Posted by mancinblack on Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:39 | #

Insofar as I’m aware, Hitler was the beneficiary of a sense of German-ness that had been building since before unification on Jan 18th (my birthday) 1871 (I’m not that old). Having missed out on a place in the sun, this longing for German-ness took on Imperialist ambitions. Imperialism was de riguer in the nineteenth century after all - but the Germans were too late for the party, Britain , France, Spain and Portugal having left little more than breadcrumbs. This German longing for empire met its Waterloo in 1918 but the American General Pershing was correct but unheeded when he correctly opined that “the German doesn’t understand that he is beaten”. This led to post war German nationalists blaming the Jews in the German government for the surrender terms - like agreeing to surrender and end WWI was in anyway a bad thing, whoever did it.

The sense of German-ness didn’t end with the war, it continued to live on in the hearts of the German people, although the Imperialism survived only in the minds of the political elite, wedded as they were to nineteenth century modes of thinking.

That German-ness continued to flow like a mighty river, until it reached the dam - and the dam was breached by Hitler and his NS. This may have been good for Germany - at that time- but there was no sense in which it was good for Europe or ultimately good for Europe at large.

Happy Germans - well, looking at state managed   film of the time, it appears that way. I would hope anyone would realize that those young German women and girls at the front of the crowd had been placed there by the SS well in advance of the open motorcade’s arrival. I’ll say this for the NSDAP - they were masters of propaganda -but replicated today they would be dismissed out of hand by those who adore those 1930’s images. I should mention here that I’m old enough and privileged enough to have learned, not from books or online content but rather from British, French and German face to face conversations, that there can be no back to the future.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 30 Dec 2020 23:06 | #

I don’t know of any historians, Manc, who would argue that Hitler’s popularity among the German masses, once life for them began to improve after 1933 and in the years to the fall of France in 1940, was other than very high indeed.  There were variations in it, of course, and there were no elections, no free press by which discontents might be expressed.  But one can’t seriously declare the visible popular sentiment to have been only a phantasm created by the National Socialist’s propaganda machine.

The question is: how was that sentiment created?  Again, I don’t accept that the masses yearned for empire or for living space in the east.  I do think they yearned for affirmation of their German identity, dignity and nobility, however, and for positive steps, post-Versailles, post the collapse of the Mark, towards a fit life and future for themselves and their country.  The first part of that is the more interesting to us.

Posted by mancinblack on Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:58 | #

I didn’t comment on Hitler’s popularity, nor was I suggesting that the enthusiasm German women and girls displayed was less than genuine, however their prominence at the front of crowds lining roads was usually managed, by the SS who were tasked with policing such events, for propaganda purposes.

I don’t believe that the NSDAP gave the Germans their sense of German-ness. It was already there, from around 1800 you can trace its development in the arts and in some of their social movements. Left unmolested by the extremist politics of the reactionary right and the Communists, it’s feasible that the Germans would have created an organic form of ethnic nationalism that would have proved to be more benign and more enduring. The NSDAP gave German nationalism a particular form (one alien to my English sense of self)  that proved to be catastrophic for both Germany and Europe.

From that period in European history you can certainly learn what not to do.

Posted by Dr_Eigenvector on Fri, 01 Jan 2021 00:33 | #

Happy new year, gentlemen!

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 01 Jan 2021 11:55 | #

That’s the way it seems, doc.  Grab a lung full of air and swim!

Happy new year to you, and to Manc.  May you both prosper in every way possible (which may not be many if Boris Builds Back Better, of course).

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 00:36 | #

Consider this GW.

https://youtu.be/I9uQoW_e1WI

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 01:13 | #

My comment at PA to an article on Third Positionism by B Hall:

https://www.patrioticalternative.org.uk/transcending_the_false_dichotomy_understanding_the_third_position_pt_1_history

At its core Third Positionism is lightweight, semi-fascist politics for 120 IQ hobby-nationalists. What truths it has, it has. But those don’t include its rendering of Man. We are in a war of philosophy in which the opponent is the deep cultural entrenchment and motive power of the liberal system. That system forms from our people’s clay liberalism’s self-authoring, radically individual and radically equal Man, from which model’s sheer inauthenticity flows the manifold pathologies of the liberal elites and their political and corporate Establishments, and all the horrors of liberalism’s attenuation into the deathly hostile Judaic philosophies of the 19th and 20th centuries. It is the systemic totality of all this we oppose, for it opposes the freely expressed life and thence the very existence of our precious ethnic kind.

