Christian ethics and mongrelization


While 16th-century catholic Spaniards were extremely tough on Jews they were, at the same time, too tolerants of american natives, with Pope Paul III recognizing in 1537 that Amerindians had souls and declared them FIT TO MARRY THE BACHELOR CONQUERORS!

This astronomical blunder caused the total mess that any racially-conscious visitor can see with his own eyes in Mexico and South America. The "mestization" or mongrelization of those lands, with overwhelming Amerindian blood over the European, was, according to Hitler and among others, the primary cause of "Latin America" backwardness and ultimate historical demise in the coming decades.

Alas, like some ultra-catholics who claims to strenuously "defend the Western Civilization", Protestants are also tolerating massive miscegenation at the North of Río Grande. Some of the most devout, particularly the Evangelicals, are actually saying: “Racism is the worst sin”.

The western progressivist paradigm is based on Christian ethics. The Left is all about Christian ethics. What the left-wing is doing is not destroying Western civilization, but completing and fulfilling it. The current order is the last and terminal phase of a disease called "Western Christian Civilization". Christian axiology, is the basic etiology of Western malaise. Christianity settled in Europe, camouflaged as a "religion", stole our customs and rituals to infiltrate the souls of our ancestors, and began to erode and to poison gradually our strong vibrant ethos and replaced it with guilt and shame. It was the cultural cancer. Nowadays degeneracy is the cultural necrosis that set in after the cancer itself began to die.

Christian ethics cannot stand the sight of little brown children dying. They must help them, or they will freak out. According to Christian ethics it is forbidden and unthinkable to think in terms of not saving every little brown child across the planet. But the consequences of this mindset are catastrophic, not only to us but also to them. But since White people are so programmed according to Christian ethics, this does not seem to enter their heads. The thought is too unthinkable to be absorbed. It’s an utter taboo.

Absolutely. In fact, recently a white nationalist woman said in a very well known white nationalist radio podcast that abortion of non-whites is immoral: the opposite of what the National-Socialist Germans (who had revaluated Christian values) did: legalizing abortion in such cases.

Obviously, blaming everything on Christian mindset is a crude form of ideological myopia. Even this point of view may lead to the wrong idea that westerners are committing "racial and cultural suicide", because, after all, Christianity has been an important part of Modern Western Civilization. However, it’s not suicide, but genocide (the killing of a race by any means: it can be violent or pacifically through politics and social engineering), because the nefarious influence of the (((chosen ones))) in our civilization.

So, strictly monocausal explanations of our current predicament are myopic. At least from the religious viewpoint the etiology is basically twofold: both Christianity and Judaism are the culprits. "The Jew" merely represent a very strong catalyst of a chemical reaction that had started since their emancipation by the gentiles during the French Revolution. But on the other hand, no Jew has real power in Muslim countries precisely because Islam doesn’t preach the craziest inversion of values: Love your alien neighbor, and even your enemy!

This is why a Nietzschean point of view could think that “the fall of the Western Christian civilization should be celebrated”: it is so corrupted and stagnant, that we need something else to renew it. And it’s not until the westerners thoroughly revise their view on World War II that a change of paradigms can take place.

About Mainstream Anti-Christianity

Here a leftist man and the disgusting Jewess Sarah Silverman.
Killing another Jesus again??? Oh no please, don't make another hippie martyr for another 2000 years of lies!!!!
Mainstream-Leftist Anti-Christianity is not based in Christianity at all but actually just in Anti-White sentiments.

All religions include a ferreous, traditional, and concrete system of values, and yes, even that superstition and sickness called Christianity. Cultural Marxism despises any system other than its own, which is degenerate. Therefore, it is opposed to the concept of religion itself. One would expect Cultural Marxists to oppose all religions equally, and this is the case for some belligerent atheists who despise and attack all religions.

In practice, however, the anti-religious component of Cultural Marxism is based on its Anti-European or Anti-White sentiment, and it is sometimes eclipsed by it. That is why Cultural Marxism attacks mainly Christianity, which perceives it as a "stronghold of Western values", in addition for being the major religion and for having a great historical and cultural relevance in Europe. It is common for cultural Marxists to victimize Muslims and Jews and instead demonizes christians, especially if they are white.

Therefore, if European Native Religions were the major religions in Europe, Cultural Marxism would attack them with the same hate as happens today with Christianity. Although generally they consider them as a minor danger and "suppressed", we can check that there is a SUBTLE but even more destructive attack on European Native Religions, with the promotion of a false paganism and neo-hippie, cultural-marxist, universalist deviant tendencies such as the New Age or Wicca, besides the distortion of our white civilization's history, like the defaming of Ancient Greece and Rome with promotion of pseudo-history about homosexualism, and Hollywood mocking and caricaturing our mythologies. All these things are damaging and perverting the image of legitimate Pagan movements.

The apparent attack on Christianity by the leftist trends also provokes a fallacious illusion among nationalists that Christianity represents the true European values and for that reason it must be defended, which causes that many of our comrades fall in the trap and stand in favor of Christianity, the poison that started it all.

Note also that in the list of symbols that the Anti-Defamation League considers as "symbols of hate" there are a lot of Pagan (European) origin, but there are not properly Christian symbols at all.



Hitler, Christianity, and the Third Reich

by Kerry Bolton
THE PLACE OF CHRISTIANITY under National Socialism has been a matter of contention, as with all else connected with that philosophy. Hitler has been damned as the devil incarnate by his Christian opponents, and heralded as a Jesus-like messiah by his Christian proponents. The 24th point of the NSDAP’s political programme even describes National Socialism as standing for “positive Christianity.” In order to access the real relationship of Christianity to National Socialism it is necessary to go beyond the propaganda of both pro- and anti-National Socialist Christians.
To do this the private pronouncements of the National Socialist leaders must receive greater attention than their public statements. An additional consideration is the actual practice of the National Socialist regime towards the churches. Hitler’s private conversations with his inner circle between 1941 and 1944, as recorded by Reichleiter Bormann, himself one of the National Socialist Party’s most avid anti-Christians as we shall see, provide the most insightful of sources in determining the real attitude of Hitler towards Christianity.
Hitler commented on Minister of Religion Kerrl’s effort to identify National Socialism with “positive Christianity,” that it was “the noblest of intentions, but I don’t believe the thing’s possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself.” “As for the men close to me,” he stated, “who, like me, have escaped from the clutches of dogma, I’ve no reason to fear that the church will get its hands on them. We’ll see to it that the church cannot spread abroad teachings that conflict with the interests of the State. We shall continue to preach the doctrine of National Socialism, and the young will no longer be taught anything but the truth. In the long run National Socialism and religion will no longer be able to exist together. The ideal solution would be to leave the religions to devour themselves, without persecutions. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion has to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble.”
EARLY VIEW 

