Category: history
Freethinkers! It’s Time to Pull Back to the Secret Societies Again…
Every honest person in the Western World is right now suffering from a profound sense of unease. With another Cultural Revolution sweeping the West, it seems like the barbarian hordes are about to win their ultimate victory of destroying all order in the world. Fret not! There is historical precedent to guide us out of this turmoil – but it’s not going to be easy.
This profound sense of unease is easy to explain. Our cultural and political elites – rotten with corruption, bloated by the easiest life of any generation in history and blinded by ideology – have simply lost control. There is no longer a coherent shared sentiment that holds us together, and, without this, we have lost all solidarity.
In order to be a people, and not just a mess of randoms, we have to have solidarity. In order to have solidarity, a people needs to have a common ground.
The fashionable attitude of our time is the Orwellian “Diversity is Solidarity.” The contradiction here is obvious – the more diversity there is, the less we have in common with each other, and therefore the more diversity there is the less solidarity.
The rot has started at the top. We have an utterly corrupt political class. They inherited the highest standard of living in history after World War II and, bereft of historical awareness, have come to think it natural, and are interested in nothing beyond maintaining this comfortable lifestyle into senescence.
What happens to the generations that come after them is of no concern – as long as there are workers to sweep their streets and to wipe their arses, the Baby Boomers are happy enough. Because there naturally aren’t enough low-paid workers to maintain this lifestyle, the Boomers have chosen to simply import them, and have left us with the impossible task of maintaining a coherent culture in this maelstrom.
In recent centuries, anyone wishing to educate themselves into the nature of reality was able to do so at a university. The word ‘university’ means community, in the sense of a community of teachers and scholars. The idea is that, as a result of the collective effort of intelligent, honest truth-seekers, the true nature of reality will become apparent to the seeker.
This was true up until fairly recently. The New Zealand university system was able to produce a Rutherford a little more than a century ago.
Over the past twenty years, however, the university system has fallen into decline, and is no longer fit for purpose. Instead of honest, unconditioned freethinkers, the Western university system has become a production line of sheep-like drones, conditioned to be terrified of original thought by the ever-present threat of merciless social disapproval.
So, instead of being a community where seekers of wisdom can come together and share knowledge about the nature of reality, debating it and refining it, most of the products of this system are just pure cancer. University graduates are now more interested in virtue signalling than in the truth; indeed, the entire concept of ‘truth’ has been destroyed in the confusion wrought by postmodernism.
There’s only one solution, and history tells us what it is. In an age where the rights to free speech and free association have been lost (to both direct and indirect attacks), it’s necessary to once again meet in secret. Behind closed doors. Entry only by an invitation that is jealously withheld until proof that one is made of the right stuff has been given.
In other words, it’s necessary to fall back to the network of secret societies inspired by the Mystery Schools of ancient Egypt and Greece. The public ground has been lost to the barbarians – it’s time this was admitted by men of truth and the appropriate measures taken.
Indeed, this was where the original university system originated from – this is why people are not awarded Master’s Degrees but are rather “Admitted to the Degree of Master.”
This company has already begun work to source a kykeon capable of inspiring the spiritual insight that formed the basis of the Eleusinian Mysteries. At some point in the near future we will reinstate these mysteries in Sun City, New Zealand.
VJMP Reads: Anders Breivik’s Manifesto VII
This reading carries on from here.
In this section (c. pages 426-573), Breivik discusses “Modern Jihad”, or how adherents of the Islamic religion fight for supremacy in the modern world. Opening with a quote of Surah 9 verse 5, in which Muslims are admonished to “kill the unbelievers wherever you find them”, this section details the existing Jihads carried out by Muslims against non-Muslims.
In his characteristic way, Breivik exhaustively catalogues the crimes committed by Muslims against non-Muslims. No offence, not even ones as prosaic as common assault, is too minor to be listed here. This is enough to give the impression that Islam is at war with every other culture that it shares a border with.
To some extent, Breivik has a point here. There are very few peaceful borders between Muslim-controlled areas and non-Muslim controlled ones, and prospects for there being more are very slim.
However, one glaring point is missed: if Islam is so ruthlessly aggressive when it comes to purging non-Muslims from Muslim lands, why are there still non-Muslims there? Nazi Germany managed to exterminate the vast bulk of European Jewry in fewer than six years of trying – how can it be that non-Muslim communities still exist in Muslim lands after what we are told has been 1,300 years of relentless extirpation?
Breivik mentions that one-sixth of the population of Egypt are Christians still. This seems like an extraordinarily high proportion for a group that has suffered 1,300 years of ethnic cleansing. The Native American population of the USA, the Aboriginal population of Australia and the Maori population of New Zealand are all much lower than this – and they were displaced over 400 years or less, meaning that the Christian exterminations of unwanted populations has been an order of magnitude more efficient and aggressive than those carried out by Muslims.
Moreover, the exhaustive list of Muslim crimes against non-Muslims is not compared to the list of non-Muslim crimes against non-Muslims, so there is no reference point against which to decide whether this list has any import. 800 Americans are shot dead by other Americans every single month – a monthly list of crimes much longer than the Muslim crimes detailed by Breivik in this document. And this is with a population one-fifth of the size of the Muslim world.
