The Wickedness of Whiteness: Leftist Minority-Worship Preaches the Innate Evil of Whites

What’s the connection between cakes and leftism? Until last week, I would have found it impossible to give a good answer to that question. Then I picked up a new book by the British mathematician Ian Stewart (born 1945) and read the following:

The classic example [of fair division], from which everything else flows, is that of two children arguing over a cake. The problem is to divide the cake between them using a good protocol — a set of rules specified in advance — that is provably fair. The classic solution is “I cut, you choose.” … When I mentioned this method in an article, one reader wrote in to say that he’d tried it on his children, and Alice (not her real name) had promptly complained that Bob (not his) had the bigger piece. When her father pointed out that this was her fault for cutting badly, the news didn’t go down terribly well — in her eyes it amounted to blaming the victim — so her father swapped the two pieces. Only to hear her wail: “Bob’s piece is still bigger than mine!” (Ian Stewart, What’s the Use? The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics, Profile Books, 2021, chapter 2)

That might seem a funny but trivial story. In fact, it’s more than that: it captures the way millions of adult leftists think about “social justice” and “equality.” In particular, it captures the way Blacks and other non-Whites think. Nothing Whites can do will ever be enough to satisfy their demands or appease their anti-White hatred, resentment and envy. Whites will always be racist and White nations will always be unjust to non-Whites. Here’s an example of that kind of thinking from the Guardian:

Amy Mae Baxter was still a publishing trainee in 2019 when she founded Bad Form, an online magazine for writers of colour. … This March was a “huge month” for Bad Form, thanks to a flurry of black-authored titles commissioned in response to the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests finally hitting the shelves. Her worry, however, is that they’re all now competing with each other, meaning some might not sell as well as they otherwise could have. (“The book that tore publishing apart: ‘Harm has been done, and now everyone’s afraid,’” The Guardian, 18th June 2022)

How do you satisfy a leftist like Amy Mae Baxter? You can’t: the only solution is to get people like that out of your society. Even better is not to let them into your society at all. In other words, prevention is better than cure. The Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán believes in prevention, not cure, and refuses to open the borders of his White Christian nation to Blacks and Muslims. That’s why he is demonized by leftists around the world for his “racism” and “xenophobia.”

The toxicity of truth

Orbán has the truth on his side, but that doesn’t fully explain why he is successful. As I’ve argued before, having the truth on your side can be enervating and unhelpful, in part because you can subconsciously fall into the trap of thinking that truth will do the work for you. And believing in obvious truths doesn’t require any emotional investment or activate any of the religious modules that seem to be built into the human brain. No religion has ever been based on the claim that water is wet or that the sun rises in the east. It doesn’t take any effort to believe those things. But the very successful religion of Christianity is based on the claim that a man rose from the dead. That claim defies common sense and demands effort to believe. Once you’ve made that effort, you have an emotional and cognitive investment. Naturally enough, you then want to defend your investment and protect your belief against its critics.

Leftism also makes claims that defy common sense and demand emotional investment: we’re all the same under the skin; Blacks fail only because of White racism; East Asians flourish despite White racism; and so on. In short, leftism is a quasi-religion that activates those very powerful and ancient religious modules in the brain.  Old religious concepts like sin and blasphemy re-appear in the form of racism and hate-speech. Indeed, leftism is in part a Christian heresy or a perversion of Christianity, drawing on Christian ideas of spiritual equality but failing to accept the Christian idea that we’re all sinners. In fact, some Christians don’t accept that idea either. Calvinism has the concepts of an elect minority, bound from birth for Heaven, and a damned majority, bound from birth for Hell. In Calvinism, we’re all predestined to celestial bliss or infernal agony, and nothing we do will alter our fate.

