Authors and their literary heroes are always subject to conflicting interpretations in different historical contexts. Sophocles’ tragedy Antigone was performed quite differently in the Greek city state of fifth-century Greece than it is in contemporary versions crafted by modern producers and directors beholden to modern literary critics. The story of the mythical and rebellious princess Antigone raises a haunting question whether all we have learned so far from our Western cultural treasure trove, be it from Homer’s epics, Biblical proverbs, or from Shakespeare’s verses, or for that matter from the US Constitution, is just apocryphal nonsense or perhaps a conman job resulting in a terrible waste of time for gullible readers and theater audiences. Projecting our modes of conceptualization into the mindset of our distant ancestors is a game of wishful thinking.

Sophocles’ play Antigone is the centerpiece of Western legal, philosophical and political thought. The play conveys a timeless interaction between the rule of positive law versus the notion of unwritten justice, known also as natural or divine law.  Antigone believes that in accordance with divine laws she must provide for a decent burial for her dead brother, irrespective of his brother’s insurrectionist past and despite the fact the he was accused by their  uncle Creon of what we would call today “terrorist activities.” In Antigone’s mind, divine or natural laws honoring dead kinsmen must precede the written law of her city of Thebes however much the law of her  city strictly forbids memorial service to enemies of the state. As she claims in her defense: ”

Justice, enacted not these human laws
Nor did I deem that thou, a mortal man
Could’st by a breath annul and override
The immutable unwritten laws of Heaven.” (1)

But what god or  which gods? What divine justice did Antigone have in mind? Most modern scholars overlook the fact that the Ancients had a radically different concept of religion and justice than modern lawmakers in the US or EU. Ancient Greeks or Romans could not possibly conceive of the end-time salvation religions like monotheistic Christianity, Islam or Judaism. The Greco-Roman mindset and its conceptualization of the hereafter can in no way be substituted by Christian-inspired notions of justice. Therefore, analyzing Antigone through glasses of Christian self-denial or guilt feelings is a nonstarter. In prodding the self-perception of early Christians, Walter Otto, the well-known authority on the spiritual legacy of Antiquity, makes the following critical statements about Christian sense of justice;  “Instead of pride reigns fear. The fullness and bliss of life have vanished; dignity and distance have been abandoned and the freedom of the spirit has been stifled.” (2)

Those who cheer up Antigone are oblivious of the fact that modern Western legalism and the concept of natural law is largely influenced by the Judaic-centered religion of a vindictive, revengeful, self-centered, Semitic and totalitarian god who must be obeyed and who resolutely rejects the presence  of other gods — and therefore the possibility of existence of other truths or any other forms of justice. “If we reject such considerations as ‘antisemitic,’ we burden ourselves with new forms of ban on thought and discourse that dangerously restrict our reflection on history. … The capacity to historicize and relativize oneself is a precondition to any genuine tolerance.” (3)

These words by Jan Assmann, a renowned modern expert on Semitic religions, certainly do not come as a consolation to American January 6 Capitol protestors, who, similarly to Antigone had also their ideas about justice when rejecting the rapidly enacted voting legislation that had propelled Joe Biden into the White House. Much like Antigone’s outlawed and demonized brother, the January 6 demonstrators were quickly dubbed by Biden’s DOJ commissars with hyperbolic and criminalizing qualifiers such as “insurrectionists,” “seditious individuals,” “obstructers of justice.” Most of them have subsequently faced stiff penalties. However, the same judicial travesty when applied to the upholding of the liberal judiciary in the US and EU is neatly covered in the garb of the liberal rule of law which even King Creon would not object to. Most scholars—in fact most readers or viewers of Sophocles’ Antigone—are justly horrified over King Creon’s inhumane decision to refuse the burial of Antigone’s insurrectionist brother Polynices, leaving his corpse to rot in the field amidst vultures instead. However, modern law and opinion makers in the EU and US are fully in agreement that even eighty  years after World War II, countless burial locations of killed or deceased National-Socialist or Fascist officials and soldiers scattered all over Europe should remain banned from the public eye, with their distant next of kin being denied access to their graves. Former US president Ronald Reagan’s visit to the military cemetery in Bitburg in Germany in 1985 and his unintended homage to the fallen German Waffen SS soldiers was met with massive criticism all over the liberal and Jewish-run media. (4)

In recent times, a Catholic memorial service that has been regularly held each May 13^th over the last thirty years in the Austrian village of Bleiburg in memory of Croat victims of communism was banned by the Austrian government on the pretext that this was the “largest mass gathering of European Nazi sympathizers.”  (5)

One could go on and on with the judicial lawfare or state-sponsored criminalization of the defeated side and mention the case of fallen Confederate soldiers. General Robert E. Lee’s statues have been smeared and torn down, his name likely to be soon branded in high school history manuals with the label “forerunner of modern white supremacism.” 

The Revisionist trap

Everybody nurtures a conception of Antigone analogously to how one thinks about a household pet. Over the last century Sophocles’ play has been performed hundreds of times all over Europe and the US and will likely continue to attract comments from literary critics for centuries to come. Likewise, everybody judges Antigone’s defiance of Creon’s decrees in his own way. Everybody fits her fate within his own legal, religious or political framework when it best befits his preconceived bias or value judgments. A right-winger will praise harsh measures taken by King Creon who endeavors to secure peace and order in his city threatened by a looming civil war. Modern antifascist activists or LGBTQ+ activists, let alone some modern ageing menopausal drag queen will, by contrast, construe Antigone’s effrontery as a sign of worldwide transsexual/gender liberation.

