Perspective

The Cuckservative Vision Of Western Civ.

I’m sure all of you have experienced it:  A boomer cuckservative lavishing praise on Western Civilization . . . only to to justify some policy (such as Third World immigration) that is actually harmful to the people who built Western Civilization.

Case in point:  A truly embarrassing American Conservative article by Bradley J. Birzer, “Bring on the Conservative Debate for Immigration,” wherein Brad basically argues that the entire telos of Western Civilization is toward open borders. Seriously.  I’m not making this up.

I had never heard of Brad Birzer before reading this article, but apparently he teaches at Hillsdale College. I asked some academic friends about him and the two responses were: “major cuckservative” and “not very bright.” Both are probably true.  Nonetheless, I’ll use his article to illustrate the cuckservative mindset and what’s wrong with it.

Brad Birzer’s article may well be one of the  most historically illiterate pieces I’ve ever read.  He writes:

In the gloriously pagan Odyssey, Odysseus survives, again and again, because the highest commandment of Zeus is to welcome the stranger and protect him with all that one has. To this day, one finds remnants of this tradition throughout the Mediterranean as the stranger is greeted with olive oil, bread, and, depending on the predominant religion of the region, wine. As staple crops of the ancient world, these signified not just acceptance but actual joy at the arrival of the stranger. The god of the hearth stood as patron of the sojourner.

 

The Athenians, during the tumultuous fifth century before Christ, prided themselves on allowing not just the stranger into their communities, but also their very enemies in.  After all, what did the Athenians have to hide? Why not expose the ignorant to truth? Let the oppressed see how a free people live.

 

During the vast, long expanse of the Middle Ages, the Germanic peoples not only thought of themselves as residents of their own little piece of Middle-earth (Midgard), but they also thought of themselves as citizens of what King Alfred the Great labeled Christendom, the Christiana res publica, as well as believing themselves sojourners en route to the City of God. What Christian could allow—in good conscience—the accidents of birth such as gender or skin tone in this Veil [sic] of Tears to trump the possibilities of eternal salvation in the next?  Neither Greek nor Jew, neither male nor female. . . .

This puerile diatribe is just flat-out wrong on so many accounts.

First, the language he uses, such as “welcoming the stranger” and “sojourner,” is right out of  cuckstianity. Brad, I’m told, is a big “Cathocuck” and virtue signals non-stop like an SJW.  The fact that he uses these phrases shows he’s more interested in current liberation theology than in traditional Western thought.

Brad’s reading of the Odyssey is ridiculous. The Greeks valued xenia (hospitality), but it had limits. The Odyssey is, in fact, a reflection on these limits. Throughout the Odyssey, there is either too little hospitality (e.g. the cyclops, sirens, etc.) or too much hospitality (e.g. Calypso, Penelope and the suitors, etc.).  Odysseus tries to steer between these two extremes and find a mean.    Interestingly, the poem does not end on the note of “welcoming the stranger.”  Odysseus, in fact, murders all the suitors that invaded his island. (I suspect if Brad Birzer were Odysseus, he would have asked the suitors to stay and would have raised the kids they would have with his wife.)

In short, the Odyssey is not a screed arguing for unmitigated hospitality or open borders.  Only an extreme ideologue would read it this way, which makes me wonder whether Brad read the poem at all; if he did, he seems to have failed to understand it.

The Ancient Greeks were not SJWs, as Brad makes them out to be. They referred to foreigners as “barbarians” and in many Greek city-states, it was nearly impossible for foreigners ever to obtain citizenship. (In some city-states, in order to be a citizen, one had to prove citizenship on both the paternal and maternal lines back for two generations.)  Furthermore, there was an ethno-religious component to city-states.  Ancient paganism was a blood (not a creedal) religion and citizens saw themselves bound by blood to each other, to the gods, and to the state.  Aristotle, in the Politics, notes city-states being of the “same blood” and at one point defines city-states as “blood connections of families, brotherhoods, and common sacrifices.” Aristotle goes on to say:  “A state cannot be constituted from any chance body of persons, or in any chance period of time. Most of the states which have admitted persons of another stock, either at the time of their foundation or later, have been troubled by sedition.”

Even the Romans did not grant mass citizenship to foreigners until the Edict of Caracalla in 212 AD.  By that time, Rome was already in decline and this edict hastened that decline, as later is demonstrated when Rome’s foreign, mercenary armies begin to loot the empire from within. The British historian Peter Heather argues that mass immigration was what finally brought down the Roman Empire.

Things get worse when Brad moves to the Magna Carta.

Nothing in Christendom better represented the ideals of the free movement of peoples than did the Great Charter of 1215, forced upon King John at Runnymede.  Though points 1 and 63 of the Magna Carta demanded freedom of the Church from political interference, points 41 and 42 reveal how fundamental the movement of peoples is to the sanctity of the common law.

