Skip to content

Blog posts by Tomislav Sunić

Tomislav Sunić

  • 15 min read

Mnemosyne and Lethe; The Culture of Remembrance and Oblivion in the Western System

The Occidental Observer, November 2021.

The Culture of remembrance shapes the political foundation of every state in the world. When addressing the culture of remembrance in Germany, what crosses one’s mind immediately is the Allied-prescribed collective memory for the German people installed at the end of World War II. The psychological roots of this post-war culture of remembrance and its significance for the Germans, as well as for other peoples in Europe, go back deep into their past. Why does the culture of remembrance, as opposed to the culture of oblivion, play such a prominent role in Germany, but also to a lesser extent in the whole of the West—as if the real course of world history must have started in the aftermath of 1945?

Memory and collective memory are the foundations of the identity formation process irrespective of our hatred or love toward our opinion makers or toward our politicians respectively, or, for that matter, irrespective of the prevailing zeitgeist. One must first clarify a few terms and sort out a few names from European mythology and history, and also place this subject into a larger historical and philosophical context. Inevitably, one is bound to attempt to rescue a few poets and thinkers.

In ancient Greek mythology Mnemosyne is the name of the memory goddess; she is the symbol of omniscience and all-knowledge. Without Mnemosyne there is no human life, no language, no culture, and without her, all people are doomed to vegetate like animals stripped of their memory. In contrast to the memory goddess Mnemosyne, the goddess Lethe is portrayed as a river of forgetfulness; that is, Lethe is the stream of oblivion flowing in the notorious underworld. He who dares drink from this river forgets his previous life, but also his worries and his weltschmerz, in the hope of attaining a relatively carefree life in the underworld, or reenact a new life on earth.[i] These two goddesses are often evoked by poets, and figuratively speaking by all of us on the daily basis when struggling to suppress or obliterate embarrassing past events, including those of a political nature. Alongside, we yearn to resuscitate our beautiful memories, or better yet revive the moments of our past bliss.

There are, however, differences between individual and collective memories. Collective memories, which are usually administered on memorial days or public commemorations, or other public events, are always politically supervised. For example, countless days of collective remembrance honoring the victims of fascism or colonialism in countries of the former communist Eastern bloc turned into political spectacles—but of a transitory nature. The day after, most of those memorial days were either collectively forgotten or were met with general disinterest. Thereafter, citizens of former East Germany or former Yugoslavia made jokes behind closed doors about those communist spectacles and their organizers. One can recall gigantic memorial events in former East Germany or in former Yugoslavia held in honor of the fallen Soviet soldiers or communist partisans in World War II. Of course, public commemorations for the victims of communism were not allowed; nameless victims of communism were shoved into the culture of oblivion. In the official communist culture of remembrance there could be no victims of communism at all, given that the terms “victim” and “memory” were only applied to selected communist heroes. Following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, as well as in the wake of the collapse of Yugoslavia in 1991, communist memorial events had to be remodelled and replaced with new memorial words, with former communist self-promoters having to adapt themselves to the liberal zeitgeist. At these new commemorative events former communist symbolism is being replaced now by a liberal verbiage and iconography. Little has changed, however, as far as antifascist content is concerned. Incidentally, the days of collective commemoration for the victims of fascism and especially the homage to the Holocaust victims make up the foundation of the international law in Western Europe, Eastern Europe and in America.

Remembering the wishful thinking

Our individual remembrance, on the other hand, especially if it brings forth images of past happy encounters or joyful moments from good old or ancient times, often functions as a pipe dream, whereby we nostalgically project those past blissful images into the present, or the near future in the hope of having them relived one more time. Every wishful thinking, however, is a logical consequence of a disfigured memory. One can recall here the words by the poet Hölderlin in his poem “Mnemosyne,” in which he expresses his longing for the rebirth of mythical times:

And there’s a law,
That things crawl off in the manner of snakes,
Prophetically, dreaming on the hills of heaven.
And there is much that needs to be retained,
Like a load of wood on the shoulders.
But the pathways are dangerous.[ii]

To each of us his own memories, to each of others also his interpretation of his memories. My interpretation of my memories of my past encounters are differently crafted than those composed by the individuals who shared those previous encounters. Even unimaginative people have a need for imaginary memories often bordering on reality-denying wishful thinking. The contrast between reality and wishful thinking, however, plays a special role in individual memories, because wishful thinking often borders on self-deception. In order to better illustrate wishful thinking, one could enumerate countless German poets and especially German Dark Romanticists describing their memories that usually lead up to catastrophes, suicide or deaths.

Great disappointments in particular arise with memories relating to political views. Many of us know colleagues who are astute critics of the System, but whose alternative dreams about the future of Europe or the US are based on unreal judgments. Whenever we make reference to political dreams, what comes to mind is the symbolism in the novella An Incident at the Owl Creek Bridge by the American writer Ambrose Bierce.[iii] The main character is a Southern local politician who has been captured and sentenced to death in the midst of the American Civil War. He is already swinging on the gallows yet imagining how he has cleverly escaped the noose of his Yankee executioners, while at the same time relishing his return to his family within his self-overstretched timespan. The desire for his doppelganger who could trade places was a great illusion though. He was already dead and gone.

The difference between individual and collective memory is glaring. Our individual memories, even if they are not generated by a power politician, can also turn into a nightmare. Each memory, regardless of whether it is individual or collective, harbors the risk of playing itself out in a subjective notion of time extension. Mulling over those happy moments from the past devours more time than the actual timespan that it took to live those happy moments. Worse, mulling over happy moments can transform itself into the sense of a distorted self which longs for world improvement. Conversely, we also crave to ditch some of our bad memories, especially if they remind us in hindsight of our past grotesque behavior or our previous awkward encounters, or of our former political lifestyles. Ernst Jünger vividly describes the sense of the overstretched time resulting from ceaselessly pondering our memories.

Collective memory, or a memory imposed by a government or a tyrant easily generates mass psychosis, as we are experiencing today with state-decreed Covid regulations. Incidentally, one could also note a series of political-historical commemorations in the EU and America in favor of non-European migrants and their colonized history. German politicians on such occasions like to posture as role models for a self-induced wrongdoing nation (“Tätervolk”)—a nation that is expected to carry out in public and for all eternity the remembrance rituals on behalf of victims of fascism. This overkill in the German compulsion to cosy up to foreigners is very old, having its roots in the politics of self-denial extending deep into the hundreds of years of stateless German history. Erwin Stransky, a German thinker and neurologist of Jewish descent and very friendly to Germans, noticed shortly after the end of the First World War, that is, way before the post-World War II Allied brainwashing and liberal-communist re-education started. He noted how the Germans like raving about aliens and “that nowhere is it easier than in Germany to lure and confuse the spirits with cleverly “launched” pseudo-scientific or pseudo-legal catchphrases.” [iv] Such a disfigured memory has now become a hallmark of all Western peoples.

Getting high on oblivion

Where does the culture of oblivion stand? Collective forgetting is often encouraged by EU and US politicians and the media, especially in relation to millions of unknown victims of communism or countless victims of the World War II Allied aerial terror bombing. Over decades those victims have only featured as footnotes in Western media. Even more grotesque is the craving for oblivion by many US and EU establishment intellectuals and politicians with regard to the outdatedness of their former political views—views to which they were ardent standard bearers not long ago. This is the case with ex-Marxist intellectuals in the aftermath of the breakdown of their Marxist mystique. The majority of these people have by now completely switched to the capitalist free market ideology.

Sleep is an expedient tool to self-oblivion and above all it helps a lot in fighting bad memories. Dreamless sleep is the best way to pull oneself out of bad memories. Shakespeare’s protagonists often talk of sleep as the best method of salvation, whereby a good night’s sleep of a political prisoner brings more happiness than sleepless and memorable days of a tyrant. The life-weary Hamlet, always betrayed and duped by his royal family, speaks to himself:

To sleep! perchance to dream; ay, there’s the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time[v]_

The powerful ruler King Henry IV in another Shakespeare’s drama praises even more the salvation of a gentle sleep:

How many thousand of my poorest subjects
Are at this hour asleep! O sleep, O gentle sleep,
Nature’s soft nurse, how have I frighted thee,
That thou no more wilt weigh my eyelids down
And steep my senses in forgetfulness?[vi]_

In addition to sleep, there are more vivid methods for harnessing the forgetting process and rid oneself of bad memories, or at least temporarily keeping them under control. The age-old remedy is alcohol, or better yet the drug opium, which slows down the flow of time and keeps embarrassing memories in check. Once again, one must refer to Ernst Jünger, who was not only the best observer of our end times, but also the best German connoisseur of numerous narcotics. Jünger was a refined gentleman who dealt a lot with the intake of “acid”—LSD—in order to better circumnavigate the acidic liberal-communist walls of time. In addition, Jünger was good friends with the discoverer of LSD, Dr. Albert Hoffmann. Both lived for more than one hundred years. “Acid is great!”—so would say his disciples addicted to his name.

Under the influence of narcotics time slows down. The river flows more gently; the banks recede. Time becomes boundless; it turns into a sea.[vii]

One must be cautious though with drug trips, as there is always a risk of forgetting one’s fate.[viii] Homer’s Odysseus faced this danger with his sailors on his way back home. After their long sea-wandering, one day they all ended up in the land of the lotus eaters—men who indulged in eating lotus drug, thereby acquiring the skills to rid themselves of their memories and all accompanying worries. Odysseus had a lot of trouble getting his intoxicated, memoryless comrades back on board.[ix] In fact, those mythical lotus eaters that Odysseus met are a primeval image of contemporary citizens in Germany, the EU and the USA. No more need for the System to fabricate martyrs, as was the case under communism; the System knows how to use far more elegant methods in enforcing the general will through forced mass oblivion. In Georgia, in the Caucasus, where the tyrant Stalin was born, there is fertile soil good for cannabis growth. Instead of the Gulags in Siberia, Stalin could have had more success in setting up marijuana fields in the former Soviet Union.

Later on, Odysseus ends up at the premises of the witch goddess Circe—the goddess whose powers turned his stranded sailors into pigs. These new swinish creatures, albeit endowed with human understanding, no longer complain about their new life. Quite the contrary. The process of forgetting can be good.[x] In such an oblivion-prone environment Nietzsche’s famous words sound pretty much out of date: “Blessed are the forgetful; for they get over their stupidities, too.” Remembering a previous life on Earth can be hell for many people. The System, with its world-improving tales now uses similar Homeric pig-transformation methods of mass dumbing down, promising the birth of La La Land, yet putting it off again and again until the indefinite future when all evil has been expunged. In addition, the System employs refined techniques to keep its citizens under control, either through forced forgetting or selective memorization.

And that’s nothing new in history. Damnatio memoriae or damnation of memory was a common process in ancient Rome against despicable, albeit deceased politicians. Few are those who have the courage to attack living tyrants. The same process of cursing the memory of modern heretics or dissenters continues to rage in full force in modern Germany, the US and the EU. What is new, however, is the rise in self-censorship and self-policing of the vast majority of politicians, but also of the majority of establishment academics. Censorship has always been part of state-imposed collective forgetting, having been around since ancient times. In the contemporary West, however, self-censorship means self-denial, whereby even intelligent people at some point in their career decide on relinquishing their selves. The German poet and medical doctor Gottfried Benn, along with many other European thinkers who managed to survive the Allied terror bombing and purges during and after World War II, wrote in his poem “The Lost Self” of the individual lost in time and space, without direction or values.

Lost I – blasted apart by stratospheres,
victim of ion -: gamma-ray lamb –
particle and field -: chimeras and infinity
on your great stone of Notre- Dame.[xi]

Self-Censorship and Self-Denial

It is worth remembering the much-lauded German philologist and academic, professor Harald Weinrich, who is often quoted by the System-friendly media and who has written a good book on the culture of forgetting and remembrance in European literature. As with countless establishment academics, however, he is mandated to occasionally perform atonement rites. This strikes the eye in Chapter IX of his much-championed book Lethe: The Art and Critique of Forgetting where he chimes in on the perpetual Auschwitz remembrance. “Forgetting is no longer allowed here. There can’t be an art of forgetting here either and there should be none.” [xii] In his remarks for the media, he goes on with his virtue-signaling statements: “I can therefore only wholeheartedly agree that there should be an absolute ban on forgetting genocide.”[xiii]

Such Canossa-like confessions of guilt are today part of the political folklore in Germany. Not a word from Weinrich and other antifa fellow travelers about the forced forgetting imposed by the System in regard to millions of hunted down Germans, Croats, and other Eastern Europeans after the victorious march of the Allies in 1945. Weinrich and many of his kindred spirits, with their newly acquired religion of remembrance, fit into Nietzsche’s hyper-moralistic archetype, “where this man of bad conscience has seized on religious presupposition in order to provide his self-torture with its most horrific hardness and sharpness.”[xiv] Weinrich is only a tiny example of the majority of EU whipping-boy academics all vying for a glitzy media-academic visibility through their self-flagellation and self-denial. Long ago the allegory of this German spiritual self-emasculation was described by the German poet and painter Wilhelm Busch in his sarcastic story about Saint Anthony. The ever-repentant Saint Anthony, the great animal lover, decides to get engaged to a pig, presumably in order to better insure his transgender zoophile ascension to heaven for all eternity:

Welcome! Enter in peace!
No friend is divorced from friend here.
Quite a few sheep come in,
why not a good pig too![xv]_

Several authors have written critically about distorted historical awareness and a selective memory process of Whites. It appears that the more one talks today about the need to remember the victims of fascism, the more these regurgitated antifascist memories turn into objects of incredulity and mass ridicule. Meanwhile, the memory of millions of victims of communism is being relegated to the realm of oblivion. Remembering the fate of expelled and killed German civilians after World War II is gradually becoming of antiquarian-archival interest only, and then only sporadically. The German, US and EU media, including the establishment historians and politicians, if and when narrating communist killing fields are extremely careful never to overshadow the memory of the Holocaust body count. For example, the Croatian post-World War II catastrophe with its hundreds of thousands of dead, known among nationalist-minded Croats as the “Bleiburg tragedy” is hardly ever referred to as part Western collective memory.[xvi] On the other hand, the overbidding in antifascist, Jewish and anti-colonial memories, where the proverbial “bad German” always features on the front stage, plays the central role in international law. Sporadic anticommunist memories that are somewhat in line with the System-sponsored memorial festivities are being downgraded to semi-mythological and folkloric events that can be observed every once in a while, in today’s Eastern Europe.

Just as there are differences among the living, there must be differences among the dead. The question arises as to whether the System and its post-communist and liberal offshoots in Germany, the EU, and the US can survive at all without calling to rescue the memories of the “fascist beasts”? Without conjuring up household demons such as Ante Pavelic, Francisco Franco, Vidkun Quisling, etc.? And without constantly recalling Adolf Hitler, the timeless cosmic demon? Today’s prime time culture of remembrance, i.e., the fate of Jews in World War II, long ago morphed into the act of a religious psychodrama going far beyond historical remembrance. In addition to that, many non-European peoples are also now passionately scrambling for their own victimhood pedestal in order to highlight it as the only one worthy of world remembrance. Here we can refer to A. de Benoist’s quotation:

The favorite tool of victimhood overkill is “duty to remember”. Memory is inscribed against a background of oblivion, because one can only remember by selecting what should not be forgotten. (Such a task would be meaningless if we had to remember everything). Memory is therefore highly selective. … One of the highlights of the “duty to remember” means that there is no statute of limitations for “crime against humanity” — a notion which is likewise devoid of meaning. Strictly speaking only an extra-terrestrial could commit a crime against humanity (By the way, the perpetrators of such crimes are usually depicted in the metaphorical sense as “extra-terrestrials”.) — and in complete contradiction to the European cultural tradition, which by granting amnesty provides the judicial form of oblivion. [xvii]

One has to recall Nietzsche’s critical words here, when he writes about the overkill of our “monumental” and “antiquarian” memories: “The surfeit of history of an age seems to me hostile and dangerous to life….”[xviii] Nietzsche’s warning, however, applies today to all European peoples and their respective victimologies, be they of antiquarian or monumental nature. To what degree should Europeans, and especially the German people, stretch their historical memories? Up to the massacre of the Saxons at Verden in AD 782, or up to the millions of dead in the Thirty Years’ War, or up to the millions of ethnic Germans and Eastern Europeans killed in the aftermath of World War II? Mulling over the opposing memories is becoming pointless today. With or without their forgotten and resurrected dead, the whole of the German-EU-US System resembles a large, outdated, multicultural antiquarian bookshop where fake sorcerer’s apprentices keep lecturing on selective and fake memories.

