Operation Excalibur: Back to Church, Bucko! Part 1

Then, He said to them, “But now…he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)

“Talk is for lovers.  I need a sword to be king!” Excalibur Opening Scene (Battle of the Knights) 1981

Setting the Scene

Images of Excalibur, King Arthur’s legendary sword, typically mirror the mythic iconography of the Christian Cross.  Note the cosmic aura surrounding the gleaming hilt of the sword in the stone on the cover of my book, Dissident Dispatches.  Its mysterious magnetism beckons the man of destiny.  Only a true hero, uniquely possessed of the strength to pull the fearsome blade from the rock of ages, will be endowed with the sacred majesty of kingship.  Excalibur was a fearsome weapon, striking down the king’s enemies in a spiritual struggle between good and evil.  Of course, as a figment of literary imagination, Excalibur is more useful as an instrument of psychological or cultural rather than physical warfare. Accordingly, like any other popular meme, it can be deployed in cyberspace by any number of combatants, for fun or in deadly earnest.

On the Alt Right, the most famous, politically effective meme has been the seemingly innocuous cartoon image of Pepe the Frog.  Amidst the tumult and confusion of the Trump campaign, Pepe helped the Alt Right movement sort out amused friends from outraged enemies. The sorting process was a two-way street, however.  As part of the wider push by corporate and political wire-pullers to de-platform the Alt Right, the powerful Jewish activist organization, the Anti-Defamation League conducted a concerted, well-funded campaign of its own to brand Pepe memes as anti-Semitic and racist “hate speech”.  The goal was to outlaw reproduction of the Pepe meme by Alt Right publishers, broadcasters, and bloggers.  The tool chosen to achieve that outcome was copyright law.  Simply for featuring Bishop Pepe on the cover of a book, Arktos Media, already well-known as a dissident right publisher, found itself the target of legal action organized by the ADL.

The response was both unexpected and disproportionate.  Bishop Pepe triggered determined, well-resourced, and crafty enemies.  The frog cartoon cover art was quickly leveraged into a credible threat to the survival of Arktos Media.  In its campaign against Alt Right Pepe , the ADL had enlisted Matt Furie, a cartoonist who had drawn a primitive Pepe in a comic book, more than ten years ago.  In the meantime, thousands of green frog images had appeared on the internet and IRL during the meme wars of 2015–2016.  The ADL supported Furie in his claim to copyright ownership and hence all profits derived from the commercial use of Pepe the Frog memes.  A major corporate law firm was engaged (putatively pro bono publico) to enforce Furie’s putative proprietary interest in Pepe against all the world.  In practice, only parties associated in some way with the Alt Right or the Trump campaign received notices to cease and desist their use of Pepe memes and to hand over to Matt Furie any profits they may have earned therefrom.  In their letter to Arktos, Furie’s lawyers threatened substantial legal and commercial penalties should the publisher not capitulate to this demand. 

Faced with such an ultimatum, saving Bishop Pepe was not a major priority.  After all, he was just a cartoon figure conceived in the naïve afterglow of the God-Emperor’s triumph.  In the cold, hard light of day, the cover is just a lame effort to troll both the Alt Right and Christian conservatives.  Almost as if both movements are just friends and allies sharing a joke.  Still, there was something a bit magical about Bishop Pepe as the public avatar of the Alt Right.  Whatever that mysterious something might have been, sworn enemies of the Alt Right were out to get rid of it.  A cease and desist order to Amazon allowed the ADL and Furie to kill two birds with one stone: get rid of Bishop Pepe and harass a dissident right publisher (together with several other purveyors of “hate speech” in the form of cartoon frogs).

Arktos quickly replaced the Bishop Pepe cover with the Excalibur meme, but Furie’s lawyers persisted in their legal action.  They claimed whatever profits Arktos earned from the sale of all copies of Dissident Dispatches with Bishop Pepe on the cover.  In the real world, of course, few people decided to buy my book, having judged it by its uproariously amusing cover (or, to be frank, for any other reason).  In fact, one reviewer, whose opinion I respect greatly, remarked that he was disinclined at first to read the book, just because of its cartoonish cover.  The commercially trivial amount at stake in Furie’s copyright claim makes it obvious that the artist was but a stalking horse for powerful ethno-political interests pursuing an altogether different agenda.