  1. All merchants shall have safe and secure exit from England, and entry to England, with the right to tarry there and to move about as well by land as by water, for buying and selling by the ancient and right customs, quit from all evil tolls, except (in time of war) such merchants as are of the land at war with us. And if such are found in our land at the beginning of the war, they shall be detained, without injury to their bodies or goods, until information be received by us, or by our chief justiciar, how the merchants of our land found in the land at war with us are treated; and if our men are safe there, the others shall be safe in our land.
  2. It shall be lawful in future for anyone (excepting always those imprisoned or outlawed in accordance with the law of the kingdom, and natives of any country at war with us, and merchants, who shall be treated as if above provided) to leave our kingdom and to return, safe and secure by land and water, except for a short period in time of war, on grounds of public policy- reserving always the allegiance due to us.

If we accept the Magna Carta as one of the most important documents in the history of western civilization, we Americans cannot afford to ignore it, its intent, or its specifics.  Common law demanded that a people—and the person—move freely, border or not. Even in time of war, the enemy must be treated with dignity.

Obviously, points 41 and 42 are referencing travelers and merchants selling goods—not immigrating seeking to become new subjects. Indeed, it’s ahistorical (not to mention childish) to conflate, on the one hand, subjects and citizens and travelers with immigrants. Moreover, the notion that the Magna Carta is a template for multi-racial inclusiveness and open borders is truly bizarre, when just 75 years later King Edward I issued the Edict of Expulsion (1290), deporting all the Jews from England.

Brad’s invoking of U.S. history amounts to cherry picking at best.

When it comes to the specifically American tradition of immigration and the free movements of peoples, the issue becomes more complicated.

 

Imagine for a moment that the great waves of immigration never came to America.  In the colonial period, among those who freely chose to cross the Atlantic, you would have to dismiss the Anglicans to Virginia, the Puritans to New England, the Quakers to Pennsylvania, and the Scotch-Irish. Of the unfree peoples, you would have to take out all of those of African origin. In the 1840s, remove the Germans, the Scandinavians, and the Irish.  In the 1880s through the 1910s, remove all Greeks, Poles, Jews, Italians. . . .

 

Yes, the native American Indian population would be justly celebrating, but, overall, and, from any relatively objective view, there would be no America.

 

Between 1801 and 1924—with the critical exception of the Chinese and the Japanese—no peoples were barred from entry into the United States.  Congress forbade further Chinese immigration in 1882, and a gentleman’s agreement ended Japanese immigration in 1905. Otherwise, until 1921 and 1924, any person of any continent, of any religion, of either gender, of any skin color, or any other accident of birth could enter the United States and take up residency the very day of arrival.  Only those with known criminal records or those suffering from tuberculosis were turned away.

 

Unless you are a full-blooded American Indian (less than one percent of the present United States population), you, American reader, would not be here without some ancestor having immigrated—freely or by force—to the United States. And possibly from what one might crassly dismiss as a “sh-hole country.”

 

Brad fails to mention the the Naturalization Act of 1790, which limited citizenship to white people of good character.  He also fails to mention how the Immigration Act of 1924, which limited immigration to Europeans and lasted until 1965, actually created a tight labor market and, as many economic historians have argued, created the largest middle class in American history.  (I suppose Brad sides with the open-borders, cheap-labor corporations that want loose labor markets to drive down wages.)

And, of course, Brad makes recourse to religion:

As Christians around the world celebrated the arrival of the Three Kings—the Magi of the Orient—on Epiphany, the president of the United States called for $33 billion to shore up America’s borders with $18 billion for the wall.

 

Would the Magi have been admitted in 2018? “Excuse me, Balthasar, but I need to see that your papers are in order.  Oh, I’m sorry, but your gift of myrrh exceeds our 3.2 ounces of liquid allowed.”

 

Perhaps, President Trump simply chose his timing poorly, but it would be impossible for the Christian to miss the irony.

Brad’s use of Christianity is largely through the lens of contemporary SJW Cuckstianity where Christianity is to be a suicide cult for white people. Historically, Christianity was not always a suicide cult.  Christian nations policed their borders and repelled invaders. Even Thomas Aquinas says people have greater obligations to compatriots and blood relatives than to foreigners.  If Brad were alive at the time of Charles Martel, Brad would have tried to convince Martel to “welcome the stranger” (and then Martel would have bitch-slapped him).

Brad keeps referring to “skin color” or “skin tone” as if race is only about skin color, when in reality race is 100,000 years of evolution and encompasses many behavioral traits.  Brad really needs to read up on human biodiversity, about which I suspect he’s completely ignorant.

In conclusion, Brad has no idea what he’s talking about.  Either he’s a fool or liar, or both.

Mind you, most of my criticisms here are merely academic and show how ridiculous Brad’s historical claims are.  Even if the West were truly open-borders in the past, it would not justify open borders now, as the scale of immigration now is so much greater than in the past and most of the immigration now is from the Third World.  As a recent study in the UK showed, “More people came to the UK in 2013 than from 1066 to 1960.”  The “movement of peoples” is unprecedented.

As an aside, Brad has written a book on Russell Kirk, whom many credit as being the grandfather of American conservatism.  Interestingly, Kirk defended racial segregation in the South, apartheid in South Africa, and at the end of his life became an immigration restrictionist.  Kirk also quipped that Jewish neoconservatives “mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States.”  Brad, of course, hates all of this, and wishes to cuck-wash conservatism, which is funny considering that conservatism has already run its failed course and is a dying ideology. Let’s hope something like archeo-futurism or identitarianism replaces it. Soon.

