IMO over the last 200 years Christianity has turned into the primary foe of white civilization, no other influence has affected the mentality of our people more detrimentally. Today even though church attendance is only a fraction of what it was 50 years ago most people if asked would declare themselves in some sense to be "Christian".

These Christian values such as they are are not necessarily transmitted from the pulpit but their heritage lies in the attitudes of the liberal elite; compassion for the poor, the Third World, anti discrimination, equality, gay rights, promotion of miscegenation, pro immigration etc. What are the differences between these liberal "values" and the ethics and dogmas of Christianity?

Even Trade Unionism and Socialism had their origins/and or grass roots support in Christianity. They are inextricably linked. I venture that these "values" have not strengthened but weakened the white world. The mass of people are enfeebled and useless. They need an elite to rule and guide them but this will not come about through Christian pastors but men of iron.

Christianity has a sheepish herd mentality with its promotion of the weak, the meek, the lowly and the ugly coupled with its opposition to the strong, the noble, the aristocratic and the beautiful? Just like the leftists/liberals, what says you?

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did our forebears go lefty because of christian influence, or was it our groups tendency towards charity that made them accept christianity? The two seem to go hand-in-hand, but I cannot ascribe cause and effect to the relationship. If christianity was crafted for this purpose, it's not a real religion. Thus, the conversation moot.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Tammuz, Attis, Mithra, Osiris, Odin... all came first, right.

The various Roman councils altered the traditional cults of the European volk and the Canaanized them. The problem for the moment is that the Canaanization process has at last won out, drowning the original volkish core and creating a situation where indeed Christianity is a problem.

As others have argued, it was indeed not always thus.

The enemy is most likely white lethargy, as usual. In Europe and England and even Australia, there has been a lively debate about Christianity's core and what went into it before the Canaanization program was nailed down under Constantine the Great.

The people who most need to know about this discussion are American Christians and they are the least likely to listen. On its present course, Christianity will end the white race in less than a century, because starting with the Roman Catholic outreach in the 1950s, the whole religion on the official level is Third Worldizing.

(Read Philip Jenkins on "The Next Christianity" for the bright, non-white future Christians have in mind for the world if you think I'm joking.)

It may be that in America, a small fringe of pagan-gnostic-identity types will make a deal among themselves to cooperate and survive, because the majority is hopelessly enmired in the anti-white, pro-zion xian creed and I see no way to reach them quick enough to do any good.

trade union and socialism do have some roots in Christianity but those roots are entertwined with our native Aryan sense of community cooperation. that is what lies at the root of the "success" of socialism in Scandanavia: quality people who are concerned about others and act accordingly. That is the spirit that also lies at the heart of the economic philosophy shared by fascism, national socialism, solidarism, and distributism. Catholics might not like me linking those schools of thought but there is something to it: they are all opposed to the rootless cosmopolites and atomized materialism of Jewish extreme Marxism or extreme capitalism.

dont buy the liberterian crap.

in-group, a sense of "social responsibility" is very much a good thing. expand it to all the people on earth and it becomes meaningless. that is where liberal Christians have gone bonkers. Love my neighbor does not mean ignore my neighbor in favor of giving money to burrocrats to hand out overseas.

trade union and socialism do have some roots in Christianity but those roots are entertwined with our native Aryan sense of community cooperation. that is what lies at the root of the "success" of socialism in Scandanavia: quality people who are concerned about others and act accordingly. That is the spirit that also lies at the heart of the economic philosophy shared by fascism, national socialism, solidarism, and distributism. Catholics might not like me linking those schools of thought but there is something to it: they are all opposed to the rootless cosmopolites and atomized materialism of Jewish extreme Marxism or extreme capitalism.

dont buy the liberterian crap.

in-group, a sense of "social responsibility" is very much a good thing. expand it to all the people on earth and it becomes meaningless. that is where liberal Christians have gone bonkers. Love my neighbor does not mean ignore my neighbor in favor of giving money to burrocrats to hand out overseas.

Yes, you make good points here but I think you are speaking on a local/national level. However, we shouldn't forget that even though the Vatican was Anti-Bolshevik in the 1920's and 1930's, these Popes had their missionaries wandering off into the far corners of Africa converting the dark savages to Christianity. On a global level the Catholic church was a major advocate of Civil Rights for all races. The Pope in 1937 condemned the Third Reich for having a racial policy. Catholic leaders have been pushing egalitarian ideas for hundreds of years. This is why Alfred Rosenberg was so Anti-Catholic because he said that the Vatican advocated the concept of "No races, only the human race"....

My theory is that as soon as you spread your religion to other races, it's only matter of time before their race starts mixing with yours under the same banner of "Christianity". Look in America today, White women don't marry Korean Buddhists, they marry newly converted Korean Christians...the religious differences between races were a major reason that race-mixing didn't occur but now everything is opened up and all previous barriers no longer exist.

these Popes had their missionaries wandering off into the far corners of Africa converting the dark savages to Christianity. .