However frivolous and vexatious the cause of action, Furie’s lawyers conveyed a credible threat of costly legal action.  The relevant federal statute incentivizes legal bullying by stipulating a statutory minimum of $75,000 in damages should the matter ever come to court. Not surprisingly, Arktos chose to cough up its paltry profits from early sales of Dissident Dispatches (slightly more than $1500) just to get the ADL off its case.  While Arktos may have secured temporary relief by buying off Matt Furie and his attack dogs in the ADL, the enemies of the Alt Right remain alive and well.  Where, then, might the movement find friends?

 

Re-Awakening the Religious Right

Taken on its own, this anecdote from the contemporary world of dissident publishing is small beer. I tell the story only because I believe that Dissident Dispatches: An Alt-Right Guide to Christian Theology contains an important message, well-captured in the Excalibur meme.  The message is aimed at two apparently disparate audiences: the Alt Right movement and White Anglo-Protestant Christian churches. Whether either group wants to admit it or not, we share common enemies.  They are those who celebrate the imminent end of White America, even of White Britain and the formerly White dominions of yesteryear.  Our enemies are recruited not just from the teeming non-White immigrant masses swamping almost every European-descended nation, truculent African-Americans, and resentful Jews but especially from the ranks of our own White, post-Christian political, corporate, and religious élites.  The citadels of power have been captured by enemy forces. Not even America, much less Britain, is likely ever to be great again.  In fact, America, especially, is just about over.

The Alt Right gets that; White Christians, not so much. Nevertheless, a working, informal alliance with church-goers (people typically anchored in the everyday life of civil society) offers the possibility of a new start for the Alt-Right.  Reports that the Alt Right has collapsed and died have been greatly exaggerated.  True, the movement is experiencing a dark night of the spirit, beached on the fringes of contemporary Weimerica.  In the wake of Charlottesville, rising Antifa violence, internal scandals, multiple other mistakes, and general confusion, it is easy to lose heart.  But there is still reason to hope for the revival of the ancient spirit of ethno-religious solidarity among White Anglo-Protestant peoples around the world.

Men of the Alt Right can and should recast themselves in the role of Christian cultural (maybe even holy) warriors fighting to regenerate once-Christian nations.  Working body and soul to achieve such a restoration, the Alt Right might just spark another Great Awakening.  Ever since the colonial era, the foundations of the established order in America have been shaken repeatedly by eruptions of Anglo-Protestant revivalism.  Waves of religious enthusiasm washed over the country, fusing with contemporaneous social reform movements to spread a moralistic spirit of “romantic perfectionism”.  Millenarian religious enthusiasm was an essential ingredient not just in the revolutionary war for independence but in later upheavals associated with abolitionism, progressivism, and the social gospel, not to mention feminism and prohibition.  Revivalism and social reform were joined at the hip.

Nowadays, the Alt Right is an embryonic social reform movement promoting identity politics for White people.  If it is ever to set the mainstream Anglo-Protestant imagination alight, it must become a religious movement.  To that end, Alt Right leaders must learn how to communicate and network with the religious people to be found in Anglo-Protestant churches.  There are glimmers of hope.  I wrote Dissident Dispatches because I became convinced that a new Great Awakening is necessary, possible, and desirable, at least in America.

Admittedly, such a claim is rather counter-intuitive.  Evangelical and mainstream Protestant churches do appear to be fast asleep at the wheel.  In the face of enemies ready to fight for their faith, folk, and families, White Anglo-Protestants remain pitiably passive and apathetic.  They cannot imagine how to defend the collective, ethno-religious identity they no longer possess.  Protestant churches have become random clusters of atomized individuals not close-knit tribal communities.  Faith is now about “growing” into a personal and private relationship with Jesus.  Accordingly, White Anglo-Protestants deny the religious significance of blood and belonging.  Such radical individualism stands in stark contrast to the communitarian White Christian ethno-theology outlined in Dissident Dispatches.

Making Friends and Enemies

From the activist perspective of the Alt Right, most Anglo-Protestant church-goers have “fallen asleep” (note the biblically-charged turn of phrase).  They seem oblivious to the accelerating collapse of our visibly browning, once-White, now professedly post-Christian, civilization.  For their own good, they should be woken up.  An Alt Right mission to Anglo-Protestant churches may be just what the doctor ordered.  In his review of Dissident Dispatches, Michael Lord challenges the Alt Right to seize the moral high ground by being more Christian than the Christians.  In defence of every Anglo-European ethno-nation, the American Alt Right could step into salvation history, drawing Excalibur from “that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock [is] Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4).  Lord asks: “Are we losing what should be an easy fight because we simply aren’t showing up for the battle?”