 

Updates:

Read Ricardo Duchesne’s “The Greek-Roman Invention of Civic Identity Versus the Current Demotion of European Ethnicity.”

Alfred Clark
the authorAlfred Clark

93 Comments

  • Quite along post ,but the one invention isgreaT ONE : THE cUCSTIANITY!!! tHE AUTHOR MEANS cRISTIANITY OF HIS ENEMIES -THE REAL ONE. hE HIMSELF ,i THINK, POSESSES THE aRYANITY AFTER NAZIS HAHA.

  • I could write a book in response to this article. I’ll try to be brief. First, we must break this down to an elementary level, for clarity. A “nation” is a group of people that share cultural norms. A “state” is an area where the nation lives. Therefore, a “nation state” is the area where the nation lives. If your nation state allows immigrants to enter who are not part of the nation, you can be sure that these immigrants are actually invaders. What else can they be called? And what do invaders do? Conquer. It’s one thing if you’ve made a mistake and fallen prey to a Trojan Horse. It’s quite another thing if you’ve willingly permitted these invaders to enter your nation state. They will always seek to conquer, because they will want to claim your territory for themselves. I could go on and on, but that’s the thesis statement right there. One other note, and I’d like to hear from everyone on this subject: if we halted immigration of all non-whites, does that not destroy liberalism, really? Isn’t their whole mission as liberal globalists, to create a world without white people? If there’s no immigration battle, then how can there be globalist thought?

  • This cuck should read the Book of Facts 17:26.

    By the way, we need a Pope like Pius the XII, after this terrible experience of Bergoglio.

  • Bradley J. Birzer – another example of a white masochist. He proudly calls himself a cuckservative and a “Christian.”

    There are too many of these race-traitors, including all those working for Conservatism Inc. – David French, Kevin Williamson, Rich Lowry, etc.

    The Neocons are a separate group, who have their own agenda – William Kristol, Jennifer Rubin, Bret Stephens, Max Boot, David Frum, etc.

    David Frum has a new book – Trumpocracy – in which he argues that the USA is in danger of losing its “democracy” and “the rule of law” – LOL. Of course, that is precisely what he wants – for the USA to lose its democracy and freedoms. He is an internal enemy of the American and Canadian people.

    On Nov 8, 2016, America exercised its democracy, when for the first time in many decades it actually had a real choice. This will likely be the last time the people will be able to oppose the wishes of the globalist ruling class.

    Democracy and the rule of law will soon be dead, as endless immigration floods into the USA, Canada and Europe with the third-world masses, who all get to vote in our elections, rendering our votes null and void. Neocons are clever like that. David Frum knows all that, as do all those I mentioned above.

    Frum is a Canadian, not an American. But he voted anyway, for Hillary Clinton. It’s perfectly legal for Frum to vote in American elections.

  • This is nuts. All our founding fathers (and Lincoln) as well as most of our presidents would be called racists today – extreme ones at that. They were all very pro-white, northern European, wanting to keep the lesser races out. What possibly possessed this “professor” to write something which he knows is so entirely false?

  • During most of history, in civilized countries intelligent men were usually more prosperous than unintelligent men. As a result they usually had more children who survived and reproduced.

    On the other hand, criminals usually were killed at the scene of the crime, they died in custody, or they were executed. Sometimes they were enslaved and worked to death.

    Because of this races that have practiced civilization the longest have higher IQ averages and lower crime rates than races that have been recently introduced. This is why the civil rights legislation has not caused most blacks to behave and perform as well as most whites. It is why it is foolish to allow immigration from third world countries.

    • Your theory is likely correct. And I agree with your conclusion. No immigration “from third world countries.” I take that to include all of Africa and the Middle East, for a start.

      There should be no immigration from anywhere, as a general rule. The only exception would be white refugees from places like South Africa and Rhodesia (aka Zimbabwe).

      • I would let in Christian refugees from the Mid East. I would send the Jews to Israel. I would tell the Muslims to go to Saudi Arabia or Iran and see if they are willing to take them.

    • He’s admitting it because that response is to a “RadicalLib” and he is letting shvtlibs know that he is of no adversarial concern to them.

  • Many of the commentators on this article have brought up the theme of Christianity and race. This might be an interesting place to talk about the movement of secular or pagan nazis. We needn’t be ashamed to be Christian Aryans.

    I’ve been fascinated by the arguments that Hitler was a pagan. Secular NatSocs claim to know that Hitler’s 1934 speeches confirming Christianity were merely aimed at garnering support for his cause. But this was after he came to power. And the problem with the claim is that, if true, it makes Hitler out to be a public deceiver of his own followers.

    What these secular NatSocs appear not to know is that the allies had been openly spreading this same propganda, saying that Hitler was an atheist, in order to frighten Americans and Europeans, particularly Catholics.

    And it also appears that these secularists are also crypto-jews.

    It reminds me of the argument that evolutionary biologist make that Hitler did not believe in evolution. When we have clear evidence that he was.

    • Hitler understood what Vladimir Lenin did not understand: if he publicly expressed his contempt for Christianity he would alienate people who might otherwise become supporters. Nevertheless, Hitler did despise Christianity.

      In private Hitler said, “The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew.”