The necessity of readaptation, reappropriation, revisionism, or probably outright scriptural or legal fraud applies to all fields of science and law, often coming in handy as a tool for academic zealots or nascent political movements in search of cultural and political hegemony. Some contemporary conventional wisdoms, however, must never be revised or questioned. While it is a common and a legally acceptable practice in the US/EU to historicize, that is, inflate or deflate the number of victims of communism or dispute the veracity of distant historical facts and figures, the process of historical revisionism must stay off limits when applied to Jewish World War II victimhood. Any reinterpretation, any new reassessment of the Jewish World War II narrative is a felony in almost all Western states. By contrast, all scientific or literary adaptations, including the fate of Sophocles’ Antigone are given free reign of reinterpretation. Cases of literary reappropriation abound. The late eighteenth-century German playwright Friedrich Schiller was elevated to the level of the spiritual founding father of twentieth-century National-Socialist Germany. His name was adorned in 1935 by dozens of flowery words by hundreds of National-Socialist academics who honored Schiller’s legacy by bestowing the new Germany with the all-year-round headline the “Schillerjahr” (the Year of Schiller) on the occasion of the 130th anniversary of his death. A prominent German lawyer, also a high-ranking National-Socialist politician, Hans Fabricius, wrote in his essay a glowing praise of Schiller:

Schiller as National Socialist! With pride we must salute him. With pride and gratitude. Because no one knows if and what we would be without him. (6)

Latter-day communist and liberal intellectuals didn’t lag much behind with their revisory eulogies. Schiller’s dramas enjoyed great popularity in what was to become the Soviet-ruled East Germany (DDR). Especially popular was his drama Wilhem Tell which depicts the eponymous Swiss freedom fighter (seditious terrorist?). Tell refuses to pay homage to the hat of the late medieval Hapsburg ruler who was terrorizing Swiss peasants. Nowadays we may be disgusted at the sight of those times when European citizens were obliged to kiss the feet of their local rulers, while forgetting that our contemporary liberal deities also require mandatory public worship. Once upon late medieval times, politicians had to kneel down in front of their rulers; now they have to take the knee in front of non-White criminals or stage pilgrimages to the supremely sacred Yad Vashem.

And today’s Schiller? The spirit of the time has changed, along with the arrival of the new liberal ruling class who has tuned up Schiller’s verses to a new set of globalist, multiracial, foreigner-friendly, transgender edicts. Now Schiller’s verses from his Ode to Joy have become the official anthem of the multiracial European Union. The same methods of reappropriation of an author (or when needed demonization), bordering on outright literary or historical fakery, is the inevitable fate of all Western classics and critical historians.

Antigone’s travails know no end. On February 6,1944 around 8 pm, in the midst of US and British nightly aerial bombardments of France (7), the revamped play Antigone was staged by the French nationalist playwright Jean Anouilh at the Paris Théâtre de l’Atelier. Despite power cuts and the freezing cold, the play had a large audience turnout, earning the author an accolade from the German and Vichy government officials in the audience. After the end of World War II, or the so-called Liberation of France, Anouilh’s Antigone did not disappoint his earlier communist detractors because he made Antigone sound like the chief female symbol of antifascist resistance. Thus, the mythical and rebellious Antigone turned after World War II into an antifascist figurehead in the eyes of European leftwing literati. She was remolded into the mirror image of the Spanish communist heroine La Pasionaria or the much-acclaimed American writer and drunkard Ernest Hemingway who after World War II openly bragged about killing dozens of disarmed “Kraut soldiers.” (8)

In the fall of 1944, Anouilh along with thousands of other French nationalist intellectuals was on edge as waves of massive purges were being carried out by self-styled antifascist liberators — with the full benediction of American/UK legislators. Anouilh’s skill for allegorical plots and his irony-clad literary style, however, helped him weasel in and out and survive the vengeful shooting gallery of the antifascist victors. This was not the case with hundreds of his colleagues and fellow travelers who ended the winter 1944/45 with a rope around their neck. (9) The late 1944 Paris scenario was a postmodern reenactment of the duel between the two Antigone’s brothers who had killed each other in their quest for the throne. The much-decried modern cult of wokeness, the religion of political correctness, the dogma of cancel culture, along with their leagues of virtue signalers did not start yesterday — their origins must be traced to 1945. Or even further back to Sophocles’ Antigone and her doomsday father/brother Oedipus…

 Genes as natural law

“In large measure, our fate is in our genes”. (10) This quote by the American molecular biologist James Watson may shed in hindsight additional  light on the fate of Antigone. And for that matter it can better explain the behavior and sociopolitical choices of people throughout the ages. We can change our lifestyles, we can change our citizenship, we can learn or unlearn our acquired cultures, but for now at least, we can’t change the DNA passed down to us from our distant ancestors. No wonder that Watson’s words come as a shock to modern social science theorists and lawmakers who, despite empirical data to the contrary insist on the sole role of the economic and political environment in shaping human behavior. Some contemporary American scholars complain that “Most political science degree programs do not require any coursework in the life sciences, much less genetics.” (11) Their words basically echo belatedly the words of German biologists and geneticists who fell into disgrace after 1945.

