Martin Luther King Jr. Day has come and gone, but we are enjoined by the liberals to keep the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr. Day in our hearts 365 days a year. And most whites do just that. I saw a horrendous story out of Britain (there don’t seem to be any good stories coming out of Britain) about a 14-year-old white girl who was beaten by a gang of black girls. The white girl’s father said his daughter “was just a grain of sand,” without significance; no need to make a fuss about the incident. And the white girl who was beaten reiterated her father’s unconcern. Some have suggested that the girl who was beaten and her father are suffering, like so many whites, from the Stockholm or Patty Hearst syndrome, in which a kidnapped victim, after long captivity, starts to identify and/or sympathize with his captors. There are certain parallels. The white race is currently held captive by the black race, and the white people have given up their own identities in order to submerge their whiteness in a sea of blackness. But there is a huge difference between the Stockholm syndrome type of kidnapping victim and the modern black-worshipping Europeans. The Stockholm syndrome hostages and Patty Hearst were forcefully taken prisoner and converted after months of isolation from anyone but their kidnappers. The modern Europeans were not forcibly taken; they willingly surrendered to the black marauders. Why? What took place before the whites’ surrender to make them so willing to become worthless grains of sand, who lived only to serve the needs of the black race? I think my sister, who is a mad-dog liberal, can supply us with the answer. My sister has been mugged many times by negroes, but after each mugging she is more vehement than ever in her defense of the essential goodness and divinity of the black man. While listening to her talk about the ‘black man’ I can’t help thinking of the words from the Bible: “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him.” My sister’s credo, which is the credo of all mad-dog liberals, is, “Though the black man slay me and thee and every white person, yet will I worship him.” And why must the liberal worship the black man? Because the post-Christian white needs to worship something, and the black man fulfills that need.
At first it was only the post-Christian liberal elite who worshipped the black man, but the halfway-house Christians soon followed in the mad-log liberals’ train. If we look at the phenomenon of Abraham Lincoln, we can better understand the relationship of the halfway-house Christian to the liberal. Lincoln found the mad-dog abolitionists personally abhorrent, yet he ultimately did their bidding, saying, “We are both moving toward Zion.” Dishonest Abe was a halfway-house Christian. In the absence of a firm Christian faith, he was unable to resist the passionate intensity of the thoroughly secular abolitionists. Such is always the case. When a man wavers in his faith moral rot sets in, and he is unable to resist the blood red tide of men who are full of the passionate intensity of demonism. The modern halfway-house Christians have gone with the tide of liberalism because it is easier to surrender than resist, and because they lack the intensity of faith of the negro worshipping liberals. The end result is that the halfway-house Christians become one in faith and brotherhood with the liberals. The whites who do not suffer from the Stockholm syndrome are those men and women who have strong religious faith. If the halfway house Christians had not already had one foot in the liberals’ camp they would not have succumbed to the new faith of the liberals.
The grazers fill in the European demographic chart. They do not love the negro like the liberal and the halfway house Christian, but the grazers want to survive and they think they can survive if they appease the ruling elite. Their position is kind of like the average Joe who works for a boss who has made his son plant supervisor. The average Joe must be nice to the boss’s son for the obvious reason that he wants to keep working. The grazers must pay lip service to the liberals’ gods because they want to keep working as well. But sadly the grazers do not figure in the liberals’ plan for the future, because in the end the liberals do not trust the white grazers. They are always worried that a leader might arise and turn the grazers into white men again. So the mad-dog liberal, the halfway-house Christian, and their black gods will trudge on into the future together. Or so the liberal and the halfway-house Christian purpose. Their black gods have something else in mind for them; not by plan but by instinct, they hate the white man.
Many of the saints and mystics (we won’t debate here how saintly they really were) talk about losing themselves in God. They talk about dying to self in order to be open to the will of God. I see this religious mysticism, directed toward the negro rather than the Christian God, in the white liberals such as my sister and the ‘grain of sand’ father. Such “mysticism” seems somewhat sick to me even in the Christian mystics, because it seems in the extreme cases to be an attempt to place the ecstatic religious experience above communion with the living God. But in the case of the liberals, who want to die to all things white in order to become one with the soul of the black man, it is the height of blasphemy. And just as the Christian mystic often puts the religious experience above genuine contact with God, so does the liberal put the ecstatic experience of losing himself in cosmic blackness above the experience of actually dealing with the black as if he was a fellow human being. If the latter was the case, that the liberal really viewed the negro as a human being, he would deal with the negro as Prospero dealt with Caliban; he protected his own from the savagery of Caliban while sternly, but kindly, showing Caliban the light:
Prospero. He is as disproportion’d in his manners
As in his shape. Go, sirrah, to my cell;
Take with you your companions; as you look
To have my pardon, trim it handsomely.
Caliban. Ay, that I will; and I’ll be wise hereafter
And seek for grace. What a thrice-double ass
Was I, to take this drunkard for a god
And worship this dull fool!
