Back to Basics

This isn’t really going to be a proper post in the sense it will be a structured argument for or against something. Rather these are just some semi-organized thoughts I have been having over the past few days, after discussing Catholicism and Christian apologetics with Argent Templar and The Iberian.

Getting Past Basic Bitch Edgelordism

White nationalists and their kind have been around for decades, really. Granted, as I have mentioned in “Middle Class Reaction,” the decline of the middle class promises a future full of radicalism, certainly of the Left, and possibly of the Right. Naturally, if you are a young white male in the modern West, and you discover far-Right thinking, often the first impulse is to just get into edgy stuff that pisses off liberals. There is nothing wrong with this desire, we all have it, it’s a part of who we are in a sense. But that cannot be the be all end all. And sadly, it seems too many young men complain about degeneracy and race traitors on the internet… and then exhibit the same modern behavior in the confines of their basement. Furthermore, when you begin reading European history, especially of the 18th and 19th century, you realize that the nationalists, a long time ago, were the liberals of their day.

Edgy counter signalling is not what the soul of the West was, and really, white nationalism is just 19th century liberalism in many senses. It is very materialist most of the time, often placing the sexual acquisition of blonde girls in our lifetime as the highest good (I kid, of course, but not by much). We all like blonde girls, and we all generally think women race mixing and exhibiting generally promiscuous behavior are usually marks of degeneracy.  We like white women. We like safe streets and safe societies. We are sick and tired of Dindus and Muslims burning down cities, rioting, attacking, and raping people, all while some smug Jewish academic somewhere smiles.

Imagine if to eliminate all that tomorrow. The Jews. The Muslims. The Blacks. The Hispanics. It would do nothing in the long run. White people have become aimless, lacking in internal drive, courage, and desire to serve much of anything that is greater than themselves. White nationalism almost never offers any antidotes to these post modern conditions, mainly because white nationalism, is by and large, a byproduct of modernity.

A Moral Experiment

Really, few people would seriously die under the banner of “white nationalism.” What is a man to die for? Answering this question really requires knowing the value of life? What answer can nationalism provide us? Sure some nationalism has neopaganism infused into it, but by in large, this neopaganism is more often than not just LARPing that has little to do with actual traditional European religion. Overall, unless you are a dedicated pagan, the only answer to be offered up are purely materiel: safe streets, hot white women, and depending on your flavor of nationalism, totalitarian state induced racial jubilation. Yet, think about that. Is that all life is? Are you really going to die for your god or your country just for the thought of some woman in a cutesy European folk dress somewhere? Maybe. But look at the medieval era. Look at all the heroes of Christendom who gave it their all. These men were inspired by something higher. They were inspired to display behavior that helped their civilization, enshrined them as model men, and in the process, also served their race.  I am not attacking white nationalism from below (leftist ethnomasochisim), I am increasingly attacking it from above (It has almost no fundamental doctrine or teaching to prevent the nihilism that allowed outside forces to come in at all). The West is shaping up to be a giant Nietzsche, and judging by Tumblr and SJW culture, we are already in the insane asylum. The answer to our ills is not more materialist insanity, reducing everything down to a earthy pleasure. We need something higher to live for, die for, and dictate our behavior in a way that continues a great civilization.

What We Were

Neopagan LARPing aside, until about World War I or World War II (depends on which country, and who you ask), Christianity was really the guiding light of the west. For whatever ills it brought, Westerners enjoyed a fairly good life under the dominance of Christianity. The results speak for themselves: Look at European global control when we were Christian, now look at us in this post Christian age. We were not weak. We dominated. Vlad the Impaler brutally tortured his enemies to death. This was a religion that would defend itself.

Where I Am Going

For several days I have been talking with a few people about the validity of Christianity. I always knew Christian apologetics existed, but I never really took it very seriously until Argent started making videos about it. As an American, I am just so unused to the idea of an intelligent Christianity. We can thank low church American Protestantism for destroying the intellectual credibility of Christianity (the earth is only 6000 years old! God wants us to invade Iraq!). If Christianity was true, it would be the final peg, that final missing element, explained. I have always felt at a visceral level, that no “ideology”: the fascisms, nationalisms, communisms, and centrisms of this world could sustain a civilization for long. People need inherent value and something that goes beyond just their political epoch. Does God exist? He better. If he does not, we will all go crazy like Nietzsche, so I am inclined to think some deity exists. Why would we be created to value something that does not exist? Am I becoming a Christian? Not yet anyway, maybe not ever. But whatever direction I head, I am moving past just basic bitch edgelord bitching about non whites and Jews. Truly, we can only be saved as a civilization and as people if we have something worth serving and dying for, that was here long before us, and will be here long after we die.

Advertisements
Outcast Kaitsar

7 thoughts on “Back to Basics

  1. You seem to be catching up to where I was, internally, late last year; seeing surface-level politics and its various manifestations as rather futile, and the only thing of real importance being the interior state of ourselves, of the individual.

    Most of this post isn’t exactly arguable, and I do find myself in agreement with you overall. Some points, though; some argumentative, some critical:

    1) I find your use of certain terminology (“Shitlord,” “Edgelord,” “Dindus,” “LARPing,” etc.) to be rather in poor taste. Not that those sorts of words – slang – don’t have a place somewhere, but I do not think everyone who will read this post will actually know what you’re speaking about. Those words stem from a culture which not everyone is familiar with, and it could cause confusion for those who aren’t as such. It’s nonsensical to bring things which are reliant upon in-jokes and so on outside of their place of origin.