The above observations are by no means novel; similar — albeit more expressive and now banned — German words such as “Ahnenerbe” (ancestral heritage), “Erbanlagen” (hereditary factors), “Rassenhygiene” (racial hygiene) were used hundreds of times by hundreds of German psychiatrists, geneticists, physicians, criminal law experts and historians during the fateful years of 1933–45. For obvious political reasons, after World War II such German appellations had to be shred and gradually replaced by vague, neutral and more academically and politically correct terms such as behavioral genetics, evolutionary biology, and sociobiology, in an attempt by contemporary race scientists to clear their names in advance from any tentative suspicion of harboring racism or “Nazism.” When one looks at Antigone’s fate from the point of view of her genetic makeup, the entire play obtains a deadly different meaning.

Antigone was a progeny of kinship inbreeding; her father Oedipus was a husband of her mother Jocasta. Both Antigone and her father Oedipus, whom she had faithfully accompanied until his tragic death, were children of the same mother. Her doomsday fate resulting from the incestuous bond between her father-brother Oedipus and his mother Jocasta had been predetermined on the day she was born. It comes as a big surprise that Antigone’s genetic makeup has never been studied in the analysis of her rebellious behavior. In addition, one must also wonder, what made Sophocles and ancient Greek playwrights, as well as their future readers and viewers relish such morbid tales of incest and kinship killings — all the more as the ancient Greeks had laws allowing parents to physically remove their handicapped children. In fact, Antigone’s father, Oedipus, as a newborn baby had been ditched in the wilderness by his parents, most likely because his parents had suspected their lineage of carrying a serious genetic flaw, thus spelling doom for the city; “Sympathy with the decadents, equal rights for the degenerates — that would be the deepest immorality, that would be the very perversion of morality!” wrote a prominent German lawyer in reference to Nietzsche and his attitudes towards the legislation of ancient Greeks. (12)

What was crossing Sophocles’ mind when he wrote Antigona will never be known with certainty. Very likely he wrote the Oedipus trilogy having in mind how mixed interracial marriages or incestuous bonds are bound to cast a curse on entire ancestral lineage and in the long run destroy the life of a tribe or ingroup in the Greek polis. German scholars in National -Socialist Germany insisted on the careful choice of partners and a good insight into the family tree of both the wife and her husband. Crime and heredity are deeply interwoven, since recessive criminal genes of one or both partners may lead to disaster for future distant offspring.

Just as research on human heredity must not disregard the fact that man, in contrast to all other living creatures, is spiritually determined, we must request today from social science that it also takes into account the biological process which is closely linked the mental/spiritual process. (13)

The above quote is from a prominent German medical doctor who was dealing with crime and heredity in National Socialist Germany and who also proposed an academic curriculum fusing natural science and social science research into a single whole. He added an ominous remark that wouldn’t sound well in the ears of left-leaning college professors: “And no one can deny it: biologically based psychopathology and social science are much closer to each other than psychopathology and experimental physics.” (14)

With each regime change, such as the one that occurred in Germany and Europe, and to some extent in the US in 1945, comes along inevitably the change in political dogmas. Each time a regime change happens the new ruling class must automatically doctor up new “paradigms” in order to make scientific research fit better into their dominant ideology. Just as the story of ancient Greeks, their racial and genetic makeup, their beliefs and their mores were a foremost topic of interest to German scholars after the National Socialist takeover, so has the liberal-communist dogma of interchangeability of human races become a new myth of our times.

The Greek man always feels himself to be a son and heir: from his ancestors he inherits property and dominion, rank and fame, the noble shape of his body, strength, power, courage and achievement. The two belong together, for one is inconceivable without the other. … We are familiar with the hereditary curse in the Oresteia, which always beget new bloodguilt. This is not the revenge of a jealous god, but the natural effect of a natural cause, a fate that extends to several people, given that the family is a unit of blood. (15)

How do those ancient Greek tragedies square away today with the issue of the much-debated topic of natural laws vs. legal positivism in modern jurisprudence, especially in the US? Imposing universal rights and the concept of dignity across the board on all peoples worldwide has had so far little positive effects in terms of securing a lasting multiethnic environment or world peace. An indigenous man from Borneo or Sumatra has a different idea of natural laws and its derivative human rights than a merchant from Queens. A Palestinian-American will have a different concept of natural law and the underlying justice than an American Jew. An African-American DA conducting court proceedings involving a White American defendant will likely file a different motion than a White defense attorney representing his White client.

The American common law, unlike European civil law brags of the superiority of grand juries when passing a final verdict on an indicted suspect. But if a jury is composed of more than half of different non-White or mixed-race jurors, it is highly unlikely that the judge will hand down a just sentence, and it’s relatively unlikely that a White suspect will be acquitted.  The multiracial US and its protectorate, the multiracial EU, are more and more in the process of copying the policy of the ex-communist judiciary in Eastern Europe and Soviet Uinon where the verdict against political dissidents was known before the staged trial had even started. One good thing about Antigone is that she harbored no illusions about her fate. She had known all along that she was by her bloodline destined to die young and that she could not expect any salvation, either from people or the gods.