Hermann Rauschning
Hermann Rauschning

During the first years of the regime, and just prior to it, Hermann Rauschning recorded Hitler’s conversations with his inner circle. According to Rauschning, a conservative in the ranks of the National Socialist party who became the president of Danzig, Hitler said of Christianity, “Leave the hair-splitting to others. Whether it’s the Old Testament or the New, or simply the sayings of Jesus, it’s all the same old Jewish swindle. It will not make us free. A German church, a German Christianity, is a distortion. One is either a German or a Christian. You cannot be both…. We don’t want people to keep one eye on the hereafter. We need free men who know that God is in themselves.”
Hitler made it clear that he was not interested in an “Aryanized Christianity” or the “Aryan Jesus” myth promoted by Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Von Liebenfels, and certain party members. “You cannot make an Aryan out of Jesus, that’s nonsense,” he stated. Rather, the festivals of the church, hijacked by Christianity from the heathens in the first place, would be re-heathenized. “Easter is no longer resurrection, but the eternal renewal of our people. Christmas is the birth of our saviour: the spirit of heroism and the freedom of our people.” If the priests put up resistance the regime would expose them before the people. “We shall brand them as ordinary criminals. I shall tear the mask of honesty off their faces. And if that is not enough, I shall make them appear ridiculous and contemptible. I shall order films to be made about them. We shall show the history of the monks on the cinema.”
Indeed, in 1937 a trial was held of 337 monks, “for abusing pupils or patients” committed to their care. A few monks escaped with millions of marks of German money, while the vast majority were imprisoned. The English ex-monk Joseph McCabe commented that they went to court “on the vilest of charges.” Of a chaplain named Father Leogivill, he said: “Once when he was on night duty he raped a sick youth of 17 who was asleep in the ward, and could not defend himself because his right arm was in a sling.” This situation was not unique, nor is it today uncommon. What is unique are the effective measures the Third Reich took.
FOLK RELIGION
A folk religion would arise that would replace Christianity. “The peasant will be told what the church has destroyed for him: the whole of the secret knowledge of nature, of the divine, the shapeless, the daemonic. The peasant shall learn to hate the church on that basis. Gradually he shall be taught by what wiles the soul of the German people has been raped. We shall wash off the Christian veneer and bring out a religion peculiar to our race. And this is where we must begin, not in the big cities……”
Rauschning remarks in his Hitler Speaks that the old folks customs were being used by the regime to de-Christianize the peasantry. Agriculture Minister Walter Darre, the original proponent of the famous Blood and Soil doctrine and the real father of the “Green Movement,” was one of the regime’s most avid anti-Christians. Agricultural exhibitions had themes of the old peasant revolts against the church. Peasant calendars were produced which replaced Christian festivals with Germanic heathen ones.
COMMUNISM AND CHRISTIANITY: REVOLTS AGAINST NATURE