Rhetoric as route to power

Leftism has re-created that Calvinist concept and founded what Gregory Hood at AmRen has called the Church of the Damned, where nothing Whites can do or say will ever cleanse them from their hereditary taint—their original sin—of racism. Leftism mandates both that Blacks and Whites are born equal and that only the innate evil of Whites explains why Blacks don’t have the same high achievements as Whites. In other words, leftism has two big lies that contradict each other: first, that we’re all born equal; second, that Whites are innately evil. The contradiction doesn’t weaken leftism but strengthens it, because it trains leftists in deceit and allows them to preach one thing while practicing another. They use the rhetoric of equality and justice as a Trojan horse to get themselves into power. Once they’re in power, they impose inequality and injustice on their enemies. A cult of minority-worship goes naturally with a cult of majority-demonization. An anonymous French writer long ago described how leftism operates:

« Quand je suis le plus faible, je vous demande la liberté, parce que tel est votre principe ; mais quand je suis le plus fort, je vous l’ôte, parce que tel est le mien. »

“When I am the weaker, I ask you for freedom, because that is your principle; but when I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, because that is my principle.”

Free speech in the U.S. is a classic example. In the 1950s when Jews had relatively little power compared to the present, Congressional committees were grilling Jewish communists and communist sympathizers on their ideologies and connections. It was the period of the notorious Hollywood blacklist. At that time, Jewish activist organizations were all for free speech. It’s a distant memory now that the left has power and the ADL is partnering with social media companies and payment processors like PayPal to get right-wing and even conservative messages off their platforms. And the Biden administration is actively pressuring social media companies in the same direction—a clear violation of the First Amendment. So now there is a very different kind of blacklist, one reserved for people who do not conform to leftist narratives.

Leftism is an ideology based on lies and run by liars. Look at the topic of slavery, where leftists work tirelessly to encourage White guilt and non-White grievance. But neither the guilt nor the grievance can be justified on the central leftist principle of human equality. If human beings are, as leftists insist from one side of their mouths, innately and absolutely equal, it follows that the roles of slave and master are determined entirely by accidents of history and geography. White Europeans enslaved Black Africans in our reality, but that was pure chance. If the historical and geographical dice had rolled differently, it would have been the other way around: Black Africans would have enslaved White Europeans.

The stench of White history

But there is no hint of any of that in the endless propaganda pumped out by the Left about White enslavement of Blacks (they ignore the Muslim enslavement of Blacks and much else). Kris Manjapra, a Black professor of history at Tufts University, has asked “When will Britain face up to its crimes against humanity?” in the Guardian. But he doesn’t preach the first big lie of leftism, namely the equality of all so-called races. He doesn’t talk about historical contingency and the decisive role of chance in determining who enslaved whom. Instead, he uses rhetoric about the “stench of British historical amnesia and of institutionalised racism” to promote the second big lie of leftism, namely, the innate moral superiority of non-Whites over Whites. The implication of his rhetoric is that the innately evil Whites of Europe enslaved the innately virtuous Blacks of Africa. But he also says something very interesting at the beginning of his anti-White polemic:

On 3 August 1835, somewhere in the City of London, two of Europe’s most famous bankers came to an agreement with the chancellor of the exchequer. Two years earlier, the British government had passed the Slavery Abolition Act, which outlawed slavery in most parts of the empire. Now it was taking out one of the largest loans in history, to finance the slave compensation package required by the 1833 act. Nathan Mayer Rothschild and his brother-in-law Moses Montefiore agreed to loan the British government £15m, with the government adding an additional £5m later. The total sum represented 40% of the government’s yearly income in those days, equivalent to some £300bn today. (When will Britain face up to its crimes against humanity?, The Guardian, 29th March 2018)

Manjapra then complains that all of this huge loan, which wasn’t paid off by ordinary White tax-payers until 2015, was used to compensate the White beneficiaries of slavery rather than its Black victims. He leaves two very interesting historical questions hanging in the air. First, how were Rothschild and Montefiore, members of the tiny and oppressed Jewish minority, in possession of such a vast sum of money? Second, in what other ways were Jewish plutocrats using their wealth and influence over  gentile politicians? Manjapra couldn’t explore those questions, of course, or he would have been denounced as an anti-Semite. But a lot of that vastly disproportionate Jewish wealth came from slavery, which Jews have practiced and been enriched by for many centuries. As Andrew Joyce has described at the Occidental Observer, Jewish slave-dealers worked in Europe from Roman times before turning to the profits to be made in Africa. Among much else, they “bought and sold Christian slaves and kidnapped and castrated Christian youths for the Muslim markets in Spain.”