Notes:

1. Sophocles, Antigone, transl. Storr, (London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1912). p.15
2. Walter Otto, Der Geist der Antike und die christliche Welt (Bonn: Verlag F. Cohen, 1923), p. 36.
3. Jan Assmann, The Mosaic Distinction or the Price of Monotheism. Transl. by David Lorton / Litrix.de 2004, online, p.9.
4. David Green, “This Day in Jewish History, 1985; Ronald Reagan Sparks Storm with Visit to German War Cemetery”, Haaretz, May 4, 2016. https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2016-05-04/ty-article/.premium/1985-reagan-visits-german-war-cemetery/0000017f-f460-d47e-a37f-fd7c41730000
5. Hasnain Kazim, „Neonazis in Kärnten; Gedenken mit Hakenkreuz und Hitlergruß“, Der Spiegel, May 10, 2018. https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/oesterreich-neonazi-treffen-in-bleiburg-kaernten-a-1206675.html
6. Hans Fabricius, Schiller als Kampgenosse Hitlers (Berlin: Verlag Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, 1934), p. 164.
7. Jean Claude-Valla. La France sous les bombes américaines :1942-1945 ( Paris : Les Cahiers libres de l‘histoire, Nr.7, 2008).
8. Wolfgang Stock, „Hat Ernest Hemingway im Krieg wirklich 122 Deutsche getötet?“, Der Spiegel, December 21, 2023. https://www.spiegel.de/geschichte/ernest-hemingway-hat-der-schriftsteller-im-krieg-wirklich-122-deutsche-getoetet-a-3bb3b624-78d6-4c87-880a-207daed266ab
9. Dominique Venner, Histoire de la Collaboration (Paris : Pygmalion, 2000), pp. 515-516.
10. D. Watson, quoted in Time, March, 20, 1988.https://time.com/archive/6702116/science-the-gene-hunt/
11. Peter K. Hatemi and Rose McDermott, “The genetics of politics: discovery, challenges, and progress”, Trends in Genetics, October 2012, (Vol. 28, No. 10, p. 528). https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0168-9525%2812%2900111-4
12. Kurt Kassler, Nietzsche und das Recht (München: Verlag Ernst Reinhardt, 1941), p.67.
13. Friedrich Stumpfl, „Verbrechen und Vererbung“, Monatsschrift für Kriminalbiologie und Strafrechtsreform, 29. Jahrgang, Heft 1 (München: J. F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1938), p.2.
14. Ibid.
15. Walter Haedicke, „Die Anschauungen der Griechen über Familie, Herkunft und Vererbung“, Volk und Rasse, 12.Iahrg., Heft 10, (München-Berlin, 1937), pp. 371-372.

Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne. That’s one. Beethoven’s Violin Concerto in D major. That’s another. And Bergkamp’s goal for Arsenal away at Newcastle in March 2002. That’s a third. What are they? Supreme examples of sublime art-forms created by the Whites of north-western Europe. Classical art, classical music, and soccer are three White inventions that have delighted and dazzled the world.

Bernini and Bergkamp create beauty (images from Infogalactic and Sky Sports)

I would say that all three are art-forms that seek to stir emotion, elevate the spirit, and create stunning beauty. In fact, I’d relate soccer to a fourth world-conquering White art: ballet. I’ve always seen the appeal of soccer, but I never saw the appeal of ballet until a female friend persuaded me to watch some. And I was impressed. Ballet is not just great art: it had much more in common with soccer than I realized. There’s a parallel grace and athleticism, a parallel striving to challenge the boundaries of gravity and physiology. It’s just that soccer appeals most to heterosexual men, not homosexuals, and that a game of soccer is like two separate ballets being performed at once on the same stage. Each team is trying alternately to design and to disrupt. It wants to design patterns with the ball that create goals for itself and to disrupt the goal-hunting patterns of the other team.

Scale-spanning spectacle

That’s why a good goal is such a special event. The patterns in ballet are beautiful, but they follow a fixed script, are practised and perfected in rehearsal, and aren’t attacked on stage by half the performers. In soccer, there can be no fixed scripts and patterns are constantly under attack, are constantly failing and faltering. When a pattern succeeds and a goal is scored, it’s order being imposed on chaos, light breaking through darkness, a seed sprouting and flowering amid mud and muck. You can say the same of scores in other sports, of course, but what makes soccer special is the clarity with which you can see the patterns failing and succeeding on the stage. The ball is large, round, and highly visible. It rolls and curves and flies, but it doesn’t move with eye-defeating speed or regularly disappear amid a mass of bodies. Soccer is the supreme stadium sport, combining perfectly with White architecture and organization to create a visual and emotional feast for huge crowds around the world.

But at the same time soccer is perfect for kids to play at a moment’s notice on a patch of concrete or waste-ground. It spans scales like no other sport, combines simplicity, cerebrality and spectacle like no other sport, and is easy to understand and play like no other sport. That’s why it’s conquered the world like no other sport. It’s a game with a globe that has gone global. But don’t expect gratitude or praise for the Whites who invented it, perfected it, and popularized it among other races. Many of the non-Whites who insist that “Whites have no culture” will be avid followers of the game, supporters of one or another of the British and European clubs that laid its foundations and powered its rise to global success. Soccer is world-conquering White culture, but in winning the world it somehow lost its Whiteness. The race that gets celebrated in modern soccer is not its necessary creators and continuing sustainers, but its inessential contributors: not Whites but Blacks. Soccer would not exist without Whites and would continue to exist without Blacks.

Facially and phonetically alien

Those stark facts will be never be acknowledged in the mainstream, of course. But here are two more facts: Blacks are very good at soccer and many of soccer’s greatest players have been Black. That’s players, not coaches: Blacks excel athletically in sport, not intellectually. They can play at the highest level, but not organize teams or devise tactics and adapt them as games flow and shift. Take the half-Black, half-Algerian Kylian Mbappé. He’s currently one of the world’s best players, but I’m confident that he won’t go on to be one of the world’s best coaches. Or even one of world’s better coaches. As I write, he’s the star player for France in the European Soccer Championship 2024. After all, he was born in Paris, elder son of two French citizens, so he’s fully French and perfectly entitled to play for the French national side. Right? No, wrong! Mbappé isn’t French and shouldn’t be playing for France.