Martin Bormann
Martin Bormann

The very doctrines of National Socialism and Christianity are antithetical. Christianity was held to be the forerunner of Bolshevism, and both were revolts against Nature herself, with the Jews to be behind each. Bormann records Hitler as stating: “Christianity is a religion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.” “Pure Christianity — the Christianity of the catacombs — is concerned with translating the Christian doctrine into fact. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely wholehearted Bolshevism under a tinsel of metaphysics.”
“The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child…. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity. Bolshevism practices a lie of the same nature when it claims to bring liberation to mankind. In the ancient world the relations between men and Gods were founded on an instinctive respect. It was a world enlightened by the idea of tolerance. Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love. Its keynote is intolerance.”
THE POX OF CHRISTIANITY
Hitler contemplating a bust of Nietzsche
Hitler’s analysis of Christianity is Nietzschean: “The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.” “Christianity is a prototype of Bolshevism: the mobilization by the Jews of the masses of slaves with the object of undermining society. Thus one understands that the healthy elements of the Roman world were proof against the doctrine. Yet Rome (i.e. Fascist Italy) allows itself today to reproach Bolshevism with having destroyed the churches. As if Christianity itself hadn’t behaved in the same way towards the pagan temples.”
THE DEPLORABLE BIBLE
“It is deplorable that the Bible should have been translated into German, and the whole of the German people should have thus become exposed to the whole of this Jewish mumbo-jumbo. As a sane German, one is flabbergasted to think that the German folk could have led themselves to such a pass by Jewish filth and priestly twaddle.”
PRIESTS
“What a happy inspiration to have kept the clergy out of the party. On 21 March 1933 at Potsdam, the question was raised: with the Church or without the Church? I conquered the State despite the malediction pronounced on us by both creeds [i.e. Catholic and Protestant]. On that day, we went to the tomb of the kings, whilst the others were attending religious services. Suppose that at that period I’d made a pact with the churches, I’d today be sharing the lot of the Duce [Mussolini]. By nature the Duce is a free thinker, but he decided to choose the path of concessions. For my part, in his place I’d have decided to choose the path of revolution. I’d have entered the Vatican and thrown everybody out.”
As with many other matters, Hitler intended postponing a final reckoning with the priests until after the war. “The evil that’s gnawing at our vitals is our priests, of both creeds. After the war, I’ll take the necessary steps to make the recruiting of priests extraordinarily difficult. In particular, I’ll no longer allow children from the age of 10 upward, to devote their lives to the church when they’ve absolutely no notion what they’re undertaking — in accepting celibacy for example.”
CHURCH AND STATE
Political interference from the clergy was not tolerated. Hitler stated: “If one once allows the church to exercise the slightest influence on the governing of the people and the upbringing of the younger generation, it will strive to become omnipotent, and one makes a great mistake if one thinks that one can make a collaborator of the church by accepting compromise.” From the earliest days of the regime, the National Socialists had come into conflict with the churches. The 1933 sterilization law of the congenitally retarded was particularly offensive to the Catholic Church, with its doctrine of the sanctity of all human life, in contradistinction to the eugenic outlook of the National Socialists. In 1937 Pius XI accused the regime of “secret and open fundamental hostility to Christ and his church.” Towards the end, in 1945, Pope Pius XII described National Socialism as, “the arrogant apostasy from Jesus Christ, the denial of his doctrine and of his work of redemption, the cult of violence, the idolatry of race and blood, the overthrow of human liberty and dignity.”
One point of irritation to Hitler was that while the churches had declared themselves enemies of the German State, the people were expected to subsidize them. Subsidies were actually extracted from the wage packet much like union levies, and to contract out meant to endure considerable antagonism. This paradox was never resolved. Hitler commented that, “Once we cease handing out millions of marks a year to the church, the damn parsons will very quickly change their tune and, instead of having the impudence to revile us and to attack us in the most shameful manner, will very soon be eating out of our hands. Once the war is over I will put a swift end to the Concodat [diplomatic agreement between the State and the Vatican]. It will give me the greatest personal pleasure to point out to the Church all those occasions on which it has broken the terms of it. One need only recall the close co-operation between the Church and the murderers of Heydrich [Security Chief].” “Catholic priests not only allowed them to hide in a church, but even allowed them to entrench themselves in the sanctuary of the altar.”
“I don’t interfere with matters of belief, therefore I can’t allow churchmen to interfere with temporal affairs. The organized lie must be smashed.The State must remain the absolute master.”
“When I was younger, I thought it was necessary to set about matters with dynamite. I’ve since recognized there’s room for a little subtlety. The rotten branch falls of itself. The final state must be: in St. Peter’s chair, a senile officiate; facing him, a few old women, as gaga and as poor in spirit as anyone could be. The young and healthy are on our side. Against a church that identifies itself with the State, as in England, I have nothing to say. But even so, it’s impossible to hold humanity eternally in bondage to lies. After all, it was only between the 6th and 8th centuries that Christianity was imposed on our people by princes who had an alliance of interest with the shavelings. Our people had previously succeeded in living all right without this religion. I have six divisions of the SS composed of men absolutely indifferent in matters of religion. It doesn’t prevent them going to their deaths with serenity in their souls.”
“That the Fascists were spared a second civil war is due to the fact that the movement succeeded in uniting the Italian nation in spite of the opposition from the church. Further, Fascism clearly defined the position as regards what things fell within the sphere of the church and what things fell within the sphere of the State. When the church refused to recognize the law for the formation of the Fascist Youth Organization, the Fascists retaliated by ruthlessly breaking up every religious procession from Rome to the south of Italy. The result was that within three days the church had come to heel.”
JOY OF LIFE
The heathen character of National Socialism was contrasted to the otherworldly preoccupation of the church. Hitler states: “To deserve its place in history our people must be above all a people of warriors. This implies both privileges and obligations, the obligation of submitting to a most vigorous upbringing and the privilege of the healthy enjoyment of life. If a German soldier is expected to be ready to sacrifice his life with demur, then he is entitled to love freely and without restriction. In life, love and battle go hand in hand, and the inhibited little bourgeois must be content with the crumbs which remain. But if the warrior is to be kept in fighting trim, he must not be pestered with religious precepts which ordain abstinence of the flesh. A healthy-minded man simply smiles when a Saint of the Church like St. Anthony bids him eschew the greatest joy that life has to give, and offers him the solace of self-mortification and castigation in its place.”
HIMMLER AND THE SS
The SS epitomizes the contradistinction between Christianity and the philosophy of the Third Reich. It was a Black Order in its own right, and Himmler envisaged the creation of an autonomous SS State which would be an example to the world of National Socialism. In 1937 Himmler instructed his chiefs to plan a counter-culture to replace Christianity, and it was declared, “the age of the final showdown with Christianity” had dawned, and one of the objectives of the SS was to provide Germans with “the proper ideological foundation” to replace it.
An SS porcelain factory manufactured pagan cult objects to replace Christian symbols. The Summer and Winter Solstices were revived to replace Christian festivals. There were SS birth and marriage ceremonies of heathen character. The underlying conception behind such ceremonies was the SS perspective of birth and marriage as aspects of an eternal cycle of life and death. Himmler’s right-hand man, Heydrich, Reich Security chief, declared of Christianity and heathenism: “Who is there among us who does not, deep in his heart, provided he can still think with his blood, have a profound, strangely haunting sense of shame, when, walking through the countryside, before the panorama perhaps of snow-covered Alpine mountain tops or in the midst of a somber Westphalian heath, comes across an image of the crucified Jesus? The Gods of our ancestors looked different; they were men, and each had a weapon in his hand, symbolizing the attitude to life that is inherent in our race: that of action, that of a man’s responsibility to himself. How different the pale crucified one, expressing — by his decided look of suffering, humility and extreme surrender — qualities which contradict the fundamental heroic attitude of our race.”
Heinrich Himmler
Heinrich Himmler