Notes

  • [i] T. Sunic, Titans are in Town(A Novella andAccompanying Essays), preface by Kevin MacDonald (London, Budapest: Arktos, 2017).
  • [ii] Poems of Friedrich Hölderlin, Selected and translated by James Mitchell; bilingual, in German and English (San Francisco: Ithuriel’s Spear, 2007), p. 95.
  • [iii] Ambrose Bierce, An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge and other stories (Ein Vorfall an der Eulenfluß-Brücke und andere Erzählungen) (edited by Angela Uthe-Spencker), (München: Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag,bilingual 1980).
  • [iv] Erwin Stransky, Der Deutschenhass (Wien und Leipzig: F. Deuticke Verlag, 1919), p. 71
  • [v] William Shakespeare, Hamlet (Act III, Sc 1) (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1877) p. 210-211.
  • [vi] Dramatic Writings of Shakespeare, Henry IV, Part 2, Act III, Sc. I, (London: ed. John BellBritish Library, 1788), p.60.
  • [vii]Ernst Jünger, Annäherungen: Drogen und Rausch (München: DTV Klett-Cotta, 1990), p. 37.
  • [viii] Cf. Tomislav Sunic, „Rechter Rausch; Drogen und Demokratie“, Neue Ordnung (Graz, IV/2003).
  • [ix] _The Oddyssey of Home_Book IX,with explanatory notes by T.A. Buckley, (London: George Bell and Sons, 1891). p. 118.
  • [x] Ibid.,Book X, pp. 137-146. Harald Weinrich, Lethe-Kunst und Kritik des Vergessens, (München: Verlag C.H Beck, 1997), p. 230 https://mroche.nd.edu/assets/286548/roche_benn_verlorenes_ich_english.pdf
  • [xii] Harald Weinrich, Lethe-Kunst und Kritik des Vergessens (München: Verlag C.H Beck, 1997), p. 230. Cf. Lethe, The Art and Critique of Forgetting (Cornell University Press, 2004).
  • [xiii] H. Weinrich, „Bayerischer Rundfunk“ progam April 4, 1999. https://www.br.de/fernsehen/ard-alpha/sendungen/alpha-forum/harald-weinrich-gespraech100~attachment.pdf
  • [xiv]Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, Second Essay, Section 22. Transl. by Carol Diethe (Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 63.
  • [xv] See the whole German text, Wilhelm Busch_, Der Heilige Antonius von Padua_, (Straßburg; Verlag von Moritz Schauenburg, no date), p. 72. Also parts in English: https://second.wiki/wiki/der_heilige_antonius_von_padua#:~:text=Saint%20Anthony%20of%20Padua%20is,anti%2Dclerical%20attitude%20Wilhelm%20Buschs.
  • [xvi] Cf. T. Sunic, „Es leben meine Toten! – Die Antifa-Dämonologie und die kroatische Opferlehre“.Neue Ordnung (Graz, I/2015).
  • [xvii] Alain de Benoist, Les Démons du Bien (Paris: éd. P. Guillaume de Roux, 2013), p. 34-35.
  • [xviii] F. Nietzsche, On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life, Section 5, transl. by P. Preuss (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co., 1980), p. 28.

A QUAND LA DÉCADENCE FINALE ? DE SALLUSTE ET JUVÉNAL À NOS JOURS, Terre et Peuple (Publié le 26 mars 2019)

Les Anciens, c’est à dire nos ancêtres gréco-germano-gallo-slavo-illyro-romains, étaient fort conscients des causes héréditaires de la décadence quoiqu’ils attribuassent à cette notion des noms fort variés. La notion de décadence, ainsi que sa réalité existent depuis toujours alors que sa dénomination actuelle ne s’implante solidement dans la langue française qu’au XVIIIème siècle, dans les écrits de Montesquieu.1 Plus tard, vers la fin du XIXème siècle, les poètes dits « décadents », en France, étaient même bien vus et bien lus dans les milieux littéraires traditionalistes, ceux que l’on désigne aujourd’hui, de façon commode, comme les milieux « d’extrême droite ». Par la suite, ces poètes et écrivains décadents du XIXème siècle nous ont beaucoup marqué, malgré leur mœurs souvent débridées, métissées, alcoolisées et narcotisées, c’est-à-dire malgré leur train de vie décadent.2

En Allemagne, vers la fin du XIXème siècle et au début du XXème siècle, bien que moins régulièrement qu’en France, le terme « Dekadenz » était également en usage dans la prose des écrivains réactionnaires et conservateurs qu’effrayaient le climat de déchéance morale et la corruption capitaliste dans la vie culturelle et politique de leur pays. Il faut souligner néanmoins que le mot allemand « Dekadenz », qui est de provenance française, a une signification différente dans la langue allemande, langue qui préfère utiliser son propre trésor lexical et dont, par conséquent, les signifiants correspondent souvent à un autre signification. Le bon équivalent conceptuel, en allemand, du mot français décadence serait le très unique terme allemand « Entartung », terme qui se traduit en français et en anglais par le lourd terme d’essence biologique de « dégénérescence » et « degeneracy », termes qui ne correspondent pas tout à fait à la notion originale d’ « Entartung » en langue allemande. Le terme allemand « Entartung », dont l’étymologie et le sens furent à l’origine neutres, désigne le procès de dé-naturalisation, ce qui n’a pas forcément partie liée à la dégénérescence biologique. Ce mot allemand, vu son usage fréquent sous le Troisième Reich devait subir, suite à la fin de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale et suite à la propagande alliée anti-allemande, un glissement sémantique très négatif de sorte qu’on ne l’utilise plus dans le monde de la culture et de la politique de l’Allemagne contemporaine.3

En Europe orientale et communiste, durant la Guerre froide, le terme de décadence n’a presque jamais été utilisé d’une façon positive. À sa place, les commissaires communistes fustigeaient les mœurs capitalistes des Occidentaux en utilisant le terme révolutionnaire et passe-partout, notamment le terme devenu péjoratif (dans le lexique communiste) de « bourgeois ». En résumé, on peut conclure que les usagers les plus réguliers du terme « décadence » ainsi que ses plus farouches critiques sont les écrivains classé à droite ou à l’extrême droite.

On doit ici soulever trois questions essentielles. Quand la décadence se manifeste-t-elle, quelles sont ses origines et comment se termine-t-elle ? Une foule d’écrivains prémodernes et postmodernes, de J.B. Bossuet à Emile Cioran, chacun à sa façon et chacun en recourant à son propre langage, nous ont fourni des récits apocalyptiques sur la décadence qui nous conduit à son tour vers la fin du monde européen. Or force est de constater que l’Europe se porte toujours bel et bien malgré plusieurs décadences que elle a déjà subies à partir de la décadence de l’ancienne Rome jusqu’à celle de nos jours. À moins qu’on ne soit, cette fois-ci, voués – compte tenu du remplacement des peuples européens par des masses de peuplades non-européens – non plus à la fin d’UNE décadence mais à LA décadence finale de notre monde européen tout court.

Avant que l’on commence à se lamenter sur les décadences décrites par nos ancêtres romains et jusque par nos auteurs contemporains, et quelle que soit l’appellation qui leur fut attribuée par les critiques modernes, « nationalistes », « identitaires », « traditionalistes de la droite alternative, » « de la droite extrême » et j’en passe, il est essentiel de mentionner deux écrivains modernes qui signalèrent l’arrivée de la décadence bien que leur approche respective du contenu et des causes de la décadence fut très divergente. Ce sont l’Allemand Oswald Spengler avec son Déclin de l’Occident, écrit au début du XXème siècle, et le Français Arthur de Gobineau avec son gros ouvrage Essai sur l'inégalité des races humaines, écrit soixante ans plut tôt. Tous deux étaient des écrivains d’une grande culture, tous deux partageaient la même vision apocalyptique de l’Europe à venir, tous deux peuvent être appelés des pessimistes culturels avec un sens du tragique fort raffiné. Or pour le premier de ces auteurs, Spengler, la décadence est le résultat du vieillissement biologique naturel de chaque peuple sur terre, vieillissement qui l’amène à un moment historique à sa mort inévitable. Pour le second, Gobineau, la décadence est due à l’affaiblissement de la conscience raciale qui fait qu’un peuple adopte le faux altruisme tout en ouvrant les portes de la cité aux anciens ennemis, c’est-à-dire aux Autres d’une d’autre race, ce qui le conduit peu à peu à s’adonner au métissage et finalement à accepter sa propre mort. À l’instar de Gobineau, des observations à peu près similaires seront faites par des savants allemands entre les deux guerres. On doit pourtant faire ici une nette distinction entre les causes et les effets de la décadence. Le tedium vitae (fatigue de vivre), la corruption des mœurs, la débauche, l’avarice, ne sont que les effets de la disparation de la conscience raciale et non sa cause. Le mélange des races et le métissage, des termes qui sont mal vus aujourd’hui par le Système et ses serviteurs, étaient désignés par Gobineau par le terme de « dégénérescence ». Selon lui, celle-ci fonctionne dorénavant, comme une machine à broyer le patrimoine génétique des peuples européens. Voici une courte citation de son livre :

Je pense donc que le mot dégénéré, s’appliquant à un peuple, doit signifier et signifie que ce peuple n’a plus la valeur intrinsèque qu’autrefois il possédait, parce qu’il n’a plus dans ses veines le même sang, dont des alliages successifs ont graduellement modifié la valeur ; autrement dit, qu’avec le même nom, il n’a pas conservé la même race que ses fondateurs ; enfin, que l’homme de la décadence, celui qu’on appelle l’homme dégénéré, est un produit différent, au point de vue ethnique, du héros des grandes époques.4

Et plus tard, Gobineau nous résume peut-être en une seule phrase l’intégralité de son œuvre : « Pour tout dire et sans rien outrer, presque tout ce que la Rome impériale connut de bien sortit d'une source germanique ».5

Ce qui saute aux yeux, c’est que soixante ans plus tard, c’est-à-dire au début du XXème siècle, l’Allemand Oswald Spengler, connu comme grand théoricien de la décadence, ne cite nulle part dans son œuvre le nom d’Arthur de Gobineau, malgré de nombreuses citations sur la décadence empruntées à d’autres auteurs français.

Nous allons poursuivre nos propos théoriques sur les causes du déclin de la conscience raciale et qui à son tour donne lieu au métissage en tant que le nouveau mode de vie. Avant cela, il nous faut nous pencher sur la notion de décadence chez les écrivains romains Salluste et Juvénal et voir quel fut d’après eux le contexte social menant à la décadence dans l’ancienne Rome.

L’écrivain Salluste est important à plusieurs titres. Primo, il fut le contemporain de la conjuration de Catilina, un noble romain ambitieux qui avec nombre de ses consorts de la noblesse décadente de Rome faillit renverser la république romaine et imposer la dictature. Salluste fut partisan de Jules César qui était devenu le dictateur auto-proclamé de Rome suite aux interminables guerres civiles qui avaient appauvri le fonds génétique de nombreux patriciens romains à Rome.

Par ailleurs Salluste nous laisse des pages précieuses sur une notion du politique fort importante qu’il appelle « metus hostilis » ou « crainte de l’ennemi », notion qui constituait chez les Romains, au cours des guerres contre les Gaulois et Carthaginois au siècle précèdent, la base principale de leur race, de leur vertu, de leur virilité, avec une solide conscience de leur lignage ancestral. Or après s’être débarrassé militairement de « metus Punicus » et de « metus Gallicus », à savoir après avoir écarté tout danger d’invasion extérieure, les Romains, au milieu du IIème siècle avant notre ère, ont vite oublié le pouvoir unificateur et communautaire inspiré par « metus hostilis » ou la « crainte de l’Autre » ce qui s’est vite traduit par la perte de leur mémoire collective et par un goût prononcé pour le métissage avec l’Autre des races non-européennes.

Voici une courte citation de Salluste dans son ouvrage, Catilina, Chapitre 10.

Ces mêmes hommes qui avaient aisément supporté les fatigues, les dangers, les incertitudes, les difficultés, sentirent le poids et la fatigue du repos et de la richesse… L'avidité ruina la bonne foi, la probité, toutes les vertus qu'on désapprit pour les remplacer par l'orgueil, la cruauté, l'impiété, la vénalité.6

La crainte de l’ennemi, la crainte de l’Autre, notion utilisée par Salluste, fut aux XIXème et XXème siècles beaucoup discutée par les historiens, politologues et sociologues européens. Cette notion, lancée par Salluste, peut nous aider aujourd’hui à saisir le mental des migrants non-européens qui s’amassent en Europe ainsi que le mental de nos politiciens qui les y invitent. Certes, la crainte de l’Autre peut être le facteur fortifiant de l’identité raciale chez les Européens de souche. On en est témoin aujourd’hui en observant la renaissance de différents groupes blancs et identitaires en Europe. En revanche, à un moment donné, le metus hostiles, à savoir la crainte des Autres, risque de se transformer en son contraire, à savoir l’amor hostiles, ou l’amour de l’ennemi qui détruit l’identité raciale et culturelle d’un peuple. Ainsi les Occidentaux de souche aujourd’hui risquent-ils de devenir peu à peu victimes du nouveau paysage multiracial où ils sont nés et où ils vivent. Pire, peu à peu ils commencent à s’habituer à la nouvelle composition raciale et finissent même par l’intérioriser comme un fait naturel. Ces mêmes Européens, seulement quelques décennies auparavant, auraient considéré l’idée d’un pareil changement racial et leur altruisme débridé comme surréel et morbide, digne d’être combattu par tous les moyens.

Nul doute que la crainte de l’Autre, qu’elle soit réelle ou factice, resserre les rangs d’un peuple, tout en fortifiant son homogénéité raciale et son identité culturelle. En revanche, il y a un effet négatif de la crainte des autres que l’on pouvait observer dans la Rome impériale et qu’on lit dans les écrits de Juvénal. Le sommet de l’amour des autres, ( l’ amor hostiles) ne se verra que vers la fin du XXème siècle en Europe multiculturelle. Suite à l’opulence matérielle et à la dictature du bien-être, accompagnées par la croyance à la fin de l’histoire véhiculé par les dogmes égalitaristes, on commence en Europe, peu à peu, à s’adapter aux mœurs et aux habitudes des Autres. Autrefois c’étaient Phéniciens, Juifs, Berbères, Numides. Parthes et Maghrébins et autres, combattus à l’époque romaine comme des ennemis héréditaires. Aujourd’hui, face aux nouveaux migrants non-européens l’ancienne peur de l’Autre se manifeste chez les Blancs européens dans le mimétisme de l’altérité négative qui aboutit en règle générale à l’apprentissage du « déni de soi ». Ce déni de soi, on l’observe aujourd’hui dans la classe politique européenne et américaine à la recherche d’un ersatz pour son identité raciale blanche qui est aujourd’hui mal vue. A titre d’exemple cette nouvelle identité négative qu’on observe chez les gouvernants occidentaux modernes se manifeste par un dédoublement imitatif des mœurs des immigrés afro-asiatiques. On est également témoin de l’apprentissage de l’identité négative chez beaucoup de jeunes Blancs en train de mimer différents cultes non-européens. De plus, le renversement de la notion de « metus hostiles » en « amor hostiles » par les gouvernants européens actuels aboutit fatalement à la culture de la pénitence politique. Cette manie nationale-masochiste est surtout visible chez les actuels dirigeants allemands qui se lancent dans de grandes embrassades névrotisées avec des ressortissants afro-asiatiques et musulmans contre lesquels ils avaient mené des guerres meurtrières du VIIIe siècle dans l’Ouest européen et jusqu’au XVIIIe siècle dans l’Est européen.

L’engouement pour l’Autre extra-européen – dont l’image est embellie par les médias et cinémas contemporains – était déjà répandu chez les patriciens romains décadents au Ièr siècle et fut décrit par le satiriste Juvénal. Dans sa IIIème satire, intitulée Les Embarras de Rome (Urbis incommoda), Juvénal décrit la Rome multiculturelle et multiraciale où pour un esprit raffiné comme le sien il était impossible de vivre...

Dans ces flots d’étrangers et pourtant comme rien
Depuis longtemps déjà l’Oronte syrien
Coule au Tibre, et transmet à Rome ses coutumes,
Sa langue, ses chanteurs aux bizarres costumes...7

Juvénal se plaint également des migrants juifs dans ses satires, ce qui lui a valu d’être taxé d’antisémitisme par quelques auteurs contemporains.

Maintenant la forêt et le temple et la source
Sont loués à des Juifs, qui, pour toute ressource,
Ont leur manne d’osier et leur foin de rebut.
Là, chaque arbre est contraint de payer son tribut;
On a chassé la muse, ô Rome abâtardie
Et l’auguste forêt tout entière mendie8

Les lignes de Juvénal sont écrites en hexamètres dactyliques ce qui veut dire en gros un usage d’échanges rythmiques entre syllabes brèves ou longues qui fournissent à chacune de ses satires une tonalité dramatique et théâtrale qui était très à la mode chez les Anciens y compris chez Homère dans ses épopées. À l’hexamètre latin, le traducteur français a substitué les mètres syllabiques rimés qui ont fort bien capturé le sarcasme désabusé de l’original de Juvénal. On est tenté de qualifier Juvénal de Louis Ferdinand Céline de l‘Antiquité. Dans sa fameuse VIème satire, qui s’intitule Les Femmes, Juvénal décrit la prolifération de charlatans venus à Rome d’Asie et d’Orient et qui introduisent dans les mœurs romaines la mode de la zoophilie et de la pédophilie et d’autres vices. Le langage de Juvénal décrivant les perversions sexuelles importées à Rome par des nouveaux venues asiatiques et africains ferait même honte aux producteurs d’Hollywood aujourd’hui. Voici quelques-uns de ses vers traduits en français, de manière soignés car destinés aujourd’hui au grand public :

Car, intrépide enfin, si ton épouse tendre
Voulait sentir son flanc s’élargir et se tendre
Sous le fruit tressaillant d’un adultère amour,
Peut-être un Africain serait ton fils un jour9

Les Romains utilisaient le mot « Aethiopis », Ethiopiens pour désigner les Noirs d’Afrique.