Olivier Giroud and Kylian Mbappé: spot the true Frenchman

There’s a simple reason for this. Nations are not notions. In other words, nations are not defined by words or concepts. Instead, they’re defined by blood and belonging. Etymology, the history of words, isn’t often a reliable guide to current reality, but you can rely completely on the etymology of “nation.” It comes from the Latin verb nasci, meaning “to be born.” Nations are born, not made. They’re based on bonds of blood, they’re cemented by shared history. But Kylian Mbappé doesn’t share blood or history with the true French. When you set him beside another star of the French team, Olivier Giroud, the contrast is almost ludicrous. Giroud is clear-skinned and well-groomed, has classically refined features, looks both intelligent and athletic, and seems as French as his name. That’s just as it should be, because he is French (with some ancestry from the brother-nation of Italy). Set beside Giroud, Mbappé looks like a troglodyte and doesn’t look French in the slightest. After all, his father is Black and his mother is Algerian. His very name says that he isn’t French: Mbappé is African, not European. It’s phonetically alien, just as Mbappé himself is facially alien. It isn’t just his dark skin and non-White features. He has dead, soul-less eyes. I don’t know how well those eyes reveal his character and psychology, but I do know that Blacks and Algerians in France are hugely over-represented as murderers, rapists, and thieves.

White boys should not idolize Black Bukayo

That’s part of why Blacks and Algerians are noxious for the nation of France, just as Blacks and Pakistanis are noxious for the nation of Britain. But I would prefer to say the “nations of France” and the “nations of Britain.” I don’t think that either France or Britain is a true nation. No, they’re what you might call combi-nations, uniting smaller White nations under a single name. For example (and inter alia), France absorbed a true Celtic nation in Brittany just as Britain absorbed true Celtic nations in Wales, Cornwall, and northern Scotland. Even England within Britain could be divided into smaller and stronger nations. But it’s not wrong that there’s an English national soccer team behind which the Whites of northern and southern England can unite. Like France, England is playing as I write in the European Championships. And like France, England fields Black players who aren’t English and shouldn’t be playing in a competition for European nations. You’ve seen the contrast between Olivier Giroud and Kylian Mbappé in the French team. Now try the contrast between Harry Kane and Bukayo Saka in the English team:

Harry Kane and Bukayo Saka: spot the true Briton

Kane is White and fully British; Saka is Black and not British at all. He plays soccer very well, but doesn’t belong in the English national side. He should be playing for a Black national team, contributing to a supreme sporting spectacle for Black crowds bonded by blood to him and his team-mates. I don’t think Saka should be playing for the English club Arsenal either. Young White fans should not be idolizing Black sportsmen and Black sportsmen are very useful in the leftist project of dilution and destruction. Leftists use Blacks to dilute nationhood as they work towards the golden goal of destroying White nations. Blacks don’t belong in England or France. Or in Spain or Portugal or Germany or Austria, all of whom are still playing in the European championships as I write and all of whom are fielding Black players who are facially and phonetically alien.

The power of alphabets

That’s why I don’t enjoy watching those notionally national teams any more. I can admire the skill and appreciate the goals, but I abominate the noxious notionhood that sets Whites who belong by blood beside Blacks who don’t belong at all. However, although I can’t enjoy watching Spain or Germany any more, I’ve definitely enjoyed watching two other teams. That’s because they embody not noxious notionhood but natural nationhood. One of those teams isn’t White or European and some would say the same of the other. Who am I talking about? Turkey and Georgia, that’s who. Geographically they’re next-door neighbors; culturally and linguistically they’re worlds apart. Turkey is Muslim, Georgia is Christian, for example. But they have something big in common at the European championships. They’re fielding true national teams with not a Black in sight. The two teams met right at the beginning and although I didn’t like the result — 3–1 to Turkey — I did enjoy the Turks’ skilful soccer and savor the way that all her goal-scorers were fully and phonetically Turkish: Müldür, Güler, Aktürkoğlu. That’s four umlauts (and one breve). And those umlauts are more significant than they might appear. The Turkish leader Kemal Atatürk (1881–1938), who was possibly part-Jewish, tried to turn Turkey into a secular European nation and cut her off from the Ottoman period. As part of that, he mandated the Roman alphabet for the Turkish language, which had formerly been written in Arabic script.

Atatürk was abolishing a border, dismantling a linguistic wall. Or rather, he was abolishing one border even as he established another. Use of the Arabic alphabet had aligned Turkey with Arabs and the East; use of the Roman alphabet aligned her with Europeans and the West. Turks no longer needed to struggle with a new alphabet when they learned French or German or English. In more ways than one, Atatürk diluted Turkey’s Islamic identity with the stroke of a pen. Alphabets can be powerful as political tools, not just as linguistic ones. You can also see that in Turkey’s neighbor Georgia, which has maintained its own unique alphabet for its own unique language down many centuries. Language and alphabet have undoubtedly helped tiny Georgia maintain her nationhood even as giants like Turkey and Russia have regularly seized her territory and crushed her independence. The Jewish language Yiddish offers another example of the same thing. Yiddish is more or less a dialect of German and if it were written in the Roman alphabet, it would always have been readily accessible and at least partly comprehensible to gentiles who spoke German.

Bonded vs Blackened

But Yiddish is in fact written in the Hebrew alphabet, so it isn’t accessible or comprehensible to outsiders at all. Jews wanted to maintain their nationhood, so they put up a linguistic barrier. Atatürk wanted to remake Turkish nationhood, so he pulled down a linguistic barrier. But he could never have succeeded in making Turkey European and in a perfect world they wouldn’t be playing in the European Football Championships. But the world isn’t perfect and as it is I think Turkey are doing Europeans a service by playing there. They aren’t just playing attractive soccer: they’re showing Europeans what a true nation looks like.