As the first step in that altar call, we can confess our ancestral ethno-religious identity as Christian nations.  To that end, we can and should embrace an openly historical and political Christian ethno-theology.  Politics is defined by the distinction between friends and enemies.  Having been systematically un-friended by the powers that be, the Alt Right is becoming all-too-familiar with the existential meaning of that distinction.  Far from being welcome in polite Christian company, the Alt Right more often gets the cold shoulder; no one, least of all the womenfolk, wants to talk about friends versus enemies with someone reputed to have a soft spot for Hitler.  Deaf to rhetoric officially designated as “hateful,” Christian theologians and Protestant pastors instead profess their selfless, undying love for the Other.  By and large, organized Christianity reserves the status of enemy for White nationalists, treating them as pariahs to be shunned and publicly denounced by true believers.

Just last year, for example, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a near unanimous resolution explicitly condemning the Alt Right as a “racist” and “White supremacist” movement.  The driving force behind that resolution was a Black pastor, Dwight McKissic, Sr.  As a racially-conscious, prominent Black preacher, McKissic knows well how to play the race card.  In the months since he persuaded the SBC to denounce Alt Right ideas, McKissic dialled up his anti-White rhetoric.  He tweeted recently that “Alt Right persons shouldn’t be welcomed as members in SBC Churches”.  He made sure to personalize his exclusionary message, demanding the expulsion of Tennessee talk radio host James Edwards from his local Baptist church.  How, one might wonder, can a Christian pastor justify the excommunication of White Baptists espousing constitutionally-protected religious or political views?  Simply because someone is associated with the Alt Right in the mind of a Black racial activist?

One of the most valuable resources available to enemies of the Alt Right within the church is the vast reservoir of White guilt accumulated over the past seventy years.  Wrapped in the moral certitude of Black liberation theology, Dwight McKissic clearly expects little resistance when he calls upon unsuspecting White Baptists to kick Edwards out of his ancestral church.  He automatically pushes the White guilt button, issuing a boilerplate allegation that Edwards somehow “embraces racism & racists” on his radio show.  McKissic brands both the Alt Right and fellow-travellers such as James Edwards as “enemies of the gospel”.  Clearly, the gauntlet has been thrown down.  Like it or not, White racial advocates who also happen to be Christians must prove McKissic and his allies elsewhere within the church wrong.

It is easy to imagine circumstances in which one’s fellow congregants might be driven in fits of pathological penitence to drive Alt Right Christians out of the church.  Churches succumbing to such moral panics will embolden further the enemies of White Christian nationhood.  This, of course, is nothing new.  For decades now, misguided traditions of millenarian utopianism in both Protestant and Catholic churches have propped up a globalist regime hostile to the very idea of Christian nationhood.  Everywhere in the Western world, global capitalism relentlessly uproots and destabilizes the folkways, faith, and families descended from White European Christian ethno-nations.  The deracinated globalist faith in perpetual progress is a poor substitute for the “racist,” “sexist,” “homophobic,” and “xenophobic” faith of our fathers.  Alt Right Christians must develop confidence in their ability to defend themselves in theological debates where they stand charged with heresy.

In Part Two of this essay, I discuss the biblical foundation for what might be called an Alt Right Christian political theology and how it might contribute to the next, long-overdue, Great Awakening in the political and religious history of White Anglo-Protestant churches.

Go to Part 2.

Andrew Fraser is a retired law professor. For many years, he taught constitutional law and legal history at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. He recently completed a degree in theology.

48 replies
  1. Johnny Rottenborough
    Johnny Rottenborough says:

    White Anglo-Protestants remain pitiably passive and apathetic

    From my bitter experience of posting comments on a Christian website, Christians of all denominations firmly believe that ‘Jews are our friends’ and that, as mass immigration is part of God’s plan, resistance is pointless. Out of the many hundreds of Christian posters to the website, just two or three showed signs of common sense. If white homelands do survive, it is my firm belief that it will be in spite of Christians.

