substitutes for God, how can we expect a miracle? God’s grace exists, but it flows through His divine channels of grace, not through our man-made liberal sewers of bilge.

It’s not ‘science as the study of the natural world’ or ‘voting to determine a local magistrate or governor’ that has led the modern Europeans down the lonesome road that leads to hell. It is ‘science as the Holy Ghost,’ and ‘democracy as a divinely inspired multicultural government’ that has distorted the vision of the European people. We no longer have Europeans who see existence with the inner eye, the eye of the spirit; they now see only with the exterior eye, the eye of science. C. S. Lewis captures the essence of this modern problem of vision in his seventh volume of the Chronicles of Narnia books, The Last Battle:

Aslan raised his head and shook his mane. Instantly a glorious feast appeared on the Dwarfs’ knees: pies and tongues and pigeons and trifles and ices, and each Dwarf had a goblet of good wine in his right hand. But it wasn’t much use. They began eating and drinking greedily enough, but it was clear that they couldn’t taste it properly. They thought they were eating and drinking only the sort of things you might find in a stable. One said he was trying to eat hay and another said he had got a bit of an old turnip and a third said he’d found a raw cabbage leaf. And they raised golden goblets of rich red wine to their lips and said, “Ugh! Fancy drinking dirty water out of a trough that a donkey’s been at! Never thought we’d come to this.” But very soon every Dwarf began suspecting that every other Dwarf had found something nicer than he had, and they started grabbing and snatching, and went on to quarreling, till in a few minutes there was a free fight and all the good food was smeared on their faces and clothes or trodden under foot. But when at last they sat down to nurse their black eyes and their bleeding noses, they all said:

“Well, at any rate there’s no Humbug here. We haven’t let anyone take us in. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs.”

“You see,” said Aslan. “They will not let us help them. They have chosen cunning instead of belief. Their prison is only in their own minds, yet they are in that prison; and so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out. But come, children. I have other work to do.”

The Europeans can’t see the obvious, that negro-worshipping liberalism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christian Zionism, Islamic Catholicism, and all the other –isms are from the devil, who roams about the world seeking the ruin of souls. And the Europeans can’t see the obvious because they refuse to be fooled by the fable of the Christ which they see with the exterior eye alone. The inner eye, the eye of the heart, is pure myth; it is nothing more than an organ that pumps blood to the brain. So say our modern European dwarfs. The reason the Christian church men have brought negroes into their churches to be worshipped as gods and have been the leading advocates for Muslim and Aztec immigration to white lands is because they have lost sight of the God who can only be seen with the interior eye. You can’t blend scientism with Christ. Organized Christianity on a cosmic scale is exteriorism taken to its blasphemous extreme. Such a Christianity, as Dostoyevsky so vividly describes in the Grand Inquisitor chapter of The Brothers Karamazov, is a religion for an evil, adulterous generation that seeketh after external signs of the living God. Are negroes and barbarous nature religions the signs of our salvation? Yes, the church men tell us.

There are some clear-thinking, democratic, white nationalists such as Geert Wilders and Jared Taylor who are trying to awaken the European people to the dangers of the Islamic and colored invasion, but they do so from outside the miracle culture of the European people. Can scientistic, democratic rationalism save us from the evils wrought by scientistic, democratic rationalism? When Christ had a local habitation in the hearts of the European people, race-mixing was a sin that cried out to heaven for vengeance. Muslims did not dwell in Christian lands, and the Christian Europeans did not look to Jews in order to learn about the living God. We who are about to die need a miracle. Within our racial home is that miracle. Christ still, if we ask Him to come back to our racial hearth fires, will defend His people from the wickedness and snares of the devil. We have seen, if we have eyes to see, the futility of life without a racial home and without the God of our ascending race. Of course when I say, “We have seen… the futility of…,” I am referring to “we few.” The grazers have not seen the futility of life without a Christ-centered racial hearth fire, and the liberals have built a kingdom based on the hatred of the Europeans’ racial hearth fire.

I don’t see a single external sign that the European people will return to their racial home and become the type of people who protect and defend their own, but our faith is not something that can be seen. The spirit goeth where it lists. Our trembling faith tells us that when we thirst, Christ will give us living water to drink. And do we not, we few, thirst for Christian Europe? The European fairy tales are true: “When hope is nearly gone, God’s relief to us is surely won.” +

Posted in blood faith, Europeans and Christ, fairy tale mode of perception | Tagged ,

Rejecting the Demonization of the White Race

Barton_Pensioners'_Garden“He was a man, take him for all in all.” –Hamlet


On the same day last week, I heard a radio preacher going on about the necessity of “defending Israel” and read an article by a conservative-traditionalist Catholic pundit who expressed admiration for the Moslem terrorists that murdered those 12 Frenchmen in Paris. Both men, the Preacher and the Pundit, reminded me of a classmate from my high school. Let me set the stage: Behind our school was a secluded wooded area where the boys who had irreconcilable differences would settle those differences. Since there were no blacks attending our school, the fights never went beyond the rough-hewn chivalry of a white schoolyard. One knockdown generally ended the fight, and there was no kicking, eye-gouging, or hitting below the belt. We all took the code as a given, even the punks; little did we dream that only ten years later when the school became integrated that our civilized field of honor would be a scene of brutal beatings and knifings.

Now, back to the classmate. Let me imitate Dickens and give the classmate a name to suit his character. I’ll call him Freddy Spineless. It wasn’t the fact that Freddy was little and avoided all fights that made him reprehensible, it was because he gloried in the fights second-hand. He was always trying to bring about a fight between potential combatants with his “Do you know what he said about you?” tattle-tale rhetoric. Freddy was often successful in his efforts to instigate a fight, but he was held in contempt by most of his classmates, because he fed off the blood and strength of other boys without taking any risks himself. He would always “toady up” to the winner, but the winners had no respect for Freddy. Which, by a roundabout route, brings me back to intellectual Christians such as the Christian Zionist and the pro-Moslem Catholic pundit.