Qui interprète l’interprète ?

L’interprétation de chaque ouvrage par n’importe quel auteur, sur n’importe quel sujet social et à n’importe quelle époque, y compris les vers de l’écrivain latin Juvénal, se fera en fonction des idées politiques dominantes à savoir du Zeitgeist régnant. Or qui va contrôler l’interprète aujourd’hui si on est obligé de suivre les oukases pédagogiques de ses chefs mis en place après la fin de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale ? À cet effet on peut citer Juvénal et les fameux vers de sa VIème satire : « Quis custodet ipsos custodes » à savoir qui va garder les gardiens, c’est à dire qui va contrôler nos architectes de la pensée unique qui sévissent dans les universités et dans les médias ?

A peu près le même principe de censure et d’autocensure règne aujourd’hui au sujet de l’étude et la recherche sur les différentes races. Aujourd’hui, vu le dogme libéralo-communiste du progrès et la conviction que les races ne sont qu’une construction sociale et non un fait biologique et en raison du climat d’auto-censure qui sévit dans la haute éducation et dans les médias, il n’est pas surprenant que de savants qui analysent les différences entre races humaines soient souvent accusés d’utiliser des prétendus « stéréotypes ethniques ». Or le vocable « stéréotype » est devenu aujourd’hui un mot d’ordre chez les bien-pensants et chez les hygiénistes de la parole en Europe. La même procédure d’hygiénisme lexical a lieu lorsqu’un biologiste tente d’expliquer le rôle des différents génomes au sein des différentes races. Un savant généticien, s’il s’aventure à démystifier les idées égalitaires sur la race et l’hérédité risque d’être démonisé comme raciste, fasciste, xénophobe ou suprémaciste blanc. La nouvelle langue de bois utilisée par les médias contre les mal-pensants se propage dans toutes les chancelleries et toutes les universités européennes.

Certes, les idées, en l’occurrence de mauvaises idées, mènent le monde, et non l’inverse. Dans la même veine, les idées dominantes qui sont à la base du Système d’aujourd’hui décident de l’interprétation des découvertes dans les sciences biologiques et non l’inverse. Nous avons récemment vu la chasse aux sorcières dont fut victime le Prix Nobel James Watson, codécouvreur de la structure de l'ADN et du décryptage du génome humain. Il a été attaqué par les grand médias pour des propos prétendument racistes émis il y a une dizaine d’année à propos des Africains. Je le cite : « Même si j'aimerais croire que tous les êtres humains sont dotés d'une intelligence égale, ceux qui ont affaire à des employés noirs ne pensent pas la même chose».10 Ce que Watson a dit est partagé par des milliers de biologistes et généticiens mais pour des raisons que nous avons déjà mentionnées, ils se taisent.

Nos Anciens possédaient un sens très aigu de leur héritage et de leur race qu’ils appelaient genus. Il existe une montagne d’ouvrages qui traitent de la forte conscience de la parenté commune et du lignage commun chez les Anciens. Nous n’allons pas citer tous les innombrables auteurs, notamment les savants allemands de la première moitié du XXème siècle qui ont écrit un tas de livres sur la dégénérescence raciale des Romains et d’autres peuples européens et dont les ouvrages sont non seulement mal vus mais également mal connus par le grand public d’aujourd’hui. Il est à noter qu’avant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale et même un peu plus tard, les savants et les historiens d’Europe et d’Amérique se penchaient sur le facteur racial beaucoup plus souvent et plus librement qu’aujourd’hui.

Il va de soi que les anciens Romains ignoraient le lois mendéliennes de l’hérédité ainsi que les complexités du fonctionnement de l’ADN, mais ils savaient fort bien comment distinguer un barbare venu d’Europe du nord d’un barbare venu d’Afrique. Certains esclaves étaient fort prisés, tels les Germains qui servaient même de garde de corps auprès des empereurs romains. En revanche, certains esclaves venues d’Asie mineure et d’Afrique, étaient mal vus et faisaient l’objet de blagues et de dérisions populaires.

Voici une brève citation de l’historien américain Tenney Frank, tirée de son livre Race Mixture in the Roman Empire ( Mélange des races dans l’Empire de Rome), qui illustre bien ce que les Romains pensaient d’eux-mêmes et des autres. Au début du XXème siècle Frank était souvent cité par les latinistes et il était considéré comme une autorité au sujet de la composition ethnique de l’ancienne Rome. Dans son essai, il opère une classification par races des habitants de l’ancienne Rome suite à ses recherches sur les inscriptions sépulcrales effectuées pendant son séjour à Rome. Voici une petite traduction en français de l’un de ces passages :

.…de loin le plus grand nombre d’esclaves venait de l'Orient, notamment de la Syrie et des provinces de l'Asie Mineure, avec certains venant d’Égypte et d’Afrique (qui, en raison de la classification raciale peuvent être considères comme venant de l'Orient). Certains venaient d’Espagne et de Gaule, mais une proportion considérable d'entre eux étaient originaires de l'Est. Très peu d’esclaves furent recensés dans les provinces alpines et danubiennes, tandis que les Allemands apparaissent rarement, sauf parmi les gardes du corps impériaux. (L’auteur) Bang remarque que les Européens étaient de plus grand service à l'empire en tant que soldats et moins en tant que domestiques.11

Et plus tard il ajoute :

Mais ce qui resta à l’arrière-plan et régit constamment sur toutes ces causes de la désintégration de Rome fut après tout le fait que les gens qui avaient construit Rome ont cédé leur place à un race différente.12

Les anciens Romains avaient une idée claire des différents tribus et peuples venus d’Orient à Rome. Comme l’écrit un autre auteur, « Les esclaves d’Asie mineur et les affranchis cariens, mysiens, phrygiens et cappadociens, à savoir les Orientaux, étaient, par rapport aux esclaves d'autres provinces, particulièrement méprisés dans la conscience romaine. Ces derniers sont même devenus proverbiaux à cause de leur méchanceté. »13

En conclusion, on peut dire qu’une bonne conscience raciale ne signifie pas seulement une bonne connaissance des théories raciales ou pire encore la diffusion des insultes contre les non-Européens. Avoir la conscience raciale signifie tout d’abord avoir une bonne mémoire de la lignée commune et une bonne mémoire du destin commun. Cela a été le cas avec les tribus européennes et les peuples européens depuis la nuit des temps. Une fois l’héritage du peuple, y compris son hérédité, oublié ou compromis, la société commence à se désagréger comme on l’a vu à Rome et comme on le voit chaque jour en Europe aujourd’hui. « Les premiers Romains tenaient à leur lignée avec beaucoup de respect et appliquaient un système de connubium selon lequel ils ne pouvaient se marier qu’au sein de certains stocks approuvés ».14 Inutile de répéter comment on devrait appliquer le devoir de connubium en Europe parmi les jeunes Européens aujourd’hui. Voilà un exemple qui dépasse le cadre de notre discussion. Suite à la propagande hollywoodienne de longue haleine il est devenu à la mode chez de jeunes Blanches et Blancs de se lier avec un Noir ou un métis. Il s’agit rarement d’une question d’amour réciproque mais plutôt d’une mode provenant du renversement des valeurs traditionnelles.

Il est inutile de critiquer les effets du métissage sans en mentionner ses causes. De même on doit d’abord déchiffrer les causes de l’immigration non-européenne avant de critiquer ses effets. Certes, comme if fut déjà souligné la cause de la décadence réside dans l’oubli de la conscience raciale. Or celle-ci avait été soit affaiblie soit supprimée par le christianisme primitif dont les avatars séculiers se manifestent aujourd’hui dans l’idéologie de l’antifascisme et la montée de diverses sectes égalitaristes et mondialistes qui prêchent la fin de l’histoire dans une grande embrassade multiraciale et transsexuel. Critiquer les dogmes chrétiens et leur visions œcuméniques vis-à-vis des immigrés est un sujet autrement plus explosif chez nos amis chrétiens traditionalistes et surtout chez nos amis d’Amérique, le pays où la Bible joue un rôle très important. Or faute de s’en prendre aux causes délétères de l’égalitarisme chrétien on va tourner en rond avec nos propos creux sur le mal libéral ou le mal communiste. On a beau critiquer les « antifas » ou bien le grand capital ou bien les banksters suisses et leurs manœuvres mondialistes. Reste qu’aujourd’hui les plus farouches avocats de l’immigration non-européenne sont l’Église Catholique et ses cardinaux en Allemagne et en Amérique. Roger Pearson, un sociobiologiste anglais de renom l’écrit . « Se répandant d'abord parmi les esclaves et les classes inférieures de l'empire romain, le christianisme a fini par enseigner que tous les hommes étaient égaux aux yeux d'un dieu créateur universel, une idée totalement étrangère à la pensée européenne... Puisque tous les hommes et toutes les femmes étaient les "enfants de Dieu", tous étaient égaux devant leur divin Créateur ! »15

Si l’on veut tracer et combattre les racines de la décadence et ses effets qui se manifestent dans le multiculturalisme et le métissage, il nous faut nous pencher d’une manière critique sur les enseignements du christianisme primitif. Ce que l’on observe dans l’Occident d’aujourd’hui, submergé par des populations non-européennes, est le résultat final et logique de l’idée d’égalitarisme et de globalisme prêchée par le christianisme depuis deux mille ans.

Tomislav Sunic et écrivain, ancien professeur de sciences politiques aux Etats-Unis, ancien diplomate croate. (www.tomsunic.com)

  1. Montesquieu, Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence (Paris: Librairie Ch. Delagrave : 1891), Ch. IX, p. 85-86, où il cite Bossuet; “Le sénat se remplissait de barbares ; le sang romain se mêlait ; l’amour de la patrie, par lequel Rome s’était élevée au-dessus de tous les peuples du monde, n’était pas naturel à ces citoyens venus de dehors..” http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/montesquieu/considerations/Considerations_romains.pdf ↩

  2. T. Sunic, „Le bon truc; drogue et démocratie“, dans Chroniques des Temps Postmodernes ( Dublin, Paris: éd Avatar, 2014), pp 227-232. En anglais, „The Right Stuff; Drugs and Democracy“, in Postmortem Report; Cultural Examinations from Postmodernity ( London: Arktos, 2017), pp. 61-65. ↩

  3. Voir T. Sunic, « L'art dans le IIIème Reich », Ecrits de Paris, juillet—août 2002, nr. 645, Also “Art in the Third Reich: 1933-45”, in Postmortem Report ( London: Artkos, 2017) pp. 95-110. ↩

  4. Arthur de Gobineau, Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines, (Paris: Éditions Pierre Belfond, 1967), Livres 1 à 4, pp. 58-59. ↩

  5. Ibid, Livres 5 à 6., p. 164. http://ia802900.us.archive.org/27/items/EssaiSurLinegaliteDesRacesHumaines/EssaiSurLinegaliteDesRacesHumaines.pdf ↩

  6. Salluste, Ouvres de Salluste, Conjuration de Catilina - ( Paris: C.L. F. Pancoucke, 1838), pp 17-18. http://ia802706.us.archive.org/5/items/uvresdesalluste00pancgoog/uvresdesalluste00pancgoog.pdf ↩

  7. Satires de Juvénal et de Perse, Satire III, traduites en vers français par M. J . Lacroix (Paris : Firmin Didot frères Libraries, 1846), p. 47. ↩

  8. Ibid. p.43 ↩

  9. Ibid., p.165 Egalement sur le site: http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/satire/juvenal/satire3b.htm ↩

  10. “ L'homme le plus riche de Russie va rendre à James Watson sa médaille Nobel”, Le Figaro, le 10 Dec. 2014. http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2014/12/10/01003-20141210ARTFIG00268-l-homme-le-plus-riche-de-russie-va-rendre-a-james-watson-sa-medaille-nobel.php ↩

  11. Tenney Frank, „Race Mixture in the Roman Empire“, The American Historical Review, Vol. XXI, Nr. 4, July 1916, p. 701. ↩

  12. Ibid. 705 ↩

  13. Heikki Solin, “Zur Herkunft der römischen Sklaven” www.academia.edu/10087127/Zur_Herkunft_der_r%C3%B6mischen_Sklaven ↩

  14. Roger Pearson, « Heredity in the History of Western Culture, » The Mankind Quarterly, XXXV. Nr. 3. printemps 1995, p. 233. ↩

  15. Ibid p. 234. ↩

When is the final decadence coming? From Sallust and Juvenal to the present (Part 1), TOO. April 5, 2019

The Ancients, that is, our Greco-German-Gallo-Slavo-Illyro-Roman ancestors, were well aware of hereditary causes of decadence, although they attributed to this notion different names. The idea of decadence, let alone its reality, has always been present, although its current denomination came first into the French language by the eighteenth century in the writings of Montesquieu.1 Later on, toward the end of the nineteenth century, the so-called “decadent” poets in France were a favorite and highly praised genre in traditionalist literary circles, labelled today in a somewhat derogatory way as “far-right circles.” Subsequently, these so-called decadent poets and writers started to exert a considerable influence on many right-wing rebels despite their own often unbridled, transracial, alcoholic and narcotized manners, or simply put, despite their decadent lifestyles.2

Although less common than in France, the term “Dekadenz” was also common in the prose of reactionary and revolutionary conservative writers in Germany by the end of the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth century. Like their counterparts in France, these writers had become terrified over the climate of moral decay and capitalist anomie in the cultural and political life of their country. It should be pointed out, however, that the German word “Dekadenz,” which is of French origin, has a different meaning in the German language, a language which prefers tapping into its own lexical treasure trove and where signifiers often yield different meanings. A good German conceptual equivalent of the French word “décadence” would be a very unique German term “Entartung”, a term translated into French and English by a heavy-handed term “degeneracy,” which, because of its biological connotations, does not always match with the original meaning of the German word “Entartung.”

The German word “Entartung,” whose etymology and meaning were originally politically neutral, refers to a process of “de-naturalization,” a process not exclusively linked to biological degeneration. This unique German word, due to its frequent use during the period of the National Socialist rule in Germany, underwent a negative semantic shift in the wake of World War II and following the Allied anti-German propaganda, to the point that it is no longer in use in the realm of culture and politics in contemporary Germany.3

In ex-Communist Eastern Europe, during the Cold War, the term decadence was almost non-existent. Instead, the communist commissars blasted Western capitalist mores with a revolutionary and all-purpose term that soon became a derogatory buzzword in the communist vernacular: “bourgeois.” In summary, one can conclude that the most avid users of the term “decadence,” as well as its most ardent critics, have been writers classified as right-wingers or authors on the far right.

Three essential questions need to be raised. When does decadence start to manifest itself, what are its origins, and how does it end? A host of premodern and postmodern writers, from JB Bossuet to Emile Cioran, each in his own way and each resorting to his own mode of literary expression, have provided us with apocalyptic accounts of decadence seen as steering us now toward the end-times of the European world.

Despite this, it seems that Europe is still alive and kicking despite a series of decadences it has encountered over its history, starting with the decadence in ancient Rome all the way to serial decadences in modern times. With one big exception. In view of the large-scale racial replacement of European peoples by the masses of non-European peoples, the old European world seems to be now preordained not to a transient decadence, but rather to a terminal decadence.

Before one starts lamenting about the decadences described by our Roman literary ancestors and our contemporary authors, and whichever appellation critics may attribute them, such as “nationalists”, “identitarians, “traditionalists”, “ the alternative right, “or the extreme right” and so on, it is important to single out two modern authors who had first signaled the arrival of the final decadence, although their respective approaches to the content and the causes of decadence were quite opposite. These are the German author Oswald Spengler and his thick two volumes Decline of the West, written at the beginning of the twentieth century, and the French Arthur de Gobineau whose equally massive work, The Inequality of the Human Races, was written sixty years earlier. Both men were writers of prodigious culture, both shared the same apocalyptic vision of the European future, and both can be rightfully called cultural pessimists with a refined sense of the tragic.

For Spengler, decadence is the result of natural biological aging of human populations, aging that befalls each people at a predictable historical moment, resulting in its death. For Gobineau, decadence is caused by the loss of racial consciousness, making a people accept false altruism, forcing it to open up the gates of its city to its former enemies, causing it to embrace members of another race, and spurring it, little by little, to indulge in miscegenation and finally accepting its own death. Similar observations were made by many German scientists in the interwar period. Here, however, one must make a clear distinction between the causes and the consequences of decadence. The tedium vitae (life fatigue), the corruption of morals, debauchery, and avarice, are only the effects of the fading of racial consciousness and not its cause. Racial mixture or miscegenation, terms avoided today by the establishment and its scribes, were designated by Gobineau by the term “degeneration.” Accordingly, racial degeneration operates as to grind down the genetic heritage of all European peoples:

The word degenerate, when applied to a people, means (as it ought to mean) that the people has no longer the same intrinsic value as it had before, because it has no longer the same blood in its veins, continual adulterations having gradually affected the quality of that blood. In other words, though the nation bears the name given by its founders, the name no longer connotes the same race; in fact, the man of a decadent time, the degenerate man properly so called, is a different being, from the racial point of view, from the heroes of the great ages.4

Later on, Gobineau summarizes in a single sentence the main thesis of his entire work: “Above all, and without adding anything else, almost everything that Imperial Rome knew well came out of a Germanic source.”5

What strikes the eye is that sixty years later, that is, at the beginning of the twentieth century, the German Oswald Spengler, hailed now as the best weatherman of decadence, never quotes anywhere in his work Arthur de Gobineau despite his numerous quotations on decadence borrowed from other French authors.