Listening, Learning, Lying

You wouldn’t guess any of that from anti-White propaganda-films like Amistad (1997), which was directed by the proudly Jewish Steven Spielberg and is about Blacks mutinying against cruel Whites as they are carried into slavery. In Hollywood, Jews are not simply over-represented but overwhelmingly dominant, and they have been promoting minority-worship and majority-demonization for decades. That propaganda will increasingly shift from denying history to outright reversing it. Leftism is abandoning the rhetoric of equality to insist on the wickedness of Whiteness. In August 2022, the White American historian James H. Sweet made a doomed attempt to criticize this trend:

The Elmina [Ghana] tour guide claimed that “Ghanaians” sent their “servants” into chattel slavery unknowingly. The guide made no reference to warfare or Indigenous slavery, histories that interrupt assumptions of ancestral connection between modern-day Ghanaians and visitors from the diaspora. Similarly, the forthcoming film The Woman King seems to suggest that Dahomey’s female warriors and King Ghezo fought the European slave trade.

In fact, they promoted it. Historically accurate rendering of Asante or Dahomean greed and enslavement apparently contradict modern-day political imperatives. (President of American Historical Association Dares Doubt the 1619 Project, Quickly Apologizes, Steve Sailer, 20th August 2022)

The video below is a classic summary of African culpability in the British slave trade that dumbfounded Don Lemon, a CNN anchor — Africans rounding up Africans and depositing them in cages on the beach, the costs to the British navy for policing their ban on the slave trade [2000 dead British sailors], and the uniqueness of the British anti-slavery policy at a time when slavery was essentially universal.

As Steve Sailer has noted, Prof. Sweet was quickly forced into a groveling apology. He announced that “I sincerely regret the way I have alienated some of my Black colleagues and friends” and promised that “I’m listening and learning.” One of the things he is “learning” is that traditional White standards of scholarship have no place in modern academia and must exercise no influence on portrayal of the past. Yes, it’s historically true that King Ghezo and his female warriors promoted the European slave-trade rather than fighting it. But so what? If it serves the purposes of leftist propaganda and the promotion of Black grievance to invert the truth, that is precisely what must be done. Virtue trumps veracity and it is virtuous to sanctify Blacks and demonize Whites.

History isn’t a science, as you can see from the inability of historians to make accurate and useful predictions of the future based on their study of the past. But I’m an amateur historian and I will confidently make this prediction: that the demonization of Whites will not lessen as ever more power and wealth are taken from Whites. On the contrary, it will intensify. George Orwell also described how leftism operates: “The more the Party is powerful, the less it will be tolerant: the weaker the opposition, the tighter the despotism.”

Not by words but by war

Black leftists like Kris Manjapra are not seeking justice and equality. No, they’re seeking revenge. And their anti-White rhetoric will increasingly translate into anti-White action. Manjapra and countless other non-Whites share the psychology of the Black criminal Eldridge Cleaver (1935–1998), who made this boast way back in 1968: “Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man’s law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women — and this point, I believe was the most satisfying to me because I was very resentful over the historical fact of how the white man has used the black woman. I felt I was getting revenge.”

Revenge and resentment are what power leftism and motivate the Black and Brown foot soldiers of leftism. That’s why leftists were so eager to open the borders of formerly cohesive and conservative Western nations. Hungary can defend its native Whites and maintain its ancient traditions because anti-White barbarians are outside its gates. America, Britain and France can’t emulate Hungary because anti-White barbarians are inside the gates. And those barbarians are growing in numbers, aggression and arrogance by the day. Separation is the only solution and separation will not come by words but by war.