    • Tim Folke
      Tim Folke says:

      Hey Johnny:

      I agree with you, but do understand that Christians suffer not from errors in their religion, but rather from ignorance and bad Bible translations. They do not know the difference between the Ashkenazim ‘Jews’ (the fake Jews, just like fake news – about 85% of so-called Jews in the world today – these are your Soros’s, Zuckerbergs, Ginsbergs, etc.) and real Israelites. And, most of them believe everything in their Bibles, TV and what is on the internet.

      Please be patient with us. We can be of the greatest of assets, if only we have the proper direction. We are worth the investment of time and patience from good people like you. If you and others like you invest that in us, we will repay you with a strong power that our people need at this time.

      • Johnny Rottenborough
        Johnny Rottenborough says:

        Tim Folke—To ‘ignorance and bad Bible translations’ we can add ‘leaders who betray their flocks’. Justin Welby addressed a gathering of exotics in London shortly after the murder of Lee Rigby: ‘Welby told his audience that diversity was a “gift not a threat” and he did not want to live in a “monocultural” society.’ An archbishop who would not want to live in a Christian society. The best of luck to you.

        • Nick Dean
          Nick Dean says:

          And so a man who isn’t a ‘WASP’ but bizarrely identifies as one, introduces religious division into what should simply be a racial discussion. Great work there, Fraser!

          Whites pushing for Whites only is what’s needed. All else is time lost and definitely costs many White lives, if not all White lives.

        • Tim Folke
          Tim Folke says:

          Johnny: Yes, I agree. In regards to ‘flocks’ you hit the nail on the head. It is this flock, or sheeple mentality, that makes many Christians susceptible to the deceptions of bad leaders. So, perhaps as more Christians make the transition from sheep to wolf we will see a real spiritual strength arise.

        • Trenchant
          Trenchant says:

          Maybe you could point out that the Lee Rigby “murder” was a security service psy-operation, a victimless hoax designed to shore up the Muslim domestic terrorism narrative. Nick Kollerstrom does good work exposing that charade. Like the very real false flag of 7/7, these events do nothing but polarize opinion and permit further curtailments of civil liberties.

    • The AntiLoser
      The AntiLoser says:

      Getting rid of Christianity seems to be the most important goal for Jewish nationalism or Zionism. Jewish groups like the ADL have strongly condemned Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and the Catholic church, despite their support for Israel. In recent years, Christians have evolved with the times and have watered down a number of doctrines that secular Jews oppose, such as prohibitions on pornography, homosexuality, and abortion. Also, Jews have heavily subsidized the wing of evangelical Christianity which holds that Jews must govern Palestine. Jewish Bolshevism has ceased to be an irritant since the Soviet Union collapsed and China decayed into ideological impurity. However, Christian passivity in the face of Jewish power stumbles when confronted with the question of Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians. The most liberal Christians are better educated and more affluent than the evangelicals and are increasingly willing to break the taboo against gentile criticism of Israel. They are also better able to see, even if they won’t say it out loud, that there is a problem with the “whatever you say” attitude to Jewish power. At a certain point, everyone at once drops the pretense of having failed to notice. That is how these things tend to go. If US foreign policy brings us to the brink of nuclear war you may see an upsurge in truth-telling. One point that people on the Alt Right seem to miss (on purpose?) is that the power of organized non-white minorities is imaginary. As was the case with the civil rights movement, Jews pay the bills and call the shots. The idea of a “race-war” is laughable. Without Jews the ‘war’ would be more one-sided than US versus Grenada. Non-white minorities have no money or positions of power and are just chess pieces to be manipulated. Their main job is to vote Democrat, and must be kept angry over slavery and discrimination lest they forget to vote. People who grew up in red states generally don’t know Jews from jackdaws.
      From my point of view the ‘Alt Right’ is pretty left-wing, since young people show the effects of exposure to an educational system that for decades has been dominated by socialist atheist libertines. The French Revolution defined the terms Left and Right and the primary opposition was in the attitude to Christianity. That is still the essence today.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      It is the same on Breitbart, not that I go there any more – the Christians keep reaching out the hand of friendship to the Jews and want to hug them with love and support, and in return this is seldom reciprocated, and all they get back is a lecture about various grievances they have from the past. But the Christians do not seem to notice the hostility, and just listen patiently. Christians have been very strongly conditioned to not under any circumstances be ‘racist’ and this is why they submit to hostility from other races.

      These Christians on Breitbart blog generally have no idea how strongly the Jews at the top levels of their organisations support mass immigration into the West. This is the purpose of Breitbart – to make a successful place for the right to go and then control the narrative.

