The International Paneuropean Union

The "International Paneuropean Union", also known as the "Paneuropean Movement" and the "Pan-Europa Movement" is the forerunner of the European Union which began with the publication of the manifesto "Paneuropa" by Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi in 1923, which introduced the idea of a unified European state without national borders. Coudenhove-Kalergi was the architect of the criminal Anti-White "Kalergi Plan" whose aim is the genocide of white people through miscegenation, and massive non-white immigration to Europe.


The stated goal of the organization is the "unity of a Christian Europe". The International Pan-European Union has four basic principles: liberalism, Christianity, social responsibility and -alleged- "pro-Europeanism":
"Christianity is the soul of Europe. Our mission is characterized by the Christian image of man and the rule of law. By calling on European community values, the Pan-Europa Union opposes all tendencies which erode the intellectual and moral force of Europe. It respects the contribution of Judaism and Islam for our mental and cultural development, something in which they inseparably share." 
-International Paneuropean Union Programm.
Among its notable members were Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Thomas Mann, Léon Blum, Fridtjof Nansen, Johan Ludwig Mowinckel, Franz Werfel, Bronisław Huberman, Aristide Briand, Konrad Adenauer, Benedetto Croce, Bruno Kreisky and Georges Pompidou. Winston Churchill lauded the movement's work for a unified Europe prior to the war in his famous Zurich speech in 1946.

The organisation was prohibited by the Third Reich in 1933, and was founded again after the Second World War. 

Spiritual Progressivism

The worship of one god always seems to be touted as a "conceptual leap" over polytheism. They tend to look at cultures that worship many gods as "primitive", and those who worship one god as "advanced". The alleged "step" from polytheism to monotheism is regarded as a "progress" by Christian mentality.

Atheists also do this because they think that "it's a step closer to atheism".

Auguste Comte, one of the most important theorists of progressivism, developed an idea called "Law of Three Stages". It states that society as a whole, and each particular science, develops through three mentally conceived stages: (1) the theological stage, (2) the metaphysical stage, and (3) the positive stage.

The Theological stage refers to explanation by personified deities. During the earlier stages, people believe that all the phenomena of nature are the creation of the divine or supernatural. In this mentality, men failed to discover the natural causes of various phenomena and hence attributed them to a supernatural or divine power. Comte broke this stage into 3 sub-stages: 1. Fetishism. 2. Polytheism and 3. Monotheism . Thus, Comte states that Monotheism is a "progress" and "improvement" over Polytheism, idea that since then is held by all Cultural Marxists without exception.


But we must say, on the other hand, that even the term "Polytheism" is commonly referred just to a simplistic concept applied from the monotheistic point of view. Ancient Polytheism understood that in essence there is one Ultimate-Supreme God in which all the Gods abide together. Unlike Monotheism which conceives "God" to be a completely separate thing from the Universe, Polytheism is actually an integral and total way of conceiving the Universe. It is immanent, but also it is transcendent.

No, Christianity didn't give us science

"Science is the first of sins, the germ of all sins, the original sin. The moral imperative is reduced to this: 'Do not know'. The rest follows from there". 
-Friedrich Nietzsche.
"For the Christian, it is enough to believe that the cause of all created things, whether in heaven or on earth, whether visible or invisible, is nothing other than the goodness of the Creator, who is the one and the true God."

Many Christians loudly proclaim that Christianity made possible the modern scientific revolution and that other religions or beliefs would have made it impossible for science to flourish.

Pioneers of science were nearly always in christian orders simply because without the possession of private wealth no avenue for study existed outside of the Church. Usually heretical in their opinions, 'monkish scientists' often lost their sinecures and fell foul of the Inquisition.

 European Universities were only possible in High Middle Ages, ie, 700 years after Christianity took control over society, and though controlled by Christianity, their existence is due naturally to innate curiosity, genius, and initiative of European mankind.

 However, for those bright and privileged enough to seek education, career opportunities now lay exclusively within the hierarchy of the church and a Christianised state bureaucracy. With the active cooperation of the imperial court the Church had grasped complete control over education and, having done so, restricted instruction to potential priests.

 Initially, rhetoric and grammar remained on the syllabus but knowledge which did not serve the purposes of the Church was suppressed. Mathematics, with its historic link to the 'demonic' philosophy of the Pythagoreans, was especially suspect:
"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell."
– St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37.

Some classic writers – Homer (in whose work Christians saw allegories), Plato and Aristotle (philosophies which 'anticipated' Christianity'), and some poetic and rhetorical works (Juvenal, Ovid and Horace) useful as teaching aids – were preserved; most were destroyed.

 Such was Christian hostility to general learning and practical knowledge that access to scripture itself was forbidden to any lay-person who might still be literate. Preoccupied with ceremonial and holy pageants, within a few generations most members of the priesthood could not even read their own Bible. Ritual had replaced reading, iconography had replaced words.

 Scientific method – empirical observation of the natural world, the testing of hypotheses and revision of assumptions – had no role in an age in which eternal truth had been made known to man by the revealed Word of God.

 Martin Luther condemned Copernicus' heliocentric theory and Protestant Johannes Kepler, a follower of Copernicus, is expelled by his coreligionists from the theological school of Tübingen.

 In Galileo’s days, you had to profess Christian faith or you’d be burned at the stake. Galileo spent the last decade of his life under house arrest. And in 1600 Giordano Bruno was burned alive because his ideas contradicted the christian faith. Galileo was aware of this and remained silent to preserve his life. Thus it took many centuries and hurdles to get scientific facts accepted because Christianity held them back.

 It was not until Darwin that it became safe enough to have a different opinion about the world, but even then there were massive social persecutions. But once religion’s power grip loosened, science began to flourish faster.