The Enemy Within

One must continue with theoretical remarks on the causes of the decline of racial consciousness, which in turn makes miscegenation look like a new and respectable way of life. However, one needs to look first at the notion of decadence as examined by the Roman writers Sallust and Juvenal within the social context of ancient Rome. Sallust is important in many ways. First, he was the contemporary of the Catiline conspiracy, fomented by Cataline, an ambitious Roman noble who, along with many of his consorts of the decadent Roman nobility, had almost overthrown the Roman Republic and imposed his dictatorship. Sallust was a partisan of Julius Caesar who later became the self-proclaimed dictator of Rome, following the periods of endless civil wars that had impoverished the genetic fund of Roman patricians.

Moreover, Sallust leaves us precious pages describing an important notion of politics which he calls “metus hostilis” or “fear of the enemy”, a notion that had constituted among the Romans during their wars against the Gauls and Carthaginians of the preceding century, the main shield for their racial preservation, their virtue, their virility, as well as a solid awareness of their ancestral lineage. However, after ridding themselves militarily of “metus Punicus” (fear of the Carthaginians) and “metus Gallicus” (fear of the Gauls), after having removed all danger of external invasion, the Romans, in the middle of the second century BC, quickly forgot the unifying power of communal spirit inspired by “metus hostilis”, or the “fear of the Other.” Creeping fashion of miscegenation with a taste for interbreeding with members of non-European tribes resulted in the loss of their collective memory — a first sign of decadence.

Here is a short quote by Sallust from his book Conspiracy of Catiline, Chapter 10.

Those who had found it easy to bear hardship and dangers, anxiety and adversity, found leisure and wealth, desirable under other circumstances, a burden and a curse. Hence the lust for money first, then for power, grew upon them; these were, I may say, the root of all evils. For avarice destroyed honour, integrity, and all other noble qualities; taught in their place insolence, cruelty, to neglect the gods to set a price on everything.6

The fear of the enemy, the fear of the Other, a notion used by Sallust, was much discussed by European historians, political scientists and sociologists in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This notion, launched first by Sallust, can help us grasp the mindset of non-European migrants swarming now in Europe, as well as the minds of White European politicians extending welcoming invitations to migrants. Admittedly, the fear of the Other may become the strengthening factor of racial identity, as can be seen in the proliferation of different White identity groups in Europe today. However, at a given moment, the “metus hostilis,” fear of the Other, runs the risk of morphing into its opposite, namely the “amor hostilis”, or love of the enemy, which in turn destroys the racial and cultural identity of a host nation. Today’s Westerners are already victims of such a new multiracial landscape, a landscape in which they were born and in which they continue to live. Worse, White Europeans, little by little, are visually getting accustomed to such a new racial re-composition of their homelands, even interiorizing it as a natural matter of fact. These are the same people who only a few decades earlier would have considered surreal and morbid any such idea of racial change followed by unbridled altruism, and would have been willing to fight it by all means available.

There is no doubt that the fear of the Other, be it real or artificial fear, tightens the ranks of a nation while fortifying its racial homogeneity and cultural identity. But there is a negative side effect to the fear of the Other which was taking place in imperial Rome and which was well described by Juvenal. The sum total of the love of the enemy (amor hostilis) reached its apex toward the end of the twentieth century in the West. As a result of material opulence and a self-imposed dictatorship of well-being, accompanied by the belief in the end history as conveyed by a set of strange egalitarian dogmas, the Europeans have started, little by little, to mimic customs and habits of their former enemies. Formerly these enemies were Phoenicians, Jews, Berbers, Numidians, Parthians and Maghrebians, considered also hereditary enemies by the Romans. Today, faced with storms of non-European migrants the old White fear of the alien Other manifests itself in the apprenticeship of “self-denial” — rejecting the self. The process of White self-denial, best observed today amidst the European and American political class, is operating as a psychological ersatz for former White racial identity, which, from now on, is either scorned or discarded. By way of example such a new negative identity, put on display daily by Western rulers, takes the shape of imitative doubling down of the mores of Afro-Asian migrants.

We are also witnessing the apprenticeship program of negative identity among many young Whites mimicking diverse non-European cults. Moreover, the reversal of the notion of “metus hostilis” into “amor hostilis” by the current European rulers results in the culture of political penitence. Such national-masochistic mania is especially visible among contemporary German politicians who embark daily on neurotic hugging sessions with Afro-Asian and Muslim nationals against whom their forefathers had waged savage wars of survival from the eighth century in Western Europe until the eighteenth century in Eastern Europe. The present obsession with the extra-European Other — whose image is being embellished by the contemporary media and cinema — was already widespread among the decadent Roman patricians in the first century A.D., as described by the satirist Juvenal. In his Third satire, entitled Fleeing Rome (Urbis incommoda), Juvenal depicts the multicultural and multiracial Rome where, for a delicate mind like his, it was no longer possible to survive.

To see the scum of Greece transplanted here,Receiv’d like gods, is what I cannot bear.
Nor Greeks alone, but Syrians here abound,
Obscene Orontes diving under ground,
Conveys his wealth to Tiber’s hungry shores,
And fattens Italy with foreign whores.7

Juvenal also complains about Jewish migrants in his satires, which earned him the accusation of anti-Semitism by some contemporary critics.

Though now the sacred shades and founts are hir’d
By banish’d Jews, who their whole wealth can lay
In a small basket, on a wisp of hay;
Yet such our avarice is, that every tree
Pays for his head; not sleep itself is free:
Nor place, nor persons now are sacred held,
From their own grove the Muses are expell’d.8

Juvenal’s lines are written in dactylic hexameter, which means, basically, a use of rhythmic exchanges between short or long syllables, thus providing each of his satire with a dramatic and theatrical tone that was fashionable among the Ancients, including Homer’s epics. In the Latin hexameter, Dryden, in his translations, inserted the rhymed syllabic meter thus capturing more or less well the disillusioned sarcasm of the original Juvenal. One is tempted to call Juvenal the Louis Ferdinand Céline of antiquity. In his famous Sixth satire, on Women (Mulieres), Juvenal describes the proliferation of Oriental con men who came to Rome from afar and introduced into the ancient Roman mores the fashion of zoophilia and pedophilia and other vices. Juvenal’s language describing sexual perversions imported to Rome by Asian and African newcomers would even be an embarrassment for many Hollywood movie makers today. Here are some of his verses translated into sanitized English given that they were intended for the general public:

Thou may’st be Father to an Æthiop’s Son.
A Boy, who ready gotten to thy hands,
By Law is to Inherit all thy Lands:
One of that hue, that shou’d he cross the way,
His Omen wou’d discolour all the day.
I pass the Foundling by, a Race unknown,
At Doors expos’d, whom Matrons make their own9

The Romans used the word “Aethiopis”, i.e. “Ethiopians” when describing African Blacks.

To be continued.

  1. C.L. Montesquieu, Considerations on the causes of the grandeur and decadence of the Romans ( New York: D. Appleton and Co, 1882). In French, 1734. ↩

  2. T. Sunic, „Le bon truc; drogue et démocratie“, dans Chroniques des Temps Postmodernes ( Dublin, Paris: éd Avatar, 2014), pp 227-232. In English, „The Right Stuff; Drugs and Democracy“, in Postmortem Report; Cultural Examinations from Postmodernity ( London: Arktos, 2017), pp. 61-65. ↩

  3. Cf. T. Sunic, « L’art dans le IIIème Reich », Ecrits de Paris, July-August 2002, nr. 645, Also “Art in the Third Reich: 1933-45”, in Postmortem Report ( London: Artkos, 2017) pp. 95-110. ↩

  4. Arthur de Gobineau, Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines, (Paris: Éditions Pierre Belfond, 1967), Livres 1 à 4, pp. 58-59. I am using here the original text in the French language translated into English. ↩

  5. Ibid, Livres 5 à 6., p. 164. http://ia802900.us.archive.org/27/items/EssaiSurLinegaliteDesRacesHumaines/EssaiSurLinegaliteDesRacesHumaines.pdf ↩

  6. Salluste, Ouvres de Salluste, Conjuration de Catilina – ( Paris: C.L. F. Pancoucke, 1838), pp 17-18. http://ia802706.us.archive.org/5/items/uvresdesalluste00pancgoog/uvresdesalluste00pancgoog.pdf ↩

  7. Satires de Juvénal et de Perse, Satire III, translated into French verses by M. J . Lacroix (Paris : Firmin Didot frères Libraries, 1846), p. 47. See a good translation of Juvenal into English by John Dryden (1631-1700). https://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/poems/third-satire-juvenal ↩

  8. Ibid. p.43 ↩

  9. Ibid., p.165 (In French); in English www.bartleby.com/204/217.html#note217.48 Also on the website: http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/satire/juvenal/satire3b.htm ↩

When is the final decadence coming? from Sallust and Juvenal to the present (Part 2) TOO April 7, 2019

Interpretations of any text, on any social subject and at any time, including the interpretation of the verses by the Roman poet Juvenal, are also the mirror image of the dominant political ideas — the dominant zeitgeist. But who will control the interpreter if many Western dissident thinkers today are forced to follow the pedagogical ukases set up by politicians after the end of World War II? In this respect one could cite Juvenal and his famous verse in the Sixth satire: “Quis custodet ipsos custodes.” Who will guard the guardians?, or better yet who will control the architects of today’s newspeak which is raging in the Western universities and in the mass media?

More or less the same principle of intellectual censorship and self-censorship reigns today in the study and research on different races. Given the liberal-communist dogma of progress and the belief that races are solely a social construct and not a biological fact, and in view of the climate of self-censorship running rampant in high education and in the media, it must not come as a surprise that scholars who analyze differences between human races are often accused of using “ethnic stereotypes.”

Now, the term “stereotype” has become yet another buzzword today among scores of speech sanitizers in Europe. The same procedure of lexical hygienics is taking

place when a biologist tries to explain the role of genetic differences in affecting the trait distributions of races. A geneticist, should he venture into the demystification of egalitarian dogmas about race and heredity is certain to be demonized as racist, fascist, xenophobe or a proverbial White supremacist. The newspeak used by the media against the evil-thinking intellectuals has spread by now in all chancelleries and in all European and American universities.

Admittedly, ideas, in this case false ideas, dominate intellectual discourse in the West and not the other way around. In the same vein, the dominant ideas which lie at the System’s foundations, will be a decisive factor in the interpretation of some new genetic discovery, and not the other way around. Recently we saw a witch hunt of the Nobel Prize winner James Watson, a co-discoverer of the structure of DNA. He was attacked in the mainstream media for his allegedly racist remarks made about ten years ago about Africans, stating that “our social policies are based on the fact that their [Black Africans’] intelligence is the same as ours — where all the testing says not really”.1 What Watson said is shared by thousands of biologists and geneticists, but for reasons already mentioned, they remain silent.

Slide by Aaron Panofsky presented at an academic conference: Cheered by the deaths of several important scientists (such as Arthur Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton, James Watson), counting down the time until the the deaths of others (such as Charles Murray), praising the work of a co-ethnic, the academic leftist activist Jonathan Marks

Racial Science

Our distant ancestors possessed a keen sense of their racial heritage which they called genus. There is a mountain of books dealing with the strong awareness of common kinship and common lineage among the Ancients and into the first half of the twentieth century. One cannot cite all of these authors, especially German scholars of the early decades of the twentieth century who wrote scores of books on racial decay of the ancient Romans and Greeks and whose books are ignored not only by the general public but also by mainstream scholars. It should be noted that before World War II and even much later, scholars and historians in Europe and America examined the racial factor in social behavior more often and more freely than is the case today.

Needless to say, the ancient Romans were unaware of the Mendelian laws of heredity as well as the complexities of DNA. However, they knew very well how to distinguish between a barbarian from northern Europe and an African barbarian. Some slaves were highly prized, such as the Germans who even served as bodyguards to Roman emperors and eventually became leaders of the Roman army. On the other hand, slaves from Asia Minor and Africa were frowned upon and were often the subject of jokes and popular derision.

Here is a brief quote from the American historian Tenney Frank, from his book Race Mixture in the Roman Empire which illustrates what the Romans thought of themselves and others. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Frank was often quoted by Latinist scholars and was considered an authority on the ethnic composition of ancient Rome. In his essay, following his research on sepulchral inscriptions made during his stay in Rome, he offers a racial classification of inhabitants in ancient Rome

.… by far the larger portion came from the Orient, especially from Syria and the provinces of Asia Minor, with some from Egypt and Africa (which for racial classification may be taken with the Orient). Some are from Spain and Gaul, but a considerable proportion of these came originally from the East. Very few slaves are recorded from the Alpine and Danube provinces, while Germans rarely appear, except among the imperial bodyguard. Bang remarks that Europeans were of greater service to the empire as soldiers than as servants.2

And further he adds:

But what lay behind and constantly reacted upon all such causes of Rome’s disintegration was, after all, to a considerable extent, the fact that the people who built Rome had given way to a different race.3

The ancient Romans had a clear idea that the peoples who came to Rome from the Orient were different tribes:

The slaves of Asia Minor and the Carian freedmen, Mysians, Phrygians and Cappadocians, namely Orientals, were, compared to the slaves from other provinces, particularly despised in the Roman conscience. The latter ones were famous on the grounds of their wickedness.4

In conclusion, it can be said that a good racial consciousness does not only mean a good knowledge of racial theories, or even worse, proffering insults against other races. Having a good racial consciousness means first of all having a solid memory of common lineage and a good memory of one’s kindred and common destiny. This has been the case with European tribes and European peoples since time immemorial. Once a nation’s heritage, including its heredity, is forgotten or compromised, society begins to fall apart as was observed in Rome and as we can see every day in Europe now. Roger Pearson, a prominent sociobiologist, in his study of decadence in ancient Rome, remarks that “the early Romans similarly held lineage in great respect and enforced a system of connubium, whereby freeborn Romans could only marry into certain approved stocks.”5 No need to repeat how the duty of connubium in Rome should be practiced by young European would-be couples today. However, suggestions of this sort go beyond the scope of this article. Having been subjected for decades to Hollywood propaganda, it has become fashionable among young Whites to bond with partners of different races. Very rarely do sentiments of reciprocal love occur; rather we see a trend toward idealizing miscegenation originating from the reversal of traditional in-group values.

It is useless to criticize the effects of miscegenation without mentioning its causes. In the same vein, one must first decipher the causes of non-European immigration before criticizing its deleterious effects. Admittedly, as has been already pointed out, the main cause of decadence lies in neglect of racial consciousness. But racial consciousness had already been weakened or suppressed by the early Christian teachings on equality whose secular forms are now surfacing in the ideology of anti-fascism and the rise of various egalitarian and globalist sects preaching the end of history within a great multiracial and transsexual embrace. Criticizing Christian dogmas and their modern ecumenical visions of non-White migrants is quite an explosive issue among our traditionalist Christian friends and especially among our friends in America, a country where the Bible still plays a very important role. However, if we do not tackle the negative causes of Christian egalitarianism we might just as well be going in circles with our hollow remarks on the liberal or the communist evil. As much as it is very commendable to criticize “antifas” or the big capital of globalist corporations and their financial maneuvering, it must not be forgotten that the loudest advocate today of non-European migrations is the Catholic Church and its German and American cardinals. Roger Pearson writes:

Spreading first among the slaves and lowest classes of the Roman empire, Christianity came to teach that all men were equal in the eyes of a universal Creator God, an idea that was totally alien to older European thought which had recognized a hierarchy of competence among men and even among the gods. … Since all men and women were the “children of God,” all were equal before their Divine Maker!6

If we were to trace and then combat the roots of decadence and its bad effects that manifest themselves in multiculturalism and miscegenation, we must first look critically at the early Christian teachings on equality. What we are now observing in the West submerged by non-European populations is the final and logical result of the ​​egalitarian and globalist mystique preached by Christianity over the last two thousand years.

  1. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/james-watson-racism-sexism-dna-race-intelligence-genetics-double-helix-a8725556.html ↩

  2. Tenney Frank, „Race Mixture in the Roman Empire“, The American Historical Review, Vol. XXI, Nr. 4, July 1916, p. 701. ↩

  3. Ibid. 705 ↩

  4. Heikki Solin, “Zur Herkunft der römischen Sklaven” www.academia.edu/10087127/Zur_Herkunft_der_r%C3%B6mischen_Sklaven ↩

  5. Roger Pearson, « Heredity in the History of Western Culture, » The Mankind Quarterly, XXXV. Nr. 3. printemps 1995, p. 233. ↩

  6. Ibid p. 234. ↩

What to read? (Part 5) A White Character Survey: Envy in Politics and Literature (Part 1)

Among Europeans, since antiquity, envy and jealousy have been main driving forces in the political process, resulting in a treasure trove of different literary genres. All European languages make a fine distinction between envy and jealousy, although both notions often overlap. The Germans have an additional nuanced word for this character aberration, i.e. “Schadenfreude,” a compound noun literally meaning when someone rejoices over someone else’s bad luck.