Only an intellectual Christian, who sees life through the narrow, outward prism of the mind while avoiding the inward vision of the heart, would try to settle his differences with his white secular enemies through the good offices of the Jews or the Moslems. The Moslems and the Jews are like unto the liberals: all three are hostile to the central tenet of the Christian faith, the divine condescension: God became man and dwelt among us! Only halfway-house Christians who have intellectually leveled the profound depth of the Christian faith into a superficial affirmation of a generic God would seek to blend the Christian faith with other non-Christian faiths in order to strike back at liberals. Even if such a cowardly tactic worked, it would be morally reprehensible, but in point of fact it doesn’t work. The Jews and the Moslems will never accept the white Christian as one of their own unless the white Christian denounces his faith completely.

Peter Kreeft spoke for halfway-house Christians from both the Protestant and Catholic camps when he wrote a book called Ecumenical Jihad. Isn’t that title the classic example of an oxymoron? In the book, Kreeft argued for an alliance of Jews, Moslems, and Christians against the liberals. That type of blasphemy has two root causes. The first cause was years and years of outward-ritual-and-learned-men Christianity. “So long as we pass down the proper rituals and the documents of the learned men to each successive generation of generic men and women, we are preserving the Christian faith.” Such was and is the belief of the rationalist Christians. But what about the circumcision of the heart that needs to take place before a man can have a genuine faith in the living God? Saul had an outward faith once, but he needed an interior conversion before he could become St. Paul. Intellectual Christianity ignores the channels of grace, our familial and racial hearth fires, that give us the inwardness to truly understand and love the God-man. The intellectual Christians who bid us make common cause with other religions read like those cold obituaries of our loved ones that we see in the paper. “You never knew him,” we say with sorrow, “those were only the externals of his life. To his loved ones, he was so much more.”

Can European hearts, hearts that love, accept any other God than the incarnate Lord who enters human hearts? What kind of victory do we achieve over the liberals if it is achieved in the name of Christian Zionism or Islamic Catholicism? The victory would be just as fruitless as a victory achieved over Zionism or Islam while we were allied with the liberals. The Christian Europeans must stand alone, separate from the Jews, the Moslems, and the liberals.

The second cause of the Ecumenical Jihadist disease among intellectual Christians is the complete triumph of liberalism and the total absence of any opposition to liberalism from the organized Christian churches. The rationalist Christian, partly because he feels bound by a false idea of non-violence and primarily because he is afraid to act alone, wants somebody, he doesn’t care who, to strike out against the liberals. This won’t do. It is Christian Europeans, heart, blood, and soul Europeans, who must do battle with the liberals. If there is any killing to be done, we, not the heathen and the colored strangers, should do it. Who else can be entrusted with the task? Why should those who have no concept of charity or mercy, because they have no faith in the God of charity and mercy, decide who should live and who should die? A Jewish or Moslem state would be just as devoid of Christian charity as the liberal states we now live in. And for the people of the West a liberal state is preferable, not because it is any less immoral than a Jewish or Moslem state, but for the reason that Kipling articulates in his poem, “The Stranger”:

The men of my own stock,
They may do ill or well,
But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
They are used to the lies I tell;
And we do not need interpreters
When we go to buy and sell.

“Wait,” you say, “the liberals hate the men of their own stock.” Yes, they do, which is why we should fight them with might and main just as we should fight the Jews and the Moslems. But the liberals are of our own stock. We should not look for outsiders to fight what should be our battle against the liberals. It sickens me to hear the self-righteous intellectual Christians say we should tolerate Islamic terrorism or even applaud it, because the West is decadent. Do such people have children? Do they trust the Moslems to only kill people of the West who deserve to be killed? And again, why should white Christians let the Moslems or the Jews decide who is to be killed in the lands that should belong to Christian Europeans?

What is missing in the propositional Christians is a love and respect for the people of their own race. They are mad at the people of the white race for their refusal to listen to their theories. So like petulant children who can’t make the other children play by their rules, they try to get some neighborhood bully to come in and punish the children who won’t play by their rules. But the bully isn’t going to stop with the destruction of the children who won’t play by the rules, he will destroy the petulant children who invited him into the house as well.

Christian utopianism is just as deadly as secular utopianism. Belloc viewed the French Revolution as a necessary purging of bad Catholics. Even if we accepted that satanic the-ends-justify-the-means ideology (which I do not), we need to ask, did we see a great Catholic age envelope France after the blood-letting? And if we look at our own benighted Europe, we see a liberal minority ruling over a majority of European grazers. Are all the grazers to be put to the sword because they are insufficiently Christian to cast out their liberal rulers? The intellectual Christians who have foisted a bloodless, multicultural, multiracial, anti-incarnational Christianity on the grazers are responsible for their stupefied indifference to all things Christian. And now those same intellectual Christians want the grazers punished and replaced by the merciless strangers of Islam, Africa, and Jewry. They live by the ethos of Freddy Spineless: “Let me see blood, so long as it is not my own.”