 The ancient Greeks and Romans faced the same problems when Christianity came to power. Atomism was banned as blasphemy, even though it was correct 2,400 years ago. And the dark ages fell over Europe. The Church stagnated scientific progress. In China, there were actually more advances in technology before the modern era, we just hear history from a Western perspective. The compass, gunpowder, papermaking, and printing, were all invented in China centuries before Europeans had them. And the Islamic Golden Age made advances in astronomy, math and science before the modern scientific revolution in Europe.

 So it is not true that Christianity can be thanked for science. The foundations of it go way back before Christianity, specially in Pagan Europe. The truth is that Christianity since IV century destroyed large part of the European knowledge accumulated over centuries, medicine, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, architecture, geometry. Anything that might remind ancient pagan beliefs and traditions, any medicinal knowledge of plants or animals, was branded as heresy and persecuted. Any kind of knowledge that was not Judeo-Christian, was pursued thoroughly. The spiritual terror had appeared in the ancient world, bursting bloodily in Europe.

 The Natural World was demonized. The 'philosophy of the pagans' and secular public education were thus marginalised and eliminated. Lamented Ammianus Marcellinus, Rome's last great historian (who died in 395):
"Those few mansions which were once celebrated for the serious cultivation of liberal studies, now are filled with ridiculous amusements of torpid indolence ... The libraries, like tombs, are closed forever." 
Most Christians today are anti-science. More than half don’t accept evolution. Same is true with Muslims. The more Christian a country is today, the more uneducated they tend to be on science. For a great majority of the Christian scientists during the early centuries of the scientific revolution, denying Christianity wouldn’t be compatible with staying alive. Science thus flourished in spite of Christianity's domination, not because of it.

Pagans and Christians United... Is this possible?


Would we fight beside White christians shoulder to shoulder for defending our blood? I don't know about you, but absolutely I would. Our people is more important than personal beliefs.

 As I said before, our efforts are not intended to attack christians as a persons. After all, many of them were born as christians because of their parents, and these in turn by theirs. Even many of us were christians once. And this is just due to a very traumatic and unfortunate event happened 16 centuries ago in the Roman Empire.

 There are many pro-whites that come and say that "this page is dividing our people" just because we are exposing the core ideology of christianity in its TRUE form. This christian ideology teaches, among many other abrahamic-semitic bullshit, that their god is the "only valid", and that if you are christian, you must fight against others who don't believe in your "only valid god". Seriously, what kind of people do you think is truly working to divide us? Unfortunately for a christian his true brothers are not bounded by blood, but by dogma, something that in us is the just opposite.

 The virus of Christianity has been so long time stuck in Europe, that now it has led to believe, even to some of the most ardent nationalists, that the Christian faith is "part of Europe" and that it can be used as a kind of "defense against what is killing Europe". Nothing is more false than this. The Europe´s cancer is a consequence of an older infection. The defense mechanism of the christian disease, created by the most ancient and archetypal antipode of Europe, is precisely to create the illusion that it can be used against its own symptoms, and even against its creators, because it is precisely when the cancer turns more harmful to the point that it hurts the whole body, when the root of rottenness can be revealed. Therefore it will try to spread its poison with all its might to avoid being cut. We are not exaggerating when we say that Christian disease is the most perfect psychological weapon ever created, because even those who are awakening to the reality of Europe, can be dragged into its lies, making the cycle beginning again.

I say it again for the clueless, we believe that if a christian defends the same pro-white ideals, he should be respected as a person. At least I venture to say that most of us as pagans actually are willing to work with christians for our race. But could most of christians say the same?

 Again and again we have seen that, generally, a far-right christian, in the depth, gives a fuck if Europe remains White, he just wants a "Christian Europe". As white nationalists and pagans, we give a fuck the personal beliefs of somebody, as long he fight to preserve the racial identity of Europe, but the fact is that Abrahamic influences within Christianity are ESSENTIALLY opposed to this as it is. What it is true, beyond all doubt, is that far right christians, specially catholics, are declared enemies of Pro-White movements. Religion is a personal choice. However, our struggle against christianism is not just about religion differences, this is about of what beliefs are good to our race and what are not.

 The word "catholic" is an adjective used by the two largest Christian churches in the world to define themselves: the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, and it comes from the Greek καθολικός, katholikós and means "universal". They are "universal" because they accept all people as a christian regardless the race. It's illogical to think yourself as and Identitarian/White-European Nationalist if christianity has the globalist purpose of convert all the world, which disfigures national/cultural IDENTITIES. Christianity, as a Universalist creed, is diametrically opposed to the ideological core of White Nationalsim.
"Deus vult" means to catholics "God wills it".
So, the jewish god, Yahweh, wills the destruction of white people. 
But, for the greater good, against a greater threat, we think we should not refuse to a possible alliance with those who do not think like these scourges. Once we have defeated our common enemy, we can resolve our differences. And as Celsus said:
It is also to them to whom this page is addressed, because many of us who now follow the true roots, were christians once.
And this doesn't mean that we can't keep doing hard criticism to the faith of our white brothers. We believe too that we have the right to spread the reasons we think christianity in its essence is a true harm to White people, although this could be not apparent to many pro-white people.

 The problem that we see with christianity is not their "traditional values", of course. We have respect for christians who act as it should be: natural family, respect for life, etc. And even more if those christians stand for their race. David Duke is a good example of a pro-white christian who we admire as the pagans and anti-christians we are.

However, for example, take a look at this message we received from a facebook user:

We just can't stand the incongruence of those alleged "white nationalists", like this one, who give so poor value to their own people, blood or heritage and put above it a foreign-jewish superstition, enough to believe that it is "the very thing that would keep us together". 

 This is another reason why we fight Christianity.

 Blood keep us togheter! And we are fighting to PRESERVE what keep us together!