Today, the notion of schadenfreude may apply to Whites who savor the professional failure of their racial next-of-kin. Schadenfreude has been for centuries a dominant feature among White intellectuals, rulers and politicians, although for obvious reasons, none of them has ever been eager to publicly admit this character defect. Outbursts of poorly concealed envy can be observed today among a number of White nationalists, White self-appointed leaders, and White spokesmen, faking sympathy and compassion for their better-skilled rivals on the one hand, yet gleefully gloating in private over their next-of-kin’s minor faux pas on the other. Over the last half a century envy and jealousy have been the prime reason for the lack of unity among so-called White movements and parties in Europe and the USA.

The most glaring case study of the destructive envy can be observed today among individuals critical of celebrity billionaire Donald Trump and his beautiful wife and intelligent, attractive children, who in turn are now being assaulted by a lethal barrage of pathological envy and jealousy, not only by predictable envy-ridden non-White detractors, but also by more intelligent, jealous White rivals. The late French-Romanian philosopher of gloom and doom, Emile Cioran, a household name among Alt-Right and New-Right intellectuals and sympathizers, describes political rivalry as just another shorthand for the envy contest.

More or less all humans are envious; politicians are absolutely envious. One becomes envious insofar as one can’t stand anybody next to himself or above himself. Engaging oneself in a project, a project of any kind, even the most trivial one, means sacrificing oneself to envy — the supreme prerogative of all humans (French original, p. 1009).

Beware of White Friends

Undoubtedly the self-perception of Whites differs substantially from the perception of Whites by non-Whites. There is ample empirical evidence showing the lines of cognitive demarcation and IQ difference between different races, thus slowly but surely refuting the modern dogma of racial equality. But what about ingroup rivalry resulting in envy and hostility between two White equals? To make matters worse even the most intelligent, the most cultivated, the least biased White man of strong character and of impeccable civic virtues, may become at times a victim of trendy power delusions, which in turn makes him a nuisance to his kind and ruins the community he lives in. Witness the timeless Shakespeare’s character Macbeth, becoming belatedly aware of the nullity of royal life without progeny, and who had turned from being a virtuous man into a mass killer.

Upon my head they plac’d a fruitless crown, And put a barren sceptre in my grip, Thence to be wrench’d with an unlineal hand [1]

Due to the impossibility of quantifying someone’s character, the subject of character flaw still remains an uncharted field for racial theorists, aka “political anthropologists.” The late German anthropologist Ludwig Clauss, whose works were quite influential in Weimar and later on in National Socialist Germany, dismisses the idea that Whites are endowed with better character than non-Whites. Advocating racial difference should by no means amount to setting up a scale of White character compared to non-Whites, nor attributing White European notions of good vs. evil to non-Europeans. It is precisely the modern millenarians, egalitarians and multiculturalists who use this implicit discriminatory procedure against non-Whites: dismissing the race factor and advocating miscegenation on the one hand, while simultaneously resorting in all fields of life to White man’s standards on the other. Non-Europeans flooding Europe, or for that matter “Black lives matter” movements in America, are only able to gain self-legitimacy because they have been previously turned into subjects of victimization and self-pity by their self-hating White patrons.

To be Nordic, for example, does not mean to be a good man or a noble man. Not every Nordic man embodies Nordic values. A man of the Nordic style can also be a crook or a criminal. A Nordic miscreant differs from a Mediterranean, Alpine, or a Middle Eastern miscreant as clearly as a righteous Nordic man differs in this sense from righteous people of those races.

To single out White miscreants is not difficult. One can always rely on the safe passages of comparative literature with its overcrowded gallery of White saints and White con men. Again and again we see the role of political and religious sentiments, the obsession with one’s self-appointed grandeur, let alone a genetic proclivity to lying or intellectual pilfering, or congenital melancholy, or inborn bent to suicidal cultural nihilism or philosophical pessimism. Or better yet, someone’s inherited tendency for hallucinatory spells about an abstract communistic Brave New World.

These are only a few among numerous character flaws that need closer reconsideration by evolutionary psychologists. Character flaws or strengths, unlike cognitive skills, or IQ, cannot by measured in numbers, nor can they be quantified by equations. In order to partially grasp the deep-hidden character defects among Whites one is obliged to resort to metaphor and literature more than to mathematics. The bloody in-group wars between Whites, starting from the mythical Trojan war, all the way to incessant inter-White bloodletting in Europe, and then to the relatively more recent carnage linked to the inter-White War of Secession in America, followed by the recent gory Spanish civil war, and the latest conflict among ex-Yugoslavia’s peoples — these internecine wars have all proved to be far more savage than all the past wars fought by Whites against non-Whites combined. Genetic proximity and racial kinship amongst Whites are in no way a guarantee for the absence of jealousy, bickering and wars, which, to be sure, in the eyes of non-Whites, are often seen as the main trademark of the Western civilization. Age-long infighting between Whites, be it on a family, local or a global level, must be surely looked at with a great deal of bemusement by incoming masses of non-White migrants.

The Judaic god Yahweh is a jealous god (Exodus 20:5), which he himself openly admits and brags about on several occasions. He is by definition a totalitarian god who tolerates no other gods and by extension must reject any alternative version of truth, as well as all other systems of belief. His chosen people, just like himself, are therefore required to be jealous and vindictive, dismissing any form of critical introspection when residing amidst a host nation — as decreed by Moses in Deuteronomy. Yahweh is a far cry from the down-to-earth gods and goddesses in Homer’s Iliad, who take frequent turns at jealousy, fooling each other, cheating with each other’s spouses or siding up with opposing warring parties — yet never, ever holding lengthy grudges against each other. Achilles spiritual protector was the war goddess Athena; his military rival Hector had the god Apollo as his guardian and guiding spirit.

In ancient Rome and Greece, vanquished tribes were often subjected to terrible physical ordeals, albeit with one notable exception: neither the Greek nor the Roman armies ever thought about imposing their own systems of belief on the vanquished. The gods, myths, lies, verities, or narratives of the vanquished were left intact. With the rise of Christianity, envy, jealousy and self-righteousness, handed down by the Jewish religious ukases in the form of the 10th Commandment, although brandishing envy as a major sin, had brought instead the White character flaws to their deadly paroxysm.

It would be silly to argue that sentiments of envy and jealousy were nonexistent in ancient pagan Rome. Those inborn, creeping, lowlife features of human behavior have always been common to our White ancestors, as seen in countless examples of bloody strife and civil war, stretching from ancient Greece and Rome all the way to the present times. The school of Stoicism, however, with its most illustrious thinker Seneca, tried to set up some character strengthening devices in order to tame the feelings of envy. Blind discriminatory nature, however crucial it is in man’s phylogenesis, can hardly dispense with harsh and disciplined nurture.

Each man, according to his lot in life, is stultified by flattery. We should say to him who flatters us: “You call me a man of sense, but I understand how many of the things which I crave are useless, and how many of the things which I desire will do me harm.

Seneca’s answer to aping sycophants in his entourage is simple: the less we crave for fame the less we shall be envious of our look-alikes. Another heavyweight philosopher of doom and gloom, highly popular among scores of White nationalists and conservative thinkers, Arthur Schopenhauer, writes in his famed Chapter “On the Vanity and Suffering of Life”:

An indirect but certain proof of the fact that men feel themselves unhappy, and consequently are so, is also abundantly afforded by the fearful envy which dwells in us all, and which in all relations of life, on the occasion of any superiority, of whatever kind it may be, is excited, and cannot contain its poison. Because they feel themselves unhappy, men cannot endure the sight of one whom they imagine happy.

Probably Schopenhauer should have titled this chapter of his “the ode to death,” given that throughout the chapter he raves about the “blind will” causing ceaseless envy, only to end up in dismal despair. Neither could he hide his own immense envy against his contemporary rival, the philosopher Friedrich Hegel whose entire philosophy he derisively calls “Hegelei,” and who stole from him much of his craved academic glitz and glory during and after his lifetime. Why him, why not me? — these are timeless haunting questions hovering over all of us.

In the gallery of the envious one stumbles upon the inevitable late medieval poet Dante voyaging in his purgatory kingdom of the blind where shadows of the deceased are obliged to cleanse off their character flaws by having their eyes sewn shut with lead. Dante’s infernal allegories in his epics were a carbon copy of the hellhole of thirteenth-century northern Italy where religious and ideological fervor and serial slaughters between the imperial-minded Ghibellines and the papists Guelfs reigned supreme. A wretched character whom Dante meets during his passage through Purgatory tells him:

My blood was so with envy set on fire, That if I had beheld a man make merry, Thou wouldst have seen me sprinkled o’er with pallor.

Similar feelings of envy resulting in mass killings, once akin to warring Ghibellines and Guelfs in medieval Europe, have gradually morphed into the proverbial hatred between European Left and Right, taking on today their finite form in the clash between the modern pontiffs of Antifascism and Multiculturalism and modern racial nationalists. Dante’s dismal premonitions were to be echoed seven hundred years later by his best disciple, the poet Ezra Pound, whose own apocalyptic Cantos where framed on the model of those of his medieval teacher, presaging his own intellectual and political proscription in the newly established post-World War II world. Pound’s gallery of the envious is manifest in the verses he wrote right on the eve of Europe’s breakdown:

… And then I slept And, waking in the wasted air, Saw and heard thus – He whom I saw seemed like a cavalier, And I heard this: “Watching my people die Does not satisfy even if they broke their word, Even if they deserve to be governed by King Turd. |Roosevelt, Churchill and Eden bastards to a man, Liar, Jew and glutton.. have squeezed the people dry like sheep!

To be continued.

What to read? (Part 6): A White Character Survey; Envy in Literature and Politics (Part 2)

Physical blindness and the verdict of ignorance, meted out to envious politicians in Dante’s epic poem, can often be bliss. Eyelessness can have advantages, as demonstrated by the blind, poor, uneducated, self-effacing, albeit very intelligent seer, Tiresias, who is brought to the court of King Oedipus, only to announce to him his eyeless future of blind destiny (vv 364-377).

For that matter willful ignorance and dismissal of the brainwashing curriculum in the modern educational system in the US and EU can be a sign of a healthy state of mind. What on earth is to be seen in the political process in multicultural America and Europe today? What good can be learned in multiracial colleges in Europe, whose program consists of lessons on White man’s guilt? For centuries, in order to avoid envy-inducing temptations, high-IQ young introspective White European males opted for monastic life. The harmful side of monasticism was that it prevented good genes to be passed on to future offspring, thus leaving the political arena open to an array of genetic and character misfits: the bad, the ugly and the envious.

Lengthy is the list of authors, usually associated with the heritage of cultural conservatism, who have prodded into the roots of envy-driven politicians. Highly envious politicians are usually very cunning individuals, with above average IQ, possessing, in addition, good skills at camouflaging their moral sleaziness with an aura of tearful humanitarian palaver. They also excel at expressions of sympathy for the plight of their future prey.

This brings to mind is the huge literature on so-called Jewish social mimicry, aka “trickster-do-good-Jews” (“Mauscheljuden”), popularized in National Socialist Germany by the works of Theodor Fritsch and Arthur Trebitsch, and scores of other writers.

It would be a serious error, however, to reduce the art of impersonation to Jews only. Envy-ridden White politicians have thrived in abundance in Europe and America, and their best literary embodiment is found in Shakespeare’s Richard III, a supremely intelligent miscreant, who, when left alone with his monologues, takes extreme pleasure in calling himself a supreme villain, all set to eliminate his next of kin.

And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover, To entertain these fair well-spoken days, I am determined to prove a villain. (_Richard I_II, Act 1, Scene 1)

Examples of virtue, passed down by sages and held for centuries as a symbol of moral goodness, are essentially an elegant cover-up for self-deception and fake commiseration. This is how the French seventeenth-century essayist François de La Rochefoucauld sees social reality in his satirical aphorisms about the army of jealous and envious politicians hiding beneath false charity and feigned compassion.

Festival of Fakery

We are false in different ways. There are some men who are false from wishing always to appear what they are not. There are some who have better faith, who are born false, who deceive themselves, and who never see themselves as they really are; to some is given a true understanding and a false taste, others have a false understanding and some correctness in taste; there are some who have not any falsity either in taste or mind. (VI. On Falsehood)

La Rochefoucauld’s influence on future European cultural pessimists was immense. Friedrich Nietzsche’s own aphoristic style and his own acerbic words against the danger of the rising tide of egalitarian ideologies of the later nineteenth century, is closely patterned on La Rochefoucauld’s prose. Outbursts of feigned magnanimity — the hallmark of many French nobles of the seventeenth century — provide a timely example for understanding the similar make-believe humanism of the modern liberal ruling class, including modern American cuckservatives. On the one hand, they love to show off empathy for disfranchised fellow Whites; on the other, they are keen on keeping to themselves in their gated communities.

A critical approach to the pretend humanism of the elites was a popular subject among French authors in the seventeenth century. Traditionally their literary legacy was associated with the intellectual baggage of the so-called anarcho-nationalists and revolutionary conservatives; today, it is linked to the work of the New Right and Alt-Right respectively. Those French classics are important because their description of seventeenth-century elites hiding behind trendy facial mannerisms and grandiose self-righteousness can be projected on the corrupted behavior of contemporary homegrown elites in the US and EU. The unfolding chaos in the West, however, cannot be blamed on the incoming armies of Muslims or any other group of non-European migrants. Those who started the chaos and those who are now stoking it are decadent White elites who keep importing non-European migrants.

It is fairly easy to spot an envious villain if his character deformity is accompanied by physical depravity, as seen in Richard III. A similar envy-ridden character appears in Friedrich Schiller’s drama The Robbers in the person of the wicked, crippled, yet highly intelligent Francis, who endlessly schemes how to destroy his better looking and virtuous brother Charles and his entire family:

Why did I not crawl the first from my mother’s womb? why not the only one? why has she heaped on me this burden of deformity? on me especially? Just as if she had spawned me from her refuse. Why to me in particular this snub of the Laplander? these negro lips? these Hottentot eyes? (Act 1, Scene 1)

The wicked Francis is an epitome of the in-group infighting among Whites. Such infighting has taken diverse forms of political expression over the last few millennia. In the face of ongoing foreign racial and cultural replacement, however, the laudable desire to reestablish White identity does not guarantee at all that Whites will dispense with their mutual envy, treachery and civil wars. Modern sociobiologists still need to examine why civil wars are more brutal than wars against well-demarcated and segregated out-groups. Far more dangerous than outgroups are character defects when they surface under the guise of the same phenotype, same idiom, and same racial entourage, as has been observed countless times in Western political history. In the same vein, many Whites make a major mistake by using insulting terms against African and Middle Eastern migrants storming into Europe, forgetting that the treacherous or self-hating Whites who are bringing them in are the ones to blame.

In the near future one can expect that feelings of mutual envy and hidden resentments will not disappear from transgenderized and miscegenated Europe and America; instead they will only take on alternate forms. Many intelligent remaining Whites will become indispensable leaders in dysfunctional non-White multiracial regimes. They will, however, be confronted with an age-old reality: they will either share their political power and work spaces with lower IQ, less individualistic non-Europeans, or they will face the haunting challenge of enduring the presence of envious, scheming, high-IQ White rivals. In America and in Europe it is a widespread practice in affluent White households to hire non-White handymen or nannies, the implicit assumption being that a non-White will never measure up to the cognitive appetites or excessive ambitions of a White employee. Feigned docility of South Asian and Latino women is often in demand by sexually frustrated White bachelors in Europe and America. Those non-White females, in quest of the improvement of their socio-racial status, know how to hide their envious behavior much better than single White females. White males, mistakenly, see them as no threat — as long as they stay out of White wedlock.

Historically, an implicit social consensus for a racially segregated society has functioned fairly well despite the bad press and academic vilification it has been subjected to over the last 50 years. In hindsight, the segregated American South and the apartheid regime in South Africa were functional and stable societies, where each racial group knew its place. It was the rise of egalitarian ideologies, imported from the West, which prompted non-Whites to start fantasizing that they could henceforth be whatever they wished to be. The tragic results, both for ingroups and outgroups, are visible today.

Under the credible assumption that in the very near future multicultural America and Europe will face major disruptions and face large scale foreign-inspired terrorist incursions, it would be naïve to think that Whites can be militarily defeated. Even a very small number of Whites can put up powerful resistance against a far larger military might of non-Whites. The major problem, however, resides always inside the gate and not outside the gate, as was observed time and again in European history, and as was recently illustrated by Harold Covington’s novels. Germanic Gepids sided in the mid-fifth century with invading Asian Huns, just as a thousand years later Muslim-Turkish incursions into the heart of Europe could not have occurred without the logistical support and diplomatic blessing of Catholic French monarchs. Stalin owed his military success in 1945 to thousands of Marxist intellectuals who had laid already the intellectual ground for the subsequent communist killing fields.