The intellectual Christians have more in common with the liberals than with the antique Europeans. What they have in common is a propositional view of existence. They only acknowledge their own abstractions as real. The liberals envision a world of natural, black and brown noble savages presided over by an all-knowing and all-wise white liberal. The rationalist Christians envision a world of strong, vital people of strong, vital faiths. Some dream of the people of Israel, some of the “sexy, earthy” blacks, or the intelligent, inscrutable but oh-so-mystical yellow people. And others dream of Islamic Christians (another oxymoron) who will fight all the enemies of the rationalist Christians’ propositional Christianity. The central tenet of the propositional faith, be it utopian liberal, or utopian Christian, is an incredible hatred for the European people past and present, because they are not and were not perfect specimens of humanity. No, they were not, and they are still not, perfect. But they were the only people that loved and championed the incarnate Lord, who was crucified, died, and was buried, and on the third day rose from the dead. And in their fallen, stupefied state, the white grazers still remain the Christ-bearers. They need to shake off the liberals’ and the propositional Christians’ vision of a intellectualized world devoid of the living God, the Christ, who, when worshipped in the fullness of His God-Manhood, can stir hearts and raise up men of blood who are not vital as the devil would have us be vital, but are vital according to His laws of charity and mercy.

Propositional Christianity is the Achilles’ heel of the white man. It spawned propositional liberalism and turned brave and honorable white men into grazers who only come alive during natural disasters and liberal-sponsored wars. Two men mark the dividing line between the antique European world, in which God’s only begotten Son entered human hearts, and the modern world, which champions a propositional God created by the minds of men. Those two men are Edmund Burke and Hilaire Belloc. Burke saw every sin of commission and omission of the French royalty and the French aristocrats, and yet he loved them and supported them against the French Jacobins. He supported them because he knew that no ruling aristocracy can stand if they must be perfect, and he supported them because he took them for “all in all.” And taken for all in all, they were noble souls, who were spiritually superior to the Jacobins. In contrast, Hilaire Belloc saw only imperfect Catholics, far below his abstract ideal of what a true Catholic should be, when he looked at the French royalty and aristocracy. They had to be purged so a noble, pure Catholicism could be built on their unhallowed bones.

I hate Belloc and his ilk with all the hate of a Christian Goth, and I love Burke and the Europeans of his stripe, Europeans with that charity of honor, with all my heart, mind, and soul. Among those aristocrats slaughtered by the Jacobins were Belloc’s fellow Catholics, thousands of priests who refused to take the oath of allegiance to the Jacobins. Only the non-Catholic, Burke, who looked for Christian hearts, not at Christian sects, had sympathy and support for the Catholic French aristocrats that Belloc consigned to posthumous infamy and damnation.

This Burke/Belloc conflict is alive today. All my life I have heard my people demonized by propositional Christians and propositional liberals: They were and are insufficiently Christian or else they were and are racist. In both cases they are damned, so say the propositional Christians and the liberals. From an overflowing heart the tongue speaks – I don’t accept their filthy condemnations of my people, past and present. I see my peoples’ real sins much more clearly than the liberals and the propositional Christians, who are so blinded with their hatred of white people for not living up to their abstract utopian ideals that they make up false sins to hurl at them. Despite their real sins, my people are the only people that reflect the image of God in man. I see them for all in all and I love them. Let the propositional Christians and the liberals take their anti-white, anti-human calumnies with them to hell. And let us stay, through our fidelity to our people, at the foot of the Cross, our only hope in this world and the next. +

Posted in Grazers, Propositional faith | Tagged

Sacred to the Memory Of

Shepard_MrBadger_chapterHome! That was what they meant, those caressing appeals, those soft touches wafted through the air, those invisible little hands pulling and tugging, all one way! Why, it must be quite close by him at that moment, his old home…

The Wind in the Willows

On Monday, January 19th, the liberals celebrated their most holy day of the year. And they have promised us that the remaining days in January and the entire month of February will be one long hymn of praise to their negro gods. It’s difficult to imagine how February can be a more negro-centered month than the other eleven months of the year, but the liberals will manage – they always do – to make February an extra special, negro-infested month. ‘Tis a consummation we most devoutly do not wish for, but it will come nevertheless.

Just as the nations of Europe used to have “the very same Christian religion, agreeing in the fundamental parts, varying a little in the ceremonies and in the subordinate doctrines,” so do the modern liberal nations of Europe agree on the fundamentals of negro worship, varying only a little in the ceremonies and in the subordinate doctrines. The white people of the anti-nation called the United States, having twice elected a negro president, seem to have a negrophile edge on the other white nations, but the other nations of Europe will strive to catch up. If the dark shadows of negro worship are not altered, the European nations will soon have black barbarian presidents and prime ministers just like the United States. And why not? Shouldn’t all the white nations make their gods their rulers?

Since I do not subscribe to the same faith as my liberal rulers, I do not take part in the great negro festivals. In fact, I intend to spend my time, during this festive time of year for the liberals, being a wet blanket and criticizing negrophile liberalism.

Negro worship is a white, post-Christian phenomenon. Only white people, whose ancestors were Christian, are now devotees of the sacred negro. The non-black colored tribesmen do not worship the negro, nor do the negroes worship themselves in the same way that whites worship them. The blacks want power, and the whites’ reverence for blacks gives them that power, but the blacks do not revere blacks as sacred deities as the post-Christian white man does. Such reverence can only come from a people who once loved the living God. Satan took the white man’s passion for Christ and redirected it to the black man.

The black noble savage was always a necessary part of the white utopian’s rebellion against God. If nature, not Christ, is God, then the natural man, the noble negro savage, must be nature’s god. This “natural” utopian faith was institutionalized in Jacobin France. What was rational and natural was also what was inhumane and bloody. Taine observed, “All means are justifiable and meritorious with traitors; now that the Jacobin has made his slaughtering canonical, he slays through philanthropy.” First it was the natural, organic, white proletariat who had the right to slaughter white aristocrats, but Haiti was the model for the future. Every European nation is moving toward the Haitian solution of the race problem.