      – Hitler’s Table Talk, 1941 – 1944, page 7.

      • Try to be careful when you read people writing or translating things about Hitler. It is very much like seeing through dirty glass. Many parties are contending with him or against him.

        Look up the name Farncois Genoud, the translator of French edition of Table Talk. Get your hands on original German source materials. It’s always better to read in the original German language, at least as much as possible.

  • Bradley Birzer was recently made the president of the American Conservative. Birzer also, based on his article and photos, suffers from Down Syndrome, which means that the American Conservative is now literally retarded.

  • Dirt on Brad Birzer:

    A friend of mine goes to Hillsdale College. She’s sympathetic to the alt-right (privately, not publicly). She said some students refer to Birzer as “Creepy Brad” and are afraid to be alone with him. She said she wouldn’t be surprised if he’s bisexual on the down low.

  • Other races will fail to preserve Christianity. They forget that Christianity would have ceased to exist if it hadn’t been for white Europeans. (statement solidified by Mark Collet last month)

  • you, American reader, would not be here without some ancestor having immigrated … to the United States.

    This is just dumb. There was no “United States” – it was Turtle Island. Our – well, MY – ancestors did not “immigrate” to Turtle Island and join a savage Indian tribe. My ancestors were pioneers that eventually created the United States “for ourselves and our posterity.” That means me, not you.

  • I couldnt even read this, as skimming it confirmed the main idea. Bashing the confused normie Christians is as much of a waste of time as bashing any other normie groups. They all are brainwashed we know that. But picking out Christians is typical. Its ok though, Christians need a lot of prodding to revolt, but historically it has happened time and again. The Left is trying to put a shutdown to sexual purity and traditional families aka straight by calling them homophopes and transphopes (-phobes? Im not scared are you?) Eventually this is going to lead to a split. Some churches will fold and others will stand firm. We will side with those who stand firm and bring them around on other issues. I see this event being a major event of growth in our future. It will also bring more levelheaded people in, which honestly we need for gaining legitimacy as a cause in the eye of the public.

  • The ‘Christian’ compassion of such types is self-servingly one-sided – does he ask why all these refugees have to abandon their homes to share ours permanently? No reflection on the U.S. war machine sowing chaos, displacing these people from their rightful lands, and dragging us all deeply into debt in various ways.

  • I didn’t want to be lazy after looking at that pic and questioning whether that thing was actually a white man (I have serious doubts, and I often dine in mixed company).

    All institutions are compromised.

    Those who freely use labels are the most suspect of all people, in my experience. Even those / especially those who use labels to describe themselves. We all know that Kurt Kikenworld is Episcopalian, because it told us so. Ignore how it acts, goy.

    Since receiving the last bitter red pill that destroyed my disneyfied view of reality forever, I have unwillingly paid attention everywhere that I have gone and I am unfortunately but not unsurprisingly aware that my own church is full of zionist shills doing their very best to destroy my nation as quickly as possible.

    I too, long for the days where a male welsh priest would take me through a simple Anglican service without attacking my culture, heritage and race. A simple reading of the old, new testaments, a brief discussion of something poignant in a way that didn’t insult my intelligence but led me to deeper thoughts, and then the gift of communion (I know you Catholics are laughing, but it still means something).

    At my last place of employment, I used to sneak out of work to attend. But even that is gone. That simple purity that appealed to the Englishman/Welshman in my DNA has been rotted away as the same church has insisted that invaders should replace us all.

    • Your countrymen used to have some comprehension, however small, that gentiles were the inheritors of Christian gospel. They understood wahat Pascal wrote centuries ago: the jews are a cursed race, and the fullness of the prophetic promise could only be understood by a Christian, not a materialistic Talmudic jew. As Pascal wrote, the jews have their holy books but they cannot understand them. They are the greatest proof of the truth of Chirstianity.

  • Whahahahaha. But hey, he’s against gay marriage right? And for small goverment so what are you complaining about?

  • A lot of what Brad Birzer has written sounds like Roman Catholic justification for allowing more Roman Catholics from Latino America into the United States.

    Catholics just don’t get it that there are a lot of White Protestant people who are descendants of the pioneers, the people who braved an ocean crossing before steam, and into an uncharted howling wilderness complete with wild animals, and just as wild stone age cannibals.

    Fredrick Muhlenberg who was the Speaker of the House when the Naturalization Act of 1790 was passed, and his brother John were both Protestant ministers and Generals during the American Revolution. Fredrick Muhlenberg didn’t enter the American militry until after his church had been burnt down by the British. I’m very distantly related to the Muhlenbergs, as Americans used to say, a couple of different ways. LOL.

  • The West and the Christendom are dead. The post-Christian, post modern, post everything nations of the First World are simply living off the fumes of the ancient regime.

    These populations are predictably breaking down along the lines of ethnicity and (in the case of assimilated European nationalities) White race. Racisms like La Raza and Sharia and Judaic supremacy will be good enough for those to whom they belong but I seriously doubt this will win the European racial stock of the post Christian nations.

  • could be a very small funding source if done correctly.

    the nazi jackass movie.

    this would involve various “stunts” like the following:

    1. carrying a banner in the nyc israel day parade saying “Open Borders for Israel”.