The present times are just a low-level protraction of the ongoing civil war among Whites, pausing briefly in 1945, only to continue today with sporadic unarmed and intellectual clashes between White Antifas and White nationalists. Those who must always be watched with caution, writes the philosopher Emile Cioran, are the alleged best friends of ours:

If our deeds are the fruits of envy we will understand why the political struggle, in its ultimate expression, boils down to calculations and intrigues that are conducive to the elimination of our rivals or enemies…. Do you need a right target? Well, start then by killing off all those who reason according to your categories and according to your prejudices, those who have travelled the same road with you and who inevitably dream how to replace you or shoot you. These are the most dangerous rivals; focus on them only, others can wait. If I were to get hold of power, my first care would be to eliminate all friends of mine. (french original, p. 1009)

Sounds shocking and surprising? Not at all. All of us, at least once in our lifetime, if not millions of times, have prayed to see our congenital rivals perish in a car accident or by having their towns firebombed. The second civil war among Whites, known as WWII, and is present sequel today, testify to that.

Es leben meine Toten! (Die Antifa-Dämonologie und die kroatische Opferlehre)

Neue Ordnung (Graz), I/2015

www.neue-ordnung.at

Die dämonologische, mythologische und kriminologische Schilderung Kroatiens im Zweiten Weltkrieg bildet noch immer die Grundlage für die Historikerzunft. Die verzerrte Geschichtsschreibung über Kroatien seitens der ehemaligen Systemhistoriker war die Hauptursache für das entstellte Geschichtsbewusstsein jugoslawischer Völker, was schließlich den Zerfall Jugoslawiens und den anschließenden Krieg in 1991 ausgelöst hatte. Im Lichte der neuen Forschungen, die zum Teil auf forensischen Untersuchungen basieren, deuten heute manche kritische kroatische Historiker, sogar in den etablierten Medien, auf viele fragewürdige Einzelheiten in der Prosa der ehemaligen Systemhistoriker hin. Im heutigen Kroatien, ähnlich wie in der BRD, will die Vergangenheit nicht vergehen. Das Hexenspiel mit Opferzahlen des Zweiten Weltkriegs tobt heftig weiter. Das Ustascha-KZ-Lager Jasenovac und der Schreckensname Ante Pavelić, der Name des Ustascha Staatsführers, der von 1941-45 in Kroatien regierte, wird weiterhin als Sinnbild für das absolute Böse hervorgehoben. Gelegentlich wird sein Name auch in bekannten Weltzeitungen als „einer des größten Massenmörder Europas“ als Warnzeichen gegen alle europäische Nationalisten verwendet. '1

Nach jedem neuen Regimewechsel schwankt die offizielle Zahl der ehemaligen kroatischen Ustascha-KZ-Jasenovac Opfer. Während der kommunistischen Herrschaft in Jugoslawien, d.h. von 1945 bis 1990, wurde die offizielle Zahl der dort ermordeten Serben, Juden, Zigeuner und Kommunisten in Schulbüchern mit "700.000" festgesetzt. Nach dem Zerfall Jugoslawiens 1991 wurde in Kroatien die Zahl der Opfer um das Zehnfache verringert, das heißt auf die Zahl von "70.000" Toten beziffert. Tudjman selbst schrieb in seinem umstrittenem Buch, welches zwei Jahre vor dem Zerfall Jugoslawiens veröffentlicht wurde, dass „ in Jasenovac wahrscheinlich zwischen 30.000 bis 40.000 Gefangenen gestorben sind; meistens Zigeuner, Juden, Serben und Kroaten“ '.2 In diesem Buch hatte sich Tudjman auch kritisch gegenüber den medialen „Dämonologen“ des kroatische Volkes geäußert, die über „den Jasenovac-Mythos und die These von angeblicher Genozidität der Kroaten“ schreiben '.3 Diese Worte haben ihn, sowie das ganze Kroatien nach seiner Unabhängigkeitserklärung, schwer belastet. Einige nationalistische kroatische Autoren gehen heute noch weiter und senken die Zahl der ermordeten Serben, Juden und Kommunisten im Jasenovac-KZ-Lager auf magere "500 bis 700" Tote. '4 Meistens sind es Polemiker die einseitig mit Jasenovac-Opferziffern spielen und die sich nur auf ex-jugoslawische, bzw. kroatische Archivbücher berufen.

Das Herumbasteln mit den Ustascha-Opfern ist noch immer eines der zentralen Anliegen im Zweikampf der Opferlehren zwischen Serben und Kroaten. Bis heute jedoch, trotz des Endes des jüngsten Krieges, wurde von der Historikerzunft keine endgültige Lösung gefunden. Das Ustascha-Lager Jasenovac gilt weiterhin "off limits“ in Kroatien, bzw. außerhalb der Grenzen wissenschaftlicher Bearbeitung. Keinerlei Ausgrabungen in dem Jasenovac-Lager werden derzeit in Kroatien gestattet. In bezug auf das Schicksal der ermordeten Juden, die angeblich als "Kapos" in Jasenovac tätig waren, soll man auf die Angaben von dem bekannten ex-Bolschewiken Ante Ciliga – auch ein guter Bekannter von Tudjman, und ein ehemaliger Jasenovac-Insase - vertrauen. Ciliga war nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg in den Umkreis der nationalistischen Exilkroaten in Italien geraten, obgleich seine Bücher über die sowjetische Betonsprache und kommunistische Doppelzüngigkeit häufig in politologischen Kreisen Frankreichs zitiert werden'5 .

Laut manchen kroatischen Historikern, die man heute oft in den etablierten Medien in Kroatien liest, wurde Jasenovac zwischen 1945 und 1947 von den jugoslawischen Kommunisten in ein Lager für antikommunistische Kroaten und Volksdeutsche umgewandelt. Zehntausenden Gefangene sollen dort von den jugokommunistischen Wachen nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg ermordert worden sein. In der meistgelesenen kroatischen Tageszeitung gab es unlängst einen Aufsatz über „das Nachkriegslager und Schafott Jasenovac“. „Das ist jedoch nur ein Rad welches einen weiteren Durchlauf in den Enthüllungen ermöglicht, und welches niemand mehr aufhalten kann“.'6

Das ehemalige KZ-Jasenovac spiegelt nicht nur eine tiefe Spaltung zwischen den sogenannten antifaschistischen und nationalistischen Historikern in Kroatien wider, sondern steht auch als Symbol für zwei zusammenstoßende Opferlehren zwischen Serben und Kroaten, sowie für die verschiedenen Opferlehren europäischer Nationalisten jeglicher Couleur. Nach den jüngsten Wahlerfolgen nationalistischer Parteien in Europa, wäre es naiv über „eine europäische gemeinsame nichtislamische oder weiße Heimat" zu phantasieren, wenn man bedenkt, dass sich ein polnischer Nationalist völlig anders als sein deutschnationaler Kollege auf den Bromberger Blutsonntag 1939 oder auf die Geschichte Schlesiens besinnt. Das neuste Beispiel zusammenstoßender europäischen Opferlehren ist die gegensätzliche historische Erinnerung pro-russischer und ukrainischer Nationalisten in der Ukraine.

Der endlose Krieg der Erinnerungen beinhaltet immer seine Helden und seine Unpersonen, seine Dämonen und seine Gutmenschen. Wenn die historische Erinnerung verlangt, dass man seinen Feind im voraus als den bösen Geist darstellt, kann folglich des besiegten bösen Geistes nicht länger als eines menschenwürdigen Opfers gedacht werden. Andererseits: die kroatische Nachkriegskatastrophe mit ihren hunderttausenden Toten, die als „Bleiburg Tragödie“ im heutigen Kroatien sehr oft thematisiert wird, ist in den westlichen Medien und Schulwesen kaum bekannt. Außerhalb des jüngsten und gut belegten Buches des Historikers Florian Thomas Rulitz über die kroatische Bleiburgkatastrophe',7 neigen viele nationalgesinnte kroatische Autoren die Bleiburg-Katastrophe hochzuspielen und einseitige, hochpolemische Traktate über die Serben zu schreiben. Außerdem hat die Opferzahl der kroatischen Bleiburg-Katastrophe eine andere Bedeutung für einen ehemaligen kommunistischen Politiker im heutigen Kroatien, eine andere für einen serbischen Bauer der in der Nähe der kroatischen Kleinstadt Sisak wohnt, und wieder eine völlig andere Bedeutung für einen kroatischen Bauern aus der gleichen Nachbarschaft, geschweige denn für die vielen alten Exilkroaten die in Santiago, Stuttgart oder Sydney wohnen.

Die Eingeweihten und die Ausgegrenzten; Negative politische Legitimität

Die heutigen antifaschistischen Erzählungen gleichen oft den alten europäischen Mythen, Sagen und Dämonologien. Irgendwelche Dämonologie mit ihrer selbstgefälligen Opferlehre ist eine Sache des Glaubens, eine Art des Kollektivmythos, genauso wie der heutige Demokratismus ein Mythos oder jener von der Ewigkeit der Europäischen Union, oder jener des grenzenlosen Wirtschaftswachstums. "Für viele Zeitgenossen ist die Demokratie nicht eine Lehre, über die man diskutieren soll. Sie ist keine "Tatsache" die die Erfahrung widerlegen kann. Sie ist die Wahrheit eines Glaubens, die unbestritten bleiben muss." '8 Es ist naiv zu glauben, dass die antifaschistischen Dämonologien mit Argumenten widerlegt werden können. Angenommen, dass die heutigen antifaschistischen Dämonologien tatsächlich eines Tages als unzeitgemäß oder als groteske Fabelei abgeworfen werden; an ihre Stelle träte schnell ein neuer Mythos mit einem neuen Reich der Gutmenschen und mit seiner Unterwelt des Bösen. Die Zeit der Aufklärung im 18. Jahrhundert konnte die alte christlich-geprägte Dämonologie loswerden, nur weil an ihre Stelle aufgeklärte politische Märchen, wie der Mythos des Gutmenschen, und der Mythos des permanenten Wirtschaftswachstums, treten konnte. Das tiefsinnige psychologisch-geprägte deutsche Wort „Gutmensch“, das heute sehr anschaulich die selbstzensurierenden und hypermoralistischen Akademiker und Journalisten in der BRD bzw. Europa bezeichnet, kann schwer in andere Sprachen übersetzt werden. Man kann es jedoch mit dem Ausdruck „der Dämon des Guten“ bezeichnen, wie der Titel des neuen Buchs von Alain de Benoist heißt („Les Démons du Bien“, Paris 2014), wo er die Psychologie der heutigen medialen Schickeria seziert:

„Das zentrale Element bezüglich der Opfehrlehrenüberbietungen ist ‚die Erinnerungspflicht‘. Die Erinnerung bleibt ein Bestandteil am Randbereich des Vergessens, zumal, da man sich nur daran erinnern muss, was nicht vergessen werden soll. Jede Erinnerung ist höchst selektiv. Einer der Höhepunkte der ‚ Erinnerungspflicht‘ ist die Unverjährbarkeit des ‚Verbrechens gegen die Menschlichkeit‘ -- ein Begriff, der völlig sinnlos ist. Wörtlich genommen, kann nur ein Außerirdischer ein Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit begehen.“9

Sollte sich jemand heute zufällig wagen, seine Missbilligung gegen den Multikulturalismus-Mythos oder gegen den idyllischen Mythos des Zusammenlebens eines Bauern aus Südtirol mit einem Afrikaner, oder mit einem LGTB Agramer Päderasten in Frage zu stellen, gerät er prompt ins Visier der Systemdämonologie.

Akademische Forschungen in allen Bereichen der Geisteswissenschaften sind immer noch von historischen und politischen Umständen bestimmt. Ohne Stalin und ohne Kommunisten hätten die westlichen Alliierten nie den Zweiten Weltkrieg gewonnen. Ohne Roosevelt und das kapitalistische Amerika, hätten Stalin und der Jugoslawe Tito auch nie den Zweiten Weltkrieg gewonnen. Heutiger geisteswissenschaftlicher Unterricht an Universitäten in Amerika und Europa hat nicht bloß den politpädagogischen Zweck der Umerziehung, sondern dient auch als Mittel, die Uneinsichtigen mit einem Einzelfahrschein in die Dämonenunterwelt des Systems hinunterzuwerfen. Das System kann nicht funktionieren ohne vorerst seine negative Legitimität durch die Dämonisierung der Andersdenkenden sicherzustellen und ohne das Aufbauen der Unterwelt zu errichten. Das Lager Auschwitz wurde von der Roten Armee Ende Januar 1945 befreit, obwohl die Rote Armee auf ihrem Weg nach Auschwitz hunderttausende deutsche Zivilisten liquidiert und in die Unterwelt geschickt hatte. Auch der alte antike Heide Herakles oder Vergils Held Aeneas müssten sich zuerst in Gutmenschtugend eneinweihen lassen und die Rechtschreibung der Unterweltkommissare erlernen, ehe sie die Erlaubnis zu einer Visite der Leidenden in der Unterwelt erhielten. In gleicher Weise muss heute ein ausgegrenzter Europäer, der die Unterwelt der Systemleute durchsuchen will, zuvorderst viel Mut haben und er muss die Rechtschreibung der Systemsprache auswendig lernen. Man soll jedoch nie das System und seine Dämonologen überschätzen: „ Als der Kerberus Herakles erblickte, floh er zitternd zu seinem Herren, dem Unterweltskönig, und verbarg sich unter dem Thron des Hades.“'10

Im Rückblick auf die alten europäischen Mythen, mit ihren surrealen Entstellungen und hyperreal Ungeheuren, muss man feststellen, dass sie mehr historische Glaubwürdigkeit als alle moderne Opferlehren haben. Friedrich G. Jünger hat diese Überlebungsformula für jeden freidenkenden Mensch, der die Systemzeiten bekämpft, vorgeschlagen, wobei sich jeder immer an die bestraften und extrem- leidenden Titanen in der Unterwelt besinnen muss: „Er erfährt an sich die Kräfte der Titanen, er lebt mit ihnen. Der Fischer und Schiffer, der sich auf die Wasser hinauswagt, ist im titanischen Element. Dem Hirten, dem Bauern, dem Jäger geschieht in ihrem Bereich das gleiche.“'11 Alte europäische Mythen, Sagen und Legenden gedeihen in Zeitlosigkeit; sie trotzen jeder Geschichtlichkeit. Dies ist der Hauptgrund warum sie nie dogmatisch sein können und keinerlei Eingriffe der Gesinnungspolizei brauchen um sich glaubhaft zu machen.

Die Totenkulte

Darüber hinaus stellen sich viele ausgegrenzte Völker der historiographischen Dämonisierung ihrer eigene Geschichte entgegen, die oft aus subjektiven und hypermoralistischen Erzählung besteht und deren Hauptzweck ist die eigene Totenabrechnung zu erhöhen und die Verluste der anderen Seite zu vermindern. Jede Dämonologie in bezug auf fremde Unwesen trägt immer ein engelhaftes Gegenbild – mit ihren eigenen zusammengeschusterten Opferlehren. Schließlich hatte auch der Henker von Maria Theresias Tochter in Paris, in 1792, seine eigene Opferrolle; nach der Enthauptung von Marie Antoinette ging er nach Hause zu seiner schwer erkrankten Frau.

Zudem spielt jede Opferrolle, einschließlich jene der Kroaten im Hinblick auf ihre Bleiburger Tragödie, letztlich eine rachsüchtige Rolle. Das beste Beispiel war der zweimalige Fall Jugoslawiens vor seiner Auflösung 1941 und 1991. Ein verlogener Krieg der historischen Erinnerungen musste unausweichlich zum Hass und nachfolgendem bewaffneten Konflikt im Jahre 1991 führen. 25 Jahre nach der Neugründung Kroatiens bleibt die Erinnerungskultur des kroatischen Volkes sehr oft auf ein blosses Anti-Serbentum fixiert. Für viele kroatischen Nationalsten kann man nicht ein guter Kroate sein, ohne zuerst ein guter Anti-Serbe zu sein.