To possess historical potential … the potential to replace systemic liberalism … any alternative, aside from being holistic and original, must address the great question of the age. In our age that is very plainly an existential question begging an existential answer. It is not a question about racial power and racial destiny … not an airy-fairy, hero-boy fiction from the days of the 1950s bedroom nazis and 1970s NF street activists. Thinking nationalists must now understand that all that is dead. We are normal, healthy and whole, loving and aware Englishmen (and Welshmen, and Scots). Knowing our people we know they are not post-WW1, Catholicised, Teutonic dreamers, for pete’s sake. They did not respond to Third Positionism in the 1950s or the 1970s, and they will not respond to it now. We, however, absolutely MUST respond to that too too solid fact by becoming philosophically what Griffin and the BNP falsely claimed to be politically back in the noughties: ethnic nationalists (not ethno-nationalists, please – a name dreamt up by an American academic describing not us but some other thing in his own head).

Now, it isn’t so easy to speak of a nationalism of the essential principle … the native principle … the natural identity. We don’t yet have a systemic rendering. We have, for the greater part, an instinctual sense of it; but that is manifestly not enough, given the massive imbalance of political forces. Therefore, I appeal to all competent minds to turn away from the past … let go of its sentimental but failed ideological attachments … and focus on this pregnant question of how a people’s inherent truth may be recovered and asserted in an age of political lies. We really have no other viable recourse.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:31 | #

Thanks Thorn, yes there is some consonance between the way the homoeopathy guy uses the term and the way we would use it of the human estate.  There is likely one significant difference, however; and that is that we, as (I would say) Heideggerian ethnic nationalists, do not seek to impose an outcome on that estate ... say, in order to justify homeopathy.  We seek to free human beings to generate out of their own nature and truth.

It’s the same with traditionalism.  From a Heideggerian perspective tradition does not find human being.  Human being finds tradition.  It has to be done the right way around or, because occidental tradition is moribund and cannot be properly re-situated except by imposition, the result will be reduction.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 18:28 | #

The main reason I posted that, GW, is to highlight the fact human nature is too complex to be subject to reductionism. Paradoxically people are affected by simple slogans. So it seems to me what is sorely lacking in the WN message is an attractive array of slogans and taking points— i.e. an effective and comprehensive marketing campaign. As it is now (and for all the obvious reasons [e.g. Neo-Nazism being the most egregious]), WN is a turn-off to the masses. IMHO we don’t need any more Heideggers or Rivelo Olivers et al (reason and logic is useful but isn’t enough), what we need is creative geniuses to market our message. The level of creative genius like those who create effective political slogans, corporate advertisement and Hollywood motion picture productions. The type of product/messaging that attracts rather than repels. Absent an appealing marketing campaign/counter message, whites will continue to be vulnerable and defenseless against the Left’s slick propaganda and raw intimidation.

Just my opinion.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 06 Jan 2021 23:43 | #

In my experience very few WNs grasp the extent to which Homo americanus is a creature of the Enlightenment.  Some may know it with their heads, but it eludes their hearts.  On this side of the pond we have the advantage, even with the estranging sins visited upon us everywhere we turn, of closeness to something particular.  We have no philosophy for it, as I continually point out, and we do need that to contest as an agentive force.

For the sake of clarity, if one stands back a little one can quite easily see what the sins are and how they manifest as the outlines of two streams of formative influences, one material and historical, the other ideational and historiographical, thus:

History
Technology, modernity, urbanisation, alienation.
Capitalism, materialism, economism, commodification, homogenisation.
Power elitism, cosmopolitanism, globalism, immigrationism.

Historiography
Judaism and the Jewish ethnic paradigm, Christianity, liberalism ...
Individualism, atomisation,
Universalism, utopianism, equalitarianism, socialism/Marxism.

All this we must address, if we are to secure the existence of our people and a white future for our children.  It is a vast task, and I really don’t think that WN is even remotely equipped to undertake it today.

Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2021 01:43 | #

Of course, GW being the self aggrandizing liar that he is, would never admit that the platform that I’ve brought to bear addresses all of this and offers positive direction besides.

I’ve been so disgusted and done with his treacherous gaslighting that I’ve only just managed to bring myself to look at his recent strawmen. For just one example, he proposes something like my being in league with Derrida (I’ve always hated Derrida, made that clear at Majorityrights, and it would be clear to anyone who has read my discussions of White Post Modernity that Derrida has nothing to do with it. White Post Modernity (in accordance with the reason why persons of good will conceived of Post Modernity to begin with) is about re-centering and protecting the world view of a our people against the negative sides of modernity and backward tradition, while availing ourselves of their positive sides for our people’s interests. But GW says that my concept of Post Modernity is like Derrida. That’s how desperate he is to misrepresent - totally misrepresent (and just one example) what I say and distract people from actually looking at what I say. ...says that Morgoth has a good handle on this stuff, while Morgoth chases the same red cape misrepresentations that he does. If these weren’t important matters to get right, it would not matter so much, but GW’s ego is all the reason and cannot be allowed to obstruct proper understanding.

You deserve to have Thorn in your court. Didn’t you say to me that he is Jewish?

Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2021 02:09 | #

...he certainly is Jewish friendly, and his rooting for you (against me) should provide a clue to you (though you won’t get it).

Posted by Thorn on Thu, 07 Jan 2021 14:37 | #

Believe me, GW, many of us Americanos feel, to some degree, that “closeness to something particular.” After all much of American culture was derived from English culture, so naturally we feel attachment thus grieve when we see it slipping away. Or more accurately see it deliberately destroyed—especially by way of immigration.

I’ll never forget the feeling I got when I was told—some 15 or so years ago—the native English were a minority in London. I was floored! I assumed London had a small minority of negroes and Asians living there but was stunned to find out 40% of its population was non-white!!!! ... and only 40% were native-English! How did that happen? I asked myself. Of course the answers to that question only made me more upset. TPTB are hellbent on making every single European nation a multicultural/multi-racial clusterfuck. Their purported reason for doing so is the notion that multicultural states are less inclined to go to war with one another than ethnically pure nation-states. Maybe so but as we fully understand the fate of the white race hangs in the balance. Not only hangs in the balance it’s almost a certainty our genepool, over time, will be subsumed by the other.

Hopefully the course of this mass extinction/race-replacement will reverse course but as of now things look bleak. Sorry to be such a Debbie Downer but that’s the way I assess the situation.

Posted by Thorn on Thu, 07 Jan 2021 14:38 | #

Wrong Danny. Thorn is in no way shape or form Jewish. Not Jewish friendly either.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 07 Jan 2021 17:37 | #

Daniel, Thorn asked a considered question, without rancour.  I answered it likewise.  There is absolutely no problem.  Why are you offended?  Why do you think anyone is “rooting against you”?

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 08 Jan 2021 02:35 | #

GW, are you kidding me? Move from Thorn’s most recent comments toward me into the history and then ask again, “why I think he is rooting against me.” The question could not be more ridiculous. And while he may not be Jewish (as YOU suggested to me), he certainly has been defensive regarding critiques of Jewry; but even more certain, he has been doggedly defensive against crticisisms of Christianity, it’s yoke, to the point where he was so obnoxious in his antagonism that that the need for a Christian free platform became clear; which made him “root against me” even more (whereas you like to argue with Christians, at least). And he “roots for you” because mine is the platform that Jews, with Christians in yoke, don’t want us to have. Why you don’t see this and the reasons for it, goes to a problem with your judgment.

That would be just one reason among several for taking offense regarding your position. But while I had intended to stay away for a good long while, when you said the following, I simply could not remain silent:

You went through a list of items that WN needs to address; then adding that WN is not remotely equipped to take these issues on.

While you have been obstructive to addressing parts of this list…

I, for one, have addressed all of these issues, and have more than “remotely equipped” their undertaking.

It is typical of you to present yourself as the only one who can see matters clearly to this point, with no one else in sight who has a significant idea or capacity.