Which, if I'm recalling TT or MK correctly, pissed off The Fuhrer no end, though I'm not sure He was writing only of the papists and not the Lutherans too. His great admiration for the British Empire was based on its then policy of leaving its colonials pretty much to their own devices culturally, whereas, in His view, Germans were always trying to scrub the black off niggers (or some such).

Here's some pretty mundane social science type bullshit, but the papistry is firstly an institution. Institutions like to grow. Looking solely at 'Kwa, as traditional RC's like Irish and Italians have become more prosperous and hence (so it seems) less interested in what kike Marx called the opium of the masses, is it at all surprising that the Church would embrace Mexcrement and other muds? I read somewhere that some Baptists are now even competing for newly-arrived wetbacks in Texas. And I hear the Mormons have been converting Korean gooks for years. That they all do this I find predictable. Just another example of self-interest run amok in the absence of Racialist government control.

This article shows the mentality of the so called good Christians that destroyed America. Yesterday’s puritan has become today’s liberal, they are similar in arrogance, ignorance, and in the absolutist attitude that they are the only ones who know what is best for the people. The only difference between today’s liberal and their puritan ancestors is that they are now sexual perverts.


The Yankee Problem in America

http://www.lewrockwell.com/wilson/wilson12.html




The politicians and TV personalities who stood around telling us what we are to think about it are Yankees. I am using the term historically to designate that peculiar ethnic group descended from New Englanders, who can be easily recognized by their arrogance, hypocrisy, greed, lack of congeniality, and penchant for ordering other people around. Puritans long ago abandoned anything that might be good in their religion but have never given up the notion that they are the chosen saints whose mission is to make America, and the world, into the perfection of their own image.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, raised a Northern Methodist in Chicago, is a museum-quality specimen of the Yankee – self-righteous, ruthless, and self-aggrandizing. Northern Methodism and Chicago were both, in their formative periods, hotbeds of abolitionist, high tariff Black Republicanism. The Yankee temperament, it should be noted, makes a neat fit with the Stalinism that was brought into the Deep North by later immigrants.

In the 1960s the Yankee had one of his periodic eruptions of mania such as he had in the 1850s. Since then, he has managed to destroy a good part of the liberty and morals of the American peoples. It remains to be seen whether his conquest is permanent or whether in the future we may be, at least to some degree, emancipated from it.

Yes, you make good points here but I think you are speaking on a local/national level. However, we shouldn't forget that even though the Vatican was Anti-Bolshevik in the 1920's and 1930's, these Popes had their missionaries wandering off into the far corners of Africa converting the dark savages to Christianity. On a global level the Catholic church was a major advocate of Civil Rights for all races. The Pope in 1937 condemned the Third Reich for having a racial policy. Catholic leaders have been pushing egalitarian ideas for hundreds of years. This is why Alfred Rosenberg was so Anti-Catholic because he said that the Vatican advocated the concept of "No races, only the human race"....

My theory is that as soon as you spread your religion to other races, it's only matter of time before their race starts mixing with yours under the same banner of "Christianity". Look in America today, White women don't marry Korean Buddhists, they marry newly converted Korean Christians...the religious differences between races were a major reason that race-mixing didn't occur but now everything is opened up and all previous barriers no longer exist.

Part of solving the riddle of how this horrible mass miscegenating fuckup of the current social situation came about is realizing that "race" as a concept was not very strong until le Comte de Gobineau, who was contemporaneous with the victory of White Imperialism over the Earth. Prior to European colonization outside Europe, there was not a strong sense of the European tribeal nations as being part of a common community except as Christians. Once you have contact with the rest of humanoid "humanity" such as it is, Whites start to figger out they're White. The same thing is true on a microscopic level with individuals who have grown up in an all-White environment free of blacks, and then they get thrust into a situation with blacks. They soon recognize there is something MORE FUNDAMENTAL than the social category of Nation, and that is the social-biological category of Race. If people arent around other races, they dont even realize it exists for the most part, and their focus becomes nation vs nation. Hence the anti-Irish klan of the 20s.

Religion is not a substitute for race. I do not and never have advocated that. Race and religion exist in different spheres. Race is not a substitute for religion either. Religion deals with certain spiritual ideas that are in some ways more fundamental than race. Such as the idea of death, which exists for all living things. Religion invovles much puzzling over death. But the shared experience of death among blacks and whites for example, does not in any way negate the differences among races. We dont need to pretend that it does-- that is the antiracist pretence and it is wrong. The flip side of that is the anti-religious attitude that has developed in the past hundred years.

Things are changing very fast. There is much confusion and plenty of time to sort things out provided we survive as a race. Christians should have no doubt that "race" as a category is real and legitimate as "nation" and any attempt by utopian-jew-liberal-puritan fanatics is wicked and equivalent to trying to build a new temple of babel.