  2. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    Perhaps the Southern Baptists need to tell Dwight McKissic to stop his cultural appropriation of their religion.

  3. Kyle McDermott
    Kyle McDermott says:

    IMHO, this topic reduces to a very simple choice: particularism v. universalism. I don’t give a Jew’s ass how you get there – just get to particularism.

    • Irene
      Irene says:

      I didn’t read the article but we know that only Nationalism can be particularist; everything else is a waste of time.

  4. Lee
    Lee says:

    It is worth noting Jim Crow was hatched in Southern Baptist country much like apartheid in South Africa by the Calvinist Dutch. The crafters were conscious to the reality of race and differences.

    It was the New England Yankee liberal theologians and their Lutheran allies who were staunch abolitionists and pushed race-mixing on southerners. In fact most modern race-mixing and compromised churches are more pentecostal than baptist. Modern pentecostalism was started by a negro preacher called William Seymour at Azusa Street in Los Angeles.

    Many Pentecostals and Christian Zionists today are also not even “Anglo” but of German stock – late Kenneth Hagin, John Hagee, Gary Bauer, Ed Young Sr. (Junge), Joyce Meyer, Marilyn Hickey, Daniel Kolanda, late Kathryn Khulman, Joel Osteen who runs a mega church in Houston etc.

    Christian Zionism itself is a very new idea and is pushed mostly by Jews in lots of pentecostal movements like Jay Sekulor is chief legal counsel for Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law & Justice and John Rosenstern who is part of Jimmy Swaggart’s Sonlife Broadcasting Network. This is much like the way commies and Jews infiltrated the Catholic Church to push Vatican II reforms.

    Even Martin Luther at first took a liking to Jews but got real upset when they refused to convert – “The Jews and their Lies”. The Apostle Paul himself talked about evil Judaizers while St. John talks about the synagogue of Satan. Paul didn’t even campaign to slavery in the Roman Empire if you read Philemon.

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      I grew up in the Lutheran Church in the 1950s. What we were taught, had been buried by the late 60s, and by the late 70swas unrecognizable as being Lutheran. The message was simple: the Jews didn’t keep their end the deal/covenant, so a new covenant was created through Christ. Christians were the chosen people.

      As for Luther, he didn’t so much “like” them, as recognize that they were the former chosen. His Bible translation included the Old Testament only for the purpose of showing what the old covenant was. “Jews and Their Lies” was written after he had read the Talmud.

    • Seraphim
      Seraphim says:

      @Paul didn’t even campaign to slavery

      Jesus did not come to abolish slavery, institute social justice, equality, he was not the first communist and the first Christians did not live in ‘communes’. Contrary to what people believe, he didn’t even condemn lending with interest and paying taxes!

  5. Sursum corda
    Sursum corda says:

    The problem here is protestantism, protestantism and protestantism. Until you grasp the fact that protestantism is judaizing, these problems will persist. The protestants align themselves with the Jews because protestantism is a form of judaism. It’s a heresy just like judaism. Only a muscular Catholicism will be able to overcome these problems. Full. Stop.

    • Mr Natural
      Mr Natural says:

      Only a muscular Catholicism will be able to overcome these problems?

      Pope Francis would appear to me as working feverishly to neuter anything approaching “muscular” Catholicism. I wouldn’t be surprised if he changed his Church title from Pope to Rabbi.

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      “protestantism is a form of judaism”
      Is that why several denominations have protested by joining the BDS movement? Protestantism began as protests to reform excesses or inconsistencies in RC Church doctrine. The first stirrings produced a well reasoned response authored by Thomas Aquinas. After that it was the death penalty.

      I suggest you wait to write you posts, until after the effect of the brownies has worn off.

      • Sursum corda
        Sursum corda says:

        Completely lucid and not a drug user. Yes, your religion is judaizing, it is a heresy and it’s a form of judaism.

    • The AntiLoser
      The AntiLoser says:

      Theology and its history are complicated, but the pressure against traditional American culture with its hegemonic Christianity has come primarily from secular Jews, not people like the Hasidim, who tend to go their own way. Secular Jews tend to define Judaism as a culture and ethnicity whose interests are threatened by any hegemonic religion, and in practice by Christianity and Islam in their traditional forms, whose values stand in opposition to Modernity.

  6. James Bowery
    James Bowery says:

    Cuius regio, eius religio is the ecclesiastical principle of The Fair Church℠ and was, in fact, the Westphalian spirit animating the US during its heyday, the preservation of which was expressed in the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution.