The people of Europe were not ready, at the time of the French Revolution, to commit racial suicide, but they were also not ready to face up to the threat that a rationalist, utopian state within the bowels of Christian Europe presented to the people of Christian Europe. The people were not prepared to meet the Jacobin threat, because they too were tainted with the same rationalist, utopian fever that motivated the French Jacobins. Burke’s own party expelled him, because they agreed with the ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. The general European consensus was that Robespierre managed things badly but the Revolution was good. A latter day French historian and novelist, Andre Maurois, criticized Edmund Burke for being “obsessively” hostile toward the French Jacobins. Spoken like a true halfway-house Christian. How is it possible for a Christian European to be too obsessively hostile to the incarnation of Satan within the heart of Europe? And how is it possible today to be too obsessively hostile to the modern, negro-worshipping liberals of Europe who are the spiritual descendants of the French Jacobins?

Where you stand on this issue depends on your faith. From a Christian European viewpoint, Burke was right: the implementation of the Jacobin principles he opposed has brought about the creation of the kingdom of Satan on earth. From a liberal’s perspective the implementation of Jacobin principles throughout the West has moved mankind closer to that utopian paradise of racial and sexual harmony, which translates to negro worship and sexual depravity. Just a few more whites to eliminate, and paradise will be here.

Where do (and where did) the halfway-house Christians stand on this issue of Jacobinism, negro worship, and sexual depravity? The clergy, the “conservatives,” and all the other rationalist whites who are neither fish nor fowl will never look on Liberaldom and see the kingdom of Satan on earth. They are one in spirit with the democratic republicans of Europe who condemned Robespierre’s excesses while applauding the Jacobin principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity. They refused to accept the fact that Robespierre was not Jacobinism derailed, he was Jacobinism realized! It is the same today as it was then. Negro worship, which spawned the sexual revolution, is not civil rights gone wrong, it is civil rights fulfilled.

When the liberals rhapsodize about the 1960’s they usually list the civil rights movement and the sexual revolution as the great accomplishments of the sixties’ radicals. Christians of a more conservative bent usually applaud the civil rights movement and deplore the sexual revolution. Neo-pagans usually deplore the civil rights movement while enjoying and celebrating the sexual revolution. Seldom do we see a Christian condemning the civil rights movement or a neo-pagan condemning the sexual revolution, but the two movements were part of one, united, satanic attack on the mystical body of Christ. Christian Europeans should oppose both.

The mixed-race movement (which is what the civil rights movement was) and the sexual revolution were both grounded in the utopian thinking of European intellectuals, exemplified by Rousseau’s The Social Contract and Voltaire’s Candide respectively.

The mixed-race movement was the precursor of the sexual revolution. When a European embraces race-mixing, he must not only reject the authenticity of the Bible, he must also reject the traditional wisdom of the European people. He must believe that the strictures against interracial marriage and the desire to live with one’s own kind were the prejudices of a sick and demented people. Henceforth the new European will emerge, free of prejudice and free from any ties to kith or kin. His is a universal tie to all mankind.

The tie that binds the new European to all mankind is an intellectual abstraction. He loves a theory of unity, but he has no flesh and blood connection to a particular race of people. But the utopian’s intellectual denial of his blood cannot change reality; a man needs something to stir his blood. If he refuses to be inspired by the traditional sentiments that fired the blood of the antique European — attachments to kith and kin – he will need something else to stir his blood. That something else is sex. It is sex unconnected to love. Blood will out; if the European renounces the ties of blood that ennoble and elevate a man, he will end up a slave to the urges of the blood that debase and debauch a man. Interracial coupling is a necessity to a man who has no blood connection to a particular people or a particular God. And who becomes the utopian’s God? The people who can stir his blood.

Racial Babylon and Sexual Babylon are fraternal twins. The one precedes the other but only by an infinitesimal fraction of a hair. They both come from the same parent. Satan loves and wills racial and sexual diversity because it kills the image of God in man.CWNY

So long as rational, halfway-house Christians refuse to see that the racial issue is the battering ram of liberalism, they will stay on Satan’s side of the great divide. I saw an example of this just the other day: I saw a halfway-house Christian on t.v. debating a mad-dog liberal on the subject of same-sex marriages. Once the mad-dog liberal equated the Evangelical Christian’s opposition to same-sex marriage with the antique European’s opposition to race mixing, the Evangelical became a quivering mass of jelly. He let the liberal turn the debate into an inquisition, and he was the defendant trying to defend himself against the ultimate heresy, namely, racism. “I am not a racist, I support mixed marriages,” the Evangelical intoned. But the Evangelical’s pathetic pleas were greeted with scorn and derision by the mad-dog liberal. He had gained the upper hand by playing the race card, and he was not about to take his foot off the throat of the hapless Evangelical. What if the Evangelical had been a full-fledged Christian European? Then he could have fought back, and instead of trying to run from the racial issue he would have used it as the center piece of his attack. “Yes, I am against race mixing, because it is against God’s law and it leads to…” But the rational halfway-house Christian is not able to take such a stand, because he has only a rational faith that is a reed for every liberal wind that blows.

In the 20th century most whites sided with science and rationalism against the Christian faith, while a smaller minority tried to blend science, rationalism, and Christianity. By the time of the 21st century, blended Christianity had been almost completely absorbed by rationalist, scientific, negro-worshipping liberalism. You can no longer gauge the resistance to militant, atheistic liberalism by counting the people who go to church, because that is now an indication of how many new converts the liberals are getting. Almost all of us were brought up in either a rationalist Christian household or in a completely secularized rationalist household. Very few of us ever knew the full-fledged Christianity that was once every European’s birthright. We need that full-fledged European faith, because it is the true faith and no other faith can sustain us in our battle against the liberal pestilence and the colored barbarians’ arrows.