    2. interrupting anything at Davos with chants of “Open Borders for Israel”.

    3. showing up to a lecture by david horowitz and filling the question queues.

    4. knocking on a starbucks window at night in the upper east side and giving the roman salute to its kibbitzers.

    etc.

    • Very VERY small funding source.

      My suggestion: better to spend your time on a video about trolling bus stations late at night for White teenage runaway girls and giving them literature about the Alt Right and how they can have meaningful lives by marrying young and raising large Alt Right families.

      Include the address for Christopher Cantwell’s future Cantville.

      And include in the video strict guidelines to ensure these vulnerable girls are treated with the utmost respect and are not molested.

  • A question to our Jewish Supremacist Masters.

    Can white gentiles be released from serving the agenda of Jewish Globalist Supremacism?
    Can white gentiles opt out of serving Zionist oppression of Palestinians?
    Can white gentiles break free from supporting more Wars for Israel that destroys Muslim nations and turns so many Arabs into ‘refugees’?
    Can white gentiles disobey Jewish demand for ‘new cold war’ with Russia based on lies and hysteria?
    Can white gentiles be liberated from bailing out Jewish banksters on Wall Street?
    Can white gentiles be emancipated from Jewish marketing of vice like gambling and opioids?
    Can white gentiles gain sovereignty and not kowtow to the neo-religion of Homomania concocted by Jews as replacement faith for Christianity?

    Jews have supremacist domination over white gentiles, and they want whites enslaved forever. So, Jews shame any sign of white freedom by smearing it as ‘white supremacism’ when it is a desire to break from the shackles of Jewish tyranny.

    Alt Right should begin 2018 with one simple question to Jews:

    “Can we whites refuse to support your Zionist supremacist oppression of Palestinians?”

    Funny how Jews accuse whites of ‘supremacism’, but it’s Jews who are forcing whites(and other gentiles) to repress their desire for freedom and autonomy to serve the megalomaniacal agenda of Jews whose greed and hatred cannot be appeased.

    Jews claim to protect non-whites ‘victims’ from ‘white supremacists’ but pressure all white politicians to support the Zionist supremacist criminalization of BDS movement that demands justice for Palestinians who still live under Occupation.

    Jews are vile.

    It all comes down to Jewish Supremacism and White Emanicationism.

    White National Emancipationism now. Whites must say NO to serving the supremacist ambitions of crazed Jews.

    • Why ask jews if we have their permission to live? The answer is obviously no, and the question is ridiculously craven.

    • Lol. As if you have the right to ask them. It’s rebel or be a soon-to-be-ruined-puppet with those creatures of satan. They feel no compassion because they aren’t genetically capable of doing so, their prime directive is to mislead and destroy other races.

    • You might be urprised what can happen when any Aryan people overcome their shame at being Christians.

      For he that shall be ashamed of me, and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation: the Son of man also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

  • There is literally no such thing as Churchian or cuckstianity. They are completely made up to fit a narrative.

    All people are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-28). This is what gives all humans dignity and value. God’s creation of humanity in his image means that there is one and only one human race, and that all people of all ethnicities have the same inherent dignity as God’s image-bearers.

    All people are sinful, having fallen in Adam (Rom. 5:12-21). This means that all people by nature are subject to the judgment of God (Eph. 2:1-3). It also means that racism has its ultimate roots not in circumstance or social conditioning, but in our sinful nature.

    Salvation in Christ is offered freely to all who believe, regardless of ethnicity (Acts 17:30; Rom. 3:22b-23).

    In Christ, Christians have a spiritual and covenantal unity that transcends ethnic differences (Gal. 3:28). The unity Christians have as members of the body of Christ is also a unity that genuine brings together people who have nothing in common outside of Christ, creating a glorious picture of God’s radical grace.

    Local churches should be characterized by unity-in-diversity (1 Cor. 12:12-26). Ethnic diversity brings glory to God (Rev. 7:9-10). This means that ethnic differences are not merely boundaries to be overcome. Rather, we should celebrate them as expressions of God’s multifaceted glory. This means that we shouldn’t seek cultural uniformity in our churches, but unity-in-diversity.

    One day, God will perfectly gather to himself a people from every tribe, tongue, and nation (Rev. 7:9-10). In the end, ethnic differences will no longer divide God’s people, but will rather enhance our grasp of the wisdom and glory of God in creating and redeeming multitudes of wondrously different people.

    However, since we live on the near side of that great day, we should expect that ethnic differences will not be fully transcended in this life, which provides an opportunity for sensitivity and love among God’s people. Despite our best efforts, ethnic differences will continue in some measure to separate and divide people from one another, even the people of God. Therefore, the people of God have the opportunity to show deliberate care across ethnic lines, recognizing it as an opportunity show honor to the parts of the body that have lacked it (1 Cor. 12:24-26).

    As an aside, archeo-futurism or identitarianism are merely tools of the Alt Right to strip the liberty of men and women, a fulcrum to obliterate humanity.

    • Wow. You nearly had me.

      But by deliberately ignoring the jewish threat to humanity itself, you overplayed your hand.

      God has washed his hands of the jews who demaned the blood of Christ. The fanatical and dishonest approaches of the jews throughout history and in current times cannot be answered by the suggestion that white people should stop opposing their own murderers.