36 replies
  1. HamburgerToday
    HamburgerToday says:

    Truly a great essay. It says all the important things that need to be said about the current political-cultural environment.

  2. Vladimir
    Vladimir says:

    I agree with much of this article. Whites in America are endangered by the Left and J**s.

    But there are things about Hungary’s Viktor Orban that many people don’t know but should know.

    He’s not a man who is truly on the White side.

    Orban is in league with Turkic countries, who consist of nearly all Muslims.

    Turkey itself is Islamist and anti-Christian.

    Please read on:

    ANALYSIS – Hungary in the Organization of Turkic States: A Bridge between East and West:


  3. RockaBoatus
    RockaBoatus says:

    “And those barbarians are growing in numbers, aggression and arrogance by the day. Separation is the only solution and separation will not come by words but by war” – That’s an important point we should remember. I don’t advocate racial war and violence on behalf of our cause. The thought of how much murder, mayhem and chaos would result under such a scenario is distressing to say the least. I’m hoping we can have an amicable divorce from the Left, and a peaceful secession in which Red states separate from Blue states. It doesn’t have to be perfect, and it’s unlikely we will agree with everything. But it may prove to be better than our current circumstances.

    Yet as we know, the Left never gives up power willingly or as a matter of principle and fairness. They know only force and intimidation. Our enemies don’t play by the same rules, and they have no integrity and honor among their ranks. And so as much as we might want a peaceful separation, there is little hope that the Left will give it to us.

    These past seven or eight years has proven that the Left cannot be reasoned with. One cannot persuade an opponent that has lost its grip of reality, who shrieks and foams at the mouth at anything he doesn’t agree with. The days of hopeful and rational discourse are over. It should be obvious to all of us.

    Some have suggested that Whites separate themselves from the Left and its racial ‘pets’ by moving into rural areas. I agree, yet of course the federal government is doing all in its power to bus Mexican illegals and Africans into the Whitest regions of North America. Before long, we won’t be able to separate from non-Whites and the government will make sure of it. They’re determined to rub our collective noses in the filth of ‘diversity.’

    In the meantime, I can only suggest that Whites get ready for the dark days ahead by getting out of debt, downsizing, storing up food and can goods, purchasing a house or property in White rural areas within Red states, partnering with other White families as a form of protection and mutual support, and removing oneself from the matrix of the Judeo-Left.

    It’s a good and important. I’m sure others here at TOO can suggest other practical ideas.

    • Captainchaos
      Captainchaos says:

      By the time the Jews are done fumbling around with Ukraine and sending the FBI after MAGA they will have lost most of Western Europe to the far right. What you’re going to see is Red State politicians increasingly thumbing their noses at the dictates of the federal government, daring ZOG to stop them. ZOG is effectively the east and west coasts of America. In between that there is too much land and people to be governed effectively if they are hell bent on rebellion.

    • Bob
      Bob says:

      A few years ago I celebrated German culture at Busch gardens in Virginia ☺️ they can’t sell you a beer for each hand tho…so it’s somewhat of a letdown. Wonder if it will be banned one day?

    • Bob
      Bob says:

      Well, I would want a more Christian version of Hollywood… however bad of a Christian I am… Salvador Dali packed Spanish churches for fascist Spain… they didn’t deport him either ☺️ so… just make your own version…deautschland wood 😁 you can make your Goebbels films of propaganda about characters moral failings and how Germans are good people. I love Michael Schenker and Uli jon Roth. I don’t think all Germans are bad people. But im a protestant musician and in my religion… the media has always been the enemy to avoid. Catholics like U2 are much more vocal. That’s one area you could change up.