Himmler’s idea of God was a major influence on SS philosophy. This Got was spelled with only one ‘t’ in archaic German, to distinguish it from the Christian “Gott.” At an SS birth ceremony it was declared: “From Got your knowledge, your tasks, your life-purpose, all life’s perceptions flow. Each who drink from this tankard be witness to the fact that you are Got-united.” SS newlyweds were betrothed before the SS Wedding Altar and presented with a wooden bread dish by Himmler. This bore the carved legend: “Be worthy of the bread of your soil, then your kin will live forever.” Himmler, in his 1935 publication The SS as an Anti-Bolshevik Battle Organization, rejected atheism and propounded a belief in a god or first principle responsible for cosmic ordering of “this whole earth, the entire plant and animal world.” Amongst his trusted aides he referred to this god as Uralten — “the original or ancient one,” an old Germanic conception. Christianity had placed women in a position of subjection to enforce their destruction. The priesthood was seen as a homoerotic and even homosexual institution, anti-woman by its nature.
“The whole tenor of the priesthood and the whole of Christianity [was that of] an erotic male fraternity for the formation and maintenance of this Bolshevism.” “I have the conviction that the Roman emperors, who exterminated the first Christians, did precisely what we are doing with the communists. These Christians were at the time the vilest scum, which the city accommodated, the vilest Jewish people, the vilest Bolsheviks there were. The Bolshevism at that time had the power to grow large on the dying body of Rome. The priesthood of this Christian church, which later in unending battle subjugated the Aryan Church, was engaged from the fourth to the fifth century in demanding the celibacy of the priesthood. They based themselves on St. Paul and the original apostles who presented the woman as something sinful and tolerated or recommended marriage as a legal way out of whoredom — that is in the Bible — and represented the procreation of children as a ‘necessary evil’. This priesthood pursued this path consistently through those centuries until in the year 1139 the celibacy of priests was put into effect. Further, I have the conviction that merely for the few who do not wish to reconcile themselves to this homosexuality — especially for the parish priests who in my estimation are to an overwhelming extent over 50% not homosexual, while I assume that in the monasteries homosexuality amounts to 90-95-100% — there is a way out created for them to procure the necessary women and females in the oral confession box.”
Himmler hoped that within a few years judicial proceedings would show the church leadership up as a homosexual fraternity which “has been terrorizing people for 1800 years, claiming from them the greatest blood sacrifices, sadistically perverse in its manifestations.” As we have seen, several years later, the judicial system did begin to address this matter with the trial of monks for molestation. Himmler emphasized the anti-woman nature of the Medieval witch and heresy trials. It is an interesting sidelight that he expected particular attention to be paid to interaction between his SS men and young women socially, to combat the “exaggerated masculinizing” of society.
Addressing SS at Posen in 1942 on their numerous tasks, Himmler zeroed in on Christianity, saying that it would have to be dealt with more vigorously than hitherto. “This Christendom, this greatest pestilence which could have befallen us in history, which has weakened us for every conflict, we must finish with.” Himmler attacked the Christian idea of Man as above or apart from Nature, and explained his cyclic conception of Eternity, that Man must be anchored in his ancestors and in his grandchildren.
MARTIN BORMANN ON CHRISTIANITY
Runic studies by SS
Martin Bormann, who became Hitler’s secretary and deputy after Hess’ abortive peace mission to England, like Himmler, Rosenberg, Heydrich, Hitler and most of the others at the top of the Reich hierarchy, also had a clear perspective on Christianity. The following is taken from Kirchliches Jahrbuch fur die evangelische Kirche in Deutschland: “National Socialist and Christian concepts are incompatible. The Christian churches build upon the ignorance of the men and strive to keep large portions of the people in ignorance because only in this way can the Christian churches maintain their power. On the other hand, National Socialism is based on scientific foundations. Christianity’s immutable principles, which were laid down almost two thousand years ago by Jews, have increasingly stiffened into life-alien dogmas. National Socialism however, if it wants to fulfill its task further, must always guide itself according to the newest data of scientific researchers.”
“When in the future our youth no longer hear anything about this Christianity, whose doctrine is far below our own, Christianity will automatically disappear.” “When we National Socialists speak of God, by God we do not understand, as do naive Christians and their clerical beneficiaries, a manlike being who is sitting around in some corner of the spheres. Rather, we must open the eyes of mankind to the fact that in addition to our unimportant earth there exist countless other bodies in the universe, many of them surrounded, like the sun, by smaller bodies, the moons. The force which moves all those bodies in the universe, in accordance with Natural Law, is what we call the Eternal, the Allfather or God. The assertion that this world- force can worry about the fate of every individual, every bacillus on earth, and that it can be influenced by so-called prayer or other astonishing things, is based either on a suitable dose of naiveté or on outright commercial effrontery.”
“In contrast, we National Socialists call upon ourselves to live as naturally as possible — that is, in keeping with the Laws of Life. The more thoroughly we know and attend to the Laws of Nature and Life, the more we adhere to them, the more do we correspond to the will of the Eternal; the deeper our insight into the will of the Eternal, the greater will be our success.” “It follows from the incompatibility of National Socialist and Christian concepts that we must oppose any strengthening of existing Christian denominations and must refuse to give them any assistance. We can make no differentiation between the various Christian confessions. Any strengthening of the Christian concepts would merely work against us.”
“To an ever-increasing degree the Folk must be wrested from Christianity and their agents, the pastors. Obviously, the Christians, from their standpoint, will and must defend themselves against this loss of power. But never again must Christianity regain an influence in the leadership of our folk. This must absolutely and finally be broken.”
CHRISTIANITY IN THE THIRD REICH
Despite the pragmatic and relatively cautious approach the times required, the regime did begin preliminary measures against Christianity. One means was to heathenize the churches from within. A National-Socialist-oriented German Christian Faith Movement was formed in opposition to the mainline Protestant churches. Hundreds of pastors of the Confessional Church were arrested in 1937. Catholics were removed from the Civil Service. In 1937 over 100,000 Germans formally left the Catholic Church. According to the reliable British historian David Irving (The War Path), “The Nazis discouraged Catholic education in schools, the convents and monasteries were dissolved and their property confiscated, and the Jesuits were driven out of influence everywhere.” The Hitler Youth sung such verses as, “I am neither Christian nor Catholic, I am for the SA through thin and thick.”