      Truly you are an evil people without limits.

    • You don’t really believe what you are saying. You are confused: Christian salvific grace among all races does not bring with it the necessity nor any kind of infused grace or desire to live with someone of another race. IF that were the case, why would it not also bring together the sodomite one with another?

      That is not sound doctrine. Neither for Catholics, not for Anglicans, nor for Protestants.

  • Just as an aside: that professor is cephalically inferior. You see it in the forehead. I’ve talked with my friend about this. There is a neanderthal sugarloafing in his forehead that is an indicator of lower status. You find this South of London. You see this skull type all the time in the old servant photos. The skull shape affects the mental capacity of these people. You disregard this at your peril.

    If you want help with this, just look at dogs. Ruling families always bread dogs. They used to bread them to match the different racial types. For instance, the brachycephalic dog: the French bulldog. They tend to overheat and snore when they breathe. They are popular because of their flat faces. Very popular in England. I was visiting an English couple who had a little pig squeeze toy, and it made this grunting nose when you squeezed it, and the little pug went nuts for it.

    • His entire phenotype suggest weak genes.

      What is it you are saying about the forehead?
      Do you mean sloping, like the guys at Arianism.net push, or simply a larger brow.

      These, so called Aryanists, clam that if a white has a sloping forehead and a nonwhite doesn’t, that the non white is thus superior to the white.

      • No, I have no idea what anyone else is pushing.

        You really have to look at photos and paintings, tapestries, wall murals, the bronze statues in museums. Go to a museum. One autumn I spent every day walking through the Met and just looking at the paintings. Just look at old photos. Online I suppose. It’s not about long skull alone. Indians have that. Certain negroes have long skulls. If you’re looking for just that, you won’t see what you need to. I mean, when I talk about this with my acquaintances, really we just tend to talk about racial scoiological reality types.

        You just see these types over and over again. Fiilmmakers use them in their films when they have a servant or a dumb groundskeeper, or a caveman. Maybe because I was made to draw as part of my education. A lot of my friends went to art schools.. You just get better at seeing differences. We call it The Cockney’s mirror.

        But to answer your question: sloping of the forehead, which has always been important, the lack of definition at the top edges around the hairline. the texture of the hair, thickness of the hair, the way the forehead narrows as it rises up. It’s a million things. The troglodytic brow bone is very pronounced. You ought not to dismiss this feature.

        Practice looking at photos of different types. The Cockney is the most obvious and easy to spot: http://swingthegate.co.uk/jack-mcnaughton-cardboard-cavalier

        • The English actors Colin Ferrell and Sean Connery is who this man reminds me of. If you squint your eyes, you’ll see it. He has something of the Med in him.

        • The conclusion that suggests itself to me when reading Birzer’s article is that he’s a homosexual or a crypto jew. The more aggressive characters among libertarians are usually homosexuals. The implicit Weltanschauung of these types can be smelled a mile off: “As a superior individual, I moved away from the icky small town rednecks whom I grew up with and made it to The Big City, where I have defiantly acquired HIV!”

          But in Birzer’s case, I read a crypto jew more. First of all, the name Birzer. I’m sure he would tell us he’s Scots-Irish, or German, or a French-German-British-Cherokee mix, etc. But come on. Birzer. How many German gentiles of your acquaintance are named “Birzer”? Sometimes the truth is right in front of us. Second, the aggressive defense of open borders. Third, the sheer chutzpah of arguing for the destruction of the West in terms of preserving it (its “ideals”). Fourth, the propagandistic use of Christianity for culturally Marxist ends; jews are always fucking with Jesus .

          As Kevin MacDonald points out, “crypto” status can include ignorance of one’s own jewish heritage. Perhaps this Birzer fellow believes he’s simply “open-minded” and “idealistic” and isn’t aware he’s a jew. And there is a chance – very slim – that he isn’t a jew. But I wager he’s a fully conscious subversive jew.

          I admire the “sloping brow” et al. theory, but aren’t such criteria subracial? That is, they most usefully apply within a racially homogeneous group. Otherwise, one might be tempted to class Cockneys and some Negroes together, and more to the point, long-headed Whites and long-headed jews together. The trans-racial elite theory is laughable in that it always transpires that the “trans-racial elite” is a bunch of jews.

          • I’m looking at his photos now. I kept noticing that hook in his nose, and I couldn’t get it out of my head. I just wrote it off as an aryan character. What threw me though is the narrowness of the nose vertically, and the thinness of the lips. Those are not Jewish typical characteristics.

            If he is jewish, that’s a tough call for me to make. Safer to say Med, probably Welsh, maybe The Fen District north of London. Definitely working class.

          • There’s a photo of him as a young man, and that one, I thought, looked jewish. This one:

            https://progarchy.com/2017/09/06/happy-birthday-brad-birzer-uber-progarchist/

            I disagree that the sloping brow is subracial. It is the most obvious determinate of the gradation from Aryan to negro. What I maintain is that all these characteristics have got to be taken into account.

            You knwo I think if he is a crypto-jew, it is unlikely that he has never been confronted about it. He cannot claim to be oblvious to it. But if he is jewish, it seems to be mixed at some point with English med.