  4. moneytalks
    moneytalks says:

    Your erudite and hard hitting essays are superb except for your advocacy of Christianity as an indispensable factor for [ saving ] the White race when Christianity appears to be the obscured hidden root facility or obscured hidden primary facility of the near total deracination of virtually all Westernworld NORDICS
    ( aka : Whites / Aryans / Euromen / Europeans / Indo-Europeans / Caucasians / and some other unspecified smaller predominantly Nordic populations scattered around the world .
    Is Carolyn Yeagar amenable to the race designator Nordic ? ) .

      • JM
        JM says:

        @Franklin Ryckaert

        ‘If I had to guess from her portrait I would say she is Italian, rather than German.’

        I thought she’d pass as German, but am under-qualified to argue about it. I think I saw somewhere that she’s Sudeten German. Historically there were many Italian building craftsmen in Bohemia-Moravia, so that could account for some Italian ancestry, should your view be correct.

    • Bob
      Bob says:

      Even Hitler and James Mason have time for the risen savior. Mason has spent his time in prison annotating the Bible in his race driven mind to make white people the ancient Israelites ☺️ he claims white people are the Jews and mixed with the cananites to make the other Jews. It’s pretty silly but he sees the value in having a mythology to follow. Im an actual Christian myself.

  5. Mad World
    Mad World says:

    Frau Meloni shows her bulging melons (no, not millions). Which
    of her faithful adepts would not like to feast on them to sleep?
    “Now everything will be different!” promises the perky made-
    up pantskirt. But when energetic ladies make “promises,” gene-
    rous gentlemen should remain skeptical as a matter of principle!

    In the realm of canyon yodelers, too, one
    of these kosher parties has won the day.

    But what does that mean in the “democratic compe-
    tition” of postmodernism? We all know it: nothing!

    • Bob
      Bob says:

      The future will be great and we won’t be around anyway. I’ve got a poster on my wall from the missionary who went to sentinel island and it always cheers me up. He wanted to spread the good news to the natives, and I guess they speared him to death. It’s somewhat obscured that the British Navy guy , Portman spent time on the island quite a bit. I think big government can probably offer enough gifts to keep the hunger games contestants happy.

  6. Marcus Baskett
    Marcus Baskett says:

    Separation from Mexicans and blacks is not the answer because they’re under the same oppression as whits are just not on the same slippery-slope side of a standing narrative imposed on white gentiles (yes, most certainly by the out of control -money by the gobs getting machine, created, maintained and fiercely defended by Jews and their non Jewish minions) that we are innately racist because so much of the time white gentiles unwittingly have been corralled and pressured to react negatively in front of Jewish owned cameras thus becoming pseudoscientific “proof” of the core values (ie, none whatsoever) of white gentiles and backed by bogus history classes and other medias. This is a crime – not against whites but against the right and yearning of humanity to move ahead towards a natural individuality fulfillment, world peace and liberty as our bottom line cultural platform underpinning. Jews have sold gentile altruistic innate tendencies to “get along with others” as the candy to the kid (while misrepresenting it as health food) to the immigrants at the table of hungry dupes (No pun intended). We need our government back in our hands and we made an irreversible gain towards that goal by voting in President Trump and it required our exertion of all that is good about us as a people to nearly topple their tower of mud (tal-mud). This gain of ours I’m talking about as irreversible is clearly evident in the way “the left” or “democrats” resorted to bald face lying about EVERYTHING and their denial of the obvious on “mainstream media” instead of the usual spoon fed propaganda mixed in with the narrative of a passive yet asserted bogus norm of “fighting white supremacy”…what Jews say when their white, attraction for foreigners turn to inquire about the yoke they realize is foisted on them and find themselves odd man out in their own neighborhoods where usually they WERE at least the more welcoming of citizens to strangers from another land licking their lips for a slice of thaddole American pie and groomed to view you and me as doormats and or obstruction to their way of life now unwelcome in what is Now “Their neighborhoods”
    I see lots of comments here on TOO in general of the defense of racism and that it’s an understood and established norm and perfectly sane and rational but I don’t stand in solidarity with any sort of racism but what I do stand my ground on is the forcing of one people onto another by yet a third party peoples that stonewall any and all rational discussion about it. Am I saying the Jews do this? Yes. Racism not required.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      …” yearning of humanity to move ahead towards a natural individuality fulfillment “…