    2) I’m not sure you fully understand Nietzsche. He would utterly deplore modern progressivism; he saw the liberalism of his day as pathetic and weak. He attacked Christianity because he saw a reflection of that in the ethos of the Christian spirit; an ethos of love, inclusion, tolerance, acceptance, and so on. Nietzsche’s nihilism doesn’t stem wholly from his own mind, it was an observation of broader humanity after the Death of God. Thus, he formulated the Ubermench, a man capable of surviving a post-religious era; a man capable of realising himself fully without the need for divine direction because he is that himself through his own greatness.

    Evola’s criticism of Nietzsche begins here. Evola pointed out that one can surpass the Ubermench without Christian ethics and spirituality if one looks towards either the East and Far Eastern spiritual traditions (like Buddhism), or if one turns towards the most esoteric European traditions (like Hermeticism). Nietzsche completely misunderstood asceticism and self-mastery, and he completely missed Hermetics and the more sacral-initiatory formulations of Christianity. He failed to realise that it is only through various traditions a man can actually realise himself as they are conduits, essentially; links between man and the divine which give us Earthly beings a chance at transcendence. Nietzsche wanted to erase that (or he felt he had no choice but to) and thus he failed (hence Evola is our true Lord and Saviour). I should probably write something further on this to give a more detailed explanation.

    3) Straw-manning White Nationalists as basement-dwelling rednecks obsessing over the death of Jews and the screwing of pretty Aryan princesses – on a public blog under multiple names – is a bad idea. I know it’s all tongue-in-cheek, but it’s exactly that: a straw-man. And this isn’t about pissing people off, it’s about misrepresentation and inaccuracy. The number of White Nationalists genuinely like that are small in number and are, in my opinion, not important enough to recognize. Libertarian Realist on YouTube doesn’t fit that stereotype, and I’d say he’s definitely a White Nationalist. Watch a few of his videos and formulate a criticism; that’ll be a real challenge instead of attacking a stereotype which won’t bite back as it doesn’t exist in the force you suppose it to, and as you’ve done in previous posts. You’re smarter than that, man.

    In any case, good post. It’s about time someone other than myself made an appearance!

    1. Mixed feelings, I do think having a big of humour is normally a plus. Sorry I haven’t been posting much, I write much slower than I speak (learning disability) so I tend to do video’s instead of write articles, but I should put another one up. I have also been putting some work into the facebook page and its coming along good.

      1. I wasn’t bashing humour itself, just that specific brand of humour which can only properly exist in a certain pace and does not belong anywhere else. I spoke of it in the most recent Babblefest the other night.

        And hold on… we have a Facebook page..? I… alright then.

  2. I won’t go into it all, here and now, but I’m a former Atheist with an high IQ who also found Christianity ridiculous, once upon a time. Of course, as you point out, there is a lot of unreflective prejudice against the Faith, fueled especially by the discrediting behaviors of many (pseudo-Christian) sectarians. But I began a process of discovering more profound, Christian thought – starting with C.S. Lewis and eventually stretching back through all the Church Fathers and Doctors – and came to see it as the most sublime, intelligent and wise system of belief ever seen upon the Earth.

    This culminated in my conversion to the Catholic Faith, after spending ten years as a monk of the Greek/Russian Orthodox Church. When it comes to modernity and its ills, I came to see that the Church stood alone against it, while Protestantism and all of her daughter “-isms” in modernity represented a unified system of apostasy and irrationality, and liberal revolution against God and nature. There is the important caveat that, in the early 60s, a long-prophesied apostasy and infiltration of the Church, of which the popes had continually warned in the preceding centuries, produced what was called “the French Revolution within the walls of the Church” – i.e., the penetration of the modernist, irrational and rebellious mindset even into the Church, the heart of Western Civilization. Those who are not Catholic will naturally find it hard to understand – many who call themselves Catholics, even, are afraid to understand – that the theology and Canon Law of the Catholic Church foresee the possibility of defection from the Faith by bishops and even popes, and tell us that these men lose their office automatically and are severed from the Church, without need of any declaratory sentence or official process. Generally, in past ages, such apostasy has been met in relatively short order with an official process and declaration (which are useful for clarity’s sake); but the immense scope of the modern apostasy – something predicted in Scripture as the “Great Apostasy” – has meant that the huge majority of apostate hierarchs retain public possession of office and “respectability,” and the faithful are thrown into great confusion. This has produced an unprecedented crisis in the Church, whereby the vast and imposing edifice of Catholic “officialdom” has actually ceased to be Catholic and now, in point of fact, is at the service of the revolution and defection from Catholic Faith.

    You must read “Liberalism is a Sin” by Don Felix Sardana y Salvany. Your thoughts here resonate with its message. Mark Yuray did a good write-up on the work, with some background about its writing, here: http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/01/12/don-felix-sarda-y-salvany-liberalism-is-a-sin/ He ends his article with a link to a good version of the book online, though the site has a massive amount of introductory material before the actual text of the book begins, which you may simply want to skip. I would also heartily recommend that you read the papal encyclicals and teaching on Liberty (such as Leo XIII’s magnificent “Libertas Praestantissimum:” http://www.fisheaters.com/libertas.html) and the accelerating infiltration of the Church by liberals and modernists (pope St. Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis: http://www.fisheaters.com/pascendidominicigregis.html). These things represent the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church (including Don Felix’ book, which the Sacred Congregation of the Index warmly approved), which cannot change; when the Church – and with Her, authentic Western Civilization – is restored, these principles will again be ascendant.

    1. Overall an excellent reply, out of curiosity are you a Sedevacantist? I myself am not a traditionalist per say, I am more a conservative in the Pope Benedict mold, but one who is more willing to criticize the hierarchy.

      Its funny actually I also have a high IQ, I think it was tested at 99.99 Percentile back in grade 3 and my personality type is extreme INTJ but like you I found Catholicism to be intellectually rigorous and always with a good logical answer for just about everything.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s