The secular-oriented nationalist publications set great store in “getting the message out to white people.” But isn’t that putting the cart before the horse? White people have to first regard themselves as a people before they will respond to pleas to rise up in defense of their people. The colored races have the same pagan blood and sex religions that they have always had. They hate each other, but above all they hate the white man. And the liberal worships the negro and hates the white man with a religious fervor. How can mere pragmatism counter such hatred? Passionate religious intensity can only be countered with passionate religious intensity. I share the white nationalists’ disgust with the Christian churches, but mere occupancy of a building that was once a place of worship does not make a gaggle of fusionists into Christians. It’s not as if there is no historical record of Europeans who were Christian. There is! And European Christians, for all of their faults, did not betray their own people by blending with the colored races or by sacrificing their own to the colored savages to be tortured and murdered. Let me amend that. No honorable white mixed his blood with the coloreds or offered his people up for sacrifice to the coloreds. Pirates, prostitutes, and carpetbaggers did just that.
After the worst of the reign of terror was over and France was under the Directory, the practical men thought it was time to make peace with regicide France. Edmund Burke objected to such a peace. He pointed out that no man could be a member of the Directory who had not given his consent to the murder of the King. How could such men be trusted to make an honorable peace with Christian nations? And how could Englishmen and men of honor in every European nation permit the principles of atheistic revolution to spread throughout Europe because of the failure of the European nations to punish regicide? Well, practical men did make peace with the regicides, and the ideals of the French Revolution did poison and kill Christian Europe.
The racial suicide of the Europeans is the final denouement of the French revolution. First, regicide was permitted and celebrated as a great step forward for mankind. Then every advance that pushed Europeans further away from God and closer to Satan was celebrated until an atheistic hierarchy passed a death sentence on the Europeans by mandating the worship of negroes throughout the formerly white Christian nations of Europe. In Liberaldom there is one major condition, to which one must agree in order to be a member of the governing Directory of Liberaldom. One must consent to the death of the European people through miscegenation, and no member of the base populi can dissent from the primary credo of the Great Liberal Directory if they want a share in the post-Christian, post-European world of the future.
Time has proven Burke right, and the practical men, who thought Burke exaggerated the dangers of the spread of French utopianism to England and the rest of Europe, wrong. For years England was held up as a model of civilization by French and English historians. England vowed “never again” after their bloody civil war, and they kept that vow, always moving into the future “while holding on to the threads of the past.” This was true of England up to and through World War II, but then England let go of her past at an accelerated rate as if the English people, having been the most “backward” of people (from a French avant-garde viewpoint) became the most determined anti-European nation in Europe. It is only a difference in degree though, because all European nations are liquidating everything that stinks of old Europe.
The spirit of abstraction that Burke rightly saw as the spirit of atheism and revolution turns a people into an aggregate herd and an individual into an inanimate grain of sand. There is no such thing as a practical world distinct from the spiritual world. We are not meant to be divided men; we are meant to live connected to a non-abstract, personal God who bids us live and die connected to Him through our love for our kith and kin. When the liberals tell us we must walk away from our race in order to be accepted in their world they are really telling us to turn from our personal God to their abstract black idols. The eternal quest of Satan is to separate man from God by dehumanizing and depersonalizing every aspect of our existence here on earth. And the most dehumanizing and depersonalizing thing a man can do is to give up his racial identity, which is of the spirit, in order to serve in Satan’s Babylonian dystopia. That man who said the beating of his daughter had no more significance than a grain of sand is a man of whom we can say, “He did not die but nothing of life remained.”
When Burke turned the sentiment in his own country and other European nations against the French revolutionists he evoked images from his nation’s past. He showed his countrymen that in their past was kith, kin, and God. Why should they give that up for an abstract future devoid of kith, kin, and God? And the Burkean vision of a people that marched into the future while holding on to the threads of the past stood the blessed plot and her people in good stead, until they cut the threads to their past in the second half of the 20th century. Now the blessed plot is leased out to the abstractionists and the barbarian hordes of color.
The moral conservatism of Burke was not invented by Burke; it was embedded in the soul of all European nations. But Europeans needed a Burke to redirect their vision to the sacred treasures contained within their own countries’ traditions that were not the traditions of abstract thought unconnected to the human heart; they were traditions connected to the hearth fire, where a man was not an abstraction, but a particular person connected to a particular people and a personal God. Burkean conservatism was the conservatism of our Lord. Throughout His ministry here on earth, He took great pains to show that His future death and resurrection were tied to the past that His people must know and cherish. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”
And at the inn at Emmaus it was Christ who showed the apostles, His people, just how intimately their past was connected to Him.
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
“Did not our hearts burn within us…” Yes our hearts do burn within us when we are connected to our European past that contains the European Christ story, which is not an abstracted theory about the rights of man; it is the story of God’s grace and a people who responded to His grace. The new multi-racial, multi-faith world that we are told we must accept is a world we most certainly will not accept. We will not accept that world because He doesn’t dwell in that world. We are bound to our European past with ties that cannot be broken by liberals, colored barbarians or Satan himself. In the midst of the Babylonian night the European remnant turns to Him, who never has and never will refuse to hear the prayers of His people:
“Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent.” +