The Roots of White Moralistic Aggression: Pursuing Utopian Causes Framed as Moral Issues
The Western world is in a crisis in large part because its culture from beginning to end is depicted as immoral in the elite media and throughout the educational system. It has affected a great many White people—people like those depicted in my compendium of White liberals rejoicing at the decline of people like themselves. As I noted,
As individualists, White people are particularly prone to forming moral communities (rather than kinship-based communities like the rest of the world) and to punishing people who dissent from their moral world view, even at substantial cost to themselves and even if they share many of the same characteristics as the people they are punishing, such being White. This is termed altruistic punishment by evolutionary psychologists and is a major theme of Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. Liberals therefore rejoice when Whites are punished for their racial attitudes.
To flesh out the theme that moral communities rather than kinship-based communities are fundamental to thinking about the West, I post a section from Chapter 6 of Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition which provides some historical background. As noted in the section quoted below, “A critically important feature of Puritanism is the tendency to pursue utopian causes framed as moral issues.” In the nineteenth century, the main moral issue was slavery—Puritan-descended intellectuals were the main influence in developing the moral case against slavery. Now it is the charge of “systemic racism” whereby Whites, just by being White, are recipients of “White privilege.” Whites buy into a system that systematically disadvantages People of Color (ignoring the success of several non-White groups, such as Chinese-descended Americans).
Thus in my view, this moralistic fervor—a fervor that has often led to altruistic punishment of White people like themselves—has deep roots in the culture of the West, particularly the cultures of northwest Europe. In Individualism I argue that these tendencies are genetically based on the basis of historical patterns in family structure and genetic clines. However, my view is that the current culture of moralistic self-hatred is not an inevitable consequence of White tendencies toward moralistic utopianism and altruistic punishment: “With the rise of the Jewish intellectual and political movements, the descendants of the Puritans readily joined the chorus of moral condemnation of America. With their base in the Ivy League universities, Puritan-descended intellectuals dominated intellectual discourse in the United States until the rise of a Jewish elite beginning in the 1920s which accelerated after World War II and became dominant after 1965.”
There are, of course, other reasons besides feeling morally superior for buying into the culture of anti-White hate—most obviously that individuals who publicly dissent from that culture are likely to be punished with ostracism and loss of job; and there are rewards for White people who go along with it—there is a very prosperous diversity industry manned by people—many of the White—who get rich by participating. But as I note, “After the evil has been vanquished, the rhetoric dies down, and disillusionment may occur as people realize that evil has not, after all, been extirpated.” They’ve been trying to “close the gap” in performance with African-Americans for 50+ years now, but it never seems to go away; same for the crime. But by the time disillusionment sets in, it may be too late for White America.
* * *
In short, the Puritan Revolution meant the end of the Indo-European world and its Christian version: the king and aristocracy (“those who fought bellatores”), the Church (“those who prayed, oratores”), and the commoners (“those who worked, laboratores”). It was thus the quintessential modern revolution—a fundamental break in the history of the West. It marked the beginning of the end of aristocratic individualism with its strong emphasis on hierarchy between social categories and the beginning of the rise of egalitarian individualism with its ideology of social leveling.
The revolution, although begun in England, was slow to reach its completion there, whereas in the United States, “as a consequence of the Civil War, the absolute hegemony of the leveling, acquisitive and utilitarian society pioneered by the Puritan Revolution was firmly entrenched.” The Civil War pitted “the Cavaliers of the Old South [who] recalled the highest ideals of European chivalry” against “the soulless materialism of Northern capitalism.”
The new order was far more egalitarian than the older order. Congregations elected their ministers, who served at their pleasure. Whereas war had been the province of the nobility, Cromwell’s New Model Army was based on citizen participation.
It was also profoundly spiritual and created enormous energy—energy that was eventually characterized far more by capitalist financial concerns than religious spirituality. “Possessive individualism” and “tasteful consumption” had come to define the highest expression of Anglo-Saxon character and culture. The government of England and other Anglo-Saxon areas became dominated by commercial and financial interests.
When the intellectuals of the new order looked at the English past, they did not see a social order of liberty and reciprocity. Rather, Whig historians saw the Middle Ages as oppressive, that people had no share in the government and the vast majority were the villeins, vassals, or bondsmen of their lords.
In the United States, the Puritan revolution was carried to its extreme. Freed of the hereditary aristocracy and religion of England, during the Jacksonian era “the few remaining conservative influences in religion, politics, and law” were swept aside. The result was an exultant radical individualism in which every person was to have direct, unmediated access to God. This radical individualism distrusted all manifestations of corporate power, including chartered private corporations. However, the corporations established by the heirs of Puritanism, referred to as WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) in the following, eventually metastasized into monsters “incapable of preserving either the class boundaries of the bourgeoisie or the ethnic character of the Anglo-American nation as a whole.” In the hands of recent and contemporary Anglo-Saxons, the modern business corporation is analogous to the “proposition nation” concept: merely a concatenation of contracts, with no ethnic character, although Fraser is quick to note that corporations dominated by other groups do not lose their ethnic character.
Fraser usefully divides U.S. history into four periods defined by three transformation: The Constitutional Republic dating from the American Revolution to the Civil War and based on political decentralization, liberty and egalitarianism; the Bourgeois Republic resulting from the victory of the North in the Civil War and lasting until Franklin Roosevelt, typified by the Fourteenth Amendment and a large increase in federal power; and the Managerial/Therapeutic leviathan since that period, characterized by an even greater concentration of power at the federal level, combined now with energetic attempts to change the attitudes of Americans in a liberal and eventually in an Anglophobic direction.
None of these eras was explicitly Anglo-Saxon Protestant: Even at the outset, “the Anglo-Saxon character of the Constitutional Republic was merely implicit. The fourth, as yet unrealized, republic is slated to be the Transnational Republic where all traces of White domination have been erased and WASPs have become” a shrinking and despised minority.”
The Puritan-energized egalitarian tendencies of the first period, the Constitutional Republic, eventually ended the aristocratic, Indo-European-derived social order of the Old South.