In the old European fairy tales the hero is often aided in his journey through the dark and sinister woods by a wise magician. But there are limits to the wise magician’s powers. The hero must go into the woods, where he will confront the evil witch or dragon, alone. This is because the heart of the hero is stronger than the mind of the wise magician. The theologians, who are the wise magicians, told the European people that the Pauline/Shakespearean/Dostoyevskian journey into the depths of the soul, a journey that ultimately results in a vision of the living God, was unnecessary. “Just learn the catechism,” we were told, “and all will be well.” But all is not well if our faith is not stronger than the faith of the rationalist magicians. We must have a hero’s faith. Where there is no bleeding, sighing, and striving toward the Man of Sorrows, there is no true faith.

The European poets, the true chroniclers of the European peoples’ struggle toward the light, all tell us a fairy tale story of a struggle between good and evil. That story is like unto the Biblical story of God’s struggle to keep His people connected to Him in preparation for the coming of the Son of God and the final battle between God and the devil. But when we get to the 20th century, the story of the European people changes. It is no longer Christ who saves us from the devil, it is science, reason, and the negro that save us from the antique Europeans and their God. Only poets such as Kenneth Grahame, C. S. Lewis, and Walt Disney, who tried to take us back to the childhood of our people, tell us of a world where material objects are only symbols of a greater spiritual realm presided over by a God with a European habitation and a name. Sacred to the memory of: His name is Jesus.

When we were young , we knew that the Christian fairy tale was true and that scientific, rational, negro-worshipping liberalism was false. We knew this by an instinct stronger than reason. I once heard a halfway-house “Christian” broadcaster say that Christ died for interracial marriage. Is not that blasphemy the result of years and years of blending egalitarianism and rationalism with Christianity? True thought is “inwardly”; like true circumcision, “it is of the heart, in the spirit and not of the letter.” The rationalist, be he theologian or secular philosopher, wants to make the Grace of God and man’s response to that Grace into a visible, material, quantitative product of the natural world. The small units, the hearts of individual men and women, count for nothing when they are viewed by the universalist eye of the theologian. But those small units of grace, those human beings, are everything to the God whose name is Jesus. Universalist thinking shrinks men and women into insects. The Divine Love, which has a human heart and a human face, makes each human heart a universe.

In the New Testament, Christ is crucified between two thieves. The one thief sees Christ as a fellow malefactor while the other man sees Him as the Son of God. In Shakespeare’s Richard III, two men are sent to murder Clarence. One man strikes and kills Clarence, but the other recoils from the deed and cannot join in. The grace of God is real, but it cannot be put in a test tube or a silver rod. It runs through human hearts that are infinitely more complex than the most difficult problem in math. “A man lives his whole life,” Dostoevsky’s underground man tells us, “to prove that he is more complex than piano keys.” We will be ruled by our Lord and Kinsman, the God who joined His blood with ours, not by the liberal piano tuners! The rational men, the men who worship reason devoid of thought and mankind devoid of humanity, see, when they look at “poor, bare, unaccommodated humanity,” piano keys to be played upon and put into one huge universalist orchestra, where there are no individual human beings connected, through their racial hearth fire, to the Son of God.

Satan knows that if you destroy a man’s racial home you have destroyed his connection to the living God. The Jacobins, the New Age Christian rationalists, and the negrophile liberals are united to Satan in their hatred of the Europeans’ racial home. If we fight past their rational condemnations of our European home and stay true to the non-diverse, non-blended Europe that we loved in the childhood of our race, in that blessed childhood where we loved much and were forgiven, then we will know that we will always have a home in this world and the next. Surely that is a consummation more devoutly to be wished for than a place in the liberals’ negro-worshipping kingdom of Satan on earth. +

Posted in antique Christianity, post-Christian rationalism | Tagged

Where Two or Three Are Gathered Together

Dore_St_JohnAtPatmosNation is a moral essence, not a geographical arrangement, or a denomination of the nomenclator. – Edmund Burke

Islam gives liberals, who like things kept simple, problems. I first noticed this some years ago when the Iranian “students” took the Americans in the embassy hostage. It took the liberals awhile to sort that crisis out. Had black South Africans taken white Americans or white South Africans hostage, the liberals would have known what side to root for. But in the Iranian hostage affair the liberals had a dilemma. On the one hand they viewed all anti-Western groups as good, but on the other hand they viewed all religious fundamentalist groups as bad. What to do? Most liberals solved the dilemma with the ‘bad Muslim’ gambit. Islam was good, my liberal professors all told me so; it was a much more sublime and healthy religion than Christianity. But some Muslims, a tiny minority, were ‘bad Muslims’ who were giving Islam a bad name. The conservatives, who of course were really liberals, concurred with their liberal brethren. Muslims were good; they just needed to adopt free enterprise and purge the ‘bad Muslims’ from their nations.

Islam has gained strength since the 1970’s, but the liberals’ and the conservatives’ attitude toward it has remained the same. The liberals are committed to their belief that the good Muslims can be blended into their multicultural, negro-worshipping democracy, and the conservatives are committed to their belief that the ‘good’ Muslims can be blended into their democratic, free enterprise system. This false ‘bad’ Muslim/’good’ Muslim dichotomy of the liberal-conservative coalition makes it necessary for the Western powers to bomb ‘bad’ Muslims over there, at the same time assuring the ‘good’ Muslims that the West loves Islam, while opening up their borders over here to Muslims. Thus multi-culturalist liberals and free-enterprise conservatives, by ignoring their Christian European heritage, give us the worst of all possible worlds. The people of the West are naked to their Muslim enemies at home while their liberal governments indulge in the inhumane practice of slaughtering Muslim civilians abroad.