David Irving
David Irving

Something of what the regime had in mind for eventually replacing Christianity with after the war can be deduced from the proposals drawn up in 1942 for the creation of a National Reich Church by leading National Socialist philosopher Alfred Rosenberg. Indeed his own magnum opus The Myth of the Twentieth Century had met such condemnation by the churches since its first publication in 1930. Among the points for a Reich Church were: “13. The National Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible in Germany.” “14. The Führer’s Mein Kampf is the greatest of all documents……embodies the purest and truest ethics for the present and future life of our nation.” “18. The National Church will clear away from its altars all crucifixes, Bibles and pictures of the saints.” “19. On the altars there must be nothing but Mein Kampf and to the left on the altar a sword.” “30. On the day of its foundation the Christian cross must be removed from all churches, cathedrals and chapels, and it must be superseded by the Swastika.”
Alfred Rosenberg
Alfred Rosenberg

The priesthoods were to be replaced by orators. Also see The German Religion — Deutsche Glaubensbewegung — (German Faith Movement): Three years after Adolf Hitler assumed the seat of power in Germany, in 1936 the National Reich Church was established, and in it only national orators of the Reich were allowed to speak. Reich Church Bishop Ludwig Müeller: “The National Reich Church demands an immediate stop to the printing and sale of the Bible in Germany. The National Reich Church will remove from the altars of all churches the Bible, the cross, and religious objects. Mercy is an un-German conception. The word mercy is one of the numerous terms of the Bible with which we can have nothing to do. On the altars there must be nothing but My Struggle (Mein Kampf), and to the left of this a sword.”
Sources:
David Irving The War Path NY 1978
William Shirer Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich
Hitler’s Secret Conversations 1941-1944

Herman Rauschning Hitler Speaks
Peter Padfield Himmler: Reichsfuhrer SS Macmillan London 1991

Rigveda and how the Indo-Aryans were racially


The Rigveda is the oldest Indo-European text known, and it is usually accepted as coming from the time of the Indo-Aryan invasion of India (1,500 BCE). However, some passages, according to astronomical references, come from as old as about the year 6,000 BCE. The invasion process involved a racial and spiritual conflict between an aboriginal religiosity considered "sinister and demonic" and the new "Olympic" and Heroic religiosity of the Aryan invaders. According to the Rigveda, the leader of the invasion of the Aryas was the God Indra (just as the Helenic invasion of Greece had Apollo as its leader).

Indra, the Thunder God, is the Indo-European archetype who shares his origins with the Greek Zeus, Roman Jupiter, Germanic Thor-Donnar, Slavic Perun, Baltic Perkunas or Celtic Taranis.

The original inhabitants of India were Australoids who spoke a language related to Khmer and Vietnamese. At some point in the past they were replaced by the Dravidian, Tamil and other peoples who now occupy southern India. No one knows where these people come from, but it is speculated that they came from what is now Pakistan and from the Indus Valley civilization, also of Australoid origin.

The Indo-Aryan (Vedic) mythology describes the glorious and epic conquest of India by the Indo-Europeans which the most accepted version by archaeologists states that they have their origin in the Ukrainian steppes.

These invaders of European origin and self-called as Arya ('Noble' in Sanscrit), when entering into violent contact with these aboriginal populations, immediately acquired an instinct of purity and protection which led them to impose a racial segregation (the caste system) through rigid religious laws to preserve their blood and to avoid miscegenation with the aboriginal population that outnumbered them. They achieved this for 900 years, which is the time that lasted the glorious Vedic civilization. Once the caste system was abolished, Indo-Aryans suffered the racial mixing that characterizes the current population of India.

The Indo-Aryans brought to India the war chariots, the swastika, the patriarchy, the nordic blood, a heroic and solar religion, and a warrior worldview. In those immense lands of plains and jungles, populated by the primitive race of the dasyu, the European race, in a vast minority, triumphed over multitudes infinitely more numerous and over the civilization of Indos, a native culture whose cities were razed by the new Indo-Aryan invaders. The European blood, in a pleasant climate, a fertile land and an almost infinite slave workforce at its service, prospered in the East, reached very high summits of creation and was able to suddenly deploy all the creative talent that was carrier from its origins. Real lineages, endless dynasties, a whole race of warriors, priests, sages, mystics, poets and pioneers. Under the Vedic civilization, India reached very high levels of prosperity and wisdom.

The Sanscrit word for "caste" is varna, it means "color," and was distinguished between the Aryavarna (literally, "noble color") fair and associated with the nobility, white and rubicund invaders, and the dark Dasavarna (literally "enemy color ") of the aborigines, called the "dasyu" or "dasas" ("enemies"), considered as "impure" and "subhumans". The castes were totally impermeable and only procreated between them. The noblest families were the upper castes of the conquerors, while the "plebeian" families and the descendants of the subjugated Indians constituted the lower castes. Thus, low castes tend to be quite dark in tone, while high castes, carrying more Aryan blood, are lighter in skin and abound more in Europid features.

All this is embodied in the Rigveda, a truly racist book (that it is even strange that has not been censored by the System as an "apology for genocide" "hate speech" and "incitement to racial hatred") which relates the invasion of the Aryas, their racial and physical aspect and the annihilation of 'dasyus or 'dasa', which are described with abhorrence, as dark-skinned (krishnam vacham), flat-faced and speakers of "an ugly tongue to the ear". They even are called as "without nose" or "noseless", what means, without nasal bridge, a racial feature that is common among the negroids and australoids. Indra himself receives the title of Dasyushatya ("killer of dasyus").

Some verses of Rigveda protraits the Aryan invaders and his main God as blond and fair skin: "With his fair skin friends, Indra conquers the country," says a verse from the Rigveda, and the Indo-Aryan God Vishnu bears the title of Hari ("Blond", "Golden"):

You, Indra, are the destroyer of all cities, the killer of the dasyu, the prosperous man, the Lord of Heaven. (8.87.6) 
The god who destroyed the dasyu and protected the Aryan Color (Aryavarna). (3.34.9) 
The mighty Thunderer, with his fair skin friends, won the Earth, the sunlight and the waters. (1.100.18.) 
Upon Father and Mother they have roared in unison, shining with the verse of praise, burning those who have no rite, sweeping from the earth and the heavens with supernatural strength, the dark skin hated by Indra. (9.73.5.)  
You killed the dasyu without nose, with your weapon and in their home you overthrown the hostile talkers. (5.29.10.)  
Indra protected in battle the devotee Arya, and subjugated for Manu to the lawless ones and conquered the black skin. (1.130.8.)  
Indra, the killer of Vritra, the destroyer of the cities, has dispersed the dasa, born of dark ancestry. (2.20.7) 
Indra chased away "the vile brood of dasyu". (2.12.4). 
They arrived active and brilliant, impetuous in speed like bulls, expelling away the black skin. (9.41.1.)  
Indra brings drops of moisture on his yellow beard. (10.23.4.)  
With the drink, the Soma drinker grew in power, the Iron God, with a yellow beard and yellow hair. (10.96.8.)  
Oh, Lord of all men, with a clear cheek. (1.9.3.) 
Throw your dart against the dasyu, Thunder God; Increases the power and glory of the Arya, (1.103.3.)
Of course, nothing of this is to provoke any contempt for other peoples, but only to show how actually the protagonists of Vedic civilization were racially in contrast to the aboriginals, how they actually thought, what was their attitude, and that they were not a softened, effeminate and politically correct society as today the Anti-White System wants to teach us.

