“Racist is a person who loves his race.”
The following is a draft of my opening article for the forthcoming 2017 revised edition of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour.
White nationalism, more recently known as the Alt-Right, is an American Pan-European internet movement which advocates for people of white heritage coming together in a united political bloc to lobby for their interests. Most white nationalists, usually sons of Christian parents, believe that Jewish subversion (see the three articles about the Jewish question in Part I) is the main cause of white decline.
Axiology is the philosophical study of value, or meta-ethics: the axis around which our moral compass spins around. In my writings I refer to the study of value in the West; more specifically, the universalist Christian ethics that fecundated the egalitarian ideas of the Enlightenment; the ideals of the Founding Fathers of the United States, and the French Revolution. By studying Christianity and secular liberalism from the axiological viewpoint we arrive to a different conclusion from the one reached by white nationalists: Christianity and liberalism are the primary infection; Jewish subversion, a secondary infection.
A single example will illustrate our point. When the great European civilizations were at their apex the epithet “racist” did not exist. Under a negative light, the Church used it first in the nineteenth century. On 10 August 1872 the Synod of the Orthodox Church issued an official condemnation of ecclesiastical racism, that they called ethno-phyletism:
We renounce, censure and condemn racism [emphasis added], that is racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds and dissensions within the Church of Christ, as contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our blessed fathers which “support the holy Church and the entire Christian world, embellish it and lead it to divine godliness.”
In other words, the Church should not be confused with the destiny of a single nation or a single race. That is heresy. Thus, in condemning “phyletism” or “racism” the Synod in Constantinople introduced a Newspeak term for their congregation.
From Newspeak to Nietzsche
The critique of language is the most radical of all critiques. If we don’t uproot from our vocabulary the Newspeak of the anti-Western societies we won’t even be able to start discussing the issues. More specifically, as long as “racism” is seen as the ultimate evil we have two choices: repudiate the label or transvalue universalist Christian values back to ethno-Aryan principles (see the texts by Manu Rodríguez that I translated to English in Part IV).
White nationalists chose the former approach. They rarely use the term racist while describing themselves. The purpose of this book is to show why the latter approach is more radical.
The roots of anti-white Newspeak started with Constantine and his Imperial Church. The fourth century of the Common Era, during the reign of Theodosius, witnessed the consolidation of power of the bishops in the Roman Empire after the premature death of Julian the Apostate (see Emperor Julian’s own words in Part IV). Those unconverted to the new religion, that in the times of Julian enjoyed special protection, became second-class citizens. A new word was coined, pagan to label the adept of the millenarian Greco-Roman culture. Once created the Newspeak those stigmatized as pagans—and especially the Christian heretics—were persecuted more zealously than the Roman persecutions of Christians in times of emperors Decius and Diocletian. Only by such means the new theocracy succeeded in eradicating the original culture. Moreover, as some critics of psychiatry have noted, Theodosius was the first one in history to weaponize the word madness to label those who did not embrace the new religion.
The Roman Empire collapsed after the institutionalization of the Imperial Church (see Karlheinz Deschner’s introduction to his 10-volume work, also in Part IV). As we will see, Hitler, noted that Christianity was the Judeo-Bolshevism of the Ancient World.
Above I referred to the fact that when the European civilizations were on their prime the label racist did not exist. According to George Orwell the objective of Newspeak is social control. Orwell’s focus was a hard totalitarian dystopia. Presently, a pejorative use of the word racism is used in the soft totalitarian societies of the West.
Since the common use is derogative many white nationalists erroneously attribute the term racism to the Jew Leon Trotsky. Hadding Scott, a contemporary advocate of National Socialism, unearthed some documents demonstrating that the word was used before Trotsky. I would add that the documents that Scott has called our attention to are later documents, no less than a quarter of a century, of the above-quoted 1872 anathema. But Scott’s findings are worth mentioning. In Charles Malato’s Philosophie de l’Anarchie (1897) we find both raciste (French for “racist thought”) and racisme. In English, the first use of the word racism was by Richard Pratt, “a Baptist religious zealot,” in 1902, five years after Malato’s use of raciste and racisme in French. Scott also found raciste and individualité raciste (“racist individuality”) in the a 1906 volume of La Terro d’oc: revisto felibrenco e federalisto, a periodical championing the cultural and ethnic identity of people in southern France.