    It fits the present conflict well because it has become obvious to virtually every young man of military age that their contract with society upon which civilization is founded has been abrogated by society’s relegation of young men — particularly white heterosexual young men (prime military meat) — to virtual outcasts: Relentlessly dishonored by all authorities of that civilization. Across all sexual species for 600 million years, male intrasexual selection allocated territory as reflected in the geography of the male chromosome. Territory and morality combine in the concept of honor as moral territory.

    One tactic:

    1) Identify churches involved in obvious violations of territory in the form of programs such as “refugee resettlement”,

    2) Admonish the young men of of those churches that they have a moral obligation to oppose the violation of community preferences — since virtually no community wants (as measured by opinion polls) these “refugees” settled among them,

    3) Such opposition should take the form of another legally recognized church with exactly the same doctrines of their original church, sans the mendacious authorities of the original, coopted, church with its abuse of local communities, and

    4) Put their tithes in their new church, cleansed of the agenda to conquer the territory of the young men — hence dishonor them.

    An additional tactic is to point out the obvious fact that Paul’s teachings on women in the church are being violated by every current Protestant denomination — and that this condition is, just as Paul said, a dishonor of the young men whose wives ask for guidance from anyone other than their husbands, let alone speak in church.

    You can’t deal with the spiritual malaise besetting civilization unless and until you recognize the foundation of civil society is the honor it must accord to young men who do not stand up and call out the authorities to single combat to the death, as is the natural right of young males of all sexual species since the Cambrian Explosion.

    Get your priorities straight.

    • The AntiLoser
      The AntiLoser says:

      Interesting comment but I don’t follow how breeding establishes territory or how theology mandates respecting separateness of territories. The Christian church is supposed to gather adherents from every land. Saint Paul never said to exclude black people.

      • James Bowery
        James Bowery says:

        Theology mandates social structures. Social structures occur in physical space — ecologies — known to both anthropologists and zoologists as “territory”. If there are differences in theology, as there will be in some if not all instances, physical separation of respective ecclesiastical authority is pragmatic as is, for instance, separation of territories in which one drives on the left hand side of the road from those in which one drives on the right hand side of the road.

        Or did I misunderstand your question?

        As for Paul, there are those who take him seriously and those that do not, but even for those that take him seriously _and_ decide its either race-mixing or Hell, would you want them in your territory? If not, why object to separate territories for various ecclesia?

  7. Merlin
    Merlin says:

    Is this a joke? Did you understand one single aspect of the symbolism in Excalibur (1981)? Apparently not, because it’s basically the most pagan movie ever made. Everything is symbolic in it, reflecting a pagan world view.

    We don’t need Judaism 2.0 a.k.a. Christianity. We need a religion of the blood, soil and European spirit.

  8. stealth
    stealth says:

    the traditional anthropology can be proved, the flood, the lack of ice ages, the age of the earth, dinosaurs fit this narative and not the scientismic one, coders recognise dna looks designed..what christians need though is a scientific mechanism for christ,how can his death save souls?.this might be provided by carl jungs collective unconscious.could christs presence in the human version of cloud computing stop the collective unconsious being taken over by evil?

  9. John
    John says:

    Go to You Tube and enter “Hail Christ – The Anglo-Israel Message and It’s Importance.”

    It’s an hour long, which you can most certainly spare. Listen and learn while taking notes to check later in the “Good Book” for their veracity. What we know as “Jews”, be they Ashkenazi’s of Khazar (Turko-Mongol) descent or the Sephardics are not the Israelites of the Bible, regardless of the Testament in which they appear. Judaics in Christs time were Edomites, Caananites and Kenites with a mere smattering of confused members of the Tribe of Judah and Benjamin mixed in. Moreover, anyone living in Judea at the time of Christ was considered a “Jew”, not by religious belief, but by the mere fact they lived in Judea and the appelation is not different than referring to a recent naturalized Hispanic immigrant to Texas as a “Texan.” Properly put, in the O.T. the Tribe of Judah should have been translated as Judahites rather than Jews, the adherents to Phariseeism in Judea as Judaics and residents of Judea as Judeans. The Israelites were not “Jews.” They were and are, “Us.”

    “My people perish for lack of knowledge.”