      Authentic science has revealed
      the ultimate purpose of humanity
      ( the aggregate of all human individuals )
      is a relentless endeavor
      to achieve goals/objectives known as having FUN ;
      which is understood by the vast majority ,
      of normal people of the world , to mean __

      happiness / pleasures / satisfactions /
      enjoyments / thrills / (and the like) .

      In other words ,
      humanity struggles to survive
      in order to have more FUN ( as broadly defined )
      at some time in the usually palpably near future .

      True science — not religion — has inferentially revealed the empirical purpose of human life ; where the meaning of life is intrinsic to the purpose/goal or else the meaning is otherwise at best moot and lacks practical significance .

      In particular , Christians proclaim the ultimate fulfillment of individuality would be the fantastical notion of achieving a deity status of God ( that is , individuals are to strive in becoming identical to the creator and ruler of all the universe [ i.e. become one with him the creator God ] ) ; which would mean that the ultimate individuality fulfillment would include a psychotic capability to completely destroy humanity .
      To wit :


      able to destroy both soul and body in hell .

      “” .

      ( verbatim quote of JC from :
      The Christian NT / KJV /
      Book of ST. Matthew / chapter 10 : verse 28 )

      Be assured that
      survival is a pre-requisite to have FUN .

      The ultimate fulfillment of normal individuals is to achieve/have FUN as they each determine it .

      • Marcus Baskett
        Marcus Baskett says:

        …As determined by each individual is what I agree with but I doubt that it’s “fun” as the be all end all objective but Purpose does seem to be what everyone inevitably yearns for. Continued Growth in one’s character against the background of one’s culture. A sense of surprise of something “good” that is developing inside of ourselves and what it attracts by happenstance in-spite of unrealized goals of idealism. Self esteem. Self respect. Self sacrifice. Prestige. Adoration. Purpose. Self defense. Protection of weaker peoples than ourselves. Fighting battle. Letting the senses of wonder about mystery passively lead us in our understanding of what we Do know already. Becoming ever wholer by embracing as much of the range of experience, feelings and emotions as presented to us in our lives while understanding that’s what brings wholeness and balance in ourselves to bring to bare in navigating life as individuals on the track of fulfillment which is a direction not a destination. I know how antisemitic that all sounds but I do not apologize for my obvious words of hate.

        • moneytalks
          moneytalks says:

          “” I doubt that it’s “fun” as the be all end all objective but Purpose does seem to be what everyone inevitably yearns for.””

          …” Purpose does seem to be what everyone inevitably yearns for.”

          No doubt ; and it is the same as asserting

          [ Achieving a goal/objective does seem to be what everyone yearns for.]

          “FUN” has been broadly defined herein various TOO commentaries as a word …

          ” which is understood by the vast majority , of normal people of the world , to mean __

          happiness / pleasures / satisfactions /
          enjoyments / thrills / (and the like) .”

          Do you have a better or more simple single word than “FUN” to describe all of those listed mental states that people actually do often refer to as being “FUN” ?

          Regardless , in any case it would seem that anyone whom does not honestly admit to having one or more of those listed psychological states , including also any state like those specified , as a “Purpose” is either insane , a liar , fooling him/her self , or trying to fool others about their raison d’etre ( reason for wanting to continue to live ).

  7. Captainchaos
    Captainchaos says:

    All of the most formidable Jews – the Original Gangstas – are well into their 70s and 80s. After guys like Soros are done, who do the Jews really have left? Zuckerberg, Greenblatt, Ben Shapiro? They are all bozos who couldn’t subvert their way out of a wet paper bag.