A natural social order dating from time out of mind had been leveled. The egalitarian sense that every free man must participate in labor now outlawed “invidious” social distinctions between those who worked, those who prayed, and those who fought. It also aggravated the growing split between the North and South. Both the celebration of work and the disparagement of idleness made “the South with its leisured aristocracy supported by slavery even more anomalous than it had been at the time of the Revolution.” Combined with the anti-institutional fervor of evangelical revivalism, the democratic ideology of free labor eventually lent its mass appeal to a multi-pronged crusade against Negro slavery. … The conquest and destruction of the Old South marked the second phase of the permanent American Revolution.
The triumph of the North in the Civil War meant that the US was even further removed from its Indo-European roots than before.
The result of Lincoln’s victory was that limits on federal power “were swept aside by executive decree and military might. By crushing the southern states, Lincoln fatally weakened the federal principle; his arbitrary exercise of emergency powers laid the foundations for executive dictatorship whenever exceptional circumstances justify the suspension of constitutional liberties. The war was an exercise in constitutional duplicity; the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 was accomplished only by means of blatant fraud and military coercion. Nonetheless, once securely enshrined in the Constitution, the amendment provided both the Second [i.e., Bourgeois] Republic and the Third [i.e., Managerial/Therapeutic] Republic with their formal constitutional warrant. … By the standard of the First (Federal) Republic, the Fourteenth Amendment was unconstitutional. But, despite some initial resistance, the legal priesthood of the Republic soon elevated the amendment to the status of sacred writ.
Nineteenth-Century Intellectual Trends
A critically important feature of Puritanism is the tendency to pursue utopian causes framed as moral issues—their susceptibility to utopian appeals to a “higher law” and the belief that the principal purpose of government is moral. New England was the most fertile ground for “the perfectability of man creed,” and the “father of a dozen ‘isms.’” There was a tendency to paint political alternatives as starkly contrasting moral imperatives, with one side portrayed as evil incarnate—inspired by the devil. Puritan moral intensity can also be seen in their “profound personal piety”—their intensity of commitment to live not only a holy life, but also a sober and industrious life.
Whereas in the Puritan settlements of Massachusetts the moral fervor was directed at keeping fellow Puritans in line, in the nineteenth century it was directed at the entire country. The moral fervor that had inspired Puritan preachers and magistrates to rigidly enforce laws on fornication, adultery, sleeping in church, or criticizing preachers was universalized and aimed at correcting the perceived ills of capitalism and slavery.
Puritans waged holy war on behalf of moral righteousness even against their own cousins—quite possibly a form of altruistic punishment as discussed in Chapter 3. Whatever the political and economic complexities that led to the Civil War, it was the Yankee moral condemnation of slavery that inspired and justified the massive carnage of closely related Anglo-Americans on behalf of slaves from Africa. Militarily, the war with the Confederacy was the greatest sacrifice in lives and property ever made by Americans. Puritan moral fervor and punitiveness are also evident in the call of the Congregationalist minister at Henry Ward Beecher’s Old Plymouth Church in New York during World War II for “exterminating the German people … the sterilization of 10,000,000 German soldiers and the segregation of the woman.”
It is interesting that the moral fervor the Puritans directed at ingroup and outgroup members strongly resembles that of the Old Testament prophets who railed against Jews who departed from God’s law, and against the uncleanness or even the inhumanity of non-Jews. Indeed, it has often been noted that the Puritans saw themselves as the true chosen people of the Bible. In the words of Samuel Wakeman, a prominent seventeenth-century Puritan preacher: “Jerusalem was, New England is; they were, you are God’s own, God’s covenant people; put but New England’s name instead of Jerusalem.” “They had left Europe which was their ‘Egypt,’ their place of enslavement, and had gone out into the wilderness on a messianic journey, to found the New Jerusalem.”
Whereas Puritanism as a group evolutionary strategy crumbled when the Puritans lost control of Massachusetts, Diaspora Jews have been able to maintain their group integrity even without control over a specific territory for well over 2,000 years and even during periods when they adopted crypsis to avoid persecution. This attests to the greater ethnocentrism of Jews. But, although relatively less ethnocentric, the Puritans were certainly not lacking in moralistic aggression toward outgroups, even when the outgroup was their close relatives in the Confederacy. And while the Puritans were easily swayed by moral critiques of White America, Jews, because of their stronger sense of ingroup identity, have been remarkably resistant to moralistic critiques of Judaism.
With the rise of the Jewish intellectual and political movements, the descendants of the Puritans readily joined the chorus of moral condemnation of America. With their base in the Ivy League universities, Puritan-descended intellectuals dominated intellectual discourse in the United States until the rise of a Jewish elite beginning in the 1920s which accelerated after World War II and became dominant after 1965.
Ernest Tuveson notes that the moralistic, idealistic strand of American thought tends to come to the fore in times of crisis—“the expansionist period, the Civil War, the First World War.” After the evil has been vanquished, the rhetoric dies down, and disillusionment may occur as people realize that evil has not, after all, been extirpated. However, it lurks in the background and may revive in times of crisis. “Yet, despite post-Civil War disillusionment, the myth of the Redeemer Nation kept a hold on the deepest feelings of the country, and in critical moments asserted itself,” citing several speeches of Woodrow Wilson: “America had the infinite privilege of fulfilling her destiny and saving the world.”
 Andrew Fraser, The WASP Question (Arctos, 2011), 117,
 Ibid., 122.
 Ibid., 156.
 Ibid., 27.
 Ibid., 254.
 Ibid., 280; emphasis in text.
 Ibid., 322.
 Ibid., 287–288. In the passage, the inner quotations are to Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York: Vintage, 1991), 336–337.
 Ibid., 294–295.
 David Hackett Fischer, Albion’s Seed (Oxford University Press, 1989), 357.
 Alden T. Vaughn, The Puritan Tradition in America, 1620–1730 (University Press of New England, 1997), 20.
 Kevin Phillips, The Cousins’ Wars (Basic Books, 1999), 477.
 Ibid., 556.
 Arthur Hertzberg, The Jews in America: Four Centuries of an Uneasy Encounter (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 20–21.
 Ibid., 20.
 See Kevin MacDonald, “The Israel Lobby: A Case Study in Jewish Influence,” The Occidental Quarterly 7, no. 3 (Fall 2007): 33–58.