According to ultra-cuckservative christards, White-European people was completely worthless before christ-insanity and without it. This is what they actually believe. "There is no History, no traditions, no culture, no dignity for Europeans before the "Saviour" Jew". The Blood and Heritage of our ancestors mean nothing to them, only "worldly things". Europeans, Asians and Africans are just THE SAME "worthless" people without their superstition, and also they will be ALL THE SAME "elevated" people with it.

For them, there is no White nor Black, only christian or non-christian. That they deride our roots in this way it is already something so serious and blatant which reveal them as the Anti-White they are. One wonders if White Nationalists can live in peace with themselves while at the same time they follow such ideas. But I know that gradually the smarter ones of them, those who really love their race and are opposed to the ongoing genocide of our people, will realize the truth and will honor their authentic roots, while the rest will hate their fathers and their mothers as taught by their gospel and will stay in their globalist, universalist, multiracial worship of Yahweh, hobnobbing, fraternizing and mixing their blood with millions of their non-white coreligionists and the people of their ilk.

 And although it is true that Cultural Marxism is certainly attacking christianity, this is just one part of the truth. The whole truth is that this is not because christianity "is the true worldview" as christians claim, but because, first, it happened that it is the most spreaded "religion" in Europe, and second, it happened that it has been somehow a stronghold of some survivor “traditional european values" which exists since our pagan past, despite christianity.

The cultural attack upon Europe is not at all targeted just on christianity. Historical Christian propaganda, New Age and Wicca bullshit are also pushed and promoted by Cultural Marxism to attack and ridicule 'paganism', ie, the True European Culture, so far-right christians continue mocking of it and to prevent the resurgence of their heroic values in all their glory... those that obey the call of the blood!

The traditions of our blood are what have been demonized for centuries. The jewish sect even butchered our ancestors only for practicing what was their organically growing culture, just as they had been doing for hundreds of thousands of years! International jewry has attempted for 1800 years to annihilate them in name of their hebrew idol Yeshua. 

The entire European morality with values like courage, strength, beauty, wisdom, magnanimity, etc derives from our pagan tradition making the foundation of European ethics STILL predominantly pagan. So, we don’t need christianity to hold good values, and unlike christianity, euro-pagan worldview is actually within our blood and spiritual essence, and even more, most aspects of christianity has prevented us to overcome us as a race by, for example, opposing eugenic sciences, precisely because the hierarchy of values is different to the hierarchy of values given to us by Nature.

The only ethics that christianity has truly introduced in Europe are submissiveness, guilt (as everyone is sinful from birth), glorifying weakness and inferiority whilst spitting upon everything which is noble since 'god loves all people' as they claim, leaving no place for natural racial distinctions and recognizing and praising the superior qualities of men.

Christianity did not "became" a part of the problem, it has always been the main tool of subversion of our enemy in the first place. The early christian sects were jewish! The families delivering popes to the Vatican were almost exclusively ethnic jews as well. Butchering our people, ruining their tradition, burning our most beautiful and excellent women as 'witches'. Introducing celibacy and to prevent the best specimens of our race from procreating, etc. etc.

Our White brothers must not fall on the trap to defend one of the major tentacles of international jewry which has been poisoning the spirit of Europe for centuries already!

Christianity has never had any roots in Europe and never will. We Europeans will rather reclaim what is truly ours, our ancient tradition which has organically grown from our own trial and error and from the spirit of our Blood and Soil. No need for any hebrew desert idol to tell us Europeans how to live.

End of discussion. Christianity is inherently Anti-White and miscegenationist. They don't care if White Race "change" or disappear as long as they can preserve what they arrogantly call "the truth of god", and anyone, regardless his race, can do that job well enough.

Enough is enough. Christianity is a cancer to the Pro-White movement. It is undermining the efforts of recovering our place in the world. 




If god created the races, it was with the intention of them being different and not mixed into an amorphous mass without identity. If races are a work of god, then you should want to protect and preserve that work. For most christians, however, it is more important an idea of "god" which just emerged 2000 years ago than a reality which is thousands and thousands of years older.

Glad that we can hope "salvation" after death,
thus death of our race (White Genocide) is nothing to worry about.

>"Salvation" is the only truly beneficial thing our race can hope".
>"Salvation is from the Jews". (John 4:22.)



There will be who can make a mess with that of the "Christian heritage" of Europe. I do not. I see Europeans living with customs and natural rites, beautiful and harmonious, which automatically led to the most normal thing in the world, thus taking part in that immense orchestra that is the Earth. I see a fanatical creed preached by Semitic fundamentalists from the East and Africa, who inflamed the spirits of the world's scum against the good people, against the native Europeans, against the representatives of order and light. They said that our ancestral customs were abominations. They said that us who practiced them were sinners. They said that our science was demonic sorcery, and our art, blasphemy. They said that whoever did not kneel before a strange and new oriental god deserved the worst torments. They cursed the strong, the nobles, the fighters, the pure, the philosophers and the wise, and blessed the slaves, the sick, the trampled, the prostitutes, the ignorant and the cowards. They destroyed the legacy that we had accumulated for centuries. They killed our leaders. They put an end to an Empire that could, under the Germanic influence, spread throughout the world. They plunged Europe into ignorance and banned knowledge. For centuries, they extended depression, guilt and the feeling of sin, introducing in Europe that cancer that is the Old Testament, and that castrating poison that is the New Testament. If Europe could develop in these conditions, it was not thanks to Christianity, but in spite of it, and due to the things that Christianity had not yet touched.
-Europa Soberana, Judea contra Roma.

See also:

The "True Only One Universal God"

With this three (and even more) headed monster no wonder why anti-religious people exists.

 Judaism, Christianity and Islam claim that their desert god is “the only one”, the "true" and he is "infinitely powerful" and "infinitely just"...

However, the existence of multiple interpretations of this "one universal god," is a proof that this god is neither powerful nor just.