          • No, Barnabas, good ole Adolph was Aryan. As are the Egyptians. and the Spanish. and the Germans. And the Swedes. And the English. And the French. Excluding all arabs and negros and mongaloids.

          • My point is that, while the slope forehead is at times a reliable sign, it is not infallible and for every image of an Aryan without a slope, I can show you two with one.

            same with blonde hair.

            That said, I don’t think your sincere and I’m of the mind that you are a subversive Kike, who belongs in an oven.

          • LOL!

            Barnabas, one thing no one can ever say about you is that you don’t have firm opinions.

            Of course, the sloping forehead is “at times” reliable. That’s because it’s a gradation. You’ve seen those old drawings where a white man and a black man and a caveman are standing one behind the other, and each one has a forehead with a greater degree of slope?

            Ergo, Aryan men all have varying degrees of slope. Ergo, of course for every image of an Aryan without a slope, you could show me two that had a slope.

          • I mean can you really not see the superiority of those white Germans at the Olympic stadium when Hitler gave his speech. The ones WITH blond hair. Even Hitler mentions this. Don’t model yourself so much after one man who came from Tyrol, the heart of the Alpine. Hitler had an identity crisis from his earliest youth. That area of the world has a long history of Gaulic and mediterranean warfare and instability.

            People need to start realizing their own power and whiteness. After all, that’s what Hitler wanted more than anything. Look forward!

          • In my opinion the Germans were before 1945 the most superior of all peoples, whites included.

            I also belive that Hitler was the embodiment of the Aryan collective spirit in all its glory, truly Wotan’s avatar. This being the case it’s hard for me to get stuck in “blondism”.

            The original hyperborean blondes were certainly superior but there is little to no evidence today a blonde European is individually greater than a brunette one. Blondes have lost any power they may have had.

          • I’d actually like to believe what you’re saying. I mean the Swedish blond model of superiority is hard to except as an person of English extraction. There is an argument that the greater the purity of blond and blue eyed blood the greater the difficulty in maintaining it. But that could mean that it is more valuable and beautiful. Omnia clara est rara, as the Romans used to say.

            In one of his biological treatises, Aristotle wrote that blue-eyed people tend to be a little unstable. He favored the eye that was slightly aqua colored, blue tending to just off-blue.

            I see your point about Hitler. I’ve heard that before. But there is an argument, and this comes through in Hitler’s own writings, that mixing of race brings with it instability. He had the honor and goodness of heart to acknowledge the superiority of the purer raced Scandinavian type Nords.

          • I don’t disagree on the race mixing concept, it’s bad all the way around. Even mixing Irish and English is not ideal, for both ethnicities, though it’s a lot less harmful than a mongol, Aryan mix.

            Remember that, Hitler viewed the Germans, Dutch, English, Norwegians, Danes, all before the Swedes. He says specifically in table talks(if you can trust it, it seems authentic to me) that he would have all those groups settle the new Deutsche frontier before the Swedes. I’m not sure exactly why but my theory is that the scandinavians essentially “brain drained” themselves during the Viking conquests and migrations.

            He did admit the superiority of the Nords and I agree with that up until 1945 and even then they were a little degenerated. Now a days, the Nordic strain is not pure no matter how blue the eyes or blonde the hair. All of us whites have degenerated from our ancestors and it’s up to us to figure out how to re purify our blood, in the future. That said, we are still immensely superior and more powerful than the negro, mongol, and Arab.

            As it stands a brown haired European can be equal or better than a blonde haired European.

          • One should be cautious before believing that no pure Nord blood exists. It may have been reduced, but it hasn’t been extinguished altogether. Nordic blood is a purely European type, and so, in that sense, it is Homo europaeus. It clusters around the Baltic and the North Seas. The Scandinavian peninsula is its true home, from which it spread out as far as India. You know the old saying: wherever there’s a blue eye in the darkess, a Nord has been there. The Brahmin caste in India, who gave it their only real language, their religious books, the vedas. These are all remnants of the Nord.

            I believe what Hitler is trying to express in those passages is his belief that the vigor and power of the Nordic race could not have developed to its fullest extent in Sweden. They needed a continent in which to develop to their fullest. Hitler believed in evolution, and so he believed that the Nordic race must have gone through a long period of expansion and weeding out of defectives. This must have taken place in the harsh winters of northern continental Europe. Here a much stronger race was produced, virile, but self-contained, while not being isolted as they were in Sweden.

            It seems that Hitler was simply saying that these superior types (the types that had been adventurous enough to strike out from Sweden) should be given a privilieged place in any experiment at white nationhood.

            But remember, in all of those nationalities, he is referring specifically to the Noric race.

          • Be careful of the books you read about Hitler. There are many parties contending with him or against him. They will distort what he really believed in, who he really was. They will make him appear more god-like or more weak than he really was. They are lies, distortions, like seeing through dirty glass.

          • Lulz the first band Birzer listed thats shown in that Progarchy link is Jo0ish.

            (((Rush)))

          • I think you’re probably right. He has a great similarity morphologically to someone like Henry Kissinger. The shape, the hair texture, the pin headed kind of forehead.

            The name Birzer is German, but it may have been taken up by jews, maybe ashkenazis, when they immigrated. I don’t know. Usually those names were something -son. That is, they were patronymics.