Our Christian European forefathers–and I’m not talking about our inconsequential constitutional forefathers–knew that Islam was a militant anti-Christian and therefore anti-European force that had to be held in check. They kept Europe free of the Muslims and involved themselves in Muslim internal affairs to the extent their individual governments thought it necessary. They were not utopianly perfect in their internal meddling, but they were still superior in every way to our modern liberal governments.

The two opposed forces involved here are Christianity and liberalism. When Europeans were Christian they knew that the Muslims were their enemies. Now that they are liberal they will never concede that any nation, tribe, or religious sect that shares their hatred of the incarnate Lord is their enemy. And as a corollary, the liberals will always side with blacks, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Asians, Aztecs and so on against white Europeans, because the white Europeans were, and are still called to be, the Christ-bearers.

Despite their shared hatred of the white race and the Christian faith, the liberals will never come to a peaceful accord with the colored tribesmen or with the devotees of the non-Christian sects. The colored tribesmen are attracted to the blood, sex, and power faiths such as Islam and voodoo. Having never been Christian, the colored barbarians feel no attraction to the post-Christian faith of the liberals. Only the white man worships the negro, because having once believed in The Savior, the post-Christian liberal still needs a Messiah. But the post-Christian Messiah, the negro, is no longer an incarnate God, he is a natural god, the purest of nature’s children. The black barbarians will take advantage of their divine status in white cultures by raping and murdering whites with impunity, but they will not become converts to liberalism. Despite their lowly status in the Muslim world, it is to Islam, not Christianity, that the blacks are turning. D. P. Dugauquier tells us the reason for this phenomenon in her book Congo Cauldron.

Another film depicting in symbolic form the ending of the Arab slave trade by the white man was greeted with equal enthusiasm—each slash of the long whip on the wretched black man’s back was cheered wholeheartedly, and when in coming to grips with the Arab the white hero is momentarily thrown to the ground—their shouts reached a crescendo of support for the Arab—not as representing a race, creed or idea—but simply because he symbolized power and force.

Christianity has only been accepted in depth by one people. For over one thousand years the Christian faith was the moral essence of the European nations.

The nations of Europe have had the very same Christian religion, agreeing in the fundamental parts, varying a little in the ceremonies and in the subordinate doctrines. The whole of the polity and oeconomy of every country in Europe has been derived from the same sources. – Letters on a Regicide Peace

In the wake of the recent Paris terrorist attack, all the retired U.S. generals went rushing onto the Fox News channel to tell us how we could go get the terrorists. But the retired generals, like Martha, have lost sight of that which is truly important. It makes no difference whether a nation whose moral essence is liberalism defeats a nation whose moral essence is Islam. Either way the white man loses. If Europe will not be Christian and fight Islam in the name of Christ, then there is nothing of any worth at stake in the battle. Islam is a blending of Judaism and paganism, and liberalism is a blending of Christianity and paganism. Which faith is preferable? A Christian European does not choose between two evils. He fights a two-front war in the name of Christ the King. There has been no Christian opposition to either liberalism or Islam. This is because whites have abandoned the living God of the European people for a theoretical, abstract god that is the end product of a syllogism.

Let us look at the organized “Christian” churches. The mainstream Catholic and Protestant churches are merely adjuncts of liberalism which makes them a fusion of Christianity and paganism. Nothing more needs to be said about them; they serve Satan. The Protestant fundamentalist and charismatic churches that have sprung up in response to the apostasy of the liberal churches have blended Christianity with Judaism; hence the fundamentalists’ obsession with Israel. And the traditionalist Roman Catholic sects, without actually adopting Muslim rituals, have blended Islamic spirituality, which is really an absence of spirituality, with Christianity; hence the traditionalists’ hatred of Christmas carols and all aspects of Christianity that suggest the living God possesses a divinely human heart which moves Him to impart the blessings of His heaven to human hearts. (1)

Where does this leave us in the year of 2015, still referred to by European Christians as the year of our Lord? It leaves us back with our people, the Europeans. The ideologues told us that Christ did not reside in His people; instead He came to us through the minds of specially designated men of learning. But Burke was right: what the men of intellect could not bring to light, the simple faith of the European people did bring to light. The moral essence of our people is grounded in the love of Christ. When the Europeans ceased to be one in faith and one in race, they lost that moral essence, which is their reason for being.

The great spiritual crisis that almost resulted in the destruction of the entire human race took place when the “sons of God,” who were demons, were captivated by the beauty of the “daughters of men” and desired to “come in unto” them. The result was that only Noah’s bloodlines remained free of demon blood. Do we not face a similar crisis today? God’s grace flowed through European bloodlines. If those bloodlines are contaminated with the blood of colored tribesmen who are connected to Satan, what will be the result? We have already seen, in the Arab world, what happens when the races mix. It produces a faith that is opposed to Christianity. Race-mixing always produces a spiritual crisis. How could it be otherwise? Our race is our spiritual armor; without it we are defenseless against The Enemy.

The minds of men cannot understand the sublime magnificence of the Incarnation. But men with hearts of flesh can and did understand the incarnation of Christ. Behold! A God who weeps for us and with us, because He too has a heart of flesh. All non-European people hold the divine condescension, the incarnation of our Lord, to be either a blasphemy or a fairy tale. And now the Europeans have joined the heathen chorus; they too have forsaken the God with the Heart of flesh. This is a new diaspora: the people of God, the Europeans, have no geographical nation. Wherever two or three Europeans are gathered together, true to their God and their race, there is the nation of Europe.