Georgia are doing the same. They’re ranked 74th in the world but they beat Portugal, who are ranked sixth. Georgia are bonded by blood; Portugal are blighted by Blacks. Georgia also play with far more spirit and unity than England, but I think that’s easy to explain. The Georgian team embodies natural nationhood; the English team embodies noxious notionhood. Kylian Mbappé and Bukayo Saka are undoubtedly very good players, but they’re French and English only on paper. Olivier Giroud and Harry Kane are French and English in the way that truly counts: by blood. Soccer is a game with a globe that has gone global, but it also reveals the limits of globalism. Blacks don’t belong in European teams. Nations are not notions.

“O my brothers, break, break the old tablets!”
—Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (3.12.10)

According to Jewish mythology, Moses came down from the mountain with two stone tablets in hand. Inscribed on them, by the Jewish god Yahweh, were 10 “commandments” for the Jews to follow in their interactions with other Jews (though not with non-Jews, for whom there were no such laws). This so-called decalogue, or “10-words” (deka-logos), is offered up as a kind of divine law, binding on all religious Jews—and on foolish Christians who inexplicably feel themselves bound by Jewish law.

As the story goes, Moses became upset with his people because they deviated from God’s law, and in anger, he broke the tablets (Ex 32:19). (Later, when the Jews were reformed, God gave Moses a replacement set.) As a set of laws, this original decalogue is wholly unimpressive; it ranges from the obvious and mundane—“don’t lie,” “don’t steal,” “don’t kill,” “honor your parents”—to the absurd: “no other gods,” “no graven image.” Certainly there is nothing of penetrating insight or deep wisdom, such as might be expected from a divinely-dictated legal code. But it is perfectly suited for a small tribe of nomadic and superstitious Jews.

The coming of Christianity muddied the waters. Jesus’ relationship to the 10 Commandments is fraught with difficulty; did he come to “fulfill” and uphold Mosaic law, or did his “new covenant” override it? There is no consensus on this. As a result, it is entirely unclear if Christians are bound by the original decalogue at all, even apart from the fact that the original was intended only for Jews.

Be that as it may, this Mosaic decalogue is almost useless for any modern, contemporary, rational society. The mundane laws are so obvious that they are already granted moral and legal standing in virtually every culture, and the absurd theological laws are meaningless for anyone not captive to a ridiculous Judaic ideology. Worst of all, to grant any standing to “God’s law” is to grant unwarranted credibility to a pathological Judeo-Christian worldview based entirely in mythology and Jewish supremacism. Any reasonable person can agree to not killing, not stealing, etc., and we don’t need God’s or Moses’ sanction to uphold such decrees. What we need, then, are new laws, new tablets—a new decalogue that can guide us through the present stormy waters.

One early skeptic who saw through the charade of Judeo-Christianity was Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche understood that this religious outlook was a complete fraud—in fact, a multi-level fraud. The Mosaic stories, along with the cosmic origin in Genesis, Adam and Eve, the life of Noah, and so on, are portrayed as actual fact when in truth we can see them as, at best, inspiring fables; and at worst, as sheer nonsense. Nietzsche was also appalled that Gentile Europeans could believe that anything in the Old Testament—the Jewish bible—applied to them. He understood that the much-proclaimed “neighbor” of Old Testament morality referred only to the Jewish neighbor: “‘the neighbor’—really the coreligionist, the Jew”.[1] Nietzsche also condemned “the Jewish instinct of ‘the chosen’”; the Jews “claim all the virtues for themselves without further ado, and count the rest of the world their opposites; a profound sign of a vulgar soul.”[2] Indeed, the Jews are

people of the basest origin, partly rabble, outcasts not only from good society, but also from respectable society; grown away from the atmosphere of culture, and undisciplined; ignorant, without even a suspicion of the fact that conscience can also rule in spiritual matters; in a word—Jews. (Will to Power, sec. 199)

No matter what Gentiles and Christians believe, the Old Testament God is a god of the Jews, one who “remained a Jew, he remained a god of nooks, the god of all the dark corners and places, of all the unhealthy quarters the world over!”[3]

But the greatest fraud was Christianity: a Jewish-inspired hoax of the highest order, intended to degrade and destroy Gentile humanity—Rome above all. Paul constructed an elaborate deception based on a Jewish rabbi, turning him into a miraculous son of God who falsely promises eternal rewards to even the most lowly and undeserving. The whole belief-system is so absurd and so opposed to worldly existence that it undermines and ultimately destroys those who follow it:

Christianity needs sickness just as Greek culture needs a superabundance of health—to make sick is the true, secret purpose of the whole system of redemptive procedures constructed by the church. … Christianity also stands opposed to every spirit that has turned out well; it can use only sick reason as Christian reason, it sides with everything idiotic, it utters a curse against the spirit, against the superbia of the healthy spirit… [S]ickness is of the essence of Christianity. (Antichrist, secs. 51-52)

The solution, says Nietzsche, is to destroy the destroyers: to smash the sick Judeo-Christian worldview and the morality based on it. True to form, Nietzsche presents himself not as Moses but as the anti-Moses: we need to “break the tablets” of Judeo-Christian morality, not because people aren’t following them enough but because they are following them too much! This endeavor is described in his brilliant but challenging booklet Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1884), especially in Part Three in the section “On old and new tablets.” This extended section, which surely ranks among the best of Nietzsche’s writings, repeatedly implores us to “break the old tablets,” and to craft something new—a task which his hero, Zarathustra, has only begun (“new tablets half covered with writing”).

