Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish, he gave an impression of deformity without any nameable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice; all these were points against him, but not all of these together could explain the hitherto unknown disgust, loathing, and fear with which Mr. Utterson regarded him. “There must be something else,” said the perplexed gentleman. “There is something more, if I could find a name for it. God bless me, the man seems hardly human! Something troglodytic, shall we say? Or can it be the old story of Dr. Fell? Or is it the mere radiance of a foul soul that thus transpires through, and transfigures, its clay continent? The last, I think; for, O my poor old Harry Jekyll, if ever I read Satan’s signature upon a face, it is on that of your new friend.” –“The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by R. L. Stevenson
Robert Louis Stevenson was one of the profoundest writers who ever took pen in hand, but he is always undervalued by the literary critics for two reasons. The first reason was his popularity. The critics believed that anyone who was popular with the general reading public could not be genuinely profound. The second reason was that in an age when the new scientific-Darwinian-Freudian-progressive view of existence was becoming all the rage in intellectual circles, Stevenson took a decidedly Christian and reactionary view of existence. Nowhere is Stevenson’s contra mundum world view more apparent than in this short story, “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.”
If you recall the story, Dr. Jekyll, a respectable, fiftyish doctor and scientist decides that he can no longer suppress his lower nature. But if he is to indulge his baser nature, what happens to the career of the respectable Dr. Jekyll? The good doctor was truly on the horns of a dilemma, but he solves it. He discovers a scientific formula that can turn him into a fiendish, loathsome, thirtyish man called Mr. Hyde. Hyde can do everything that the respectable Jekyll cannot do. Then, when Hyde is through indulging himself he can return to the form and personality of Dr. Jekyll. And as Dr. Jekyll, he is very supportive of Mr. Hyde, telling his servants to let Hyde have free use of his home and even making out a will bequeathing all his money and possessions to Mr. Hyde. It seems like Dr. Jekyll has done it. He can be respectable and debauched, just like the surgeons in the liberal television show M.A.S.H. But the liberal fantasy doesn’t work. Hyde begins to take over, and it takes stronger and stronger doses of the formula to go from Hyde to Jekyll. And Hyde complicates things further by committing a murder. Soon Hyde consumes the personality of Jekyll, and with the law closing in on him Hyde commits suicide, thus ending the respectable life of Dr. Jekyll and the infamous life of Mr. Hyde.
The liberals have attempted the same transformation as Dr. Jekyll. The psychoanalysts told them that repression led to neurosis. And who wants neuroses? Throughout the early 20th century the European intelligentsia was in the process of becoming Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. With science as the facilitator the liberals tried to become one with the negro, who was their Mr. Hyde. By the latter half of the 20th century, the transformation was complete. When the negroes murder and rape, the liberals try to protect them, because by a strange transference the liberals feel they and the negroes are spiritually joined in a triune union that consists of the white man, the negro, and science. Liberals no longer can feel anything directly, so they try to live vicariously through their negro counterparts, but as in the Stevenson story the negro Mr. Hydes have taken over the personalities of the liberals. What the negro wants is what the liberal wants; what the negro does is what the liberal sees as real life, which he attempts to enjoy secondhand through his negro Mr. Hyde, whom he has come to worship and revere as the source of his being. And how can a man be more humane than his God? He can’t. The inhumanity of the negro is the inhumanity of the liberal. They have no mercy or charity because their god has no mercy or charity. And they lay their merciless, unforgiving science at the negro’s feet in token of their devotion to their god.
I have watched this symbiotic relationship between the liberal and the negro develop over the years. Take a look at your local liberals. Their personalities have been consumed by the negroes. They hold down jobs and do mundane liberal things in their white bodies, but their heart and soul belongs to the negro. The only difference between the modern liberal and Dr. Jekyll is that Dr. Jekyll, when the end was near, knew that he had done wrong when he created Mr. Hyde. The liberals showed no such repentance before their final transformations.
Of course the whole point of the Stevenson story is that we can’t abandon the war against our baser natures by surrendering to them. The Christian faith does create a conflict within a man. St. Paul tells us that the good he wants to do is often thwarted by the evil he wills not to do. But St. Paul kept fighting against principalities and powers; he didn’t surrender to them. Darwin, Freud, and all the Oriental gurus tell us to simply give in to our baser passions. In point of fact, there are no baser passions in the new age of psychoanalytic animalism. There is only self-destructive or anti-social behavior; all other passions can be indulged. Thus an excessive passion for alcohol or drugs requires a psychiatrist because that is self-destructive. And a desire to punish negroes who murder and rape is deemed anti-social because the very fabric of society is built around the loving reverence and worship of the natural and noble black savage.
Just as Jekyll made a conscious decision to descend, with the aid of science, to the level of a savage, so did the liberal, with the aid of science, make a conscious decision to descend to the level of the black savage. The liberals used the “scientific” findings of Darwin and other such “experts” to justify their descent into animalism. Instead of thinking of man as a spiritual being connected to a personal God they saw man as part of nature. And to deny that animal nature by stifling any of the animal instincts became repression, and repression is bad.
The 20th century became the century of the scientific expert. Every two-bit doctor of psychiatric mumbo-jumbo was allowed to pontificate about the hypocrisy of the antique Europeans. “Look at their brothels, look at their wars, all such things will not exist in the new world order where men and women do not repress what used to be called the baser instincts, but which we now know to be natural instincts.” So long as what is natural means whatever is base and foul, the white man will remain enthralled by the “natural black savage.” This transformation of what is considered natural was the turning point of Western civilization. Burke, viewing existence from a Christian European standpoint, thought it was natural that he should weep for the fallen Queen of France. While Dr. Price, who saw life from a new godless utopian standpoint, thought that it was natural to exult in the degradation and the humiliation of the Queen of France.