Despite their differences, all of the –isms (negrophile liberalism, Mohammedism, Judaism, Communism, Capitalism, etc.) are united in their hatred of Christ. Which makes it all the more necessary that we, the European remnant, should stay connected to the non-blended Christ who was worshipped in the fullness of His divinity and His humanity by our European ancestors. Instead of trying to discover the day and the hour, let us take comfort in the crystal clear message of St. John in the book of Revelation:

And behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

It is not a little thing to know that in the end the non-blended Christ will triumph and He will draw His people unto Himself. But will He have a people to draw unto Himself? Will there be faith left on earth? Only if the Christ-bearing people remain true to their blood. And if we are faithful unto death we will receive the benediction of the Christ, the only God for men with hearts of flesh. +

(1) The devil can assume a pleasing shape. Obviously the men and women who fill up the pews of the various Christian churches do not sign on to everything the hierarchies of their sects endorse. But the hierarchies of these churches do have a very definite anti-European, anti-Christian agenda. What kind of church is it where you have to resist the hierarchy of your church in order to remain Christian? And why do you need such a “church”?

Posted in Christian Europe, Europe as the Christ-bearer, Uncategorized | Tagged

To the Extreme

Dore_The_Last_JudgmentSo then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth. –

Revelations 3: 16


In a remarkable speech before the Dutch Parliament, Machiel de Graaf, a member of Geert Wilders’ Party of Freedom, made a plea for an end to the Islamization of the Netherlands. It was a brave speech, a speech that no American statesman would have had the courage to give, but sadly, within the speech itself was the seed of liberalism that rendered the speech useless as soon as it was given. De Graaf stated, when listing the negative effects of the Islamization of the Netherlands, that the Muslims were not as tolerant of lesbians, gays, and Jews as were the native Dutch. No man of Europe wants to exterminate homosexuals or Jews, but a true European does want deviant behavior and anti-European groups controlled. He does not want a democratic, multicultural society.

Now, I don’t think de Graaf really cares all that much about gays and Jews; he was just trying to influence the liberals by showing them that the Muslims’ values are in direct contrast to the liberals’ values. But does this policy ever work? In our own country did the liberals stop aborting babies when the prolifers pointed out that blacks were aborting babies at a rate disproportionate to their numbers? Did the liberals sign on to stop Mexican immigration when they discovered that the Mexicans have very un-liberal ideas about the environment and pollution? And of course the most telling example of all: The liberals who claim that they and they alone really care about women continue to worship blacks who have made the rape and murder of white women their main occupation.

We must conclude that no appeal from a white male, which, if acted upon, would stop or slow down the ongoing colorization of Europe or the ongoing destruction of the traditional Christian faith of the European people, will have any effect on the liberal ruling class. And why is this? The answer is obvious to all those who have eyes to see. The liberals worship Satan, and Satan hates everything white and Christian.

White males such as Machiel de Graaf, who try to appeal to the liberals to alter some aspect of liberalism, fail to understand the nature of modern democratic governments. These governments are not derivatives of the old Anglo Saxon tribal democracies, they are the offspring of the French Jacobin democracy that Burke fought against with such incredible ferocity and nobility of spirit. “The people” must be served in the modern totalitarian democracies, and “the people” are the anti-white colored people of the world, particularly blacks, as well as every devotee of any religious sect opposed to the Christian faith. “The people” must be and will be served. So it is written in liberal law and so it shall be. The non-liberal white male is in the same position in a society governed by liberals as were the three soldiers put on trial for cowardice in the movie Paths of Glory. In that film, the defense attorney made it crystal clear that no man in any regiment had advanced further than the three men accused of cowardice, but the military judges had made up their minds before the trial began: Someone had to pay for the military commanders’ blunder, so the three soldiers were executed. In the liberals’ mind it is better that every last white man should die and every last vestige of Christian Europe disappear from the face of the earth than they should have to face up to the reality that liberalism is not only morally irredeemable but is also a hopelessly flawed system of government that cannot sustain itself. (1) Europe will either be solely white and Christian, or it will be solely colored and heathen; it will not be multiracial, multicultural, and multi-religious. The colored heathens know this: Why can’t the white man grasp it?

The colored heathens see existence as they have always seen it, as a struggle for survival and dominance. They don’t understand why the white man will not fight for the survival of his people; all they know or care about is that he will not fight. They can have the white man’s women and everything of a material nature the white man possesses. They can never have the white man’s spiritual inheritance, but that does not concern the colored barbarians.

The popular neo-pagan explanation of the whites’ surrender to the colored barbarians is that their Christian faith made them weak and passive. Only a man who cherishes his abstract idea of reality as a substitute for truth can swallow such an explanation. The Europeans, during the Christian phase of their history, expanded European dominance and influence on a much wider scale than the pagan Greeks and Romans ever did. Such an accomplishment is certainly not the proof of the truth of the Christian faith, but it does give the lie to those who claim that Christianity made the Europeans weak and passive.

The European people no longer defend their civilization, because they have mistaken their descent into the gutter of rationalism for an ascent to the heavens. Christian rationalists chopped away at the “fantastical” elements of Christianity until there was nothing left but the resurrection. And in the hands of secularists, the belief in the resurrection of Christ soon disappeared as well. The colored tribesmen have never known anything but the natural world; their gods are nature gods and their faith does not transcend the perimeters of the natural world. Not so with the Christian Europeans. For them the natural world was a mirror of a greater spiritual realm, a realm of midsummer night dreams in a kingdom of many mansions, presided over by a benevolent King. What happened to the Europeans’ dream? Why did they stop believing in their Father’s kingdom of many mansions?

In Robert Louis Stevenson’s short story “The Body Snatchers,” the villains of the story murder men and women in order to sell their bodies to doctors and scientists for the purpose of dissection. What a magnificent description of modernity! In order to dissect, we must first commit murder. The rational men treated God as part of the natural world and then dissected Him in order to know Him by the sum of His parts. Is this the God St. Paul encountered on the road to Damascus? Is this the God of the Christmas carols, the dear Christ who enters into the hearts of those who seek Him still? The dissected god is not a living God; he is not the God of the antique Europeans.