Among the new tablets are such sayings as: “Man is something that must be overcome” (sec. 4) and “become hard!” (sec. 29). Present humanity is only an intermediate state of being, “a bridge,” said Nietzsche, and our greatness lies in our transcending and overcoming the present human condition, attaining something like an uebermensch or ‘over-man.’ This exceedingly difficult task demands not Christian or feminine softness but rather something much stronger: a masculine, “Hyperborean” sense of strength and determination: “become hard!” But clearly more is needed.

All this, then, serves as a bit of background for the topic at hand. Not long ago, as I was engaged in some research on National Socialist philosophy, I came across not one but two fascinating “decalogues” developed by German thinkers, aiming at the betterment and flourishing of their fellow Germans. Like the Ten Commandments, these are 10-point plans for the enhancement and even salvation of a given people. The first appeared in peacetime and the second in the face of a bloody global war that was, in large part, instigated by Jews in the Soviet Union, England, and America.[4]

The first of the two decalogues is more personal, written by an unknown author sometime before 1940, and likely in the mid-1930s, well before World War Two. Addressed to the German youth, it enjoins young men and women to tend to their mental and physical health and, for both their own happiness and the sake of the German nation, to take great care when marrying. It declares that large, healthy, prosperous German families are the foundation of future success for the nation, and that the young have a civic duty to produce healthy offspring. In fact, this recalls one of Nietzsche’s “new tablets”: “In your children, you shall make up for being the children of your fathers” (sec. 12). The present generation, Nietzsche says, is a result of accident and capriciousness; future generations will be aimed at the higher and the better. With proper guidance, future generations can lead humanity upward, away from the abyss.

This first decalogue was published in English in 1940, in Lothrop Stoddard’s book Into the Darkness (pp. 197-200). Stoddard calls it Ten Commandments for the Choice of a Mate; I will refer to this as the “Marriage Decalogue.” I cite it below, with two alterations: (1) I have modified Stoddard’s archaic “thee/thou” language into more modern English prose; and (2) I have replaced ‘German’ with ‘White.’ It seems to me that such a set of injunctions could be useful today, not only for Germans but for all White people in all lands. Let us see how it holds up under this new reading:

The Marriage Decalogue

1. Remember that you are White! All that you are, you owe, not to yourself, but to your people. Whether you like it or not, you belong to them; you have come forth from your race. In all that you do, consider whether it serves to enhance your people.
2. Maintain your purity of mind and spirit! Cherish and foster your mental and spiritual capacities. Keep far from your mind and soul whatever is instinctively foreign to them, what is contrary to your true self, and what your inner conscience rejects. Seeking after money, worldly goods, and material pleasures may often lead you to forget higher things. Be true to your own self, and above all, be worthy of your future life-mate.
3. Keep your body clean! Maintain the good health received from your parents, in order to serve your people. Guard against expending your health uselessly and foolishly. A moment’s sensual gratification may permanently damage your health and your heritable wealth that is meant to serve your children and grandchildren. Whatever you would demand of a future life-partner, demand of yourself. Remember that you are destined to be a White parent.
4. Being of sound stock, do not remain single! All your qualities of body and spirit perish if you die without heirs. They are a heritage, a donation from your ancestors. They exist as a chain, of which you are but a link. Would you break that chain, only under stern necessity? Your life is bound by time; but family and folk endure. Your hereditary estate of body and spirit prospers in your flourishing offspring.
5. Marry only for love! Money is perishable and ensures no lasting happiness. Where the divine spark of love is absent, no worthy marriage can endure. Wealth of heart and soul is the foundation of a lasting, happy union.
6. As a White, choose a mate only of your own race! Where like meets like, true unison rules. Where unlike races mix, there is discord. Mixing racial stocks which do not harmonize leads to the degeneracy and downfall of groups and peoples. The more unlike the mixtures, the faster this takes place. Guard yourself from such ruin! True happiness springs only from harmonious blood.
7. In choosing a mate, consider the ancestry! You wed not only your mate but also your life-partner’s forebears. Worthy descendants are to be expected only where worthy ancestors went before. Gifts of mind and spirit are just as much inherited as the color of hair and eyes. Bad traits are bequeathed precisely like land or goods. Nothing in the whole world is so precious as the seeds of a gifted stock; noxious seeds cannot be transformed into good ones. Thus, do not marry the one worthy member of a bad family.
8. Health is the prerequisite for outer beauty! Health is the best guarantee for lasting happiness, for it is the basis for both external charm and inward harmony. Demand of your mate medical assurance of fitness for marriage, as you must also do yourself.
9. In marriage seek, not a plaything but a helpmate! Marriage is not a passing game but a lasting union. The supreme aim of marriage is the raising of healthy offspring. Only by the union of beings who are alike in spirit, body, and blood can this high goal be attained, to the blessing of themselves and their people. Each race has its own ethos; thus, only like souls can endure together.
10. Strive to have many children! Only by having at least four children can the continuance of your people be assured. Only by having an even larger number can the greatest possible proportion of the traits inherited from your ancestors be handed down with certainty. You will soon pass away; that which you give to your descendants endures. Your people live forever!