Really, GW, having some ability for organizing people’s ideas and a capacity to put them into lovely prose qualifies you to be a secretary; might be more nobly, a scribe, though your lack of judgment would disqualify you from even the amount of philosophical license entrusted to a scribe.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 08 Jan 2021 14:10 | #

In fact, the question, “Why do you think anyone is “rooting against you”? represents classic gaslighting when one merely looks at the things you’ve said (in overwhelming part, antagonistic) in response to my posts and offerings of the last eight years.

Posted by Thorn on Sat, 09 Jan 2021 00:25 | #

Word, Danny:

GW, as far as I can see, is the best friend you’ve ever had in this world.

Your attacks on him reveals for all to see your immaturity.

Sad because I (probably most) give you credit for trying. We understand you are trying to do the right thing. But you have thus far failed.

Keep trying, Danny boy.

Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 19 Jan 2021 07:19 | #

GW is a tried and true friend to every WN , if I may employ a blinding flash of the bleedin’ obvious. There exists no better one.  GW’s Jihad against sub Doctoral , pseudo intellectual obfuscation deserves our gratitude.

Posted by DanielS on Tue, 19 Jan 2021 10:43 | #

Oh what new information is coming through, Thorn and Al Ross don’t like me!

Interestingly their motives are from different peaks of the right wing purity spiral, Thorn being a Jesus freak who runs interference for Jewish interests and Al Ross on behalf of the neo-Nazi contingent.

Is it really a surprise that Thorn would contribute to the gaslighting, turning it on in a big way .. he can keep trying but he has failed and it won’t work.

Al, you are silly. “Pseudo intellectualism” would be so much the allegation of a lame Nazi, of bad will toward anyone who might have the nerve to deploy an academic concept and Not be in love with Hitler.

There is no fakery and pretense in what I do Al. I only use terms and concepts for sincere purposes, understanding the importance for European peoples.

Posted by Thorn on Tue, 19 Jan 2021 22:24 | #

Sorry Danny but Thorn isn’t a “Jesus Freak.” However Thorn understands that The Enlightenment began Western Man’s distancing from The Faith aka Christianity. Naturally such distancing-decoupling began to inspire and give rise to scores of culture changing, nation destroying, ideologies and philosophies (many of which GW listed in his previous comment). Fast forward to the 20th century and we see the consequences of post Enlightenment secular ideologies: less than replacement level birthrates being by far the most devastating. Funny how the Muslim nations aren’t suffering the same fate. Nor are the Hindus. That tells me a God centered religion is a necessary part of a nation/tribe/race’s culture for it to survive and thrive. The correlation is obvious - probably absolute.

Now that I clarified that a bit, you can go back to entertaining yourself with those delusions about being “gaslighted.”

Posted by DanielS on Tue, 19 Jan 2021 23:11 | #

Sorry Thornblossom, the effects of the enlightenment have been listed prior to your suggested ally and your Abrahamic god is recognized as a cause of these effects, not a solution.

Posted by Thorn on Tue, 19 Jan 2021 23:21 | #

How, pray tell, is Thorn’s “Abrahamic god” recognized as the cause for less-than-replacement-birthrates? Be specific, please.

(Danny’s answer outta make for a good laugh.)

Posted by DanielS on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 01:05 | #

It (the Christian variant) is a precipitating factor in its mandate for inordinate altruism which, in its maturation among the population, leads to interpretive “rationalizations” among the moderately intelligent, in turn corresponding to lower birthrates.

...while the less intelligent may still have children, there is no stricture against interbreeding with other races.

...the more intelligent are less likely to identify with the masses, particularly as they are wedded to this illogical religion with an unsophisticated understanding; therefore, while they might still have children, religion does not enhance their resistance to outbreeding either.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:19 | #

I have to say that I agree with Daniel ‘s general position on Christianity.  It is the parent of liberal universalism (the historiographical bridge is Catholic humanism).  Christianity favours boundless love over the natural bounds of love; and boundless love being non-possible, the effect is that self-deception and lightness of being, themselves giving of self-estrangement and alienation, enter the life of our people.  This is Judaism for the gentile at the End Time.  The bacilli cannot be got out of Christianity, although it took over a thousand years for the European racial body to sicken to its present state.