  10. Barkingmad
    Barkingmad says:

    Time for a whole new religion. One that’s 100% white but not based on any form of Christianity or modern paganism at all. A non-manufactured one, a spontaneous one. Early Christianity and paganism were suitable for the early folk and modern sects are fitting for the present braindamaged segments of the population.

    Whatever springs up after a collapse of modern culture will be perfect for those who survive it. We as a group need cleansing by fire first and this time round it’s going to be thorough. Religion that’s based on a “learned” committee sitting around talking theology, then writing out articles of belief like some kind of corporate Charter, isn’t the real deal.

    P.S. Today (April 16th) is Dominique Venner’s birthday.

  11. James
    James says:

    Europeans will continue to destroy themselves if they continue to put faith in an alien non white religion. Christianity is not pro white and not meant to save us. But so many people are simply afraid to go back to their European roots or ancestral roots what you get is people trying to warp christianity to their liking. The brutal truth is christianity is illogical nonsensical and totally chaotic and not pro white or racially aware. Islam and judaism are racially aware by comparison.

    • Jack Halliday
      Jack Halliday says:

      Agreed on all fronts. What people also don’t understand is how much the moral code of this religion has become so laced within our own societies. “Turn the other cheek” and other sophistry about peace and love and forgiveness. These are very dangerous lessons, and were not practiced by Aryans before the takeover of Europe by Christianity.

      Only after the invasion of this Eastern religion did our Race become cucks. Not only that but how many of our fellow Whites were murdered because they did not believe a particular thing about a dead Jew? That is what most of the Crusades were about. Have you read March of the Titans by Arthur Kemp? In the first volume he documents the number of people killed at the hands of Charlemagne and his subordinates.

      This religion spawned both Bolshevism and Liberalism: ideologies based on ultimate equality, and kill millions for the promised ideal of “world peace”. Anyone who wants to understand more about this religion and its effects on our people should read the blog The West’s darkest hour by Cesar Tort.

  12. Sgt. Pepper
    Sgt. Pepper says:

    Christianity is a pipe dream. What is it that makes the white mind prone to malfunction in this way?

    • T. J.
      T. J. says:

      Question should be- What is it that makes the group mind prone to malfunction in this way?

      What is the difference between religion and philosophy? Religion is to the group as philosophy is to the individual. Philosophy tolerates disagreement- religion does not. Philosophy loves free thinkers- religion hates them.

      Religion finds truth outside of reason- hearing the voice of God, intuition, feelings [muh feels], and so on. Philosophy, like science, starts with observation. The senses are considered to be valid. Arguments are made based on induction and deduction. btw my 1960 Dodge had Ram Induction [kind of pseudo supercharging]. The guy at the car place said it was the fastest car he had ever driven- based on his observations. 460 lbs ft torque.

      All religions are based on agreement-for-the sake-of-agreement, as being the truth basis of the religion. This dare not be admitted as it is so absurd.
      Why is bowing toward Mecca five time daily sacred? Because everyone else is doing it! Why is communion sacred? Because other communicants agree that it is sacred.

      Suppose their were no Islam, and one person bowed to Mecca five times every day. Probably get some mental diagnosis. Yet when millions do it, it is called “religious devotion.” Religion is based on agreement-for-the-sake-of-agreement. . .

      Give some credit to Scientology! They come right out and say so- “Reality is what we agree it to be.” But that is the exact opposite of science. . .

      • Jack Halliday
        Jack Halliday says:

        Whatever people think now, whatever they do, it is all traced back to peer pressure and sheepishness. The fact that most people call paedophiles and people who have intercourse with horses disgusting is because society tells them that this is what they must think. This makes me extremely cynical, rather than hopeful about peoples’ nature.

        Once upon a time, Homosexuality was called disgusting by the masses, but as soon as it was legalised, and shoved in your face every time you turned on the TV, and your children were made to feel bad in school for so much as committing wrong think about it, the masses decided to suck up. They thought “but is it so bad. They don’t hurt me. Love and let live. Jesus did preach love and compassion after all…”

        You see the problem here? You see how this can only get worse? You see how contemptible most White people are? What is to say that when the Government legalises incest (it is coming, trust me), then the masses will just be like “eh, no skin off my hide.”