Andererseits wird man auch Zeuge von dämonologischen Schilderungen des kroatischen Volkes, die vor allem von ehemaligen kommunistischen Apparatschiks und ihren antifaschistischen Mythographen gefördert werden. Eine erhebliche Zahl von Historikern in Kroatien sowie in ganz Europa greifen erneut zu ihrem antifaschistischen Bestiarium. In ähnlicher Weise handelte auch der Sohn eines bekannten jugokommunistischen Kommissars, der kroatische Staatsoberhaupt Ivo Josipović, in seiner Rede vor der Knesset in Israel im Februar 2012, wo er die kroatischen Ustascha-Schlangen schnell ergriff: „Einige Angehörige meiner Nation arbeiteten systematisch daran, Teile der Menschheit im Zweiten Weltkrieg zu vernichten. Wir müssen unser Herz anschauen, auch den dunkelsten Fleck unserer Geschichte. Wir müssen wissen: Die Schlange ist schwach, aber sie ist immer noch da ". '12

Kann das System und seine postkommunistischen und liberalen Ableger in Zagreb, Wien oder Brüssel überhaupt überleben, ohne antifaschistische Schlangen; ohne ihre Toten stets zu beschwören, bzw. ohne ihren Hausdämon Ante Pavelić - und ohne den zeitlosen Weltdämon Adolf Hitler? Auch die heutige Erinnerungskultur an die Leiden der Juden im Zweiten Weltkrieg hat seit langem eine transzendente Rolle erhalten, die weit über den einzigartigen historischem Massenmord hinausragt. Im Gegensatz zum Mythos spielt die Holocaust-Erinnerung eine didaktische und identitäre Rolle, die zugleich zeitlos bleiben soll, oblgeich sie von einer geschichtlichen und einer präzisan Zeitspanne bestimmt wird. Der ehemalige Bundespräsidant Horst Köhler war sich dessen bewusst, als er in seiner Rede 2005 vor der Knesset in Israel sagte: „Die Verantwortung für die Schoa ist Teil der deutschen Identität.'13 Der verstorbene Theoretiker der Postmoderne, Jean Baudrillard, hatte schon lange in Hinblick auf diese neue Problematik der Ersatzidentitäten geschrieben: „Die Rhetorik und die Symbolik des Holocaust funktioniert nicht mehr als Ort der Vernichtung, sondern als Medium der Abschreckung". '14

Mythos und Religion sind nicht Synonyme. Es gibt einen großen Unterschied zwischen beiden. Religion und Ideologie sind immer zeitbestimmt, ganz im Gegensatz zu Mythen, die immer zeitlos bleiben sollen. Kann man Jesus Christus als eine mythische, oder vielmehr als eine historisch-religiöse Figur betrachten oder beides, als einen vorderasiatischen Offenbarungs-Hokuspokusmann, oder als einen Wüstenfakir, der im multikulturellen Römischen Reich den Leuten mit Migrationshintergrund die Leviten liest? So schilderte ihn schon vor einhundert Jahren der Schriftsteller Oskar Panniza, wobei er anmerkte, dass „das Christentum zu uns aus dem Orient kam, anfänglich direkt, später fast nur mehr über Rom. Was für römisch-orientalischer Dreck auf diesem Wege bei uns abgelagert worden ist, ist unermeßlich.“ '15

In dem sogenannten aufgeklärten und freiheitsliebenden modernen System werden die Bürger in eine Fülle von bizarren infra-politischen Mythen verstrickt, in eine Vielzahl von dämonologischen Erzählungen eingepackt, vor allem von den Erzählungen, die sich mit der Wiederbelebung ihrer Toten befassen. Das größte Problem jeder Opferlehre ist, dass sie gar nicht zum gegenseitigen Verständnis der Völker führt, sondern nur den gegenseitigen Hass weiter vertieft, wie man es heute täglich in modernen Multikultigesellschaften sieht. Es ist daher sinnlos, mit modernen Dämonologen und Viktimologen zu debattieren, auch wenn man empirische Anlagen anbietet. Alle Leute sprechen zurecht davon, dass "jedes Opfer, unabhängig von seiner Größe und Zahl Respekt verdient." Wenn man jedoch diesen Ukas in Kroatien heute verwendet, nämlich die offizielle Zahl von 70.000 Ustascha Opfer des Lagers Jasenovac akzeptiert, dann bleiben immer noch 630.0000 Menschen übrig, die laut jugokommunistischer Geschichtsschreibung in Jasenovac gestorben sind. Das ist keine Kleinigkeit für kleines Kroatien, geschweige denn für die großen mythischen Geschichten oder die moderne antifaschistische Dämonologie. Morgen, wenn eine neue Dämonologie in Mode kommt, werden die Gutmenschen ihre alten Götzen schnell verneinen und ihre neuen Laren und Penaten anbeten.

von

Dr. Tomislav Sunic

Dr. Tomislav Sunic ( www.tomsunic.com) ist ehemaliger Professor für Politikwissenschaft in den USA und ehemaliger kroatischer Diplomat. Chroniques des temps postmodernes ( Avatar, 2014) ist der Titel sein neues Buchs in französischer Sprache.

Annmerkungen

  1. Sam Sokol, „Hundreds attend Zagreb mass in honor of ‘one of Europe's biggest mass murderers’“, The Jerusalem Post, 29. Dezember, 2014. ↩

  2. Franjo Tudjman, Bespuća povijesne zbiljnosti (Zagreb: Matica Hvatska, 1989) S. 316. Auf Deutsch: Irrwege der Geschichtswirklichkeit. Eine Abhandlung über die Geschichte und die Philosophie des Gewaltübels ( Zagreb, Školska knjiga, 1993). ↩

  3. Ebenda, Seite 9-23. ↩

  4. Cf. Mladen Ivezić, Titov Jasenovac (Zagreb: Samizdat, 2014). ↩

  5. Ante Ciliga, Dix ans au pays du mensonge déconcertant (Paris : Champ Libre, 1977). ↩

  6. Zvonimir Despot, “Jasenovac je i poslije rata bio logor a vjerojatno i stratište”, Večernji List-Obzor, 10. Januar 2015. ↩

  7. Thomas Florian Rulitz, Die Tragödie von Bleiburg und Viktring (Klagenfurt: Hermagoras Verlag, 2011). Das Buch erscheint vorausichtlich diesen Sommer in englischer Sprache (The Tragedy of Viktring and Bleiburg, im Northern Illinois University Press Verlag) mit einem Vorwort von Dr. P. Gottfried und einem Nachwort von Dr. T Sunic. ↩

  8. Louis Rougier, La mystique démocratique (Paris: Albatros 1983), S. 13. ↩

  9. Alain de Benoist, Les Démons du Bien (Paris : Pierre- Guillaume de Roux, 2014), S. 34-35. ↩

  10. Karl Kerenyi, Die Mythologie der Griechen, Band II ( München: DTV, 1988), S. 145. ↩

  11. Friedrich Georg Jünger, Die Titanen (Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1944 ) S. 97. ↩

  12. “Croatia president apologizes to Holocaust survivors”, The Jerusalem Post, den 16. Februar, 2012. ↩

  13. „Verantwortung für die Shoa ist Teil der deutschen Identität“, FAZ, den 2. February, 2005. ↩

  14. Jean Baudrillard, The Evil Demons of Images (University of Sydney: The Power Inst. of Fine Arts, 1988), S.24. ↩

  15. Oskar Panizza, Der teutsche Michel und der römische Papst, (Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich, 1894) S. 202. ↩

Myths and Mendacities: The Ancients and the Moderns (The Occidental Quarterly, vol. 14, no. 4, Winter 2014–2015)

When discussing the myths of ancient Greece one must first define their meaning and locate their historical settings. The word “myth” has a specific meaning when one reads the ancient Greek tragedies or when one studies the theogony or cosmogony of the early Greeks. By contrast, the fashionable expression today such as “political mythology” is often laden with value judgments and derisory interpretations. Thus, a verbal construct such as “the myth of modernity” may be interpreted as an insult by proponents of modern liberalism. To a modern, self-proclaimed supporter of liberal democracy, enamored with his own system-supporting myths of permanent economic progress and the like, phrases, such as “the myth of economic progress” or “the myth of democracy,” may appear as egregious political insults.

For many contemporaries, democracy is not just a doctrine that could be discussed; it is not a “fact” that experience could contradict; it is the truth of faith beyond any dispute.[^1]

Criticizing, therefore, the myth of modern democracy may be often interpreted as a sign of pathological behavior. Given this modern liberal dispensation, how does one dare use such locutions as “the myth of modern democracy,” or “the myth of contemporary historiography,” or “the myth of progress” without being punished?

Ancient European myths, legends and folk tales are viewed by some scholars, including some Christian theologians, as gross re-enactments of European barbarism, superstition, and sexual promiscuity.[^2] However, if a reader or a researcher immerses himself in the symbolism of the European myths, let alone attempts to decipher the allegorical meaning of the diverse creatures in those myths, such as, for instance, the scenes from the Orphic rituals, the hellhole of Tartarus, the carnage in the Iliad or in the _Nibelungenlie_d, or the final divine battle in Ragnarök, then those mythical scenes take on a different, albeit often a self-serving meaning.[^3] After all, in our modern so-called enlightened and freedom-loving liberal societies, citizens are also entangled in a profusion of bizarre infra-political myths, in a myriad of hagiographic tales, especially those dealing with World War II victimhoods, as well as countless trans-political legends which are often enforced under penalty of law. There-fore, understanding ancient and modern European myths and myth-makers, means, first and foremost, reading between the lines and strengthening one’s sense of the metaphor.

In hindsight when one studies the ancient Greek myths with their surreal settings and hyperreal creatures, few will accord them historical veracity or any empirical or scientific value. However, few will reject them as outright fabrications. Why is that? In fact, citizens in Europe and America, both young and old, still enjoy reading the ancient Greek myths because most of them are aware not only of their strong symbolic nature, but also of their didactic message. This is the main reason why those ancient European myths and sagas are still popular. Ancient European myths and legends thrive in timelessness; they are meant to go beyond any historical time frame; they defy any historicity. They are open to anybody’s “historical revisionism” or interpretation. This is why ancient European myths or sagas can never be dogmatic; they never re-quire the intervention of the thought police or a politically correct enforcer in order to make themselves readable or credible.

The prose of Homer or Hesiod is not just a part of the European cultural heritage, but could be interpreted also as a mirror of the pre-Christian European subconscious. In fact, one could describe ancient European myths as primal allegories where every stone, every creature, every god or demigod, let alone each monster, acts as a role model representing a symbol of good or evil.[^4] Whether Hercules historically exist-ed or not is beside the point. He still lives in our memory. When we were young and when we were reading Homer, who among us did not dream about making love to the goddess Aphrodite? Or at least make some furtive passes at Daphne? Apollo, a god with a sense of moderation and beauty was our hero, as was the pesky Titan Prometheus, al-ways trying to surpass himself with his boundless intellectual curiosity. Prometheus unbound is the prime symbol of White man’s irresistible drive toward the unknown and toward the truth irrespective of the name he carries in ancient sagas, modern novels, or political treatises. The English and the German poets of the early nineteenth century, the so -called Romanticists, frequently invoked the Greek gods and especially the Titan Prometheus. The expression “Romanticism” is probably not adequate for that literary time period in Europe because there was nothing romantic about that epoch or for that matter about the prose of authors such as Coleridge, Byron, or Schiller, who often referred to the ancient Greek deities:

Whilst the smiling earth ye governed still,
And with rapture’s soft and guiding hand
Led the happy nations at your will,
Beauteous beings from the fable-land!
Whilst your blissful worship smiled around,
Ah! how different was it in that day!
When the people still thy temples crowned,
Venus Amathusia![^5]

Many English and German Romanticists were political realists and not daydreamers, as modern textbooks are trying to depict them. All of them had a fine foreboding of the coming dark ages. Most of them can be described as thinkers of the tragic, all the more as many of them end-ed their lives tragically. Many, who wanted to arrest the merciless flow of time, ended up using drugs. A poetic drug of choice among those “pagan” Romanticists in the early nineteenth-century Europe was opi-um and its derivative, the sleeping beauty laudanum.[^6]

Myth and religion are not synonymous, although they are often used synonymously—depending again on the mood and political beliefs of the storyteller, the interpreter, or the word abuser. There is a difference between religion and myth—a difference, as stated above, depending more on the interpreter and less on the etymological differences between these two words. Some will persuasively argue that the miracles per-formed by Jesus Christ were a series of Levantine myths, a kind of Oriental hocus-pocus designed by an obscure Galilean drifter in order to fool the rootless, homeless, raceless, and multicultural masses in the dying days of Rome.[^7]

Some of our Christian contemporaries will, of course, reject such statements. If such anti-Christian remarks were uttered loudly today in front of a large church congregation, or in front of devout Christians, it may lead to public rebuke.

In the modern liberal system, the expression “the religion of liberalism” can have a derisory effect, even if not intended. The word “religion” derives from the Latin word religare, which means to bind together or to tie together. In the same vein some modern writers and historians use the expression “the religion of the Holocaust” without necessarily assigning to the noun “religion” a pejorative or abusive meaning and without wishing to denigrate Jews.[^8]

However, the expression “the religion of the Holocaust” definitely raises eyebrows among the scribes of the modern liberal system given that the memory of the Holocaust is not meant to enter the realm of religious or mythical transcendence, but instead remain in the realm of secular, rational belief. It must be viewed as an undisputed historical fact. The memory of the Holocaust, however, has ironically acquired quasi-transcendental features going well beyond a simple historical narrative. It has become a didactic message stretching well beyond a given historical time period or a given people or civilization, thus escaping any time frame and any scientific measurement. The notion of its “uniqueness” seems to be the trait of all monotheistic religions which are hardly in need of historical proof, let alone of forensic or material documentation in order to assert themselves as universally credible.

The ancestors of modern Europeans, the ancient polytheist Greeks, were never tempted to export their gods or myths to distant foreign peoples. By contrast, Judeo -Christianity and Islam have a universal message, just like their secular modalities, liberalism and communism. Failure to accept these Islamic or Christian beliefs or, for that matter, deriding the modern secular myths embedded today in the liberal system, may result in the persecution or banishment of modern heretics, often under the legal verbiage of protecting “human rights” or “protecting the memory of the dead,” or “fighting against intolerance.”.[^9]

There is, however, a difference between “myth” and “religion,” although these words are often used synonymously. Each religion is history-bound; it has a historical beginning and it contains the projection of its goals into a distant future. After all, we all measure the flow of time from the real or the alleged birth of Jesus Christ. We no longer measure the flow of time from the fall of Troy_, ab urbem condita_, as our Roman ancestors did. The same Christian frame of time measurement is true not just for the Catholic Vatican today, or the Christian-inspired, yet very secular European Union, but also for an overtly atheist state such as North Korea. So do Muslims count their time differently—since the Hegira (i.e., the flight of Muhammad from Mecca), and they still spiritually dwell in the fifth century, despite the fact that most states where Muslims form a majority use modern Western calendars. We can observe that all religions, including the secular ones, unlike myths, are located in a historical time frame, with well-marked beginnings and with clear projections of historical end-times.

On a secular level, for contemporary dedicated liberals, the true un-disputed “religion” (which they, of course, never call “religion”) started in 1776, with the day of the American Declaration of Independence, whereas the Bolsheviks began enforcing their “religion” in 1917. For all of them, all historical events prior to those fateful years are considered symbols of “the dark ages.”

What myth and religion do have in common, however, is that they both rest on powerful symbolism, on allegories, on proverbs, on rituals, on initiating labors, such as the ones the mythical Hercules endured, or the riddles Jason had to solve with his Argonauts in his search for the Golden Fleece.[^10] In a similar manner, the modern ideology of liberalism, having become a quasi-secular religion, consists also of a whole set and subsets of myths where modern heroes and anti-heroes appear to be quite active. Undoubtedly, modern liberals sternly reject expressions such as “the liberal religion,” “the liberal myth,” or “the liberal cult.” By contrast, they readily resort to the expressions such as “the fascist myth” or “the communist myth,” or “the Islamo-fascist myth” whenever they wish to denigrate or criminalize their political opponents. The modern liberal system possesses also its own canons and its own sets of rituals and incantations that need to be observed by contemporary believers— particularly when it comes to the removal of political heretics.

Myths are generally held to be able to thrive in primitive societies only. Yet based on the above descriptions, this is not always the case. Ancient Greece had a fully developed language of mythology, yet on the spiritual and scientific level it was a rather advanced society. Ancient Greek mythology had little in common with the mythology of today’s Polynesia whose inhabitants also cherish their own myths, but whose level of philosophical or scientific inquiry is not on a par with that of the ancient Greeks.

Did Socrates or Plato or Aristotle believe in the existence of harpies, Cyclops, Giants, or Titans? Did they believe in their gods or were their gods only the personified projects of their rituals? Very likely they did believe in their gods, but not in the way we think they did. Some modern scholars of the ancient Greek mythology support this thesis: “The dominant modern view is the exact opposite. For modern ritualists and indeed for most students of Greek religion in the late nineteenth and throughout the twentieth century, rituals are social agendas that are in conception and origin prior to the gods, who are regarded as mere human constructs that have no reality outside the religious belief system that created them.”.[^11]

One can argue that the symbolism in the myths of ancient Greece had an entirely different significance for the ancient Greeks than it does for our contemporaries. The main reason lies in the desperate effort of the moderns to rationally explain away the mythical world of their ancestors by using rationalist concepts and symbols. Such an ultrarational drive for the comprehension of the distant and the unknown is largely due to the unilinear, monotheist mindset inherited from Judaism and from its offshoot Christianity and later on from the Enlightenment. In the same vein, the widespread modern political belief in progress, as Georges Sorel wrote a century ago, can also be observed as a secularization of the biblical paradise myth. “The theory of progress was adopted as a dogma at the time when the bourgeoisie was the conquering class; thus one must see it as a bourgeois doctrine.”[^12]

The Western liberal system sincerely believes in the myth of perpetual progress. Or to put it somewhat crudely, its disciples argue that the purchasing power of citizens must grow indefinitely. Such a linear and optimistic mindset, directly inherited from the Enlightenment, prevents modern citizens in the European Union and America from gaining a full insight into the mental world of their ancestors, thereby depriving them of the ability to conceive of other social and political realities. Undoubtedly, White Americans and Europeans have been considerably affected by the monotheistic mindset of Judaism and its less dogmatic offshoot, Christianity, to the extent that they have now considerable difficulties in conceptualizing other truths and other levels of knowledge.