The horns of the dilemma of faith are that faith itself, being a genetic predisposition, must be expressed by the faith-filled, yet the old and natural form of that expression was so efficiently stamped out during the spread of Christianity - a process that continued into the 17th Century - that Europeans are effectively orphaned.  One cannot simply invent a replacement religion, although Daniel has thought about how that could come about.

We are in a bind, and probably the best way forward from where we are is to have knowledge by scientific investigation both of the phenomenon of faith and of the nature of the universe; and for faithists to confront the non-reality of the corresponding parts of their belief system and the surviving reality of those parts which correspond to human self-perfectionment and the athletics of consciousness which generate a sense of union with the All.  This is wholly consonant with my (politically-directed) interest in the relation of esoteric and exoteric.

Posted by DanielS on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:41 | #

One cannot simply invent a replacement religion, although Daniel has thought about how that could come about.

A straw man, as usual.

I do not propose inventing a replacement religion, but rather identifying what is sacred to our people for its necessity for our survival beyond the moment and episode, beyond the lived relations even into the pattern from our ancestors to our legacy; this is the organic genesis of any religion, which is then institutionalized by the common reverence for these patterns of ceremonial episode. In the wisdom of language, in the etymology of language, this process is shown as well - “religion”: Re reconstruct. Re kingdom (of sorts, spare us monarchy), i..e. Re realm - that’s more like it ...etc.  and of course, what has been pointed out by many, ligion - the ligaments, which hold the legions together in common reverence.

The “faith”, i.e., the willing suspension of disbelief is confirmed and reconstructed by this this social episode of reverence, the ligaments, the relgion, which, being anchored by praxis allows us to correct and transcend moment, episode, even the era of our fallibility as individuals and as a people, while not being skeptical that the pattern is worth while.

That is just the start of what is not only possible (contrary to your claim) but has been the start of any religion and how it is maintained; but this, with possibility of organic genesis through our roots rather than brute imposition.

Your determination to see me (as anyone) as less deep than you, to keep me in an unimportant role and thus, where most anything that can be suggest is considered unimportant, not expressing a connection to something significant for our people has caused you to derail and obstruct this opportunity among many, to see false either or and mutual exclusivity where it does not exist ... as you have obstructed and misdirected several other important matters with your strawmanning as such; not for good reasons, for selfish reasons (there can be no other). That is why I do not like you.

Posted by DanielS on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:52 | #

corrections:

I accidentally put the comment in the wrong thread so I’m adding it here, where it should be. And correcting..

therefore, while they might still have children, religion does not enhance their resistance to outbreeding either.

therefore, while they might still have children, this religion (Christianity and the other Abrahamic religions) do not enhance their resistance to outbreeding either.

common reverence for these patterns of ceremonial episode

common reverence for these patterns in ceremonial episode

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 13:28 | #

I specifically did not say that you are inventing a religion.  I said you have thought about how it might be done ... how love of kind has to be sacralised.  Which you have.

Any new religion of the masses has to be invented, by the way; but the precise means by which that has been done before are lost to us today.  We do not have ancient mystery schools or a preserved tradition of esoteric knowledge to initiate it (actually, there is no evidence that our pre-Christian forefathers ever had such goods - the Western margins of the great northern landmass may always have been a desert in that respect, and genes for faith may not be European in origin but much older).

Of course, this reading requires the understanding that (a) religion (an emotion-led believing in deity) is only a bridge to experiences which are qualitatively distinct from it and of the “real”, and can never give of anything like that of itself; and that (b) such verity and utility religion may possess depends wholly upon its creation (or invention) by those who have intentionally crossed back over the bridge for that specific purpose.

The great glory of the European Mind is its capacity for abstraction and objective contemplation, but it is also a hazard.  As a race we are still learning organically, so to speak, how to dovetail it with experience of that process which leads to affirmation and appropriation; and that is doubtless not made easier by Christianity’s gifts to us.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 13:36 | #

Good grief!

In a nutshell, Traditionally Christianity provides moral absolutes and values from which we guide our lives by. Nowhere does that compel or demand white people to be overly altruistic or engage in miscegenation. Those are more the products of modern-liberalism and Cultural Marxism. Modern-liberalism/Cultural Marxism is the product of the modern-world. It’s an ideological choice most in Western civ now embrace. The moral absolutes Christianity provided have been replaced by moral relativism. 