According to Immanuel Geiss, the term gained more popularity in Germany in the 1920s during the polemics against National Socialism. The next decade the term racism reappeared in an American anti-fascist pamphlet, and the meme spread out like wildfire. But remember that this virus for the white mind started within the Orthodox Church.
Regarding the Roman Catholic Church, the term catholic, with lowercase c derives via Latin catholicus from the Greek adjective katholikos, “universal.” A Vatican pronouncement, specifically Pope Pius XI’s statement on 29 July 1938, became memorable: “One forgets today that the human race is a single, large and catholic race.” More recently secular liberalism has coined a plethora of terms that we may consider re-elaboration of such catholic Newspeak: words like anti-Semitism in the nineteenth century and sexism, xenophobia, homophobia and Islamophobia in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The underlying meta-ethical axis of these “phobias” is a secular offshoot of the Church tenet that Christendom must not be confused with the destiny of a race.
The American Jared Taylor is one of the original voices of race realism or the Alt-Right movement. In the November 2016 National Policy Institute conference in Washington, Taylor said that the word racism cannot be sanitized; that its use means that folks like the speakers of that conference are morally defectives. Similarly, according to Metapedia, an online encyclopedia:
Racism is a term usually only used by critics. Official definitions of racism often state that the term should only be applied on the belief that some races are superior and on negative actions due to this. In practice it is often applied as a form of ad hominem on anyone believing in the existence of races or even on persons advocating restricting immigration, persons criticizing another culture or multiculturalism, persons supporting their own country/ethnicity, etc.
I fully agree. Nevertheless, potentially—and this is how we differ from white nationalism—racism could be a term used not only by our enemies but by us. Had values not been inverted by Christianity and its secular offshoot, liberalism, racist attitudes would be considered healthy. This is what Friedrich Nietzsche wrote in 1888 in Twilight of the Idols:
Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence. Christianity—the revaluation of all Aryan values, the victory of chandala values, the gospel preached to the poor and base, the general revolt of all the downtrodden, the wretched, the failures, the less favored, against “race”: the undying chandala hatred is disguised as a religion of love.
Taylor, whose texts appear a few pages ahead, is right only if we see ourselves gyrating around the current set of values. Why can’t we move away from that axis and consider ourselves the precursors of a post-Christian era? Why not educate our children to see “racism” as a great virtue, not a despicable vice?
Although most of the authors I’ll be citing in Part I are not racialist Nietzscheans, this cry from the last words of Nietzsche’s The Antichrist resumes our worldview in a nutshell:
Umwertung aller Werte!
 Papathomas, Grigorios (1995). Course of Canon Law (Appendix VI) canonical glossary. Paris.
Question: What is the most important thing you have learnt in the last year?
Alex Linder: That women really are, per Schopenhauer, overgrown children, and the corollary: a man should never follow the advice of a woman where his own ideas and masculine reasoning and intuition would lead him the opposite way. Women are always wrong about the deepest stuff, and I have come to believe it is probably wrong ever to discuss politics with them. They simply aren’t a serious sex, although they are involved with very serious matters.
• “Conservatism, Inc. unleashed the Third World immigration tsunami” – November 5, 2016
• “The Truth About Steve Bannon” – November 20, 2016
• “White Nationalism, Explained” – November 22, 2016
YouTube clip: here.
“The FBI is the world’s greatest law-enforcement agency,” says a recent National Review article.
Correction: the FBI was the world’s greatest law-enforcement agency, until it prostituted itself on Obama’s and Clinton’s altar. Nowadays the FBI and the Department of Justice are nothing but a joke. Why? Because the Clinton email investigation was an exercise in obstruction of justice by the DOJ and the FBI, including the FBI director, James Comey.
“Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity” is on the official FBI seal. Now it should be replaced with “Faking Bogus Investigations.”
The FBI is now part of a crime organization headed by the Clintons. Ultimately, Comey is a criminal who should be in jail together with Hillary.