I'm of the simple conviction that Christian faith-communities should be segregated. Very simple idea and very well implemented by the Boervolk in SA-Rhodesia. Worked fine in the South too. The problem is not really in traditional Christianity, it is in having a large permanent resident population of any group that is distinctly different either ethnically or racially. It always leads to big problems. What always makes the problem untenable is JEW MEDDLING. Like Ireland vs UK-- it took the insane Jew-loving Cromwell to really fuck things up to where it's still a disaster today.

Nah, race and religion should be the same. Like the old pagan ways when you die you join your bloodline in the after world. Wotansvolk is a good example of this. Too long priestcafters have been hoodwinking people with the soul afterworld angle. Just cons keeping people weak and depented for control. In the furture I could see keeping some christings around for sport in the arena. Or to put up on display and mock as a the jewish abusrdity they really are.

What pagans didnt believe in an afterlife? What was Valhalla? What was hades? as much an afterlife as the "heaven" most lemmings mildly believe in.

Nah, race and religion should be the same. Like the old pagan ways when you die you join your bloodline in the after world. Wotansvolk is a good example of this. Too long priestcafters have been hoodwinking people with the soul afterworld angle. Just cons keeping people weak and depented for control. In the furture I could see keeping some christings around for sport in the arena. Or to put up on display and mock as a the jewish abusrdity they really are.

You dont think pagan faiths served a social control function? You dont think social control is important?

You may think Christianity equals Jewish social control. That was clearly what Revilo Oliver thought. Today there is much truth to that. I dont think putting Christians "in the arena" will do anything today. The first people to show up to attend would be Jews, anyhow.

Man I'm a big Christianity hater but damn I have to say those dumb headed soccermomish White Christian girls are probably the only really decent women left around for breeding.

Um...If Christianity is a tool of the yid then why do they hate it so?

Maybe a double-bluff?

Nobody ever seriously thought it was a "tool of the yid", it was the tool of the powerful, which included some of them.

The zionist use of regular jews shows how little they care about most of them. They kill them in batches when it serves their purpose.

Why regular jews hate christianity is a good question. I've always had a sneaking suspicion that they are responding to the pre-christian life force religion, which survives in part embedded in some sects.

The Chirst/Passion and the Osiris/Transformation are keys for pagans. Keep in mind the rabbi and the talmudist have always considered Jesus a pagan god. On purely technical grounds this might be the simple truth.

So then it comes down to hating an archetype, not a religion. And we all know the archetype Osiris comes from Egypt and we know that Egypt was the Third Reich of its era (by Biblical accounts, of course) so jews here are only being consistent.

Pagan/Euro archetype: God within, activated and motivated (Christ dies and we internalize him.)

Hebrew/Leventine archetype: God is from without, the bully who does our punching for us. Nothing within.

No one asks "What would Moses do" for a good reason: It's a different and contradictory archetype. You can only obey Moses or not, there's no internal gnosis going on.

On the other hand, asking "What would Jesus do" is a direct wire into the mysteries of Osiris' transformation to the perfected Horus, a totally internal event that only one race seems to have felt necessary.

I think there are talmudic scholars who know this as well as I do. Relentlessly focusing on the passion/transformation part just might jog the racial memory awake.

Man I'm a big Christianity hater but damn I have to say those dumb headed soccermomish White Christian girls are probably the only really decent women left around for breeding.

looking for a ride in the minivan? LOL

you need a muscular Christianity so that when you settle down with one you can make her give it up on a regular basis and squeeze out the pups without complaint. surrender the field to jews and white faggots and you get the miscegating feminist democratic egalitarian twaddle that people call "christinsanity."

Maybe a double-bluff?

Nobody ever seriously thought it was a "tool of the yid", it was the tool of the powerful, which included some of them.

The zionist use of regular jews shows how little they care about most of them. They kill them in batches when it serves their purpose.

Why regular jews hate christianity is a good question. I've always had a sneaking suspicion that they are responding to the pre-christian life force religion, which survives in part embedded in some sects.

The Chirst/Passion and the Osiris/Transformation are keys for pagans. Keep in mind the rabbi and the talmudist have always considered Jesus a pagan god. On purely technical grounds this might be the simple truth.

So then it comes down to hating an archetype, not a religion. And we all know the archetype Osiris comes from Egypt and we know that Egypt was the Third Reich of its era (by Biblical accounts, of course) so jews here are only being consistent.

Pagan/Euro archetype: God within, activated and motivated (Christ dies and we internalize him.)

Hebrew/Leventine archetype: God is from without, the bully who does our punching for us. Nothing within.

No one asks "What would Moses do" for a good reason: It's a different and contradictory archetype. You can only obey Moses or not, there's no internal gnosis going on.

On the other hand, asking "What would Jesus do" is a direct wire into the mysteries of Osiris' transformation to the perfected Horus, a totally internal event that only one race seems to have felt necessary.

I think there are talmudic scholars who know this as well as I do. Relentlessly focusing on the passion/transformation part just might jog the racial memory awake.

wow, that is perceptive. I was onto some of that, but that distinction really hits it one the head. thanks for that excellent comment I am going to think about that.

reminds me that savitri devi wrote a book about akhenaton. I'd love to get ahold of that and read it.