Distribution of the R1a lineage, most commonly associated with the Indo-European Peoples.
This haplogroup, which seems to have its European peaks in the Urheimat of the Slavic peoples,
is also clearly related to the Indo-Aryan invasions. Source: Eupedia.com

Map of the distribution of the R1a1a sub-lineage in Eurasia.

Paganism in "Christian" Temples

Today's christian church is not remotely close to that one Yeshua bar Yosef established. So, by the very same logic they use to call us as "neo-pagans", christians of today could be called as "neo-christians". Most of this religious evolution is because when christianity came in contact with the different forms and ceremonies of European traditions, paganism gradually crept into the christian worship. Some of the old heathen feasts, as Winter Solstice or Summer Solstice, became church festivals with change of name and of worship. In about 405 A.D. images of saints and martyrs, (something that was strictly forbidden to make by the iconoclastic Bible and early christianity), began to appear in the churches, at first as memorials, then in succession revered, adored, and worshiped, as if something within our European blood called us to make these images to satisfy our spiritual need. Also, many catholic churches were built on ancient sacred-pagan sites. Catholic architecture also tended to mimic pagan architecture. Sun domes, obelisks, and even crosses have pagan origins. In pagan cultures, mother goddesses were worshiped in grottoes and groves. In Catholicism, Mary veneration is associated with caves and groves. For a religion so opposed to Paganism, it sure stole a lot of our stuff!

Art of a Roman Catholic Cathedral in southern Germany


Gothic architecture is intrinsically Pagan. In the walls and windows of some of Europe’s most renowned religious buildings dwells evidence of a still-beating Pagan heart underneath the opulent Christian facade. Even one of the most treasured monuments of devoutly Catholic Poland, Wawel Cathedral, has faint hints of it in its rose window, leafy gargoyles and, uniquely, three giant bones chained to a wall next to the main entrance, supposedly belonging to a fire-breathing dragon that had been slain there, a prolific motif of Indo-European origin which was later plagiarized by christianity. As we can see, Paganism did not die with the advent of christianity, but it survived despite it.

Despite being funded by the Church to explicitly market its power and Christian theology, Gothic architecture reflects pre-christian elements. Consider the following stylistic elements, clear indicators of the Pagan undercurrent still flowing through a supposedly converted Europe:

Green Man. The Green Man motif is a human face comprised of, surrounded by and/or seemingly sprouting from foliage, who in Pagan culture symbolized the cycle of regrowth each spring. The Green Man is often related to natural vegetative deities. It is primarily interpreted as a symbol of rebirth, representing the cycle of growth each spring. Usually referred to in works on architecture as foliate heads or foliate masks, carvings of the Green Man may take many forms, naturalistic or decorative. The simplest depict a man's face peering out of dense foliage. Some may have leaves for hair, perhaps with a leafy beard. Often leaves or leafy shoots are shown growing from his open mouth and sometimes even from the nose and eyes as well. In the most abstract examples, the carving at first glance appears to be merely stylised foliage, with the facial element only becoming apparent on closer examination.

One of four Green Men in the Cathedral of Bayeux, Normandy, France
Rose windows. These circular, kaleidoscope-style windows – usually located at the rear of the nave, facing the altar – are a staple of Gothic churches/cathedrals the world over, including St Ignatius. While their visual content is not always floral itself, their shape and composition clearly imitates that beautiful, basic reproductive instrument of Mother Nature – the blooming flower.

Spires/steeples. One of the most characteristic and venerated objects in Pagan society is the phallus, used to symbolize male power and fertility as well as associated deities. Phallic towers were common in pre-Christian societies around the world, from stone obelisks in Egypt, believed to house the regenerative sun god Ra, to wooden totem poles in Slavic Europe, representing warrior-gods such as Perun and Triglav. During the Middle Ages, as the Romanesque style of architecture evolved into the Gothic, the Christian Church also began adorning its buildings with phallic towers to imbue them with a sense of spiritual potency, and inspire awe at the all-seeing, on-high position of the vengeful god they supposedly housed.

Gargoyles. These statues look like they belong on the helms of Pagan Viking ships – yet they adorn many of the Gothic churches built throughout the Middle Ages. They generally depict strange, animalistic creatures very similar to the demons and sprites of Germanic, Celtic and Slavic folklore. Full-body gargoyles often take the form of horned, winged creatures – a belittled representation of deities relating to woodlands, animals and hunting, in whose image Christianity also fashioned its Devil.

Notre Dame gargoyles
Astrological symbols. Chartres Cathedral in Paris, France, has many pagan symbols. The West Portal contain the signs of the zodiac and the labours of the months – standard references to the cyclical nature of time which appear in many gothic portals. Also, there is a stained glass window which contains the twelve signs of the zodiac.

Chartres Cathedral-west portal-Zodiac and Monthly Labours
Some of the Zodiac signs represented in a stained glass of Chartres

Labyrinths. The Labyrinth is a symbol of the Earth. Chartres Cathedral, which is dedicated to the Virgin Mary (the mother figure in christian mythology), was built on a much-revered Pagan site dedicated to a Celtic Mother/Earth Goddess. Before christianity, there was an altar (or according to some authors, a cave) dedicated to this Goddess, this place was an important religious center for the Celtic tribe of the Carnutes. A vestige of this ancient cult is in its famous labyrinth which dates back to 1205. It has 13 meters in diameter which makes it the largest preserved for the Gothic period. It offers one possible route through a continuous line running 262 meters, forming concentric circles around 11 to the center which has a hexagonal rosette design, which appeared mythological figures of Theseus and the Minotaur, who according to the Myth, lived in a Labyrinth, now missing figures.

Chartres Cathedral's Labyrinth

Charlemagne: Defender of the West or Servant of the Jews?