Why do I feel so differently from the Reverend Dr. Price, and those of his lay flock who will choose to adopt the sentiments of his discourse?—For this plain reason—because it is natural I should; because we are so made, as to be affected at such spectacles with melancholy sentiments upon the unstable condition of mortal prosperity, and the tremendous uncertainty of human greatness; because in those natural feelings we learn great lessons; because in events like these our passions instruct our reason; because when kings are hurled from their thrones by the Supreme Director of this great drama, and become the objects of insult to the base, and of pity to the good, we behold such disasters in the moral, as we should behold a miracle in the physical, order of things…
Why? Because when such ideas are brought before our minds, it is natural to be so affected; because all other feelings are false and spurious, and tend to corrupt our minds, to vitiate our primary morals, to render us unfit for rational liberty; and by teaching us a servile, licentious, and abandoned insolence, to be our low sport for a few holidays, to make us perfectly fit for, and justly deserving, of slavery, through the whole course of our lives. – Burke in Reflections on the Revolution in France
In Stevenson’s story, Hyde, after he had overmanned Jekyll’s personality, had to hide from the rest of society which still viewed him with horror. But what if the rest of English society had started taking Jekyll’s formula and they too became Dr. Jekylls and Mr. Hydes? And what if their better natures became absorbed into Mr. Hyde? Then, instead of abhorrence they would feel loving acceptance and admiration for Mr. Hyde. Eventually they would institutionalize the worship of the original Mr. Hyde and all the followers of Mr. Hyde, because in so doing they would be worshipping a god that had become part of them. This is what has happened to the modern liberal. Instead of feeling a natural aversion for the negro, he fells a special closeness to the negro, just as the antique European once felt a special closeness to Christ. And the modern liberal has institutionalized the worship of his god just as the antique European institutionalized the worship of Christ. This hideous blasphemous transfer of allegiance was brought home to me recently when I went to a book sale at one of those big, old, impressive churches that used to be a place where Christians worshipped the living God. The books were being sold in a large room adjacent to the chapel. Some pictures on the walls showed the apostles as negroes. And another picture had a negroid Christ on the cross. Now, all churches have not become that blatant in their representation of their new god, but I don’t think that the new symbolism in that old church was out of line with the current religious sentiments of the liberals in state and church. They have replaced their old god for a new one and they have, from my perspective, changed for the worse.
There are a few conservative groups out there who try to keep abreast of and report the black atrocities against whites. The liberals’ reaction to the reports of black atrocities seem, from a Christian perspective, to be cruel and inhuman. They get angry at the people who report the atrocities, calling them racists, and more often than not they try to find some fault with the white victims of the atrocities. But the liberals are not Christian; they worship the negro so they have no charity and mercy in them. They do not believe in black atrocities. Mortal men cannot judge the acts of gods: they can only praise god for his infinite goodness and continue to fight evil, which is racist whites.
A liberal is no more likely to extend mercy to a white man than Mr. Hyde was likely to extend mercy to any human being. Grasp that fact and proceed from there. There can be no surrender to an enemy that has willingly extracted every last vestige of charity and mercy from his soul. All that is left of the liberal is an empty husk of a human being, completely devoid of humanity, addicted to the lowest forms of vice and the lowest form of religion, which is negro worship, a religion that validates the liberals’ vice. So long as they think good thoughts about their negro gods they can let their bodies wallow in the pig sties of Babylon.
The idea of an intellectual descent into controlled debauchery is not new. The Greeks practiced it in the cult of Dionysius, and the Roman sages wrote serious tomes about the proper way to indulge the baser appetites at an orgy. The Orientals were also masters of the art of cold, dispassionate debauchery and vice. Even with those pagan cultures I would argue that ultimately they could not keep their passions for vice and cruelty under sufficient control so that their Mr. Hyde personalities did not adversely affect their societies. But I would most definitely – the destruction is before our eyes – claim that a Christian culture cannot possibly be sustained by men and women who think you can indulge the Mr. Hyde side of one’s personality with impunity. The spiritual heights to which a man who responds to God’s grace can ascend is greater in a Christian society than in a pagan society. And the satanic depths to which a man can sink are also greater in a Christian society. The European is made for absolutes. There is no happy medium between God and the devil. It is all or nothing. Either we strive, on a daily basis, to kill the old Adam and seek our Lord’s grace, or we become Mr. Hydes, bound for hell.
Dr. Jekyll’s theological division of himself was evil. He separated his intellect from his evil passions thinking his intellect could control his illicit passions. That is an impossibility. Evil passions can only be overcome by an overwhelming passion for the good. The Prince in Sleeping Beauty triumphs over the evil sorceress because he loves much, not because he outthinks the satanic sorceress. But Dr. Jekyll, having succumbed to the modern heresy that views the natural world of dissection and microscopes as the whole world, is unable to summon up any good passions to overcome his evil passions. That is the conundrum of the modern European. There is a passionate faith greater than negro worship. It is an ancient faith fueled by an eternal flame. Greater than theology, greater than evil, is the European’s true faith.
At the heart of our people is His Sacred Heart. The one true fairy tale of the world came from the antique Europeans who loved much. Once we abandon the scientized, managerial ethos of Dr. Jekyll, which leads to the sinister ethos of Mr. Hyde, we will unleash our passion for the King of Kings and Christian Europe. And then — “what larks” — we will ride triumphant over the liberals and their colored Mr. Hydes. +