It needs to be stressed, though, that ancient European myths have a strong component of the tragic bordering on outright nihilism. Due to the onslaught of the modern myth of progress, the quasi-inborn sense of the tragic, which was until recently a unique character trait of the White European heritage, has fallen into oblivion. In the modern liberal system the notion of the tragic is often viewed as a social aberration among individuals professing skepticism or voicing pessimism about the future of the modern liberal system. Nothing remains static in the notion of the tragic. The sheer exuberance of a hero can lead a moment later to his catastrophe. The tragic trait is most visible in the legendary Sophocles’ tragedy Oedipus at Colonus when Oedipus realizes that he is doomed forever for having unknowingly killed his father and for having un-knowingly had an incestuous relationship with his mother. Yet he struggles in vain to the very end in order to escape his destiny. Here is the often quoted line Nr. 1225, i.e., the refrain of the Chorus:

Not to be born is past all prizing best; but when a man has seen the light this is next best by far, that with all speed he should go thither whence he has come.[^13]

The tragic consists in the fact that insofar as one strives to avoid a catastrophe, one actually brings a catastrophe upon himself. Such a tragic state of mind is largely rejected by the proponents of the liberal myth of progress.

Myths and the Tragic: the Coming of the Titanic Age

Without myths there is no tragic, just like without the Titans there can be no Gods. It was the twelve Titans who gave birth to the Gods and not the other way around. It was the titanesque Kronos who gave birth to Zeus, and then, after being dethroned by his son Zeus, forced to dwell with his fellow Titans in the underworld. But one cannot rule out that the resurrection of the head Titan Kronos, along with the other Titans, may reoccur again, perhaps tomorrow, or perhaps in an upcoming eon, thus enabling the recommencement of the new titanic age. After all Prometheus was himself a Titan, although, as a dissident Titan, he had decided to be on the side of the Gods and combat his own fellow Titans. Here is how Friedrich Georg Jünger, an avid student of the ancient Greek myths and the younger brother of the famous contemporary essayist Ernst Jünger, sees it:

_Neither are the Titans unrestrained power-hungry beings, nor do they scorn the law; rather, they are the rulers over a legal system whose necessity must never be put into doubt. In an awe -inspiring fashion, it is the flux of primordial elements over which they rule, holding bridle and reins in their hands, as seen in Helios. They are the guardians, custodians, supervisors, and the guides of order. They are the founders unfolding beyond chaos, as pointed out by Homer in his remarks about Atlas who shoulders the long columns holding the heavens and the Earth. Their rule rules out any confusion, any disorderly power performance. Rather, they constitute a powerful deterrent against chaos.[^14]

Nothing remains new for the locked-up Titans: they know every-thing. They are the central feature in the cosmic eternal return. The Titans are not the creators of chaos, although they reside closer to chaos and are, therefore, better than the Gods—more aware of possible chaotic times. They can be called telluric deities, and it remains to be seen whether in the near future they may side up with some chthonic monsters, such as those described by the novelist H. P. Lovecraft.

It seems that the Titans are the necessary element in the cosmic balance, although they have not received due acknowledgment by contemporary students of ancient and modern mythologies. The Titans are the central feature in the study of the will to power and each White man who demonstrates this will has a good ingredient of the Titanic spirit:

What is Titanic about man? The Titanic trait occurs everywhere and it can be described in many ways. Titanic is a man who completely relies only upon himself and has boundless confidence in his own powers. This confidence absolves him, but at the same time it isolates him in a Promethean mode. It gives him a feeling of independence, albeit not devoid of arrogance, violence, and defiance.[^15]

Today, in our disenchanted world, from which all gods have departed, the resurgence of the Titans may be an option for a dying Western civilization. The Titans and the titanic humans are known to be out-spoken about their supreme independence, their aversion to cutting deals, and their uncompromising, impenitent attitude. What they need in addition is a good portion of luck, or fortuna.

Notes

[1]: Louis Rougier, La mystique démocratique (Paris: Albatros, 1983), p. 13. [2]: Nicole Belmont, Paroles païennes: mythe et folklore (Paris: Imago, 1986) quotes on page 106 the German-born English Orientalist and philologist Max Müller who sees in ancient myths “a disease of language,” an approach criticized by the anthropological school of thought. His critic Andrew Lang writes: “The general problem is this: Has language—especially language in a state of ‘disease,’ been the great source of the mythology of the world? Or does mythology, on the whole, represent the survival of an old stage of thought—not caused by language—from which civilised men have slowly emancipated themselves? Mr. Max Müller is of the former, anthropologists are of the latter, opinion.” Cf. Andrew Lang, Modern Mythology (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1897), p.x. [3]: Thomas Bullfinch, The Golden Age of Myth and Legend (London: Wordsworth Editions, 1993). [4]: See the German classicist, Walter F. Otto, The Homeric Gods: The Spiritual Significance of Greek Religion, trans. Moses Hadas (North Stratford, NH: Ayer Company Publishers, 2001). Otto is quite critical of Christian epistemology. Some excerpts from this work appeared in French translation also in his article, “Les Grecs et leurs dieux,” in the quarterly Krisis (Paris), no. 23 (January 2000). [5]: Friedrich Schiller, The Gods of Greece, trans. E. A. Bowring. ttp://www.bartleby.com/270/9/2.html [6]: Tomislav Sunic, “The Right Stuff,” Chronicles (October 1996), 21–22; Tomislav Sunic, “The Party Is Over,” The Occidental Observer (November 5, 2009). www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-Drugs.html [7]: Tomislav Sunic, “Marx, Moses, and the Pagans in the Secular City,” CLIO: A Journal of Literature, History, and the Philosophy of History 24, no. 2 (Winter 1995). [8]: Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics (Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2011), 148–49. [9]: Alain de Benoist, “Die Methoden der Neuen Inquisition,” in Schöne vernetzte Welt (Tübingen: Hohenrain Verlag, 2001), p. 190–205. [10]: Michael Grant, Myths of the Greeks and Romans (London: Phoenix, 1989), p. 289–303. [11]: Albert Henrichs, “What Is a Greek God?,” in The Gods of Ancient Greece, ed. Jan Bremmer and Andrew Erskine (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010), p- 26. [12]: Georges Sorel, Les Illusions du progrès (Paris: Marcel Rivière, 1911), p. 5–6. [13]: Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus, in The Complete Plays of Sophocles, ed. and trans. R. C. Jebb (New York: Bantam Books, 1979), p. 250. [14]: Friedrich Georg Jünger, Die Titanen (Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1944), p. 89–90. [15]: bid., 105.

The Curse of Victimhood and Negative Identity (israelnationalnews.com, January 30, 2015)

Days and months of atonement keep accumulating on the European wall calendar. The days of atonement however, other than commemorating the dead, often function as a tool in boosting political legitimacy of a nation – often at the expense of another nearby nation struggling for its identity.

While the media keep reassuring us that history is crawling to an end, what we are witnessing instead is a sudden surge of new historical victimhoods, particularly among the peoples of Eastern Europe. As a rule, each individual victimhood requires a forever expanding number of its own dead within the context of unavoidable lurking fascist demons.

Expressed in the postmodern lingo of today, the modern media-made image trivializes the real death and dying into an image of a hyperreal and surreal non-event. For instance, the historical consciousness of Serbs vs. Croats, Poles vs. Germans, not to mention the victimological memories of the mutually embattled Ukrainian and Russian nationalists today, are becoming more “historical” than their previously recorded respective histories.

It seems that European nationalists do not fight any longer for their living co-ethnics, but primarily for their dead. As a result, as Efraim Zuroff correctly stated, “in post-Communist eastern Europe, [they're] trying to play down the crimes of the Nazi cooperators and claim that the crimes of the Communists were just as bad.” (AS,” Top Nazi Hunter: Eastern Europe Rewrote the Holocaust,” by Benny Toker, Ari Yashar, January 27, 2015).

Yet Zuroff’s s remarks, however sharp, miss the wider historical context. Any day of atonement or, for that matter, any day of repentance on behalf of a victimized group, is highly conflictual, if not warmongering by its nature.

It was in the name of antifascist victimology and their real and surreal fear of the resurrection of the anticipated fascist Croatia, that local Serbs staged a bloody rebellion in Croatia in 1991. It was in the name of their own post -WWII victims, killed by the victorious Communists on the killing fields of Bleiburg in Austria in May 1945, that Croats, forty-five years thereafter, began their war of secession from the Yugoslav grip. The Ukrainians still nourish the memory of Holodomor, the Poles nurture their memories of Kaytn, the Cossacks commemorate their victims in Linz, the Russians have their numerous Kolymas, the Germans their Dresdens — locations standing not only as memorial sites, but also as symbols of just retribution in the eyes of the Other.

Crimes committed by the Communists in Eastern Europe during and after World War II were not just Allied collateral damage, or a freak, unintended accident, but a planned effort to remove millions of undesirables.

Almost by definition this raises time again the painful symbolism of Auschwitz, a locality standing not only for a specific historic and clear-cut site of large-scale dying, but also as a didactic location designated for teaching the world the meaning of worldwide tolerance. Of course, the liberation of the Auschwitz camp by the lauded Soviet troops, raises a side question regarding their previous itinerary, especially if one considers that millions of East European and ethnic German civilians were either displaced or killed by the very same Soviet troops on their way to Auschwitz in January 1945.

How genuine were the tears of European statesmen and politicians at the recent commemoration event for the Auschwitz dead will remain a matter of wide speculation and wild guesses. Suffice it to note that if one were to take a peek into the recent history of France, in 1940 the entire Communist and left-leaning intelligentsia sided with the pro-fascist Vichy regime. Of course, in the aftermath of WWII it became politically expedient for the French intellectuals to posture as ardent philo-Semites and learn hastily the antifascist vulgate.

Another case in point are modern Croat politicians, who almost without any exception, prior to 1990 were strong advocates of the unity of the Yugoslav Communist state, as well as staunch purveyors of the socialist “self-managing” economy — only to rebrand themselves shortly thereafter into either rabid nationalists or Brussels-gravitating free marketeers.

The same feigned mea culpa scenario can be observed today among the German political class which had gone a step further, as seen in the recent verbal gestures of ex-president Horst Köhler and acting president Joachim Gauck, the latter of whom stated that "there is no Germanidentity without Auschwitz.”

One can thence surmise that without the memory of Auschwitz, EU politicians would likely be in goose-stepping unison, marching to the enchanting tunes of Giovinezza or the Horst Wessel Lied.

Some scholars seem to be well aware of the mendacious mentality of contemporary European politicians. As Shmuel Trigano notes, “while setting itself up as “new Israel,” the West recognizes in Judaism a factual, if not a juridical jurisdiction over itself.” His words signify that the West has become “Jewish “to the extent that for centuries it had kept denying the Jews their identity. It follows from this that the strange verbal construct “Judeo-Christianity” is not an elusive and dangerous oxymoron at all, but rather a symbol of self-defeating and false identity.

On the one hand, the latter day European victimologists nurture latent anti-Jewish feelings, while on the other hand, they continue formulating their ethical ukases and legal judgments almost exclusively on secularized teachings of the Hebrew sages.

Since the end of the cold war, the political class all over Europe claims its own bizarre brand of antifascist victimology by resurrecting the fascist straw man, as if the invocation of the fascist demonology could exonerate it from its fascist past and possibly give it a free pass in the eyes of Jews. It appears that liberal democracies in the EU and the USA cannot function at all without regurgitating fake philo-Semitic terms of endearment on the one hand, while indulging in a false self-denial on the other.

It might be worth considering setting up an international interfaith conference where scholars of different ethnic and intellectualbackgrounds could discuss both the positive and the negative sides of different victimhoods. As of now, diverse and often conflicting victimhoods are not likely to bring about genuine reconciliation among different Europe peoples, let alone solve the rapidly emerging war of victimhoods in the increasingly racially fractured and balkanized European Union. Self-serving victimhoods only exacerbate the false prejudices of the Other and lay the ground for new conflicts.

Mr. Sunic is author, former US professor of political science, and former Croat diplomat. One of his recent books is La Croatie ; un pays par défaut ? (2010).

link: israelnationalnews.com

Tom Sunic

Dr. Tom Sunic, the writer, born in Zagreb, is an author, former US professor of political...

INTELLECTUAL TERRORISM (09.02.2002., pravda.ru)

The modern thought police is hard to spot, as it often seeks cover under soothing words such as “democracy” and “human rights.” While each member state of the European Union likes to show off the beauties of its constitutional paragraph, seldom does it attempt to talk about the ambiguities of its criminal code. Last year, in June and November, the European Commission held poorly publicized meetings in Brussels and Strasbourg whose historical importance regarding the future of free speech could overshadow the recent launching of the new euro currency.

At issue is the enactment of the new European legislation whose objective is to counter the growing suspicion about the viability of the multiracial European Union. Following the events of September 11, and in the wake of occasionally veiled anti-Israeli comments in some American and European journals, the wish of the European Commission is to exercise maximum damage control, via maximum thought control. If the new bill sponsored by the European Commission regarding "hate crime" passes through the European parliament, the judiciary of any individual EU member state in which this alleged "verbal offence" has been committed, will no longer carry legal weight. Legal proceedings and “appropriate” punishment will become the prerequisite of the European Union’s supra-national courts. If this proposed law is adopted by the Council of Ministers of the European Union, it automatically becomes law in all European Union member states; from Greece to Belgium, from Denmark to Portugal. Pursuant to this law’s ambiguous wording of the concept of "hate crime" or "racial incitement," anyone convicted of such an ill-defined verbal offense in country "A" of the European Union, can be fined or imprisoned in country "B" of the European Union.

In reality this is already the case. In hindsight, the enactment of this EU law appears like the reenactment of the communist criminal code of the late Soviet Union. For instance, the communist judiciary of the now defunct communist Yugoslavia had for decades resorted to the similar legal meta-language, such as the paragraph on "hostile propaganda" of the Criminal code, Article 133. Such semantic abstraction could apply to any suspect - regardless whether the suspect committed acts of physical violence against the communist state, or simply cracked a joke critical of communism.

For the time being the United Kingdom enjoys the highest degree of civil liberties in Europe; Germany the lowest. The UK Parliament recently turned down the similar "hate crime" law proposal sponsored by various pressure groups. However, numerous cases of mugging of elderly people of British descent in English cities by foreign, mostly Asian gangs, either go unreported, or do not have legal follow ups. If a foreign suspect, charged with criminal offense is put on trial, he usually pleads innocent or declares himself in front of often timid judges as a "victim of racial prejudice". Thus, regardless of the relative freedom in the UK, a certain degree of de facto self-censorship exists. The proposed EU law would make this de facto censorship de jure. This could, possibly, trigger more racial violence, given that the potential victims would be afraid to speak out for fear of being convicted of “hate speech” themselves.

Since 1994, Germany, Canada and Australia have strengthened laws against dissenting views, particularly against revisionists and nationalists. Several hundred German citizens, including a number of high- profile scholars have been accused of incitement to racial hatred or of denying the holocaust, on the basis of the strange legal neologism of the Article 130 ("Volkshetze") in the German Criminal Code. From this poorly worded yet overarching grammatical construct, it is now easy to place any journalist or a professor in legal difficulty if he/she questions the writing of modern history or if happens to be critical about the rising number of non-European immigrants.

In Germany, contrary to England and America, there is a long legal tradition that everything is forbidden what is not explicitly allowed. In America and England the legal practice presupposes that everything is allowed what is not specifically forbidden. This may be the reason why Germany adopted stringent laws against alleged or real holocaust denial. In December of last year, a Jewish-American historian Norman Finkelstein, during his visit to Germany, called upon the German political class to cease to be a victim of the "holocaust industry" pressure groups. He remarked that such a reckless German attitude only provokes hidden anti-Semitic sentiments. As was to be expected, nobody reacted to Finkelstein's remarks, for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic themselves. Instead, the German government, via its taxpayers, agreed last year to pay further share of 5 billion euros for this fiscal year to some 800.000 holocaust survivors. Such silence is the price paid for intellectual censorship in democracies. When discussion of certain topics are forbidden, the climate of frustration followed by individual terrorist violence starts growing. Can any Western nation that inhibits speech, and the free expression of diverse political views -however aberrant they may be - call itself a democracy?

Although America prides itself on its First Amendment, free speech in higher education and the media is subject to didactic self censorship. Expression of politically incorrect opinions can ruin the careers of, or hurt the grades of those who are “naive” enough to trust their First Amendment rights. It is a growing practice among tenured professors in the USA to give passing grades to many of their minority students in order to avoid legal troubles with their peers at best, or to avoid losing a job at worst.

In a similar vein, according the the Fabius-Gayssot law, proposed by a French Communist deputy and adopted in 1990, a person uttering in public doubts about modern antifascist victimology risks serious fines or imprisonment. A number of writers and journalists from France and Germany committed suicide, lost their jobs, or asked for political asylum in Syria, Sweden or America.

Similar repressive measures have been recently enacted in multicultural Australia, Canada and Belgium. Many East European nationalist politicians, particularly from Croatia, wishing to visit their expatriate countrymen in Canada or Australia are denied visa by those countries on the grounds of their alleged extremist nationalistic views. For the time being Russia, and other post-communist countries, are not subject to the same repressive thought control as exists in the USA or the European Union. Yet, in view of the increasing pressure from Brussels and Washington, this may change.

Contrary to widespread beliefs, state terror, i.e. totalitarianism is not only a product of violent ideology espoused by a handful of thugs. Civic fear, feigned self-abnegation, and intellectual abdication create an ideal ground for the totalitarian temptation. Intellectual terrorism is fueled by a popular belief that somehow things will straighten out by themselves. Growing social apathy and rising academic self-censorship only boost the spirit of totalitarianism. Essentially, the spirit of totalitarianism is the absence of all spirit.

Pravda.ru