 Ernest Lee Tuveson, Redeemer Nation: The Idea of America’s Millennial Role (University of Chicago Press, 1968), 199.
 Mark Twain commented early in the twentieth century in notes for a projected essay: “[Robber Baron Jay] Gould Followed CIVIL WAR & Cal.[i.e., California] sudden-riches disease with a worse one… by swindling and buying courts.” Quoted in Tuveson, Ibid., 208.
 Ibid., 209.
 Ibid., 212.
The ” gap” with minorities is IQ – or genetically based. A huge error is being made by “dumbing down” academia to accommodate(at all levels) lower IQ groups in the US.NE Asians have high IQs comparable to NW Europeans.Accordingly they excel here in the US and in Asia.China will soon be the dominate World power due to superior IQs and their racial purity.The US and Europe are being pulled down by lower IQ immigration.
The Puritans had a point.The true Israelis from the North of Palestine- aka the “Lost Tribes” – are the “chosen”.They ultimately immigrated to Europe after being removed from Palestine.The current Israel should be called Judea.
If the Chinese are so smart, how then were they so stupid to embrace communism?
Very few Chinese people actually embraced communism, just as only a tiny percentage of Russians did. If a hard core band of communist doctrinaires seize power in your land, what exactly is the average person supposed to do? Americans will soon face this dilemma.
(The student Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution don’t prove anything, except that young people, especially privileged, immature but above average intelligence but youngsters, are susceptible to mad, cruel, utopian, cultish frenzies, as demonstrated to day in every university in the Western World, where the woke types come from every race on earth)
The communist take-over of China went pretty much the way it did in Russia, mass bloodshed and inhuman tyranny, followed by a cult of personality taking the thing to even higher levels of murderous insanity.
But once Mao died, the Chinese effectively abandoned communism and just became what China has always been, a normal authoritarian state that works pretty well, obviously, as it is made up of Chinese people.
As much as the Russian Mao, Stalin, was a blood-drenched maniac, he at least freed the Russian people from the Jews that instigated the whole nightmare.
The reason that Russia didn’t go the way of China after Mao’s death, and just revert to it’s natural historical place as a normal authoritarian state, is because Russians are white, and white people are more susceptible to the delusions of communist(& leftist) thinking than Chinese people, who have never really understood it.
Excellent answer, Emicho. IQ is necessary but not sufficient. Intellectuals are often especially susceptible to supposedly utopian ideologies or religions, not that university intakes (outside science and engineering) are particularly bright. Students lack the wisdom of experience and are generally susceptible to fashion and peer-pressure. We need to track the exceptions.
“If the Chinese are so smart, how then were they so stupid to embrace communism?”
A professor of mine in college, who was Jewish and lived for a time in Israel, once said that he thought Jews were the smartest and dumbest people at the same time.
25 years later in another part of the world a friend from China said the exact same thing about the Chinese, even adding that it was a commonly expressed thought there.
Obviously, the hard work that goes into making each group a success can account for the intelligence. But what accounts for the stupidity?
I think an answer can be found in that tipping point, when group cohesion becomes overconformity. In other words, conformity for conformity’s sake.
Reminds me of what Nietzsche once wrote, that the shadow of conformity was – stupidity.
Of course, the whole intelligence/stupidity thing can be found in all groups, including Whites.
But I don’t think it’s entirely an accident that European man has had less overconformity, or to put it another way, has tolerated more innovation, than have other groups, and for this reason has been more innovative and has produced more geniuses – far more – and in more areas of human activity.
In short, Whites have produced the greatest number of problem-solvers. We need them now. Because, there’s no quesiton, we have a problem.
One helpful source for understanding the problems raised by KM in this article is Nietzsche’s On The Genealogy of Morals, especially the third essay, particularly from aphorism 19 on.
Nietzsche should certainly be included among the contra mundum authors in Internet University programs for Young Students for Western Resistance & Recovery.
Jews helped Mao.
@ todd hupp
The Lost Tribes=North-West Europeans theory of British-Israel and other Christian Identity groups, unfortunately, is historically and ethnologically unsound.
The point about low-IQ mass-immigration, however, is valid. All over the southern “world of colour” there is a dysgenic birth-rate which underlies conflict, hunger and joblessness.
Take, for example, Nigeria. According to the UK LGBTQUIA+BME agitprop daily, “The Guardian”, September 6, it has “multiple security crises…banditry grew from longstanding conflict between herders and farmers, often from different ethnic groups…. The 2020 ‘end Sars’ campaign against police…showed the young’s capacity to mobilise, as well as their determination to make their country better” [the paper’s faith in “protest” instead of “production”]; the country’s woes are put down to “past administrations, colonialism and the foreign thirst for Nigeria’s resources”. In reality, there are just too many people, and too many young unemployed people, and too many not very bright people. Over 40% are under 14. The median IQ of Nigerians is estmated at 85. Their population is expected to double by 2050.
The prospect is not so much that western business will be crying out in future for cheap labour from Africa but that hordes of the “dark” continent’s unemployables will be coming to western countries as refugees; see e.g. Asfa-Wossen Asserate, “African Exodus” (2018) & Stephen Smith, “The Scramble for Europe” (2019). Maybe our Hindu and Chinese intake will show more resistance than can be expected from the woke-signaling episcopal bureaucrats of the shrinking “Church” of shrinking “England”.
China is a demographic train wreck in progress. They are over-sensitive to social pressure and are working way too much and not breeding. China will be a more dramatic example of how Japan was going to take over the world and then fizzled.
The fear of Japan taking over everything was something that happened just before I became aware of things, so I have no actual knowledge of it, just what I’ve heard.
But it seems very strange to me that anyone around then could imagine a skinny little island with zero natural resources, save the genius of it’s, what? 150 million people? Not allowed a proper military, how exactly was this supposed to surpass a combined Western Europe/North America of say a billion odd people and unlimited resources, entrenched all over earth?
This was the 1980’s? We had problems, but we weren’t in the process of ritualised, performative mass suicide on a civilizational scale, to prove how jolly decent we are, as now.
I bet it’s the same damn neurotic weirdos that were freaking out over the Japs back then, who imagine a combined bill & a half united Chinese with a great chunk of a continent to themselves, and the entirety of Eurasia and Africa on lock, and zero enforced self hate from an occupying power with bases riddling their land, these people reckon this ain’t no thang.