    A few years ago I recall reading about an Israeli court siding with some cross-dressing Jew that he had been defamed because supermarket employees refused to refer to him as “she.” The Jews have become decadent, incompetent clowns who are no longer capable of even managing the internal affairs of their own people. Just how are they going to keep their global empire on the skids given that?

  8. Gerry
    Gerry says:

    Calvinism is a strange theology. I believe Jay Atkinson got it right when he said:

    “The enlightened spiritual mind will accept predestination as a result of the foreknowledge of God and not the exclusive unconditional election of Puritan preferences.”

    Another great or surely best quote on the subject is by Arthur Wallis concerning Calvinism:

    “It is a mistake to view the sovereignty of God, as some Calvinists seem to do, as the hub of the Deity, with all of God’s other attribute’s radiating like spokes from the hub. God’s sovereignty (or ability to do what He wills) is clearly subordinate to His character of holiness and love. Because He is a moral being and has constituted man as a moral being, He cannot act without reference to His moral principles. Even a sovereign God cannot forgive the unrepentant or bless the disobedient.

    Though man may be influenced from within and from without, God still holds him responsible for his moral choices. This is the consistent teaching of scripture, and we must not weaken the grasp on conscience that this provides by suggesting that since the fall man is no longer a free agent, no longer with a will of his own. This view, carried to its logical conclusion, not only has a tendency to absolve the unconverted person from his moral responsibility towards God, but by the same token to relieve the believer of his responsibility in terms of obedience and submission. Both could be tempted to take up a passive attitude and leave it to God who “works all things according to the purpose of His will.”

    So, it begins with us, doesn’t it? Judas Escariot wasn’t predestined to do what he did by betraying his Lord! Rather God foreknows what the future will bring making unfortunately Judas the worst kind of human being. I’d imagine looking at Jesus a largely homeless person and contrasting that with Herod and his amazing palaces he may have been expecting Jesus to become or take over from Herod, in fact isn’t that what the Jewish rulers wanted and were hoping for, a political ruler to deliver the nation from Rome. Realizing that wasn’t going to be the case Judas future as some banker in a Herod’s palace was lost and so the betrayal!

    SIN! What a truly insidious and diabolical nature and desires lies within us and so the words of Christ.

    “It would have been better if he had never been born.”

    Yikes, if that doesn’t fill one with fear about ones own life and where will you spend eternity?

    As for “not by words but by war” yes violence is indeed coming I’m afraid. Lets hope however, these words rise in many a heart:

    “Have regard for your covenant, because haunts of violence fill the dark places of the land.” Psalm 74: 20

    and is sung by an amazing person.

    • Hitmarck
      Hitmarck says:

      Calvinism reduces humans to robots.
      Shooting a protestant should logically at best count as property damage.
      Since Luther himself already refused his own free will in blaming the Lord for him ending as a fatso and a pimp.

  9. JM
    JM says:

    Looks like this stuff got a bit close to the pecuniary interests of the Royal Family. They sure have the goss on all aspects of history. They’d better not push the compensation aspect, just confine themselves to using it for White Extinction.

    • Servenet
      Servenet says:

      “Calvinism” is biblical. And there’s nothing you can do about it. Virtually the entirety of Protestantism traditionally subscribed to the soteriology of Calvinism. Let’s not pretend it is some fringe doctrinal system. It is (certainly was) hugely universal in the creeds of Protestantism.

      • RockaBoatus
        RockaBoatus says:

        Good points and well said. The problem is that most anti-Calvinists haven’t actually read Calvin and the Protestant Reformers on such matters. They have little understanding of what Reformed/Calvinist theologians have said about the “five points” and how each is defined.

        Interestingly, the so-called “five points of Calvinism” (TULIP) did not occur in a vacuum but arose in response to the man-centered and unscriptural teachings of a Dutch theologian by the name of Jacobus Arminius (hence, the ‘Arminians’). The ‘Five Remonstrances’ were a rejection of Calvin’s understanding of salvation which included others matters such as human depravity, the extent of the atonement and election.