Stoddard is duly impressed: “What an amazing mixture of idealisms and [beneficial] propaganda!” We can only imagine the conditions that would allow such an official document to appear in public once again. Imagine if such a thing were the basis for all education; for all youth-based music and entertainment; for all social media; for all youth-oriented films and television. Imagine the changes that would come in just five or ten years of a youth culture centered on these values and ideals.

“Nazi propaganda!” scream the leftists. “Thank God we no longer have such official dictates,” they say. But this would be a grave error. Don’t fool yourself, dear reader, into thinking that today’s Western liberal-democratic social order is “open” and “free,” and therefore lacking in such “propaganda.” Far from it. Every cultural system carries with it a worldview and an ideology. In the West today, our ideology is one of a Judeo-centric leftist liberalism; it promotes wokeism, minority rights, racial mixing, gay rights, gender fluidity, crude materialism, and rampant individualism and narcissism. It is anti-White, anti-child, and anti-family. It promotes self-harm, sickness, and death. It attacks the best among us and praises the worst. One could scarcely devise a more pernicious ideology if one tried. What concerned parent today wouldn’t prefer this “Nazi” Marriage Decalogue to guide our youth, over the utter filth and moral depravity served up with glee by our Jewish cultural overlords?

The second decalogue comes from the hand of Joseph Goebbels. Late in 1941, and just prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, the war entered its third year; all was going well for Hitler and Germany, and victory appeared to be at hand. France had capitulated, England was on its last legs, and the Soviets were pushed back nearly to Moscow.

For both Hitler and Goebbels, the cause of the war was clear: malevolent Jewish action in the East, the West, and within Germany itself. Soviet Bolshevism, inspired by Jews like Marx, Trotsky, and Lenin (a quarter-Jew), posed a mortal threat to all of Europe; capitalist Jews in England and France agitated against Hitler from even before his rise to power in 1933; and German Jews left over from the Weimar regime continued to cause trouble domestically. From the German perspective, the primary cause and driving force of the war was global Jewry.

Thus on 16 November 1941, Goebbels published a striking essay entitled “The Jews are guilty!” It is a remarkable piece, especially given that it was crafted by the functional second-in-command of a major Western power. (The full essay is reprinted in my book Goebbels on the Jews [3^rd ed., 2024]). Of interest is the closing portion in which Goebbels enumerates ten key points in dealing with the Jews—an “Antisemitic Decalogue,” if you will. Goebbels’ references to “the war” resonate in the present day, where we in the West are involved with two major conflicts (Ukraine and Gaza), both inspired and driven by Jews; the situation then was little different than today. I cite Goebbels’ ten points below in full:

The Antisemitic Decalogue

1. The Jews are our destruction. They started this war and direct it. They want to destroy the German Reich and our people. This plan must be blocked.
2. There are no distinctions between Jews. Each Jew is a sworn enemy of the German people. If he does not make his hostility plain, it is only from cowardice and slyness, not because he loves us.
3. The Jews are to blame for each German soldier who falls in this war. They have him on their conscience, and must also pay for it.
4. If someone wears the Jewish star, he is an enemy of the people. Anyone who deals with him is the same as a Jew and must be treated accordingly. He earns the contempt of the entire people, for he is a craven coward who leaves them in the lurch to stand by the enemy.
5. The Jews enjoy the protection of our enemies. That is all the proof we need to show how harmful they are for our people.
6. The Jews are the enemy’s agents among us. He who stands by them aids the enemy.
7. The Jews have no right to claim equality with us. If they wish to speak on the streets, in lines outside shops or in public transportation, they should be ignored, not only because they are simply wrong, but because they are Jews who have no right to a voice in the community.
8. Don’t let the Jews appeal to your sentimentality. If they try, realize that they are hoping for your forgetfulness, and let them know that you see through them and hold them in contempt.
9. A decent enemy will deserve our generosity after we have won. The Jew, however, is not a decent enemy, though he tries to seem so.
10. The Jews are responsible for the war. The treatment they receive from us is hardly unjust. They have deserved it all.

Imagine a society guided by these two decalogues—how different everything would be! Imagine if they were posted in every school, in every university, and in every public institution, and then actively used to guide social policy. What a tremendous impact they could have.

This idea is not so far-fetched. As I write these words, the state of Louisiana has just passed a law mandating the display of the Jewish “10 Commandments” in every public school, “in a large, easily readable font.” Even though the posting of Jewish commandments is idiotic in the extreme, the principle is valid: establish basic rules to guide society, and especially the youth, and promote them widely. Instead of Jewish mythology, why not post these German decalogues that serve the betterment of our youth and address a fundamental threat to social wellbeing?

We ought never forget our hard-won lessons from the past. With a finely-tuned ear, we can hear Nietzsche, Hitler, and Goebbels calling to us from beyond the grave: “Break, my friends, break the old tablets! Free yourselves from Judaic thinking and Judaic values! Recover your self-confidence, your sense of self-worth, and your greatness on the world stage. Identify and drive out the pernicious elements of your society; allow yourselves to breathe freely once again. Break the old tablets, and write new ones—ones that will carry you and your children beyond their present sorry state and into a future worthy of them and their legacy. It is a great and difficult task, but not impossible; we have begun the hard work; you must now carry it forward.”

Thus do they call to us. How shall we respond?

Thomas Dalton, PhD, has authored or edited several books and articles on politics, history, and the Jewish Question. All his works are available at www.clemensandblair.com, and at his personal website www.thomasdaltonphd.com

[1] Antichrist, section 33 (1888).

[2] Will to Power, section 197 (1887).

[3] Antichrist, section 17.

[4] For details, see my book The Jewish Hand in the World Wars (2019; Clemens & Blair).