Question: Is Christianity the driving force behind needlessly importing millions of Muslims and Negroes into England? I think not. I believe anti-Christian forces (both Jew and Gentile) are the main power behind driving that move.

Remove Christianity—or a God centered religion—from the culture then the Cultural Marxists takeover. Wasn’t that The Frankfort School scholars and Gramsci’s plan? Of course it was. They were wildly successful in their endeavor, unfortunately.

Also don’t delude or flatter yourselves by believing the “more intelligent” are less likely to identify with the masses. As if the “more intelligent” are too smart to fall for irrational belief systems. If you think that then I got news for you. The “more intelligent” amongst us are just as likely to buy into irrational belief systems as the masses. Maybe more so. For example, look at Scientology or Mormonism or secular humanism. Loads of them are high IQ fools. I know plenty of high IQ ppl (have a few in my immediate family) and they are no more prone to common-sense than the average Joe. 

And lets talk about people of faith (“faithists”). The truth is everyone is a person of faith whether you like it of not. From atheists to the most zealot Christians are people of faith. It only takes a limited power to reason to come to that conclusion. That is to say since neither the atheist nor Christian nor Pagan can prove the existence of God or gods, they must rely on faith to support their belief systems. All we can do is examine the evidence and decide for ourselves to what we think is likely - God or no God.  Conceivably the ppl whom visit this website are intelligent enough to understand that.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:03 | #

Re Suicide of a Superpower by Patrick J. Buchanan

America is disintegrating. The “one Nation under God, indivisible” of the Pledge of Allegiance is passing away. In a few decades, that America will be gone forever. In its place will arise a country unrecognizable to our parents. This is the thrust of Pat Buchanan’s Suicide of a Superpower, his most controversial and thought-provoking book to date.

Buchanan traces the disintegration to three historic changes: America’s loss of her cradle faith, Christianity; the moral, social, and cultural collapse that have followed from that loss; and the slow death of the people who created and ruled the nation. And as our nation disintegrates, our government is failing in its fundamental duties, unable to defend our borders, balance our budgets, or win our wars.

How Americans are killing the country they profess to love, and the fate that awaits us if we do not turn around, is what Suicide of a Superpower is all about.

As usual, Mr. Buchanan hits the bullseye.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:08 | #

Thorn, I see Christianity as an externalised Judaism providing a moral landscape for the gentile, but it isn’t a moral landscape which serves our gene interests but the gene interests of Jewry.  Any moral good that Christianity supplies us is incidental to its temporal purpose, which is to deliver us to Olam Ha-ba (in Talmudic terms).  Yes, we adopted Christianity, and yes, to an extent we adapted it to our own sociobiology.  But its salient characteristics ... most obviously, its insistence that we internalise the Jewish deity and make our closest relation to all men and not to our kind and, by that means, to Him and to the Jewish struggle for supremacy ... remains sociobiologically alien and damaging to us.  There is no way round the fact that coming under the deity of an hyper-ethnocentric tribe cannot serve the gene interests of any people.  If that kills Christian belief for you, then so be it.  For we were orphaned by it, and we remain orphans today.  That is our hard, hard religious fact.

The secularisation of that fact into Renaissance humanism and then Enlightenment thinking, and the development of both into post-war immigrationism and Critical Theory, does not alter that one iota.  The challenge to our sense of self and kind has many faces, but the earliest was Pauline Christianity, and challenge it remains.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 20 Jan 2021 16:23 | #

GW, Thank you for providing that well reasoned comment. It makes sense thus I have little to disagree with.

But I’m not trying to convert anyone to Christianity nor am I here to advocate that European or Americans return to the Christian Faith. Euros are no longer “under the deity of an hyper-ethnocentric tribe.” Haven’t been for generations now. That ship has sailed a long time ago. But we can’t overlook the obvious: what we’re doing post-Christianity isn’t working for us. That’s all.