            You are correct about Libertarianism. Ayne Rand was a Russian jew, no?
            It is an absolutely disgusting philosophy.

          • Right, Objectivism is kikeism dressed up as the apex of Western philosophy. That it was a part of the post-war thrust toward jewish supremacism is now pretty clear. As to its confabulator, you’re right. Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum changed her name to “Ayn Rand.”

          • Thanks for the information. I honestly cannot stand to even read about that stuff. I have known two people in my life who read her work, and all I could do was try and innoculate them against it like a disease. I could see them starting to get really arrogant and actually acting like a jew. It’s all over C-SPAN and television. You see it in alternative media, Alex Jones, although he tends to use it to shelter his appeal for his business model.

  • Do a search for ‘White National Liberation’ and Google says there are 5,510 results but shows ONLY 10.

    Jewish Supremacists who smear White National Liberation and White Emancipation as ‘white supremacist’ are rigging Goolag to suppress white consciousness.

    Spread the word.

    • I put this bill here to alert those of you who want to STAY OUT OF THIS SYSTEM.

      It appears that this bill will continue the implementation of DNA testing requirements for all immigrants. Section 3107 is particularly interesting.

      The job holder in the United States is really nothing more than a slave under this bill. It requires the jobholder to waive his rights. The bill also allows the federal government to further pre-empt the rights of the states concerning immigration issues.

      The following is important: “An employer or entity who uses the photo matching tool, if required by the Secretary as part of the verification system, shall match, either visually, or using facial recognition or other verification technology approved or required by the Secretary, the photo matching tool photograph to the photograph on the identity or employment eligibility document provided by the individual or to the face of the employee submitting the document for employment verification purposes, or both, as determined by the Secretary.”

      I cannot confirm this, but it looks like the congress is using this bill to require niometric surveillance of all jobholders. There will be an Identity Authentication Employment Eligibility Verification pilot program. Two different technologies will be employed, but the bill doesn’t say what these are.

      Also the FISA memo has been released. Just not in a way that the average person will ever see it.

  • Birzer says the West is about welcoming guests.

    Okay, but guests come in small numbers with respect and manners. And they eventually leave and don’t wear out their welcome.

    What the West is facing now are not guests but invaders and colonizers.

    The Trojans certainly didn’t welcome the Greek invaders. And the one time they trusted the Greeks with the Wooden Horse, boy, that didn’t end up too well.

    If Birzer really feels this way, we should all force ourselves into his house and make him ‘welcome’ us as ‘guests’ in time-honored Western fashion. ROTFL.

    What a loon.

    PS. Palestinians initially welcomed Jewish immigrants… who kept coming and coming.. What happened to Palestinians in the end? Last I heard, they’ve been reduced to huddled wretched masses in West Bank living under apartheid conditions.

  • Trying to save Christendom and ‘Western Civilization’ by replacing white people with non-whites is like the story of the dog with bone in its jaw going for the apparently bigger bone reflected in the water.

    In doing so, not only did it fail to get the ‘bone in the water’ but lost the real bone in its mouth.

    All ideas and values are expressions of organisms. Organisms come first. White people must be the core organisms of Europe. White Europe existed long before Christianity and ‘western values’. The core value of a people is the people themselves.

    Black Africans never created great civilization, but they have value in Africa because Africa is the land of blacks. They have value as the ugabuga organisms of Africa even if they don’t have advanced civilization. Using Birzer’s criterion for value and meaning, black Africans have no reason to exist since they don’t have high values and advanced arts. But in fact, black Africans have value simply for being blacks in their homeland… just like elephants and hippos have value in their native habitats.

    It’s like your mother is the actual person who is your mother. If you define your mother as a set of views, replacing your actual mother with a woman who may hold favorable views would be getting a ‘real mother’. That’d be stupid.

    Or consider yourself. Suppose in one universe, you are well-educated and sophisticated , but in another universe you are under-educated and part of the working class.
    So, is the YOU in the other universe less ‘you’ than the other ‘you’ who is so well-cultured?
    No, you are you whether you’re very educated or less educated. The core of knowledge must be to value and secure the organismic core of your existence. That comes before anything else. What you think and believe can change over time. What is constant is you are you no matter what you believe. So, what are superior values and beliefs? Those ideas that remind you of what you are and secure your own existence. Ideas must serve the organism, not the other way around.

    • That was well stated.

      I also prefer the idea of subordinating values towards life, authentic life. We need to become fully conscious and autonomous beings who act in accordance with a sense of superiority and an indominable will power.
      We need to become a free and powerful race once more. Not meek, capitulating, trust God and do nothing “christians”.

  • Seriously, cuckservatives like this Brad Birzer are beyond hope. They are just too stupid to understand and prefer their lives of arguing about the shadows on the wall. His odds of ever being red-pilled are about 5%.

  • Cuckservative: someone who believes that the best way of defending his interests is to stab himself in the back every chance he gets!

  • We should expect to start seeing more and more bugmen kick and scream as they attempt to maintain the status quo of comfortable ignorance.

  • Jesus Christ, people like this are sad. Christianity is a failed religion. Perhaps it worked at one point, but it does more harm than good now.

Leave a Reply