        This is why most laws are pretty much moot. As soon as the System decides that the laws are no longer applicable, or if they invent new ones, then the citizens will just learn to live with it. I remember talking to my cousin once, he is about 20 years older than me. I was very young at the time, late teens. He was almost 40. I was speaking to him about the sexual attractiveness of this beautiful English girl, red hair and all. He told me that I was being a pervert and I was not allowed to think this way because she was underage by law. I saw him to be hopelessly conventional like the rest of humanity (even at my young age), and spoke no more of it. In Britain, 16 is the age of consent – Get this: If you are under 16, even by an hour, and someone 16 or over has intercourse with you, they go to jail for “sexual activity with a child”.

        This is what civilisation does, it makes you feel uncomfortable in your own skin, and a freak for what would be considered normal in healthier times (Roman Republic, Ancient Sparta).

        It is amazing how people will give up their own nature in a flash if the System demands it. They make me sick, all of them. The same thing is mentioned in Might is Right: The Government does criminal acts all the time (WACO, Ruby ridge, the bombing of Iraq after 9/11, Hellstorm Holocaust ETC), but people complain little if at all.

        It is okay for the System to commit these atrocities, but don’t you dare even think about doing this on the smallest scale. We are not allowed to practise that which the Government practises on any personal level, Race being on the personal level. This sheepishness stems from Christianity. God is substituted by the Government. You as a lowly nobody have to adhere to “thou shalt not kill” all the while Christians clad in armour are out murdering their kinsmen in the name of God.

        • Barkingmad
          Barkingmad says:

          It is amazing how people will give up their own nature in a flash if the System demands it.

          What are you saying, that one’s own nature can’t ever be twisted or some sort of mistake? Groups of people, right or wrong, whether pagan or organized-religious or barbarian or neolithic or hunter-gatherer or full-bore “civilized” are going to make rules and regulations for themselves as they need a certain amount of internal order. (Not saying that those groups in their stage of development don’t interesect at times, just trying to say that the necessity of making rules for the whole bunch has always been done.)

          • Jack Halliday
            Jack Halliday says:

            My point is the fact that people deny what they are truly thinking either because it is illegal or politically incorrect. When confronted with their inner nature, they become uncomfortable. Of course, I am not referring to people being uncomfortable because they want to have sex with a horse, or a little girl. I am referring to things as simple and healthy as being attracted sexually to someone 20 years your junior.

            In older Aryan societies, these things which are spat upon were considered quite normal. For example, a 30 year old man marrying a 15 year old girl. Sure, you need law and order, but today’s law and order is made to destroy what it means to be Human. So many in our societies have tucked their tails between their legs because from young ages they are vilified for acting a certain way, or saying something which is deemed politically incorrect. Many end up becoming ashamed of themselves as they are still afraid of this authority figure which put them down as children.

            Whatever this child said or did would have been considered either harmlessly innocent or actually quite healthy in more psychologically healthy societies, such as the Roman Republic.
            Now people feel afraid of their heterosexuality (they have a healthy sex drive) or afraid of certain personal tendencies to violence.

            Our present Big Brother System has no use for such people because they make bad slaves and are dangerous to the existence of the state. It is the same as what happened to the Mormons: Their polygamy was outlawed, then their Racial exclusiveness, because the (((System))) realised that a sexually dominant homogenous community was dangerous to the Government’s power.

            What makes me sick is how easily people adjust to infringements on their own personalities and their own spirits. Like the anecdote of my cousin: How does a man decide in what order to abandon himself?

          • Barkingmad
            Barkingmad says:

            @Jack H. You state, It is the same as what happened to the Mormons: Their polygamy was outlawed, then their Racial exclusiveness, because the (((System))) realised that a sexually dominant homogenous community was dangerous to the Government’s power.

            In some cases, anyway, young Mormon girls were forced to marry creepy old men, very much against their will. However, with older women, where no force is involved, their polygamy should have been left alone.

            Those responsible for outlawing Mormon polygamy are likely practicing it themselves through serial marriage and promiscuity – which is polygamy by another name, except without any social order or strict rules. Old fashioned polygamy (involving women of legal age and under no coercion) may be preferable to the sexual crazyness we have now, though not ideal.

  13. Nick Dean
    Nick Dean says:

    When this post has so clearly demonstrated the harm to a simple unified pro-White cause when a relentless hobby-horser introduces needless division along denomination lines within Christianity, will TOO finally give this thing a rest?

    Andrew Fraser, just pro-White please. No C of E religious admonitions directed toward us. Africans like it, we are known not to – so you’re not helping.

Comments are closed.