BTW,  All those jew hags who pushed radical-feminism and abortion on demand (Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Ruth Bader Ginsberg to name a few) their vileness came back to bit them in the ass. They’re meeting the same demographic fate as whites. With the exception of the Ultra Orthodox Jews, Jewish women are producing offspring far below replacement level. They are dying out too. (Makes me sad… lol)

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 22 Jan 2021 05:21 | #

  How splendid , GW.  The biter bit.

Every sensible White person knows that GW and Daniel S are correct about Semitic - based religion and the Supernatural . Judaism is the sword and shield of Jews. The Jewish heresy, Christianity, is a spiritual Covid for our people and a vaccine requires more than an outstretched arm , it requires an open mind. Atheism is simply not enough.

Posted by Thorn on Fri, 22 Jan 2021 14:41 | #

Two of the most salient and self evident points made on this thread:

“... (i)f we are to secure the existence of our people and a white future for our children.  It is a vast task, and I really don’t think that WN is even remotely equipped to undertake it today.”—GW

and

“Atheism is simply not enough.”—Al Ross.

Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 06:01 | #

Just in case my comment about atheism not being enough was somehow misconstrued , may I explain that atheism is a baseline defence against Jews and that much more is required of our race in the matter of active discouragement of the more proximately alien Middle Eastern imports ( Judaism and Islam ) .

Christianity is withering on the vine apace and I happen to believe that most British people never really had much faith in the Jewish Heresy even at its Victorian apotheosis.  Christianity was, for many, simply a middle class social convention.

Posted by Thorn on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 13:29 | #

Oh if life were so simple as to narrow down the cause of the White race’s demise to a conspiracy theory contending Jews used Christianity to weaken Europeans to the point of submission. People who operate in such narrow framework are seen as crass kooks and simpletons by society. No wonder WN is failing miserably! It’s ranks are saturated with crackpots!!!!

Look, the ideological enemy destroying the white race—and by extension Western civilization—is Leftism ... and Leftism isn’t authored exclusively by Jews. Some examples: Antonio Gramsci (an Italian goy) hatched Cultural Marxism. Derrick Bell, (a negro) concocted critical legal theory leading to its offshoot: critical race theory.  Nikole Hannah-Jones (a negro) authored The 1619 Project. Even Karl Marx himself built his Communist Manifesto on the teachings of his mentors - one being Bruno Bauer (a German goy).

That said by no means am I ignoring the large part evil leftist Jews have played—and are playing—in the destruction of Western civilization. I am well aware of that. But leftism is causing white nations’ demographic and cultural destruction

Again, setting your sights on traditional Christianity is missing the target. Rather, focus on Leftism and all its destructiveness. 

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:36 | #

Thorn, think in terms of foundational thinking.  Then the conspiracy stuff will fall away and not require consideration.

Posted by Thorn on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 00:58 | #

Foundational thinking tells us Western civ was built on three pillars: 1) Greek philosophy. 2) Roman Law, and 3) Christian moral absolutes.

Now that Christian morals are shunned, it all falls down.

Pat Buchanan is so right!

Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 05:06 | #

Gramsci was a Jew - I am surprised that you did not know that to be the case.

https://archive.jewishcurrents.org/gramsci-yiddish-and-building-cultural-barricades/

I rather approve of stout cultural barricades - especially against the votaries of Christianity’s root religion.

Posted by Thorn on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 12:03 | #

Antonio Gramsci was NOT a Jew.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 13:11 | #

Thorn,

1. Obviously, western civilisation is not what we are striving to save.  Saving it is an incidental effect.

2. Western civilisation is an outcome of the European racial sociobiology and creative genius.

3. Of itself Christianity could only do - and has done - harm.  What good works through it does so in consequence of its adaption to our sociobiology.  Religions are sociobiological in their benefits - the question with Christianity is: whose sociobiology benefits?

4.  The “strength” of faith-thinking ... all faith-thinking, not just Christian-centred thought ... is that it is self-proving, and returns to itself again and again without the inconvenience of examination.  I do not commend it to anyone seeking Truth, which is simply not its concern.

Posted by Thorn on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 16:31 | #

Like I said before, when it comes to matters of God, everyone is a person of faith—even the most stiff-necked ashiest. Why is that so? Just as the believer in God can’t prove God’s existence neither can the ashiest prove God does not exist. Both belief systems require a great deal of faith.