Folks’ above mentioned that the stupidity of races seems to more or less correlate to how clever they are.
From where I’m sitting, we must be damn clever.
(Just to be clear, I welcome our future subjugation to the Chinese, it really can’t come soon enough. Us in Europe will be preserved and looked after by the Chinks, if only to provide the Chinese middle class somewhere tasteful to go on holiday. Everyone knows East Asians love traveling & taking pictures. As for the Yanks, I suppose there may be some aspect of historic Americana they might want to preserve, but not much. You guys will be run the way they intend to run Africa, Australasia or central Asia. With rank indifference. Which will be like Heaven compared to the Luciferian alliance of Jews, women & homosexuals that run us all now.)
97% of major achievement comes from a small section of Northern Europe, according to Charles Murray.
In Clinton’s first term all patents were placed on CDs and handed over to China. Chinese have great difficulty with scientific method, according to my marketing professor. They do not believe in law of non-contradiction- that is, they “think” contradictions exist in existence, not just in minds.
„The triumph of the North in the Civil War meant that the US was even further removed from its Indo-European roots than before. “ True. In many aspects the South had better maintained its European roots, (chivalry, sense of sacrifice, strong racial awareness) than Europe itself – where they were violently swept away in 1792, 1918 and particularly in 1945. Early Puritanism in America was a big problem; it has devolved into a self-congratulatory SJW mindset in foreign policy and hyper-moralizing regarding practically all social issues. (Cf. F. Nietzsche, A. Gehlen. F. Mencken, C. Lasch, etc.).
The South had a heavy Jewish presence and influence. Judah P Benjamin was the Sec. of State. the Sec. of War, and on Confederate currency. Jewish. Jews were heavily involved in the slave trade and slave ownership, and merged almost seamlessly with upper class Southern society.
Spot on! The REAL “civil war” was actually because the northern jewish bankers and millers were screwing the crap out of the southern jewish plantation owners and merchants on cotton. Slavery had nothing to do with the conflict, but was used as the excuse to get white people to murder each other in large numbers, which as been the “plan” ever since.
” Slavery had nothing to do with the conflict,”…
Pure rhetoric . Anything to do with The Jews ultimately always involves slavery issues . The NWO genocidal agenda against The Whites is primarily a genocide against Whites whom resist , oppose , or refuse to fully submit to the hegemony of the zio-jew-masonic-jesuit globalist ILLuminati cabal . Most Christian Whites are in mindless submission .
“” And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you , to inherit them for a possession , they shall be your bondmen forever :””…
( verbatim quote from : The Jewish Holy Torah / KJV / Book of Leviticus / chapter 25 / verse 46 )
“bondmen” == slaves
and “forever” includes the present .
“It was foreseen by so many that the Afghanistan issue would end in a mess…. Western thinking, shared by Europeans and Americans, is conditioned on Enlightenment thinking, which is centred on the improvement of the individual…. The consequent social tinkering…has not only failed to achieve its goals but has also resulted in a long list of social and political tragedies, such as communism in Russia and elsewhere, or the American state-building initiatives, in Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan.” – Prof. Evyatar Friesel, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Letter, “The Economist”, September 4, 2021, p.12.
What purpose is served by ignoring the plain-as-day hypocrisy of an Israeli Jew’s pontifications on various fiascos—beginning with the one whose self-congratulatory historical label is “Enlightenment”—that he knows full well stink of his tribe’s manipulation and deceit in every detail of planning and effectuation?
To ignore Evyatar Friesel’s dissimulation via uncritical citation is in effect to give him and his ilk aid and comfort.
We are still waiting for a Jewish Reformation, never mind Enlightenment. It’s Muslims that usually get slandered for not going through this process, but at least there is such a thing as a Muslim civilisation. It may have peaked in Andalusia, presumably because this was furthest from the Arabian wastelands, and closest to Europeans.
But it was an actual thing that held & defended vast swaths of land, and gave it’s people a life they were obviously satisfied & content with.
Funny how no one ever talks of a ‘Jewish civilisation’, because no such thing ever existed. At least not since Biblical times.
All they did was parasite onto healthy organisms, in totalitarian ghettos. You only get totalitarianism with Jews in charge. No other human race has the sadism, the misanthropic fear & loathing, the neurotic mental intensity, or the obsession with politicising absolutely everything to inflict this on anyone. The Jewish elite spent 2,000 years inflicting this misery on their own people, then the Russians, then the Eastern Europeans, now they are trying to inflict this on the whole Western World.
Lot’s of people say “no, it’s not the Biblical Jewish plan to enslave the world, it’s more complicated than that. It’s the secret societies, it’s the global cult, it’s the Satanism of elite banker, it’s paedophile blood-drinking child sacrifice merchants, it’s a sci-fi transhumanism technetronic control grid thing.
Well it’s obviously all of these things, involving all sorts of white people & others who have went over to the dark side.
But at base it’s Jewish Supremacists, only they have the history, competence, money, intergenerational links, worldwide power and most importantly, the invincible WILL to keep pushing this horror forward.
Of course all these other weirdos play their part. But they’d just be here today, gone tomorrow eccentric nuisances without the over-arching structure to the thing that can only be provided by one group.
” Lot’s of people say “no, it’s not the Biblical Jewish plan to enslave the world, it’s more complicated than that. It’s the secret societies, it’s the global cult, it’s the Satanism of elite banker, it’s paedophile blood-drinking child sacrifice merchants, it’s a sci-fi transhumanism technetronic control grid thing.
Well it’s obviously all of these things, involving all sorts of white people & others who have went over to the dark side.
But at base it’s Jewish Supremacists, only they have the history, competence, money, intergenerational links, worldwide power and most importantly, the invincible WILL to keep pushing this horror forward.”
Superb observations . However , “the invincible WILL” is perhaps more of appearance than substance as a result of overall Christian capitulation to Judaism especially since the 1965 RCC Vatican II Council .
The extraordinary subversive capabilities of The Jews was acquired over a 2500 year period beginning no later than the ancient biblical Tower of Babel incident where they ( hebrews ) sabotaged the workplace vernacular , by injecting language confusions , and successfully caused King Nimrod to abandon the Tower project which was the greatest engineering feat in the world at the time .