To some extent, Breivik is playing on the infamous persecution mania of Christians who see enemies everywhere and a never-ending infernal plot to drive them from the world in order to conquer it in the name of Satan. Ironically, although Breivik correctly points out that Muslims always try to cast themselves as the victims in order to gain sympathy, he does the exact same thing in this document.
There are many ways in which Breivik’s discontent with the current European situation is a consequence of the failure of European leaders. He correctly points out that part of the reason why Europeans are losing rights to increased security measures is because of the Islamic presence in Europe – had Europe never let the Muslims in, they never would have lost the freedoms that have been taken from them in the fight against extremism.
What needs to be done in response is clear. According to Breivik the terms of victory are “the total banishment of traditional Islam from a specific country. Widespread emigration/deportation and large scale conversion of Muslims in the country.”
This is necessary because “An objective analysis can never reach the conclusion that Islam is peaceful, tolerant and consistent with human rights.” Here, Breivik re-emphasises the point that Islam has never undergone a reformation of any kind. What Westerners foolishly call “moderate Muslims” are simply Muslims who are not particularly religious.
This section ends with a frightening question: “How was it possible that Immanuel Kant, who lived in a German state without liberal democracy, could criticise basic aspects of religion in the 18th century, while in the West of the 21st century there are social and legal consequences for criticising other religions and cultures?”
Have we really gone backwards since the Enlightenment?
Can You Hear The Echoes Of The 1920s On Our Streets?
The 1920s were a tumultuous time in the Western World. Rebuilding from the carnage of World War One, Westerners – especially Europeans – found themselves unable to decide on a peaceful way forward, and this absence of agreement expressed itself violently in the streets. This essay examines whether or not we’re looking at a repeat.
The German defeat in World War One saw a revolution that swept away the monarchy of Wilhelm II, replacing it with a fragile democracy known as the Weimar Republic. The well-founded fear of those who wanted peace in Central Europe was of a civil war between the socialist forces that had inspired the revolution and the reactionary conservatives representing those who held power and wealth under the Second Reich.
Communist agitation, inspired by the Russian Revolution of 1917, was eventually put down by an alliance between the ruling Social Democratic Party of Germany and right-wing paramilitaries known as the Freikorps, and peace finally reigned.
But it wasn’t to last.
The severe economic problems of the 1920s, coupled with a sense of humiliation at the restrictions imposed on Germany by the victorious Allies, alongside continued communist agitation and growing nationalist sentiment, meant that chaos would soon usurp the shaky peace.
The far left didn’t like the Weimar Republic because they considered it to be holding back a communist revolution, and the far right didn’t like it because they preferred the authoritarianism that existed under the previous monarchy.
This state of affairs is very similar to what faces the West today.
Communist agitators have made a significant impact on Western society in recent years. They have successfully destroyed belief in tradition, resulting in plummeting birthrates, mass immigration that has changed the make-up of Western nations forever, and widespread and righteous anti-white racism.
Nationalist agitators have also made significant strides recently, most notably with the election of Donald Trump to the American Presidency. Many Trump supporters are shameless authoritarians, and much of the appeal of this authoritarianism lies in the belief that they are protecting the West from degeneracy.
The surge in both groups of extremists has led to increasing levels of street violence in America, most notably at the ‘Battle of Berkeley’ and then last weekend in Charlottesville. A sense of unfinished business lingers over both of these incidents, and after a fatal terrorist attack in Charlottesville the desire for revenge is a factor predicting further bloodshed.
What is the most foreboding is that Antifa is growing in strength because of rhetoric about the need to resist Nazism, and the far-right is growing in strength because of rhetoric about the need to resist Communism.
The echoes of the 1920s come from the fact that both sides are correct in their basic fears of the other side. Both sides are growing in strength because of sharply increasing dissatisfaction with the idea of liberal democracy, in a very similar way to how increasing dissatisfaction with the Weimar Republic led to widespread street violence.
The left opposes liberal democracy because it wants to shut down free speech and free expression. The Communists believe that they need to control the narrative in order to bring about revolution, and this demands that even scientists like Richard Dawkins be denied the right to speak at a university.
The right opposes liberal democracy because it wants to shut down the free movement of people. The Nazis believe that the West is sinking into chaos, anarchy and degeneracy, and only by rallying around authoritarian figures can a sufficient degree of order be imposed upon society.
Both of these sides, therefore, have grounds to eschew dialogue and democracy in favour of raw assertions of power in the streets.
Also foreboding is the belief, shared by many commentators, that the economic hardships of the Weimar Era laid the foundations for massive German discontent with the idea of democracy, which paved the way for extremists like Adolf Hitler.
The West has not really recovered from the Global Financial Crisis of 2008. Employment prospects are poor all across the West, with the dream of owing your own home now out of reach for most young Westerners, and working-class resentment at the amount of money spent on refugees risks growing into further discontent.
Perhaps all of this is building towards another climactic struggle.