So, GW, assuming you are an ashiest, you’re just as much a man of faith as any Christian. And that’s the truth!

And, of course I disagree Christianity “can only do harm.” Up until the mid-20th century it served the white race well. Then came the advent of TV. It was then when the great-falling-away started taking place. Hollywood’s culture began to supplant traditional Christian culture ... and at a rapid pace. The waning of Christian moral values and the corresponding waxing of secular-liberal values is bringing the white race to its knees. 100s of millions aborted white babies, the normalization of homosexuality-transgenderism, the attack on the nuclear family etc. etc, are products of secularism. Talk about doing harm!!!!

Then there are the boys and girls controlling the international financial system ... and the effects their migration policies are wreaking on white-nations . But that’s a topic for another day…..

Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:39 | #

If you are correct that Gramsci was a Christian , your terrier - like grip on that historical detail makes one assume that you are proud of him.  This topic is not important enough for me to adduce evidence about Gramsci’s paternal Ottoman Empire provenance.

Christianity helped ruin Ancient Rome . Gibbon attributes one of the’ Decline and Fall’ causes to the rise of Christianity and of course Gibbon provided further and better particulars re the causation of that baleful Rise : ” The Zeal of the Jews”.

Posted by Thorn on Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:53 | #

Wrong again! Thorn never said Gramsci was a Christian; in fact Gramsci was just as anti-Christian as you—but, of course, for a different reason. Gramsci fully understood Christianity is the main obstacle preventing socialism’s overthrow of capitalism. Hence a central thrust of his Cultural Marxist scheme was to subvert-destroy Christian faith. Once done (and the USA and Western Europe are almost there) communism has a clear path.

You really need to Google Antonio Gramsci on Christianity and familiarize yourself with him.

Here, this’ll get ya started:

Subverting Christian Faith

The civilized world, Gramsci deduced, had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years and Christianity remains the dominant philosophical and moral system in Europe and North America. Practically speaking, civilization and Christianity were inextricably bound together. Christianity had become so thoroughly integrated into the daily lives of nearly everyone, including non-Christians living in Christian lands, it was so pervasive, that it formed an almost impenetrable barrier to the new, revolutionary civilization Marxists wish to create. Attempting to batter down that barrier proved unproductive, since it only generated powerful counter-revolutionary forces, consolidating them and making them potentially deadly. Therefore, in place of the frontal attack, how much more advantageous and less hazardous it would be to attack the enemy’s society subtly, with the aim of transforming the society’s collective mind gradually, over a period of a few generations, from its former Christian worldview into one more harmonious to Marxism. And there was more.

Source https://thenewamerican.com/gramscis-grand-plan/

And

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2020/10/15/cultural-marxisms-origins-how-the-disciples-of-an-obscure-italian-linguist-subverted-america/

Posted by Thorn on Mon, 25 Jan 2021 15:32 | #

https://www.history.com/news/8-reasons-why-rome-fell

7. Christianity and the loss of traditional values

The decline of Rome dovetailed with the spread of Christianity, and some have argued that the rise of a new faith helped contribute to the empire’s fall. The Edict of Milan legalized Christianity in 313, and it later became the state religion in 380. These decrees ended centuries of persecution, but they may have also eroded the traditional Roman values system. Christianity displaced the polytheistic Roman religion, which viewed the emperor as having a divine status, and also shifted focus away from the glory of the state and onto a sole deity. Meanwhile, popes and other church leaders took an increased role in political affairs, further complicating governance. The 18th-century historian Edward Gibbon was the most famous proponent of this theory, but his take has since been widely criticized. While the spread of Christianity may have played a small role in curbing Roman civic virtue, most scholars now argue that its influence paled in comparison to military, economic and administrative factors.

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 27 Jan 2021 04:37 | #

The original Christians in Rome were ethnically Jewish . Later their imported Oriental poison spread through the usual method of attacking the superior Patricians and persuading the disaffected plebs ( who believed old Jesus was the Sea of Galilee’s first surfer ) . By 380AD most ’ Romans’ were not even ethnically Roman.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 27 Jan 2021 14:09 | #

More likely the Roman plebs realized a polytheistic religion which viewed the emperor as having a divine status was a false religion thus moved on to Christianity.