Injecting language confusions into any narrative , to create uncertainties and chaos , is one of the first things subversive Jews do , to this day , in their campaigns/( covert operations ) to conquer various dominions ( geo-political as well as other kinds of dominions ) of the world . The injected confusions are also for attaining the vitally important hegemony of the narrative .
The quotation was posted for discussion, and one could have written the script for Monseigneur’s over-reactive language.
I hazard another excerpt – on the retreat from Afghanistan and US “willingness to make sacrifices” for “Israel’s security”, which “makes Jews afraid”:
“Pearl Harbor and the American entry into the war was the decisive event of the 20th Century. It brought to an end a policy of isolationism and doomed Hitler to defeat. It led directly to decades of American…policy of interventon and its support for the state of Israel…. Jews have been protected by American power, Western interests and by the memory of the Holocaust. But it may now be that this era is over…. Jews are less safe as a result…. We may have thought that we were moving…towards international law and a world brotherhood and the triumph of liberal ideas…. All this seems very naive now.” – Daniel Lord Finkelstein, “The Jewish Chronicle,” September 3, p.40.
“The plan of the newspaper is good: if you can’t get a compliment any other way, pay yourself one.” Was Mark Twain thinking of you, Ned, when he wrote in this prophetic vein?
I do not know whether Evyatar Friesel is just a deceitful liar, because I do not read minds. The only “evidence” offered is that the professor is presumably of the same “ilk” as the “Mother of God” and the “First Pope”. There is in some respects more freedom of opportunity to criticise Israel inside Israel and Judaism than in the USA. And paradoxically the World Zionist Organization’s Morton Klein is among those Jews who have attacked the ADL and suchlike for backing Black Lives Matter and related scams.
As for your self-ennobled correspondent: “Sur cette Pierre je me vais frapper la tete” (cf. Matt. 16.18, La Bible de Jerusalem).
LOL! No mention by the Hebrew here of the Jewish role in forcing the US military into Afghanistan (Neo-Con Jews), ‘social tinkering’ amounting to tikkun olam, which indeed always ends in tragedy, the Jewish dominance of Communism, and the Neo-Con Jew role in forcing the US into Iraq on behalf of Israel.
I had an academic an expat British born guy who was a Freemason said to me that ‘character is something one is born with its not something you learn.’ Strange I thought too myself what then do you make of or do with the issue of sin? Silence? Next to that with that kind of sentiment it seems these Freemasons feel themselves to be morally superior too all others and therefore deserve to rule above all others. America is full, beyond full really with this Deism with its idolatry now raising its ugly head from sea to sea the world over actually. What frightens me however, is how these people work in secret and have penetrated the clergy of most if not all Christian denomination sects. Indeed I remember reading about Schuller of Crystal Cathedral fame seeking out the help of those people upon his arrival in California and then what? Then comes along his great friend Norman Vincent Peale a high degree Freemason and viola you have the hour of power and this nonsense of the power of positive thinking which made its way into the gospel of Christ an unknown thing to the original apostles. I had to laugh later to when his son took over who I gathered as a bonafide he was preaching to empty benches to the horror of his father?
As for the Puritans I am not well versed really but for a people to thumb their nose at England and leave to found a better paradise to end up practically dead in their first winter and needing the help of the native Indians just teaches me they never had either the blessings or protection of God. I don’t think their vision to leave on the Mayflower to found a better life and world was from God but from their own desires. Further did they not eventually become terribly indebted to ship owners and others back in England who were themselves probably indebted to the Monarchy and His Lords because they woefully were unprepared for what awaited them in the new world? The cost of moving people and goods back and forth must have been terribly expensive. In fact if I’im right didn’t they look at being in partnership with these very people back home promising them a share in the new worlds bounty? Isn’t it all just so hypocritical? As for this Protestant work ethic I think that as a joke to because in the New World if you didn’t work from dawn to dusk you were dead literally! I believe Michael Hoffman has a book entitled They Were White and they Were Slaves? Indeed!
No wonder a blog such as this has such a dim view of the Church and Christianity. Perhaps some reading of Charles Finney is in order:
During the early part of my ministry especially, I used to get knocked back by other preachers because of the way that I preached.
They used to complain that I let down the dignity of the pulpit, that I was a disgrace to the ministerial profession, that I talked like a lawyer at the bar, and that I talked to the people in a colloquial manner. They complained that I said “you” instead of preaching about sin and sinners
and saying “they”. They also told me that I said “hell” with such emphasis that I often shocked people. They said I urged people to respond as if they might not have a moment to live, and sometimes they said that I condemned people.
After I had preached for some time and God had poured out His blessing everywhere I went, I used to say to ministers that I did not dare to make the changes that they wanted. I said, “Show me the fruits of your ministry. If you can prove by your results that you have found a
better way, then I will adopt your views.”
They would often complain that I was guilty of repetition in my preaching. I would take the same thought and turn it over and over, and illustrate it in various ways. I told them that I felt it was necessary to do this, to make myself understood. Then they would say that the
educated people in my congregation would lose interest. But the facts soon silenced them. They found that under my preaching, judges and lawyers and educated men were converted in their droves, but under their methods such a thing almost never occurred.
I never bore any grudge towards other ministers for the rough way they often treated me. I knew they were only trying to help. One time a well-known temperance lecturer from Connecticut came down to hear me preach. He was indignant. He said I should stop preaching and
go to Princeton immediately to learn theology.
I don’t want to give the impression that I thought that my views or methods were perfect, for I had no such thought. I was aware that I was but a child, so to speak. I had not been to the higher schools of learning, so I never had any higher ambition than to go into new settlements and places where the Gospel was not being preached. I was often surprised, in the first year of my preaching, that educated people found my preaching so compelling.This was more than I had expected. In fact it was more than I had dared to hope.
I am still totally convinced that to a large extent the schools are ruining the ministers. Preachers these days have wonderful facilities, and are vastly more learned, so far as theological, historical and Biblical learning is concerned, than perhaps any age in history. Yet with all
their learning, they do not know how to use it. They are, to a great extent, like David in Saul’s armor.