The bottom line: Hillary always wins, ad nauseam, in a rigged American system. A Parkinson’s disease accident (or “October surprise”) is now our only hope for the November election.
Cross your fingers…
Editor’s note: Huffington Post took down Bill Robinson’s “Hillary Clinton Has Parkinson’s” article after her collapse at Ground Zero. Robinson’s removed article is reproduced below, including the author’s update:
Obviously, you cannot believe everything you read on the Internet.
Of course, those words were also uttered over the years about newspapers, then radio and then TV.
Just as obviously, you cannot simply dismiss all things read on the Internet either. For example, The Huffington Post is an Internet-only publication and publishes news that can be trusted.
So when Internet sources, however sketchy, start chiming in with evidence they say indicates that Hillary Clinton is not well, they should not be immediately discounted as the Leftist media is doing right now.
For the majority of readers here who don’t know, the last several weeks and months have brought increasing alarm from the ‘Alternative Media’ otherwise known as Conservatives that Hillary Clinton is sick.
Many sources and pundits have alleged Clinton has Parkinson’s Disease. While unconfirmed, the mainstream media is behaving like it is true and covering it up frantically.
Look, I’m sorry if Secretary Clinton is sick and I’m very sorry if she has Parkinson’s Disease.
But the American people simply cannot tolerate any lying, misinformation or wordplay if she is, in fact, ill. We need to know it and we need to know it well ahead of Election Day on November 8th.
If she doesn’t have a life-threatening ailment, then she should immediately submit to a thorough physical examination by an independent, non-governmental physician of great authority.
America cannot afford to end up with another un-elected President, Tim Kaine, of all people, to follow in the line of Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson, Arthur, (Teddy) Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman, LBJ and Ford. With the definite exception of Roosevelt and possible exception of Truman, there was not an above-mediocre or barely competent President amongst them.
Right now, it looks as if the complicit media is helping hide her sickness. And to discover that she was lying about her health, submitting all kinds of ‘doctor’s notes’ as flimsy proof she’s up to the Olympian task of being the American President, would surprise nobody at this point.
For example, if you do a search on this publication for the terms “Hillary” and “Parkinson’s” together, you get zero, zilch, bupkis. A Google search on the exact same terms produces 577,000 hits in .32 seconds.
What you do get searching here interestingly, is a Number One search result of “I’m A Doctor. Here’s What I Find Most Concerning About Trump’s Medical Note.” Now why in the world would that result come up when searching “Hillary?”
There is—ironically—an ‘art-imitating-life’ example for this kind of deception of the American people: TV’s “West Wing” series. In the acclaimed Liberal drama, insufferable, Lefty creator Aaron Sorkin and company wrote a story line into the later seasons wherein President Bartlet (played by another Lefty Martin Sheen) intentionally fails to inform the American people that he has MS prior, leading up to and during an election.
Way too close for comfort is the way the Liberal media is completely uninterested in Hillary’s health, while the Conservative media is howling. What’s more, simply suggesting we get more information on the Dem nominee’s physical situation, has the media and ‘Clintonista’ surrogates start threatening and name-calling. What do they have to hide? Plenty apparently.
Yet another absurd media cover-up occurred on or about January 17th, 1998 when the Drudge Report, was a fledgling news source then regularly besmirched and disrespected by the New York Times, MSNBC and Newsweek. It was particularly notable that Newsweek would be so snooty about Drudge, as on this day Drudge reported that Newsweek was intentionally withholding a story about then President Clinton having a regular sexual liaison with a White House intern. This would be the beginning of the Monica Lewinsky/Impeachment fiasco for Hillary and her husband.
If the Clinton duo can give us, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” with finger wagging arrogantly, then why not a diminutive deception like “I’m in perfect health?”
For those who might’ve forgotten or new Millennial voters not alive or cognizant, here’s what the rest of us were treated to as the biggest Presidential lie of all time.
The ‘New Media’ is seemingly more and more the “Alternative Media” of Conservatives scrutinizing Liberal politicians and regularly coming up with the goods on them. Hillary’s health is the new, central Clinton drama unfolding before us. It’s clear to me that there’s something wrong with this woman.