        Arminian soteriology (doctrine of salvation) was officially rejected by the Synod of Dort (Netherlands) in 1618 with its five-point response: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints.

        John Calvin was not without his faults, and he is not the final word on theological matters. However, in terms of understanding the soteriological framework of God’s revelation, he is absolutely correct.

        The ‘five points of Calvinism’ is probably better described as ‘the doctrines of grace’ because people get so hung up on the expression and because there are so many false claims surrounding that great French theologian.

  10. Servenet
    Servenet says:

    “…and separation will not come by words but by war.”

    Indeed. I really can’t recall an article, no matter how “far right,” that ADMITS the inevitability of WAR to eliminate the power of our enemies, racial or traitor. I, for one, don’t see how that will develop. I tend to imagine a “Road Warrior” scenario when civilization is entirely reduced to barbarism through a process of ineluctable decay. A scenario to be desired over the genocide that is in process at this moment.

  11. charles frey
    charles frey says:

    Like many others, I too thought that dropping the two atomic bombs on Japan, when it was already finished, was unnecessary, inhumane and crossed the threshold.

    Larry Romanoff, in his recent, lengthy, brilliant, documented article at the UNZ REVIEW, finally informed me, at 83, that it was FDR’s commissioner for war materials acquisitions, Baruch, who called for the targeting of Nagasaki.

    Why ?

    Because that city expelled all of its Jews in 1926.

    Romanoff’s essay is a tailor-made Statement of Defense, including jewish supportive authorship, when diaper-kid Trudeau’s puppeteers come acallin’ with anti-semitism indictments.

    Best pay attention, since Garland is visibly shaping the US security services into the bolshevist CHEKA.

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      The Satanic evil worse than the bomb was the insane demand of unconditional surrender, something totally alien to European war fighting traditions going back thousands+ years.
      Even the greatest Shabbos Goy of all time, Winston S. Churchill, thought this was too much.
      Before I was J-woke I believed the official nonsense of Roosevelt imagining he was channelling Sherman or Grant, or however the tale went.
      You realise now it’s just this savage, merciless Jewish misanthropy that’s more likely to be behind such a thing.

  12. Carolyn Yeager
    Carolyn Yeager says:

    What I notice first about Langdon’s opening story is that it is Alice who is the one whining & complaining about unfairness, not Bob. Would Langdon EVER turn the story the other way and give Alice the good role? NEVER. Some things never change.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        What? Aren’t you missing that this is a story in a book told by a British mathematician born in 1945 to illustrate a point. It could just as well have been “Bob” who had the role of the whining leftist instead of “Alice.” I’m saying that Tobias Langdon would NEVER make the whiner the male. Pretty simple point.

        Why must the prototypical whining, never-satisfied leftist be the female of the couple? It COULD be the other way around sometimes.

        [mod. comment: are you whining that your female feelings are hurt because the vile misogynist langdon didn’t falsify what was in the book? obviously not. there’s nothing leftist about you.]

  13. Bobby
    Bobby says:

    Tobias, you’re amazing. Great work as always.
    Thank you also for the Andrew Joyce link.

    You’re not an amateur historian Tobias! Far from it man.

  14. Armoric
    Armoric says:

    ” Leftism has two big lies that contradict each other:
    – first, that we’re all born equal;
    – second, that Whites are innately evil. ”

    And also, according to the leftist view:

    – All races are the same
    – but we need more racial diversity

    – Race doesn’t matter,
    – but racial under-representation is a problem

    – Race doesn’t matter,
    – but resistance to race replacement is a moral crime

    – White countries have to accept their transformation into interchangeable territories with interchangeable people, and no remaining identity.
    – But the non-whites who replace us can never move to some other interchangeable place because that would break their hearts.

    White people need to realize that it is not immoral for us to have a territory of our own. Our invaders won’t die of sorrow because they have to live separately from us.

Comments are closed.