Ministers need one thing above all others, and that is singleness of eye. If they feel they have a reputation to protect, they will do little good.
I could name ministers who are still alive today who were deeply ashamed of me when I first began to preach because I was so undignified, used such common language and spoke to the people with such directness.
I was aware from the start that I would meet with opposition, and that there was a wide gulf between my views and the views of other ministers. I never really felt like one of them, or that they regarded me as truly belonging to their fraternity. I was bred a lawyer. I came
straight from the law office into the pulpit, and talked to the people as I would have spoken to a jury.
When a city is on fire, the fire captain does not read his men an essay or a fine piece of rhetoric. It is a matter of urgency, and he has to make every word count. This is the way it always is when men are urgent and serious. Their language is pointed, direct and simple.
Their sentences are short and powerful. They appeal for direct action.
Ministers usually avoid preaching directly to the people. They will preach to them about others, and the sins of others, but rarely will they ever say: “You are guilty of these sins, and the Lord requires this of you.” They often preach ‘about’ the Gospel instead of preaching the
Gospel. They often preach ‘about’ sinners instead of preaching to them. They go to great lengths to avoid being personal. But I have always gone down a different line than this. I have often said, “Do not think that I am talking about anybody else. I am talking to you and you and you.”
Ministers told me at first that people would never put up with this – that they would get up and leave, and never come back. But they were mistaken. A lot depends on the spirit in which it is said. If it is done in the spirit of love, with an honest desire for their very best, there are
very few who will continue to resent it. At the time they may feel rebuked and upset, but deep down they know that they needed it, and it will ultimately do them good.
People are not fools. They have little respect for a man who will go into the pulpit and preach smooth things. There is a part of them that despises it.
I became aware that a large number of ministers east of Utica were writing letters about the revivals, and taking a hostile stand against them. But until I came to Auburnin 1826 I was not fully aware of the amount of opposition I was destined to meet from these ministers – who did not personally know me but were influenced by false reports. I learned that a secret network was developing with the aim of uniting the ministers and churches to hedge me in, and prevent the revivals from spreading.
I was told that all the New England churches in particular were closed to me. I became quite upset by all of this. I didn’t say anything to anyone, but gave myself to prayer. I asked God to direct me and to give me the grace to ride out the storm.
One day I was in my room and the Lord showed me a vision of what lay ahead. He drew so near to me while I was praying that I literally trembled. I shook from head to foot, under a full sense of the presence of God. It seemed more like being on the top of Sinai, with all the
thunderings, than in the presence of the cross of Christ.
Never in my life was I so awed and humbled before God. But instead of wanting to run away, I felt drawn nearer and nearer to this Presence that filled me with such awe and trembling. After a period of great brokenness before Him, there came a great lifting up. God assured me that He would be with me and hold me up – that no opposition would succeed against me. He showed me that there was nothing I should do, but to keep ministering and allow Him to vindicate my ministry.
The sense of God’s presence, and all that passed between myself and God at that time, I can never describe. It led me to be perfectly trusting, perfectly calm, and to have nothing but the best attitude towards all the brothers who were misled and were aligning themselves against me. I felt sure that everything would turn out alright in the end – that the best course for me to take was to leave everything to God and just keep on going. As the storm gathered and the opposition increased, I never doubted for one moment how it would result. I was never disturbed by it. I never spent a waking hour thinking about it – even when it seemed as if all the churches in the land, except where I had ministered, would unite to shut me out of their pulpits. This was what the leaders of this opposition had vowed to do. They were so deceived that they thought they had no choice but to unite and, as they expressed it, “put him down.” But God assured me that they would
never put me down. -[From the book, “Charles Finney – Most Powerful Revivals”]
All of the peasant class in all of history was never much far from starvation, but I still think there is truth in what was called the Protestant work ethic. Especially in the 19th century, as so many Protestant peasants shot up out of poverty, often dragging whole villages, towns & nations to prosperity with them.
If it’s just to avoid starving, this doesn’t explain why they carry on beavering away, or what explains what I have often seen from old timers with my very own eyes, the physical repulsion these guys feel when confronted with idleness.
This in bone deep in them, it doesn’t seem learned, or acquired for effect, it’s the exact same natural repulsion a normal man of any era(except this one) would feel when confronted with something that is so obviously unnatural, an offence to God, and a sin against nature and the natural order, like two men kissing each other, or even a black man kissing a white woman.
Just think how shook up and repellent this sort of thing would be to all men of all history pre the 1960’s, this is what you used to see in old timers from this Protestant work ethic tradition.
This is NOT what you got in Southern or Catholic Europe, where idleness was much more condoned/forgiven/found amusing.
Though it really wouldn’t surprise me if all this has just as much to do with the colder weather than it does with religion.
So much of what intellectuals put down to complex theories of theology, ideology or philosophy can be better explained by simple geography.
Examples: The Iberians discovered America first because they were closer than the Chinese, and the Muslims cut off their trade to the East. The USA is so strong because it is protected by two oceans and has enormous resources. Britain became the most free because the Channel protected us from Europe. Western Europe out-did Eastern Europe because the East protected them from the Muslims/hordes of Asia. Russia is naturally authoritarian because it doesn’t have any geographic defences. The Aborigines of Australia have the lowest IQs because they were the most isolated.
And so on, and so on . . .
A bit simplistic, but part of the mix for sure.
Russia has an ocean, ice sheets, brutal winters, large rivers, mountain ranges and vast open expanses as protection. Germany on the other hand has none of these defenses. None.
Are you theorizing that the isolation of the aborigines led to inbreeding, which depressed IQ? Many groups who were not geographically isolated engaged in inbreeding and might not have experienced a marked decling in IQ. Not that he was a super-genius, but Einstein married his own cousin. Lincoln’s parents were first cousins.
Not so much “in-breeding” like Pakistanis do, breeding with their cousins etc, retarding their intelligence and health, but yeah, “in-breeding” just among their own group or race, with no fresh input from a neighbouring people.
This would seem to me to either lower intelligence, or at least not improve it.
As would zero competition with competitor peoples or cultures. Maybe this isn’t actually correct, but it seems to me to be a fair conclusion.
As for marrying cousins among our people, I noticed that it seemed pretty common in the Victorian era.