Fast forward to the last few weeks and we have not only Conservative news sources hot on the trail of this Parkinson’s story but also Julian Assange and Wikileaks recently releasing very relevant emails regarding Hillary’s Parkinson’s symptoms and medicines. Could Wikileaks be the new Drudge to an even bigger Clinton lie?
Currently, we have a number of very red flags about Hillary’s health:
• Constant, unstoppable, coughing fits explained away by Hillary as “allergies.” Hmmm. These coughing jags are not allergies. While the news media takes an “it’s alright to cough” approach to Hillary’s obvious chronic illness, smart, aware people see this as simply another opportunity for a Clinton lie.
The American Mirror this week published a horrifying timeline of Hillary’s supposed “allergies.” It details with great specificity the regular and uncontrollable coughing seizures that Clinton has and includes videos of every one. Beginning on January 25th, 2016—hardly allergy season—Clinton began her stunning run of sickness. More episodes followed on February 16th, April 4th, May 5th, June 4th, August 31st and on September 5th, Hillary had not just one but two extreme coughing sessions. All supported with videos. Coughing jags such as these are typically associated with Parkinson’s Disease.
• The “brain freezes” that Hillary has had publicly several times. She seems to need to be prodded and reassured out of these by a mysterious handler. These kinds of episodes are typically associated with Parkinson’s Disease.
• The infirmity. Hillary needs to be helped up stairs, propped up with pillows everywhere she goes and frequently falls down as she did when she got a concussion. Many doctors have claimed that Hillary has a serious neurological condition or brain damage, as Dr. Drew asserts here.
These kinds of symptoms are typically associated with Parkinson’s Disease.
• The constant presence (until recently when he seems to be hidden) of a large, bald black man with a Diazepam injection pen (to control seizures) and the ability to jump to her aid to reassure her when she has a ‘brain freeze’ or needs a lozenge, water or to buy time during very public speaking coughing tantrums.
Why hasn’t the press informed the public about exactly who this mysterious person really is? Because they have a vested interest in helping keep Hillary’s secret, that’s why. If Donald Trump was being so closely monitored by a medical ghost, the press would’ve hounded him out of the primaries.
Recently, this unknown medical savior has been loosely identified. He appears to be a neurologist until recently working at the “prestigious” Neuroscience Center of Northern New Jersey. Calls to verify he works there now went unanswered.
All in all, to me a very compelling case that Hillary Clinton has something.
And if that something turns out to be anything more serious than allergies and a concussion, well then, she would be instantly unfit and unqualified to become President of the United States.
Update: Just as I was readying this piece for publication, news broke that Hillary Clinton was rushed away from the 9/11 Memorial service in lower Manhattan due to a “medical condition.” As a Conservative I do not support her candidacy for President. However, I hope and pray for her full recovery.
The Alt-Right in the US, although being minuscule in terms of its number, shows the unwritten rule how a few individuals with lots of brains can make a big political change by accepting their adversaries’ rules of engagement. Alt-Right is far better positioned in the USA than in the EU, given the monolingual cohesion of White Americans in comparison to many heavy-weight AR/NR intellectuals in Europe, who are too often fueled by their personal or own narrow ethnic agenda only.
Most of the below text is from Amazon Books:
Not for sixty years has a book been so brutally suppressed as An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945. One major newspaper, one major magazine, and three major publishers paid $40,000 for it but were scared off. One printed 6,000 books, then pulped them.
Two dozen publishers read An Eye for an Eye and praised it. “Shocking, “Startling,” “Astonishing,” “Mesmerizing,” “Extraordinary,” they wrote to Author John Sack. “I was rivited,” “I was bowled over,” “I love it,” they wrote, but all two dozen rejected it.
Finally, BasicBooks published An Eye for an Eye. It “sparked a furious controversy,” said Newsweek. It became a best-seller in Europe but was so shunned in America that it also became, in the words of New York Magazine, “The Book They Dare Not Review.”
Since then, both 60 Minutes and The New York Times have corroborated what Sack wrote: that at the end of World War II, thousands of Jews sought revenge for the Holocaust. They set up 1,255 concentration camps for German civilians—German men, women, children and babies. There they beat, whipped, tortured and murdered the Germans.
But presently, in this world of white cowards Sack’s book is out of print…