The consequence of making Christ the god of rationality was that the people of Europe placed rationality above everything, even above the wisdom of the heart, a wisdom much greater than reason. The liberals respond to every black atrocity with a defense of the black murderer, because they worship darkness and not the light. But why do the grazers not cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war on the black barbarians? They don’t do what is natural and right – natural in the Christian sense of the word – because they have been trained for centuries to be rational and moderate. Is that not the essence of the white man’s faith? The liberals are not rational and moderate; they use their reason to support their maniacal hatred of all things white and Christian. Are the colored barbarians rational and moderate? No, they are not. They are true to their animal instincts; when they sense weakness they strike, without any ethical concern about moderation and reason.

Nowhere is the sad spectacle of white rationality vs. liberal passion and black barbarism more apparent than in the ‘letters to the editor’ sections of the liberal-run newspapers and websites. It’s not often that liberal newspapers and websites publish letters of dissent, but when they do print them they are like the one I read a few days ago. The white author of the letter asked why there was no outrage last January when three black men kidnapped a white police officer in the state of Virginia and subsequently took him into the woods and killed him. Of course we know why there was no outrage about the murder of the white police officer. He was of the ‘demon’ race, and his black murderers were of the ‘sainted’ race. The letter writer then went on to reveal why white people are killed with impunity by black barbarians. He stated that he deplored the death of the white police officer just as much as he deplored the death of Michael Brown. Now, it is possible that the white author, like Machiel de Graaf when speaking of gays and Jews, did not really equally deplore the two deaths; he could have been trying to appease the liberals and get his letter published. Or, God forbid, perhaps he actually did deplore both deaths equally. But in either case, the fatal disease of the white man was on display in that letter. First, rational appeals to the liberals’ rationality will have no effect. The liberals are rational! They are rationally committed to the inhumanity of Satan. Like the pro-choicers who know what they are doing when they murder babies, the liberals know what they are doing when they support the wholesale slaughter of whites. And secondly, the two killings are not to be equally deplored. A completely innocent white man was murdered simply because he was white and a police officer. Michael Brown was killed in self-defense by a white police officer who was responding to a report of a robbery and a beating, perpetrated by the now sainted Michael Brown. We might deplore the fact that Michael Brown chose to be a thug, but we shouldn’t deplore the fact that the police officer killed him, because by doing so the police officer saved not only his own life but also the lives of the men and women who would have been killed by Michael Brown in the future.

The path of rationality and moderation is the path the liberals and conservatives always demand the white man should take. He must never, ever become “extreme” – that would be bad. But the liberals are extremists. They have taken their hatred of the white race to the extremest height of their liberal kingdom of Satan on earth, and from that height they hurl satanic thunderbolts at whites. With each thunderbolt they throw, they say to their white victims, “Be moderate, be rational.” Again we must ask, are the colored barbarians moderate and rational? They are extremists, they seek the blood of the rational and moderate whites. Can a man be rational and moderate when his foe stands over his wife and children with a battle axe? Apparently a white man can be rational and moderate in the face of that threat. But should he be?

The liberals advise white men to be rational and moderate while their people are being slaughtered, because it suits their agenda. But why do the conservatives advise whites to be rational and moderate in the face of white genocide? It is in part because conservatives think in terms of abstract people. Human beings exist as generic cannon fodder for conservative intellectuals. Whether the cannon fodder is black or white makes no difference to most conservatives; they simply need abstract people to whom they can pontificate. But some conservatives do realize that without some whites left on earth they will have no one to pontificate to, because the colored races will not listen to white pontifications. Those conservatives preach rationality and moderation because they believe it is the smart thing to do, and smartness in the modern conservative’s view of existence is the highest virtue. In the conservative’s muddled brain he is following the Greek philosophers when he calls for rationality and moderation. Even if he was correct in his assumption that the Greek philosophers preached rationality and moderation, the conservative would be wrong to follow the Greek philosophers. There is a much deeper and profounder wisdom, a wisdom that commands us to be extremists in defense of our own, that is to be found in the Christian poets of Europe. But this “golden mean” of rationalism and moderation is not even consistent with the principles of the Greek philosophers. They advocated a golden mean between eating too much and eating too little, a golden mean between drinking too much and drinking too little, and so on. Even the Greek philosophers, the best of them, did not claim that you could take a middle ground between two opposed principles and come up with the right principle. Only a modern post-Christian conservative believes in such moderation and rationality.

The devil preaches rationality and moderation to white Christians so that they will remain passive in the face of white genocide. He has even entered the Christian pulpits, enlisting the formerly Christian pastors into his satanic army. We should and must listen to other leaders and other voices. We should listen to Edmund Burke, who told us that a man who did not hate where he should hate would not be able to love where he should love. And we should listen to Thomas Nelson Page, who enjoined us to be Christian Goths, loving and hating with all our hearts. I don’t believe that a man with a European heart can ever be defeated. Such a man will be an extremist. He will fight for kith and kin in spite of liberals and colored barbarians. “Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more…” +


(1) The recent massacre in France is just one more example of the unsustainable nature of liberal governments. A multicultural, multi-religious government cannot protect its people, because such a government has no commitment to one people and one faith. If France was white and Christian, instead of multi-racial and irreligious, the real French people would not be sitting ducks in a Muslim shooting gallery.

The French government will respond to this new outrage as all the white, liberal governments respond to such outrages. They will condemn terrorists per se, but they will stress their love and support for the people of Islam. In short, they will be rational and moderate. The liberal west will never restrict Muslim or colored immigration, because the liberal west has only one real enemy: white Christians.

Posted in Christian Europe, rationalism | Tagged ,