My *guess* is that there is next to no effect from breeding with your cousin, the only problem comes when you make it into a habit.
We all know of that weird Hapsburg the Spaniards called bewitched or something, but we also all understand that the majority of the Hapsburgs seemed ok.
So what I mean is if the Aborigines were low IQ, then I reckon this was much more about isolation than inbreeding, although obviously the two things can’t be totally separated.
Aboriginals are like 14 % neanderthal on average.
Where as Asians are like 1,4 %.
Whites like 1 %
Africans between 1 % and 16 % i.e. avereg 8 % pre-neanderthal (i.e. even more stupid than neanderthals with mini brains).
See a pattern here.
It’s a combination most likely of EVOLUTION and mixing between different species.
Like WHITES are a mix of early hunter gatherers, eastern hunter-gatherers, indo europeans, asians (northern Russia, same as Japanese, but small part) and one more group, white levians which are like georgians or southern russians of some kind but they had blue eyes most likely I think (not the same as turks or arabs, these areas were invaded by the turmenians or whatever later). This according to gene technology.
So I would say all these groups exept the asians that whites are the result of mixing with are white. But then on top of that we have a lot of continuos evolution.
As for natural Russian geographical defences, sure, it has those things you mention, that is true. But the Russians don’t live in their ocean, their vast desolate expanses, on in their mountains.
And true enough, Germany doesn’t have any of these things, but Germany is cushioned from the Muslim masses by Italy and the Balkans and from the hordes of Asia by Slavs in general.
Being right bang in the centre of Europe, being the biggest country, with the largest population, and Europe best rivers, a tepid climate and plenty natural resources, there is no shortage of nations or peoples who envy Germany.
Plus Germany has mountains! When I think of mountains, Germany is the first nation I think of.
I can’t be the only person who thinks: ‘Eagles Nest’ and hears the “Hills are alive with the sound of music” when mountains are mentioned. Germany and mountains are synonymous I’d bet in many imaginations.
When I think of Germany I think of their beautiful “medieval” villages, many of which managed to survive Anglo-American Terror-Bombing, and the similarity of the English and German people which a sinister propganda, two wars and resentful envy have clouded.
Heat is debilitating and must be a factor in low productivity in much of the Arab and even Mediterranean world. Biological adaptation may have a different result compared to northern climate. I think Schopenhauer was an early commentator on this, but the first significant modern investigation was by Stefan Possony and Nathaniel Weyl, “Geography of Intellect” (1963) which some readers may not wish to read as the first author had a Jewish wife and the second a Jewish father.
Having a Jewish wife or father doesn’t make you a Jew, but having a Jewish mother does. It’s insane that our future King George, William’s son, will be Jewish, yet it is never mentioned.
As for reading Jews, it’s only Jews who are really allowed to speak of the JQ so all the best stuff comes from them. We wouldn’t know the the truth of the medieval ‘blood libel’, nor Israel Shahak’s stuff, which it is impossible to read and not become an ‘anti-Semitic’.
Makes sense, normal Jews hate their elite and wants to expose their crimes just like any normal white person hates our elite.
The claim that the Duchess of Cambridge is of the Hebrew persuasion was refuted in “The Jewish Chronicle”, June 20, 2013.
Masons were prominent in the French Revolution and American Independence. Masonry sometimes seems to be a preliminary stage before Communism, as in Russia, Spain, Portugal and – nearly – Chile.
Superb observation .
Freemasonry is nonexistent without its jewish/zionist components .
In 1843 , with Rothschild funding ( Wikipedia article does not mention it ) , the all-jewish B’nai B’rith Freemasonry lodge was founded in NYC and now dominates International Freemasonry .
Secret societies are major instruments in Zionist/Judaic conquests of world dominions because high rank members of them , holding powerful government offices , can easily evade accountability for conspiratorial activities such as facilitating the ILLuminati NWO de-population agenda . Freemasonry and related secret societies , such as Skull & Bones , are inordinately powerful major players in likely criminal world geo-political affairs .
@ money talks
Thank you for the compliment, but I think your second sentence exaggerates the closeness of the connection, whereby Masonic deists and Jews have had a shared interest in reducing the influence of RC “clericalism”.
Many connections are intimate since some Jesuits are also Freemasons and vice versa ; some Jews are also Freemasons and vice versa ; some Jesuits are also Jews and vice versa .
The ILLuminati are members of a secret club/cabal within the secret society of Freemasonry . No one other than those club/cabal members know for certain who are some of the other members ; or if they do know , they are not saying . Some researchers may know , based on credible indicators , of some who are most likely members of the inherently conspiratorial globalist cabal .
The Puritans were right to oppose slavery. Imagine how much better off America would be today if greedy, ((Jew)) and ((Jew))-collaborating (“Curse of Ham”) slave importers and owners had not been allowed to get their soulless, Mammon-driven hooks into the North American continent and into the USA?
Globalists have the same cheap labor mentality, with the same disastrous results.
Lincoln had to fight a civil war to cut these globalist slave traders off at the knees. We need to fight another civil war now to cut these globalist slave traders off at the knees again.
I didn’t think there would be many Lincoln fans at this site. He fought the war to ‘save the union’, and in the process destroyed it, because it was understood by all since USA’s inception that it was a voluntary arrangement, and any state was free to leave if they so wished.
The slave stuff obviously was a major disagreement, but was also the lipstick stuck on the ugly pig that the war was, to justify such insane carnage, suffering and destruction.
The North didn’t do the black slaves any favours. Any fool at the time could understand this, but it was proved forever by the interviews conducted at the beginning of the 20th century with old-time former slaves, who all pined for the days of slavery, when they were looked after, had work, were safe, & surrounded by their families as opposed to let loose, totally unprepared, in the most merciless capitalist system of exploitation the earth has ever seen.
By all accounts, in the 1860’s America slavery was on the way out, history was blowing in the opposite direction. If you really cared for these black people, as opposed to only caring about boasting of your own moral superiority, you’d work to wind slavery down over a couple of generations, with BDS type means, while working to ensure the slave owners and their society did all they could for their people.
What you wouldn’t do is launch a mad war and storm through the place raising the civilisation of the South to the ground.