Each of these countless branches of the desert doctrine claims the privilege that only their god is the true, the authentic, the undisputed, the only one, and all other gods are gods to laugh, false gods, smuggling and shoddy gods, and it's a pious work to fight them and crush them.


If this universal god from the desert is powerful, he can reveal his doctrine to all. Since this universal god wanted -so say Abrahamic religions- to speak to men, to reveal him to them, to entrust them his plans, to indicate them his will, to let them know the law, he could have done it to all and not just to a privileged few.

But it has not happened, since proliferate competitions on which interpretation is true: "My Religion is the Truth," says the Jew, "No, Mine is the Truth," says the Christian, "You are all crazy, Mine is the Truth, "says the Muslim ...

And in these conditions don’t you estimate prudent to think that this God has not spoken to anyone and the multiple revelations attributed to him are just frauds?

If this God truly exists, he is not powerful but powerless, and if you do not want to accuse him of impotence, we accuse him of injustice.

Do not forget that the many representatives of this god say that he is the father of all and also all we are his beloved children.

So, what do you think of that "father" which demands to his children to practice a cult, calling a few to hear his true word, while he deliberately refuses to others this distinction, this distinguished privilege?

If you think that this power is good, do not be surprised if my opinion is different.

The multiplicity of the Abrahamic superstitions proclaims it very clear that the "Universal Judeo-Christian God" lacks power or justice. And if he does lack power or justice, then he is not perfect, and not being perfect, he has no reason for being and, therefore, does not exist.

European Religion is an inseparable part of European Race

Race is not a "social construct" as claimed by the heirs of the Frankfurt School and "Critical Theory". No! Culture and society are racial constructs! Europe has been what has been, not because of this or that religion, but because White People built it.
All genuine European, cultural and religious forms were developed from their genetic basis and they are representations and expressions of their deepest spiritual essence. Therefore, the European paganism is not only a "religion" that a White person can choose to follow or not follow. All White People, whether christian or atheist, has inherited it and he carry it in his veins, like it or not.

European paganism is an essential, integral, inherent, intrinsic and inseparable part of the White Race, and whatever is your ideological indoctrination, sooner or later your blood will eventually manifest itself in various ways: art, dreams, ideas, behaviors. And when that does not happen, as it was understood in depth by the Swiss psychologist Carl G. Jung, then come all the psychological and social pathologies that have plagued us for years. Therefore, if all artistic and literary manifestations about paganism were actually destroyed (as Christianity tried in its time), if the ethnic substrate that created them survives, then paganism inevitably will survive although it will be manifested in other ways, other names...

 Christianity is an artificial idea and does not fulfill this simple and natural principle, and for centuries has been against it trying to suppressing it and to hide it. It is a doctrine that can only be adopted by cultural transmission, and not by the intuition of the blood. It was not designed by the natural development of a race or to achieve its Destiny or its heyday, it was designed to be preached to all peoples on the earth to keep them as sheep in the same corral: One World Religion, One World Thinking. That is the same universalism, egalitarianism, internationalism and "anti-racism" preached by the architects of the Frankfurt School, its illegitimate children.

Filthy Christians

After 4th century and the destruction of Classical World, ecclesiastical censorship and the suppression of Western scientific and technical knowledge facilitated the spread and transmission of diseases throughout Europe. This worked in conjunction with the Christian denigration of the human body as a vehicle for sin. Human sexuality, for example, was considered a necessary evil, to be avoided, except for procreation in marriage.

 In Ancient Pagan Europe, public baths were very common, as was the general public regularly taking time to bathe in one way or another. In classical Greece, bathing was considered a completion of athletic activity: it had to be taken with cold water and quickly, to give energy more than solace. In archaic times, the Romans used to wash their arms and legs every morning; every nine days, during market day, they washed the rest of their bodies. Due to Oriental influence, for the Greeks - but even more often for the Romans - the bath took on mainly purposes of relaxation, solace and physical well-being. The steam bath and the sweat bath were introduced: these gave a sensation of wellness and pleasure that explains their extraordinary success.

 In "Christian Europe", hygiene practices changed drastically. Although it was very close, the Church did not officially prohibit personal hygiene, but began to disapprove of an "excessive" indulgence in the habit of bathing. With the victory of Christian terror, cleanliness and hygiene were suspect because concern for the body was seen as an obstacle to salvation. The Church condemned the public bath as "sensual", "mundane", "immoral" and "sinful". Christianity condemned the way of conceiving those pleasures of the body which, in Greek-Roman antiquity, were considered positive values, even to the point of seeing them as "degenerated sexual acts". The medieval ecclesiastical authorities proclaimed that the public bath "led to immorality, promiscuous sex and diseases" and encouraged the closure of the baths that had contributed so much to preserve public health in the great cities of the Roman world. The Christians of the time avoided bathing specifically because they considered frequent cleansing as a sign of vanity, which was a "sin". Thus the infamous smelliness of the medieval period began. People bathed and changed clothes, at most, twice a year: one in the fall and another in the spring, coinciding with the arrival of cold or heat, the time to change clothes for a fresher or more warm according to the case. The Church in Spain, for example, regularly encouraged believers to avoid bathing to better distinguish themselves from the hated Moors and Jews.

St. Jerome once said:
"He who has bathed in Christ has no need of a second bath."
This axiom was taken seriously by Christian ascetics. They practiced the ritual mortification of the flesh by refusing to wash their bodies. They wore the same garments every day until they were reduced to rags. The stench that was produced was known by Christians as alousia or the "odor of sanctity". Saints like Agnes and Margaret of Hungary were venerated by Christians because of their rejection of physical hygiene. In the Rule of St. Benedict of Nursia, only those monks who were sick and infirm were allowed to bathe. Monks in good health and the young were encouraged to wallow in their own filth and excrement. The Rule of St. Benedict was the most influential in the history of Western monasticism, it was embraced by thousands of medieval religious communities as a foundational monastic text.

 This unpleasant Christian habit of not bathing eventually led to the Black Death, the most devastating pandemic in the history of mankind, resulting in the death of between 75 and 200 million people and peaking in Europe between 1346 and 1353. The damages of this disease were always significantly higher in the regions and among the populations where Christianity became the dominant religion. For example, although the plague reduced the population of the Muslim world by one third, it was even lower than the two thirds estimated for Europe. These macro-regional differences in mortality are also reflected in much smaller geographic scales. England under the Plantagenet lost one-half of its population to plague, whereas Mamluk Egypt lost only one third. Differences in physical cleanliness between entire geographic regions and whole populations mitigated or exacerbated the ravages of bubonic plague. Among populations, Jews had even lower death rates than Christians. The apparent immunity of the Jews to the disease aroused the suspicions of their Christian contemporaries who accused them of poisoning the wells and were persecuted as a result, under absolutely false causes.

The Christians who ruled Europe let the great network of public baths once owned by the Empire, including the aqueducts that provided them with water, fall into a state of permanent decay. The fall of the Roman Empire and the decline of works aimed at improving the city's water supply caused a crisis in the use of the thermal baths. The fields were emptied and in the cities, the habits like the breeding of domestic animals, of chickens, geese and pigs, clashed with the most elementary hygienic norms. Clothes were washed in the waters of rivers, where waste was often unloaded, animal carcasses were found, as well as dirty liquids from tanneries and dry cleaners. The walls that surround the medieval cities limit their development and force their inhabitants to live in increasingly reduced spaces. The streets, narrow and winding, unpaved until the 12th-14th centuries, are often invaded by mud and debris.

The ideological crisis that deeply affected the Greek-Latin civilization was favored by the philosophers of the late classical period and by religions , mainly of oriental origin, which fostered an attitude of passive resistance to earthly adversities and detachment from physical life. So much so that spread the practice of Christian emasculation, as a method of salvation. All this contributed, on the one hand, to the dissemination of the idea that the body is the enemy of the spirit and, on the other, to the birth of a certain skepticism regarding the usefulness of the study of nature and scientific knowledge. Even medicine lost credibility and a conviction was born that the disease can be overcome by resorting to divinity through prayer instead of resorting to doctors and medicines. The victory of the religious fanatics signaled the imminent closing of the secular study academies and with it, the end of the formal formation of the doctors. Any residual knowledge of ancient medical wisdom, transmitted by practitioners, was condemned as "sorcery" or "witchcraft" and this censorship extended to attacks on herbal remedies. Instead of looking for the natural causes of the disease, as the Hippocratic writers once did, the official doctrine of the Church discouraged the practice of medicine by attributing all bodily ailments to the results of sin and diabolical possession. This delayed progress in the healing arts left Europe at the mercy of the disease for hundreds of years.



The Myth

Is the word “mythology” a wrong or pejorative term to describe the sacred corpus of ancient traditions?

Many mistakenly believe that the term “myth” has the meaning of “fictitious story”, “false” or even sometimes it has used as a synonym for a “lie”. The fact that we and the society in which we live is not mythical does not imply that the myth must be understood in a pejorative sense, as if what is myth is not valid. When Christianity spread like a pestilent plague, the pagan myths acquired a pejorative context and the word myth was first used as a synonym of false belief.

However, this usage obviously does not come from an objective and serious study of myths. The myth is not intended to be as an accurate narration of an event, but a symbolic, allegorical and psychological narration which has a transcendental significance that goes beyond the images and words.

The myth is not a historical truth, and that’s why those who do not understand the mythologies, specially Abrahamic monotheistic idiots, mock them, and they think that we truly believe in a set of stories and creatures as if they had happened in that way, because they are so ignorant and naïve that they actually believe in their own mythologies in that simplistic way.

They boast to having alleged "historical" desert characters, as if their historical existence and deeds were scientifically, definitely, undoubtedly and without question proven. But their existence and deeds are in no way much more historical than those european heroes of antiquity who stood out by his feats and naturally became in myths, ie, truths, not external ones, but for our spiritual inner.

The Eight Precepts about religion by David Lane


1. Any "religion" or teaching which denies the Natural Laws of the Universe is false. 

2. Whatever Peoples perception of God, or Gods, or the motive Force of the Universe might be, they can hardly deny that Nature's Law are the work of, and therefore the intent of, that Force. 

3. God and religion are distinct, separate and often conflicting concepts. Nature evidences the divine plan, for the natural world is the work of the force or the intelligence men call God. Religion is the creation of mortals, therefore predestined to fallibility. Religion may preserve or destroy a People, depending on the structure given by its progenitors, the motives of its agents and the vagaries of historical circumstances. 

4. The truest form of prayer is communion with Nature. It is not vocal. Go to a lonely spot, if possible a mountaintop, on a clear, star-lit night, ponder the majesty and order of the infinite macrocosm. Then consider the intricacies of the equally infinite microcosm. Understand that you are on the one hand inconsequential beyond comprehension in the size of things, and on the other hand, you are potentially valuable beyond comprehension as a link in destiny's chain. There you begin to understand how pride and self can co-exist with respect and reverence. There we find harmony with Nature and with harmony comes strength, peace and certainty.

5. Secular power systems protect and promote religions, which teach of an afterlife. Thus, people are taught to abandon defenses against the predators of this life. 

6. History, both secular and religious, is a fable conceived in self-serving deceit and promulgated by those who perceive benefits. 

7. Religion in its most beneficial form is the symbology of a People and their culture. A multiracial religion destroys the senses of uniqueness, exclusivity and value necessary to the survival of a race. 

8. What men call the super natural is actually the natural not yet understood or revealed.

-David Lane, The 88 Precepts.

The Thunder God

In the Indo-European religions, Gods of Thunder and Sky are among the most important. You can see Thor in Norse Mythology (which is indeed just another name for Donar in Germanic Mythology) Zeus and Jupiter in Greek and Roman Mythologies, Taranis in Celtic Mythology, Perun in Slavic Mythology, Perkūnas in Baltic Mythology, Indra in Vedic Mythology, Fereydun/ Thraetaona /Garshasp in Persian Mythology, or Teshub/Tarhunt in Hittite Mythology.

All these figures are actually just one, derived from the same primordial Proto-Indo-European Archetype. This fact makes us to remember that all European peoples, descendants of the ancient Germanics, Celts, Slavs, Greeks, an on, despite the actually superficial differences, are a Big Family and we come from the same Primordial "White Race", or more precisely, the human subspecies that originated in the isolated cold of Northern Europe and later it spread throughout the subcontinent, and then all over the globe, including, Iran, India, China, The Americas, Africa and Oceania, conquering most of these regions.

But back to the topic at hand, in most Indo-European mythologies, this Thunder God/Hero is described as a Dragon Slayer. We can discover the struggle of this Heroic (Sky-Spiritual) principle against an "Evil" (Earthy-Material) principle, generally in the form of a Snake or a Dragon.


 This Aryan myth is also, among other things, a cosmological metaphor associated with the invasion and triumph of Patriarchal (Indo-European) civilizations over the Matriarchal (Pre-Indo-European) civilizations during the Bronze Age. This was the triumph of a people, small in numbers, over much larger ones, but undisciplined and treacherous. Patriarchal peoples always became victorious, although they were always colossally surpassed in number by matriarchal armies, so this is why the Snake/Dragon is represented as a much bigger and stronger figure.

 Currently almost everything written about patriarchy comes from feminist sources that fall into outright opposition to it, so the Patriarchy is distorted into their views and matriarchy is glorified. They want to see the Patriarchy as if it were a system in which the woman is relegated, when that is not true. Patriarchy is the integral and balanced form of the two genres. When we say "Patriarchy", we mean a society whose character is eminently strong and vigorous, so this is reflected in its mythology.

Currently almost everything written about patriarchy comes from feminist sources that fall into outright opposition to it, so the Patriarchy is distorted into their views. They want to see the Patriarchy as if it were a system in which the woman is relegated, when that is not true. Patriarchy is the integral and balanced form of the two genres where each sex has important, but different roles. When we say "Patriarchy", we mean a society whose character is eminently strong and vigorous, so this is reflected in its mythology.

Thus, the patriarchal spirituality is characterized by the cult of the ascendant, the Sun, Sky and ancestors. The primacy of religious worship belongs to the Sky Father or Father God, king of the gods, this is depicted as a warrior, once a rebel who overthrew the first gods to position as ruler. His symbol of power is the Thunderbolt and the Spear. Odin-Wotan, Zeus-Jupiter, Indra and Perun, all they are Sky Gods and fathers of gods and heroes. The cult of war and heroism is part of this worldview. Sky represents the spiritual world and light. It is seen as a source of life to the Sun (clear skies, light) and the storm (lightning, rain, wrathful heaven). It doesn't despise or omits the Earth, on the contrary, what is done is integrate it into an interaction system Earth-Sky where the prevalence corresponds to Sky, and wherein the intermediate product is the natural world of verdant vegetation and Red blood. The Aryans were not unaware of the importance of the Mother Earth. Figures of Demeter, Persephone, Gaya, or Erda attest it. Everything in the patriarchal society has a celestial ("Olympic") orientation more than terrestrial and calendars take as reference the heroic plot of birth, zenith, sacrifice, death and rebirth cycle of Sun.

Patriarchal Indo-European civilizations were characterized by cultivating a strong discipline, a warrior spirit, a strong sense of group unity, unwavering austerity, courage, order, spirituality and full freedom, they carried a solar cult, based on heroism, war, joy and honor. On the other hand, the matriarchal cultures had a cult based EXCLUSIVELY on the “Mother Earth” concept (forgetting and relegating the “Father Sky”), also on hedonism and promiscuity, and they were characterized by indiscipline, laziness, selfishness, individualism, attachment to material things (You see that the word ‘matter’ comes from the Latin word ‘mater’, meaning ‘mother’), excessive pleasure, luxury, multiculturalism and debauchery. Matriarchal peoples were decadent, aged and spiritually exhausted societies (Just like the most of world’s modern, and especially urban, societies), but the Aryan patriarchy brought a new culture based on blood and honor that forged the foundations of Europe and the Western World.
Historically patriarchal societies have proved being superior and more advanced than the matriarchal societies and also have much greater potential. There is simply no point of comparison in terms of achievements between the ridiculous-pacifist matriarchy and glorious-conqueror patriarchy. However, these higher societies may gradually deteriorate when they relax their customs. For example, when the Greeks succumbed to the influence of East, strictly matriarchal, then they went into a decline that ended with the conquest of the Romans. But once more, as if history would tend to be repeated again and again, with the entering of Christianity from the East, this new prodigious society fall into the shadows of a strange sort of “Distorted Patriarchy”, which despised, stomped and devalued the woman (just like the other abrahamic religions: Judaism and Islam), and actually hid and camouflaged all the forms of Matriarchy, although genuine forms of Aryan Patriarchy survived in spite of Christianity.
To be continued...

Crucifixion


Crucifixion (Latin: crucifixio; "fixed to a cross" and this last word from crux and cruciatus; "pain, torment, torture") was an ancient method of execution in which the condemned is tied or nailed to a wooden pole, often made in two parts: a vertical wood called stipes and crossbeam one called patibulum. That method was used by Persians, Assyrians, Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans.

Roman crucifixion had three main characteristics:

1. Painful. This capital punishment was usually used to expose the criminal to a particularly slow, horrible and public death, in order to deter people from committing similar crimes. Seneca the Younger used the phrase 'infelix lignum' (unfortunate wood) to refer to the cross.

2. For the worst offenders. It was used for criminal foreigners and slaves, who were not protected as Roman citizens, and offenders of the worst kind, especially rebels.

3. Shameful . The crucified victim was forced to undress completely before being nailed to the cross, no matter if it was male or female. Therefore crucifixion was considered the most shameful and humiliating way to die. The goal of Roman crucifixion was not only to kill the criminal, but also to humiliate the body of the condemned. Control over one's own body was vital in ancient cultures. Capital punishment removed the "self control" which denoted the loss of honor.

What can someone say about a doctrine that takes as its most sacred symbol an instrument of execution?

Three myths about the Vikings refuted

Most of historical texts about Vikings comes from Christian sources, particularly monks who were the favorite victims of Viking raids and so ended up describing their enemies in a very tendentious manner and without esteem, thus distorting their real historical image.


1. "The Vikings practiced pillage as the only way of life or livelihood".

 One of the most popular images we have of the Vikings is being looters and raiders whose main occupation was practicing raids wherever they went, stealing, raping, looting and burning all that was left in its wake. Yet again we are facing a myth historically refuted.

 It is important to realize that our written records of the Viking Age are typically dated from 200 to 300 years after the events described. Until recently, almost all we had to know about the Vikings were chronicles written by those contemporaries who suffered Viking attacks, such as Christian chronicles - as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle - where obviously the only image we have about the Vikings is as looters, since it is probably the only one that they saw or wanted to see those who were attacked by them.

 However, today we know that the Vikings rather than looters and raiders were mainly farmers and traders who spent most of the year taking care of their farms and lands and traveling to trade their products. They would have their expeditions - generally small - mainly in summer if they could afford it and, it seems, as an alternative method to get riches quickly. In fact, many inhabitants of the Vikings territories during the Viking Age, probably never went to an expedition.

 2. "The Vikings were a barbaric, savage and illiterate society of rapists".

 Again, this myth was a result of the only sources we had about the Vikings, until recently, and they were essentially a negative opinion. This image that has come to us is a "dirty", "ragged", "savage" and "rough" Vikings.

 However, we know some things that demolish this myth; According to the Chronica by John Wallingford, "thanks to their habit of grooming the hair every day, bathing every Saturday and change clothes regularly, are capable of undermining the virtue of married women and even seduce the daughters of our noble to transform them into their beloved".

 We are talking about a time when hygiene was stigmatized by Christianity as something "sensual" and "pagan". Vikings were a society with a hygiene concept pretty "modern", they washed daily, every Saturday bathed (in contrast to their Christian contemporaries who bathed and changed his clothes, at most, twice a year: one in the fall and one in spring, coinciding with the arrival of cold or heat, time to change their clothes by a cooler or warmer ones), did laundry and changed their clothes regularly and had impressive objects of care hygiene. Something that Christians didn't until many centuries later.

 In addition, the Vikings took care their physical appearance, both in their hair and their ways of clothing that became substantially refined. We know they liked the decorations, beads, jewelry carved with great detail and meticulous decorative elements. We know they liked the clothes of rich fabrics like silk - that brought through trade to places as far away as Byzantium and Baghdad - and bright and cheerful colors like red or blue that decorated with rich embroidery performed themselves with colored threads.

 And not just in appearance is the issue, the office of skald (poet), was one of the most valued among the Vikings, who were considered socially at the height of the nobles. The Vikings not only enjoyed the material art, but they were a society fascinated by knowledge - in this case of oral tradition - which greatly enjoyed poetry, art in reaching unsuspected levels of refinement for the period from which we are talking about. Poetry, mythology and knowledge were absolutely important for the Vikings, do not forget that their chief god, Odin, not only was considered the god of victory or war, but also the god of wisdom who didn't hesitate to offer his eye on the Well of Mimir for gaining wisdom and knowledge.

 About raping, there is not one single contemporary source even accusing the Vikings of raping anybody. Where comes from such reputation? About one century after the Viking Age, monks started for the first time to accuse the Vikings of rape. In other words: about 100 years after the Viking Age had ended. In fact, the raping of a free woman was one of the few reasons on which the Vikings and their assembly government applied the death penalty ("human sacrifice"). Of course, we are not saying that rape didn't happen, as it has happened in all societies of history, but to blame an entire society of it is fallacious. 

All this leads us to the topic of treatment of women during Viking Age. Viking women, as any other European women, were the transmitters of culture and knowledge of their society and they leaded home affairs. A viking woman had her dowry freely available and could apply for divorce when she believed appropriate. Viking women were not owned by anyone and they had a voice to freely say what they believed opportune and to make decisions. Viking woman was an essential part of society. This is very different to what happened in Christian society, where women were perceived as a source of sin and evil. According to Christianity, every person was born guilty of original sin because Eve tempted Adam in the story of the Garden of Eden from the Bereshit בְּרֵאשִׁית (Genesis) book. Eve, therefore, was responsible for the inherent sinfulness of mankind and the sufferings of the human race. During the Middle Ages, the Church used the Latin term maleficae (malignant) to name the "witches" i.e. those who preserved the pre-Christian traditions from prehistoric origins, in order to demonize and accuse the pagans of practicing the "worship to Devil". These ancient traditions, as it has been said, were generally transmited by women and that's why the term "witch" is usually more applied to a female figure than a masculine.

 3. "Norse paganism approved homosexuality".

 This myth comes specially from Christians who call themselves as "nationalists" taking the post-Viking age Christian writers as sources, but contrary to their fantasies, homosexuality did not have a good reputation during the Viking age as portrayed by the Christian writers. It is fair to say that Christian extremism and paranoia wanted to see perversions in almost any action did by pre-Christian cultures, similarly to what happened next with homosexual authors distorting European mythology, specially Greek mythology.

 In ancient Norse sagas Loki (a dark entity, who did not receive any kind of worship, related to chaos, fraud and deceit in Norse Mythology) accused Odin of being effeminate in Lokasenna, for practicing seiðr magic, which was seen as a feminine magic. But since Odin is the most important of all Gods, he is indeed above such laws. The fact that Loki insults Odin calling him homosexual, and Odin immediately replied angrily, shows that the Pagan Norse did not approve homosexuality, and many of modern pagans hold to this idea. The effeminate in ancient Nordic cultures was called ergi, and it was a pejorative term.

This is shown in the laws against offenses and insults. For example in the legal code Grágás it says:
There are three major terms when someone calls effeminate that lead to a lawsuit if this is said to a man, or if it is sexually used by another man, then the injured party can sue for terms of abuse, and even has the ability to retaliate in combat these words used against him.
It also mentions that those trying to avoid marriage were penalized by law. A man who refused marriage was called fuðflogi (lit. man who flees the female sex organ) while a woman avoid marriage was flannfluga (lit. she who flees the male sex organ).

 The Old Norse word used in the law code and literature for an insult was níð, which may be defined as "libel, insult, scorn, lawlessness, cowardice, sexual perversion, homosexuality". From níð are derived such words as níðvisur ("insulting verses"), níðskald ("insult-poet"), níðingr ("coward, outlaw"), griðníðingr ("truce-breaker"), níðstông ("scorn-pole"), also níða ("to perform níð poetry"), tunguníð ("verbal níð"), tréníð ("timber níð", carved or sculpted representations of men involved in a homosexual act, related to niíðstông, above). Níð was part of a family of concepts which all have connotations of passive male homosexuality, such as: ergi or regi (nouns) and argr or ragr (the adjective form of ergi) ("willing or inclined to play or interested in playing the female part in sexual relations with another man, unmanly, effeminate, cowardly"); ergjask ("to become argr"); rassragr ("arse-ragr"); stroðinn and sorðinn ("sexually used by a man") and sansorðinn ("demonstrably sexually used by another man"). A man who is a seiðmaðr (one who practices women's magic) who is argr is called seiðskratti.

 The case of the "goldgubber" plaques.

 There is a pseudo-scientific text circulating Internet claiming that there are archaeological "proofs" of vikings approving "homosexual marriages":
"A provoking bit of information is provided in the art-historical evidence as well. There exist a good number of small gold foil plaques known as goldgubber which depict a couple embracing. Frequently these are assumed to be Freyr, god of fertility, and Gerð, the beautiful giant maiden, and many commentators such as Hilda Ellis-Davidson believe that they may have been used at weddings.(Ellis-Davidson, Myths and Symbols, pp. 31-31 and p. 121). However, if one looks closely, at least two of the surviving goldgubber depict same sex couples embracing, one two bearded figures, another two women with the typical long, knotted hair, large breasts, and trailing dresses! Since these plaques in general are associated with weddings and sexual union, it is tempting to assume that these two same sex examples represent and/or commemorate homosexual relationships. Of course, the plaques in question could simply depict two friends embracing. Another possible explanation is that, in many cultures, people do not dance with the opposite sex, only with members of their own gender, and that therefore these figures may be representations of dancers."
Two gullgubber plaques presented as an allegedly "proof of gay marriage" among vikings.

Gullgubber are art-objects, amulets, or offerings found in Scandinavia and dating to the Nordic Iron Age. They consist of thin pieces of beaten gold (occasionally silver), usually between 1 and 2 sq. cm. in size, usually stamped with a motif, and are the oldest examples of toreutics in Northern Europe.

Approximately 3,000 gullgubber have been found, from approximately 30 sites in Norway, Sweden, and the greatest number in Denmark. No fewer than 2,350 were found at the settlement of Sorte Muld on the Danish island of Bornholm, while over 100 were found at Lundeborg, near Gudme on the Danish island of Funen, and 122 at Uppåkra, Scania, Sweden. Relatively few gullgubber have so far been found in Norway.

Many of the gullgubber that have been found in Norway and Sweden depict a man and a woman facing each other, sometimes embracing, sometimes with a branch or a tree visible between them. Sometimes the figures' knees are bent and they may be dancing. Some have only a single figure, either male or female, or an animal. A few are unstamped cutouts. Sharon Ratke, in her dissertation on the gullgubber, has added a further category of "wraiths" and suggests that they may indicate that some gullgubber were a tribute to the dead or to travellers. She rejects the notion of dancing, interpreting those figures as static and classing them among the wraiths. Recent attempts have been made to interpret the gestures of the couples depicted on gullgubber in terms of christian-medieval sources such as the Sachsenspiegel, as denoting "betrothal" or "marriage".

However, almost 2,500 of the 3000 (That is 78-83%) have been found at Sorte Muld, on the Danish island of Bornholm, by far the highest number at any site. The second highest number, were found not far away at Uppåkra, Scania, Sweden. At both Uppåkra and Sorte Muld, the majority of the gullgubber do not depict couples. At Uppåkra, most depict men, a smaller number depict women, and only a few depict couples.

Therefore and first of all, it is highly questionable to pretend that these objects are mostly associated with "weddings" or "sexual unions". Secondly, of the 3000 gullgubber found, only two of them depict same sex couples, that is, only 0.06%. So, why to interpret these objects as part of such a minority phenomenon as homosexualism rather than as part of a truly widespread and accepted phenomenon as friendship? That's because the interpretations of these people are biased by their own preconceptions and by their twisted and sick minds. Pretendig this as a "proof" of "widespread acceptance of homosexualism among vikings", implies a lack of intellectual honesty and it reflects that these conclusions are politically motivated.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)