At The Occidental Observer (TOO) a commenter wrote:
Here’s an idea: what if our problem is not our sense of fairness or individualism or egalitarianism, but moral fanaticism? This is something I’ve been thinking about lately: the idea that Whites are moral fanatics. More so than other races, we desire to be “good” no matter what the consequences are.
I replied that, though I have quoted the following passage several times, I will continue to quote it to convey the idea that the moral grammar that has been killing us has unconscious roots in Christian axiology.
A Swede that is now retired from the boards wrote in a counter-jihad blog:
With Christ as part of the equation, the Christian ethics of the Gospels became balanced. Humans were seen as imperfect and it was Christ who covered for us with his self-sacrifice. In Secular Christianity [i.e., liberalism] each person has to be like Jesus himself, doing self-sacrifice, since there’s no other way to realize Christian ethics. On top of that, with the Industrial Revolution and the surplus it created in our societies, we came to the point where all the good deeds of Christian ethics could finally be executed by giving off our surplus to all the poor and weak foreign people around the world: food, Western medicine, and other aid.
We should remember that our progressivist paradigm, which is always going left, is based on Christian ethics. [my emphasis] And Christian ethics means the inversion of values. So it’s the weak that is considered good, while the strong is considered evil.
Since I was a Christian, actually an admirer of St Francis in my Catholic years, I think I’ve developed a psychological knack to decipher the progressivist paradigm that has infected the West. Every time I look at example after example of deranged altruism throughout the West, especially toward the non privileged races, I cannot apart my mind from my own biography, when I admired the poor saint of Assisi’s acting out his emotional issues through eccentricities that, presently, could only be labeled as self-harming.
Remember my comment about Wuthering Heights in a TOO thread about crazy Swedes? The eccentricities of the Fraticelli, so well depicted in Umberto Eco’s The Name of the Rose, were barely tolerated by the Church in the 13th and 14th centuries precisely because, if accepted by the mainstream, this inversion of values inspired directly on the gospel would destroy Europe. (St Francis himself aged and died prematurely as a result of his extreme mortification of the flesh.) Alas, once secular Christianity was established after the French Revolution and each westerner had to be like St Francis himself, doing self-sacrifice, moral fanaticism ran amok among the deists and the atheists starting with the fateful emancipation of the Jew by the same gentiles who had sanctioned anti-Semitism in Christendom.
It is my belief that, presently, we are suffering from a secular form of runaway Franciscanism throughout the entire West.
A Nietzschean revaluation of all values back to saner times is what whites need. (That’s why the young Hitler, who also was born Catholic, carried a copy of the Zarathustra in the trenches of the First World War.) Since what we now need is the scorched-Earth scenario that the commenter Mark has been proposing in some TOO threads, I am tempted to write a book that shows my spiritual odyssey under the provocative title “From St Francis to Himmler” but, paraphrasing the gospel, that word would be hard indeed.
Who would be able to hear it?







A good Book writer? Sure. Subject matter…leave the psycho-analytical, ‘christian vs. anti-christian’ out of it; we have plenty of things to do without more, continuous, self-absorbtion.
Start developing a cogent exposition on just how we can create a viable and working government, its various methods of operation, or simply define a practical way of lookging at a new Volksgeist, one that will help to usher in a new ethno-state.
Time all the dreamers and sensitivities were put to good, practical, efforts.
Keep working….
It is not a psychological analysis of “christian vs. anti-christian” what I am after, but a transvaluation of values so that what must be done will be done.
I think my feelings would be more accurately described as the “scorched Jew scenario”.
I’ve quoted one of your recent remarks at The Occidental Observer in the latest entry. Cheers.
The purpose of this comment — I only now discovered the article — is to advise that one Jorge Bergoglio SJ, Cardinal Prince of the Roman Catholic Church, has been elected Pope, and has taken the pontifical name of Francis.
I know; I watched the ceremomy.
Odd that no Francisco had been chosen for a Pope name in honor of the Church’s greatest “saint”…