There are few figures more famous in Western history than the Emperor Charles the Great, better known as Charlemagne, of the Carolingian dynasty of the Franks. Charlemagne was the grandson of the equally famous Frankish ruler Charles Martel and like him has the reputation of being a fervent foe of the enemies of the West.

Unlike his illustrious grandfather however Charlemagne is a character who is increasingly difficult to see as a 'defender of the West'the more you know about him. Yes he fought the forces of Islam to a point, but his main energies were directed not towards the enemies of the West, but rather toward the forcible Christianization of the Germanic and Slavic peoples in Central and Eastern Europe. (1)

Unless one views 'defending the West' in the context of a Christian triumphalist worldview (which I don't) then it is difficult to see why a 'defender of the West' would spend the majority of his adult life and energies waging total war against fellow Germanics (as well as Slavs) and not the forces that threatened all the nations of the West (of whatever religious denomination) like those of Islam.

It is also notable that while Charlemagne is often conceived as a fervent Christian; he did not obey the Church, but rather believed the Church should obey him. We can see this in the fact that he view the Church as a tool of governance and not an ally against a common enemy. (2)

Charlemagne's memory has long been hotly disputed territory in large part, because he engaged in behaviour that was borderline psychotic and when the Saxon tribes killed twenty significant members of the Carolingian nobility (after the latter had invaded Saxon territory to rape, murder and pillage) he launched a fully fledged campaign of extermination against the Saxons in October 782 AD. (3)

This culminated in some 4,500 Saxons, often assumed to be nobles and leading figures, gathering at Verdun on the Aller to meet with Charlemagne for peace talks after their leader Widukind had fled to Denmark. Charlemagne's response is almost universally regarded by historians as the greatest of all stains on his reputation. (4)

Succinctly put Charlemagne beheaded all 4,500 Saxons, who had publicly put down their arms as a sign of their peaceful intentions, in a one day orgy of bloodshed that Barbero chalks up to Charlemagne's looking to the Old Testament for precedents on how to deal with his 'heathen' enemies. (5) This act of butchery absolutely horrified both Charlemagne's contemporaries and Christian commentators for several centuries afterwards. (6)

For some historical perspective we should note that several years after the massacre at Verdun the Byzantine Empire lost a full scale battle in its quest to regain control of the Italian peninsula. The Byzantines lost some 3,000 dead and buried in the process, which was considered a hideously high loss of life at the time. (7)

It is then easy to see how horrific Charlemagne's massacre at Verdun would have seem to his contemporaries as it was another fifty percent again on top of the the comparative losses suffered by the Byzantine Empire a few years later.

Charlemagne's actions have also long been regarded as so absolutely horrific by eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth century historians that many of them have tried to excuse them or claim they did not in fact happen. These claims have long been debunked however with the most persistent of them being the idea that the scribe meant to write 'decolare' (to deport) and not 'decollare' (to behead). (8)

The current favourite is to claim that the 4,500 figures is an 'exaggeration', (9) but as Becher points out whatever the number (and, as Barbero notes, we have no actual reason to disbelieve the 4,500 assertion) (10) slaughtered by Charlemagne at Verdun: it was a horrific and deliberate act of mass murder. (11)

There is precedent for it in Charlemagne's family however since his uncle, who later retired to a life of prayer and contemplation at a monastery, Carloman (the son of Charles Martel) had what can only be described as a psychotic episode and murdered hundreds, maybe even thousands, of unarmed Alamanni (i.e. those who would be Bavarian and Swiss people today) at Cannstadt in 747 AD. This was after promising them safe conduct so they can could negotiate with him and has become known as the Massacre of Cannstadt or alternatively the Bloody Court of Cannstadt. (12)

Charlemagne not only followed his uncle Carloman's example, but added to it by unleashing his army in the winter of 733-734 AD on the Saxons to rampage 'through the country, killing, burning and tearing down pagan shrines.' (13)

Accompanying this came the imposition of one of the most brutal legal codes in history, the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, which proclaimed that, essentially, the only punishment for any crime was death and many of said 'crimes' were purely religious in nature. For example if you ate meat in Lent for whatever reason you would be immediately put to death. (14)

This is especially awful since it was the Franks who provoked the Saxon wars when they deliberately cut down Irminsul in 772 AD, which lead to Saxon revenge attacks on churches in Upper Hesse and Frankish counter-reprisals. (15)

That Charlemagne was doing this to fellow Westerners and would be allies in the struggle against the forces of Islam informs us that he was no 'defender of the West' per se and also suggests that, a-la Shakespeare, 'something was rotten in the Frankish court'.

That something is quite clear when we look at how Charlemagne treated other unbelievers and note that he wasn't quite the fanatical Christian that you might think. The most obvious presence of unbelievers in the Frankish kingdom were the jews who owned the trade in luxury items from the East via Muslim Spain and lived in the cities along the river Rhone. (16)

Indeed Barbero summarizes the scale of jewish influence at Charlemagne's court as follows:

'Jewish merchants prospered under Charlemagne and even more under Louis the Pious, by supplying the court with wine, spices, and textiles, and they enjoyed wide-ranging privileges. These included the right to be tried only in accordance with their own law, to have Christian employees, and to practice their religion even within the Imperial palace.' (17)

In other words Charlemagne, and his son Louis the Pious, allowed themselves to be bribed by jewish merchants with luxury goods such as wine, spices and textiles in order to grant the later special rights and privileges (just as had occurred in the Roman Empire of Julius Caesar and Augustus).

These included effective legal immunity from prosecution (as they would be tried based on halakhah [jewish religious law] which takes an extremely dim view of gentiles [for example non-jewish witnesses don't count for much in it]) (18) not by secular or Church law as well as endangering the faith of the Christian flock by putting jews in positions of direct authority over them where they could force/lure them into Judaising (an old and persistent worry of the Christian clergy). (19) This was in addition to allowing the practice of a religion that regards Jesus Christ as, well, whore-scum in his own palace. (20)

Not only did Charlemagne allow the jews free reign over his kingdom and people, but he actively worked to increase jewish influence and wealth. Barbero describes Charlemagne's behaviour in this regard as follows:

'The protection of subjects involved in international trade was one of the sovereign specific duties. In negotiations with King Offa of Mercia, Charlemagne requested favourable conditions for "our merchants" when operating in England. Later Louis the Pious granted the merchants who supplied the palace exemption from all taxes collected within the empire, with the exception of customs duties in Quentovic and other parts of the border.' (21)

In other words Charlemagne requested that King Offa of Mercia allow his merchants favourable trading conditions and we have already seen that a significant amount of said merchants were jews (who were also directly associated as being jewish by the English). (22) Louis the Pious made this even worse by allowing the merchants who supplied the Imperial palace, who we have already seen were primarily jewish, to be free of all but a tiny amount of taxation (i.e. giving significant trading advantages to primarily jewish merchants, which directly disadvantaged most Frankish merchants).

These privileges for jews moreover were granted despite the open protest of the Frankish church, which had long been attempting to circumscribe jewish power. (23) This power included jewish merchants interfering in the politics of the Frankish church less than two centuries before Charlemagne in order to get the candidate they wished elected using their money to bribe the dissenting clergy in a case of blatant and open simony. (24)

In Charlemagne's time the anti-jewish crusade was lead by the Bishop of Lyons: Agobard.

He was not an ignorant man either: he was a man of letters and well-regarded theologian. (25) He was also ironically a young protege of Charlemagne, (26) but one who his master evidently chose to ignore on the subject of the chosen people. Since Agobard could do little other than to desperately try to enlighten his sovereign's mind on the subject of the jewish assault on both Charlemagne's people and the Frankish church itself.

Agobard was no coward and wrote at least three fervent anti-jewish missives that we know of (two of which I have translated) (27) as well as openly standing up to Charlemagne's son and successor Louis the Pious on the subject of his assuming the throne. (28)

One thing that is suggestive is that Agobard demanded that Charlemagne do something about was the fact that the jewish merchants had forced the Christians of Lyons to change the day on which they held their market from a Saturday (i.e. the jewish Sabbath) to another day. (29)

That these jewish merchants were able and empowered by Charlemagne enough to force through such a change in spite of local custom and the explicit wishes of the Frankish church necessarily suggests that they wielded a significantly greater amount of influence over the Emperor than the Christian church did.

Therefore it is little wonder that by 806 AD it had reached Charlemagne's ears that jewish merchants were boasting that they could buy anything they wanted in his kingdom. (30)

What did Charlemagne do about these erstwhile 'enemies of the faith' openly flaunting their power over him?

He warned his bishops and abbots to keep a close eye on the valuables of the Church lest they be purloined by the roving jewish merchants that he had raised above the law of the land and who had now apparently declared open season on the inhabitants of Charlemagne's empire.

Evidently Charlemagne didn't care about what the jews did to his people as long as he got to murder more unarmed pagan Saxons.

Some Christian fanatic Charlemagne turns out to be in that he conducts systematic mass murder against the pagan Saxons who fought him fair and square, but then allows the explicit enemies of his faith (remember the Gospel of John) to rampage through his dominions abusing his subjects without fear or hindrance, while ignoring the outrage of the very church he allegedly so fervently believed in.

The only question really is how much did the jews influence Charlemagne's decisions to conduct mass murder against the pagan Saxons; given that what the jews would have advised the Emperor, had he asked, is that 'if someone intends to kill you, get in first and kill him' (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 72a) as 'self-defense' is not 'murder' in Judaism. (31)

In other words the jews might well have told Charlemagne; since the Saxon idolaters attacked you after your people cut down Irminsul in 772 AD. They are intending to kill you so the law of God dictates that you exterminate them before they can kill you.

There is therefore little doubt that Charlemagne wasn't a defender of the West, but more likely was a servant of the jews.

References:

(1) Alessandro Barbero, Allan Cameron (Trans.), 2004, 'Charlemagne: Father of a Continent', 1st Edition, University of California Press: Berkeley, p. 69
(2) Matthias Becher, 2003, 'Charlemagne', 1st Edition, Yale University Press: New Haven, p. 68; Christopher Dyer, 2002, 'Making A Living in the Middle Ages: The People of Britain 850-1520', 1st Edition, Yale University Press: New Haven, p. 53
(3) Derek Wilson, 2005, 'Charlemagne: The Great Adventure', 1st Edition, Hutchinson: London, pp. 45-47
(4) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 46
(5) Ibid, p. 47
(6) Russell Chamberlain, 2004, [1986], 'The Emperor Charlemagne', 1st Edition, Sutton: Stroud, p. 135
(7) Ibid, p. 136
(8) Ibid; Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 46; Becher, Op. Cit., p. 67
(9) Wilson, Op. Cit., p. 47
(10) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 46
(11) Becher, Op. Cit., p. 67
(12) Chamberlain, Op. Cit., p. 37
(13) Wilson, Op. Cit., p. 47
(14) Chamberlain, Op. Cit., p. 137
(15) Becher, Op.Cit., p. 61
(16) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 290
(17) Ibid.
(18) For example see the following discussion: http://www.semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2011/12/critical-look-at-jewish-law-legal.html
(19) Cf. Anna Foa, Andrea Grover (Trans.), 2000, 'The Jews in Europe after the Black Death', 1st Edition, University of California Press: Berkeley
(20) Cf. Peter Schaefer, 2009, 'Jesus in the Talmud', 1st Edition, Princeton University Press: Princeton
(21) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 291
(22) Jacques le Goff, 1990, 'Medieval Man', p. 21 in Jacques le Goff (Ed.), 1997, [1990], 'The Medieval World', 1st Edition, Parkgate: London
(23) Ian Wood, 1994, 'The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751', 1st Edition, Longman: New York, p. 73
(24) Ibid, pp. 81-83
(25) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 216
(26) Ibid, p. 247
(27) See http://www.semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2013/04/an-english-translation-of-agobard-of.html and http://www.semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2013/03/an-english-translation-of-agobard-of.html
(28) F. Ganshof, 1971, 'The Carolingian and the Frankish Monarchy', 1st Edition, Longman: London, pp. 274-275
(29) Barbero, Op. Cit., p. 290
(30) Ibid.
(31) Louis Jacobs, 1995, 'The Jewish Religion: A Companion', 1st Edition, Oxford University Press: New York, p. 583