People who justify & white-wash historical wars are the moral equivalent of today’s psychopaths who push for new wars. They both need each other.
If we don’t want war in our present or our future, we really need to start showing up these war fan-boys of the past for the sick, cruel freaks that they are.
Lincoln was sceptical of a mixed-race society and spoke in favor of a repatriation to Africa. A pity Garvey failed in his efforts.
Interesting article. We have the same tendencies in many European countries although not affected by this movement as such.
For example I think Rome used a view, an interpretation of Christioanity in order to make the Vikings calm down, which was in most European regions interest. So the religion was moulded certain aspects lifted and so on with this goal.
Martin Luther said he thought jews probably opposing Rome initially put in false statements and things into to the bible. I am sure there were lotsa jews involved in the hundreds of years before the bible was written down who may have affected the text in this way. Judas betraid Jesus, was he the only idiot? Probably not.
I KNOW Christianity is the TRUE religion however I am sure it has been distorted which may also have affected the puritans…
In my region I think for example Sweden’s politicians working to have a J in jews passports to stop immigration and the socalled race research may have affected opinion that lotsa whites are ashamed of things in the past and therefore become illogical.
And certain tribal elements have certainly used this calling anyone opposing massimmigration an evil nazi and the like time after time..
The Jewish/Puritan alliance is fascinating. Oliver Cromwell not only allowed the Jews back into England after the great Crusader king, Edward I, conqueror of Wales, Hammer of the Scots, had kicked them out at the beginning of the 14th century.
The Jews in Amsterdam also financed the misery of Puritan rule in England, totalitarianism in utero, which also included the beheading of a Christian king.
Or every. Single. Time?
Dude, like writing: “the jews did this or that” is not factual. Sure jews with money or power might hvae been doing this or that it may even have been organized and decided by like the 300 elders.
This does not mean all jews were behind a thing most likely they have no clue to what their leadership does. Just like most people in the USA does not agree with politicians in many issues or people with gigantic sums of money and the like.
But sure, the racial mixture between the original jews and arabs aswell as levians and africans that most jews, NOT ALL are the result of may have caused larger issues with this particular group than others.
It’s never ‘all Jews’, it’s the Jewish elite or organised Jewry. Often your everyday average Jew is the first casualty of this tendency. Sometimes your normal Jew is the best and most fervent critic of these criminals. Although these days there doesn’t seem to be many who will speak out(only a few), it wasn’t always thus.
It’s pretty well understood that Jewish supremacists, though seeing us as insects, having no soul and our lives no meaning, they do reserve their worst hatred for Jews who leave the reservation.
This is a Biblical thing. It’s why the holocaust is called that, it was(in Jewish supremacist minds) a sacrificial human burning of Jews who had displeased Yahweh & become too similar to the goyim.
If I was a Jew, I imagine I would feel exactly as I do now, I’d blame most of this degenerative mess we see all around us on organised Jewry. Not because I hate anyone, but because it seems to be the truth. And the fact we aren’t allowed to criticise Jews appears to totally confirm this.
Being a Jew wouldn’t change that.
” I KNOW Christianity is the TRUE religion “…
Christianity may be “the TRUE religion” but it most definitely is not [ the TRUE science ] in view of Christianity’s profound lack of empirical verifications for its most audacious claims .
The big difference between Christianity and Science __
Christianity requires an abundance of faith and is bereft of facts
Science requires an abundance of facts and is bereft of faith .
In terms of the venerable oriental Yin-Yang symbol , Christianity is the dark faith half enclosing the enlightened fact circle ; and True Science is the enlightened fact half of the symbol enclosing the dark faith circle .
Ying yang, you an asian.
Asians seems to be a bit I dunno not the same as whites.
Mowe to Asia if you into their culture, but they may not want you there.
I am not asian .
My advocacy of WN does not preclude giving credit where it is appropriate .
The Yin-Yang symbol originated in the orient and it is universal , timeless , and one of the most venerable symbols known to humanity .
The Whites and every other race have an inalienable right to their own ethnostate ; and they have a pragmatic right to an ethnostate only insofar as they can establish and secure it . In other words , an inalienable right per se does not preclude the possibility of Whites becoming extinct . Many if not most USA Whites
( except perhaps for Southerners ) mistakenly think that “inalienable” means “inviolable”. Big mistake .
USA Whites on average have a very low level of political intelligence ( not mostly an IQ issue ; and except for mostly inconsequential voting enthusiasms ) compared to their chosenhite jewmasterss .
“Christianity requires an abundance of faith and is bereft of facts.”
I wish I had entitled my book Welcome to God World instead of Climate Change is the Work of God but alas we all live and learn and anyway that first title wasn’t mine but an academic who also said after listening to a testimony and reading what was in front of him “So there is a God after all.”
Climate Change the Work of God? Hows that for an “audacious claim?”
And O how I wish I had gone to school lol and been a better writer but the way things are God always uses the nothings of the world to bring to nothing everything that is.
By the way Money Talks here another audacious claim Adan and Eve didn’t have a belly button.
” Climate Change the Work of God ”
No doubt since most major Westernworld political themes originate from The RCC .
Job, John Wesley, the Moravians, Charles Finney, Asa Mahan, Jewish history every prophet that is, were not RCC in any way whatsoever and they lived the truth of climate change! John Wesley in particular the weather was affected by his life! Read his diary!
As for the rest you may want to go here to start your re-education and read the comment right before this by a Milan:
Good luck in your discovery of some much needed truth Money Talks and do please read my book its the only one ever written on the subject in the entire history of the written word of mankind period and I didn’t write it for either fame or fortune. I was told to by guess who?
We need to be hydrated. Think real hard about that the next time you drink a glass of water.
It is worth entering “Jews behind Mao” in the Google & Bing seach engines and looking up all the entries. One must take with a pinch of douanjiang, however, the claim that the Great Chairman was himself a Kaifeng Jew or a Rothschild scion (never mind, Jew En-lai).
“When the intellectuals of the new order looked at the English past, they did not see a social order of liberty and reciprocity. Rather, Whig historians saw the Middle Ages as oppressive, that people had no share in the government and the vast majority were the villeins, vassals, or bondsmen of their lords.”
That’s one way to look at it. Here’s another: