3,438 words
Achilles Dragging the Body of Hector on His Chariot – Giulio Romano, 1538
Thomas D’Arcy McGee was born in Carlingford, Ireland on April 13, 1825. From a young age, he was fascinated with Irish history and folklore. At age 17, he crossed the Atlantic for the first time, settling in Boston, Massachusetts in 1842 where he found a job as an editor of The Boston Pilot, a Catholic newspaper run by the Irish diaspora in New England. McGee made a name for himself writing and delivering speeches in favour of the cause of Irish republicanism. In addition, he advocated for Canada, then a collection of British colonies in North America, to be absorbed into the United States.
McGee returned to Ireland in 1845, during the Great Famine. He joined the Young Ireland movement who championed the cause of Irish nationalism and independence. In 1848, with revolution sweeping across Europe, McGee participated in the Young Ireland Rebellion which attempted to incite an uprising against British rule in Ireland. When the rebellion failed, McGee was one of several Young Ireland members who were forced to flee the country, sailing back to the United States in October of 1848, where he began to write for the Irish-American publication The Nation in New York City.
During the 1850s, McGee underwent a political transformation. The deplorable state of the Irish community in the United States and the widespread anti-Catholic sentiment from the Protestant majority disillusioned McGee with the country and the ideas of republicanism and classic liberalism more broadly. He took an interest in Canada, seeing it as offering greater potential for the Irish Catholic diaspora. In 1857, he moved to Montreal, Quebec where he set up a new publication titled New Era. While he continued to advocate for the interests of the Irish Catholic community, politically he turned away from his revolutionary liberal republican beliefs and embraced monarchism and conservatism.
In 1858, McGee was elected to the legislative assembly of the Province of Canada, a self-governing crown colony located in present-day Ontario and Quebec. Once a supporter of American annexation of Canada, McGee became an ardent voice for the formation of a new nation through a confederation of Britain’s colonies in North America into an independent dominion within the British Empire. He was a representative at the Charlottetown and Quebec conferences in 1864 where the issue of Canadian Confederation was discussed. Following the establishment of the dominion on July 1, 1867, McGee was elected to the inaugural Canadian Parliament as a member of Prime Minister John A. Macdonald’s government.
While he played a pivotal role in Canadian Confederation, McGee’s political transformation earned him some enemies. Once a radical republican, McGee now advocated for Ireland to attain self-governance within the British Empire as Canada had. His repudiation of the republican cause and denunciation of the Fenian Brotherhood, an American-based Irish nationalist group which advocated an American conquest of Canada, weakened his support within the Irish Catholic community. Many of them now considered him a traitor.
On April 7, 1868, while walking home after attending a parliamentary debate in Ottawa, McGee was shot and killed. After a trial which remains controversial to this day, Patrick J. Whelan, an Irish immigrant and Fenian Brotherhood sympathizer was convicted and subsequently hanged for his murder. McGee was given the first state funeral in Canadian history in Ottawa. A few days later, a crowd of 80,000 turned out for his procession in Montreal to morn his death on April 13, which would have been his 43rd birthday.
As a Canadian, I consider Thomas D’Arcy McGee one of our country’s national heroes. The crest of the Canadian Red Ensign flag is a shield featuring the emblems of the four European nations from which Canada’s founding settlers derive their ancestry: England, France, Scotland, and Ireland. I can think of no greater representative of the Irish quadrant of our emblem than Thomas D’Arcy McGee. As a historian, poet, journalist, statesman, and master orator, McGee was the epitome of Victorian excellence.
He had a raging fire in his belly and an unquenchable thirst for knowledge. Not only did this bring him back and forth across the Atlantic, placing him at the forefront of all the great political struggles of his time, but it also sent him on an equally substantial intellectual journey. This culminated in McGee becoming one of the architects of Canadian nationhood, a defender of the Canadian tradition of loyalism, and a visionary for the Dominion’s founding creed of “Peace, Order, and Good Government”.
His incredible life left him with a legacy as one of Canada’s most remarkable Fathers of Confederation, though not everyone saw him in a such a positive light. McGee remained a devote Catholic throughout his life and earnestly stood for what he believed to be the best interests of his fellow Irishmen. However, his change of heart on the republican cause cast him as a traitor in the eyes of many Irishmen, one of whom went so far as to assassinate him for it.
Under Canada’s national metanarrative, Thomas D’Arcy McGee is a national hero who was tragically taken from us too soon. Though when considering the national metanarrative of his native Ireland, his role in the story is very different. Ireland’s foundation myth is a tale of a centuries long struggle against tyrannical British rule culminating in the achievement of home rule through war and subsequently the establishment of the Republic of Ireland in the 20th century. In this story, McGee doesn’t exactly play the role of a hero. Rather, he could possibly be seen as a villain.
While I would argue that, even though his beliefs changed over time, he always stood for what he genuinely believed to be best for Ireland, I could understand why an Irishman would have a less positive view of a figure like McGee than I do as a Canadian. However, to ask if we could objectively say Thomas D’Arcy McGee was a “hero” or a “villain” would be to have a misguided understanding of the concept of heroism. Heroes are not shared universally but revered by those on behalf of whom their heroic acts were done. They fit within a metanarrative which forms the consciousness of a particular group of people. This often puts them at odds with the metanarratives of different groups of people.
Traditionally, a hero was understood to be someone who made extraordinary contributions towards their tribal collective. In the Iliad, the protagonist Achilles is a hero for his legendary might displayed in battle. However, it is important to understand that Achilles’ heroism was not universal. He was a hero of the Greeks because that’s on whose side he fought. From the perspective of the Trojans whom he fought against, Achilles was a menace. Their hero was Hector, the greatest warrior of Troy, who fought against the Greeks for in defense of his own people.
I can think of plenty of figures from Canadian history who I would consider heroes of our nation, but the number of entries on that list would decline considerably within the past 80 years of our history. While there are a few figures from this era who I admire, I can’t think of anyone worthy of the title of “national hero” who actually held political power in the present era. This isn’t exclusive to my country either. From the perspective of other Western countries such as the United States, Britain, or Germany, I would also struggle to think of any truly heroic figures from their recent history who led their countries. Why is it that heroes in the West seem like a thing of the past?
In the postwar era, the West adopted a philosophy of universalist egalitarian liberalism. The conception of nationhood as defined by shared ancestry was replaced by one defined by a set of liberal civic values which could be applied universally. This made it so that it was no longer considered heroic to fight for one’s people against their enemies, but rather to fight on behalf of this universalist egalitarian liberal doctrine. Once this new consensus was brought to its logical conclusion, the legacy of numerous once-renowned figures was brought into question.
Robert E Lee was once celebrated in the American South as a war hero and the United States more broadly as an embodiment of military brilliance and gentlemanliness. Today, he is denounced as an oppressor who fought on behalf of slavery and “white supremacy”. James Cook was once honoured across the Anglosphere as a brilliant explorer who made countless contributions to scientific advancement and paved the way for Britain’s expansion into lands ranging from North America to Oceania. Today, he is condemned as colonialist complicit in the “genocide” of indigenous people.
The moral indictment levied against Lee, Cook, and every other heroic figure who was once admired in the West is that they were “racist”. In the postwar era, the crime of “racism” was established as the greatest of all sins against the new universalist egalitarian morality. This is derived from the foundational myth of WWII. The metanarrative of the postwar era is that the ultimate evil of the “racist” and “anti-Semitic” Axis was defeated by the ultimate good of the egalitarian universalist liberal Allies. This is how WWII is portrayed as a heroic struggle under this moral framework. However, it only takes a little scrutiny to see how ahistoric this narrative really is.
I’ll use Canada as an example to illustrate this. In the 1940s, Canada was an ethnostate. The Prime Minister at the time, William Lyon Mackenzie King, explicitly stated on many occasions during his career, both before and after the war, that he considered Canada a white nation. During his time in office, Canada’s immigration policy favoured immigrants from the British Isles and King enacted numerous laws to restrict immigration from places like Asia, all on the impetus of maintaining ethnic homogeneity. King’s government also denied Jewish refugees’ entry into Canada, further discrediting the idea that Canada fought WWII to stop “anti-Semitism”. After visiting Germany in 1937, King had some criticisms of Hitler, but he also had many positive things to say about him too.
In truth, Canada was no less “racist” than National Socialist Germany was during this era. The conception of Canada held by Canadian soldiers who fought in WWII was that of a European derived nation which belonged to them and that this was what they were fighting on behalf of. Whether or not the war actually served these interests is another question entirely. Regardless of how I may feel towards that question, I still consider the valor Canadian soldiers showed at Juno Beach or Hong Kong heroic. However, the narrative that this was done on behalf of democracy and universal human rights is false.
In addition to the myth of WWII as the “good war”, today we are force-fed “heroes” like Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Anne Frank, and Albert Einstein. Rather than being revered for exceptional deeds as warriors, statesmen, or pioneers, these individuals are deemed “heroes” for their purported victimhood status at the hands of Europeans (except Einstein was also renowned for his scientific contributions). This has resulted in our culture venerating weakness and demonizing strength, which, in turn, has established victimhood as the highest indicator of virtue under the dominant morality in the West.
These individuals are upheld as virtuous for their contributions to the advancement of the universalist egalitarian creed which currently dominates the West. In reality, an analysis of any of these figures (possibly with the exception of Anne Frank since she was only 15 when she died) will show that they were simply ethnic activists pursuing their own group interests. The appeals these individuals made to egalitarianism and universalism were simply strategic ploys to gain the sympathy of Europeans in order to advance their respective causes.
They didn’t genuinely believe in these values as evidenced by the movements they spawned such as BLM, the ANC, Hindu Nationalism, and Zionism, all of which are proudly ethnocentric and have abandoned any appeals to universalism. The supposed “heroism” which these now-adored figures are alleged to have carried out is that they promoted their own group interests in opposition to those of Europeans, the thing the postwar creed axiomatically declares the greatest evil. Furthermore, this wasn’t achieved through conquest, but through deceptively appealing to a sense of fairness and compassion in Europeans which they had no intention of reciprocating.
Probably the most influential portrayals of heroism in pop culture during this era have been comic book superheroes. These fictional characters do embody some heroic virtues. They are portrayed as having extraordinary strength, placing them far above the average mortal. However, they typically are not portrayed as being heroes on behalf of a specific group of people to whom they are loyal, but rather the universal good of all humanity. The storylines of comic book heroes such as Spider-Man, Superman, and Batman are typically set in major metropolitan areas such as New York City, and their adversaries usually include one-dimensionally evil foes purely motivated by self-interest.
This has served to reinforce the idea that heroism is universalist, that heroes are selfless defenders of all mankind rather than their own kind. The phrase “cartoonishly evil” exists because in the real world, one’s enemies usually don’t resemble a villain from a Saturday morning cartoon. They are often simply representatives of the interests of their own group, and you oppose them out of loyalty to yours. Batman stopping the Joker from blowing up Gotham just to see it burn would universally be recognized as good, but would Batman fight alongside Theodore Roosevelt in Cuba during the Spanish-American War? That would mean his heroism is not universal, but specific to his country, the United States.
It’s also worth noting that almost every single iconic comic book hero in pop culture today was written by Jewish authors in the United States in the 20th century. As a result, undertones of Jewish angst in American society were regularly infused into these stories. For example, the character Superman, a creation Jewish comic creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, is an alien who blends in with humanity, but continues to feel like an outsider due to his exceptionality. This is a not very subtle allegory for how Jews see themselves in American society. It’s noteworthy that the story places the social outsider in the role of the hero in contrast to traditional tales where the hero is a part of society.
X-Men, which was written by Jewish comic creators Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, is a story of a team mutants whose mutations grant them superhuman powers but also result in their ostracization from society. The overarching theme of X-Men is the veneration of otherness. The mutants are portrayed as victims of, yet morally superior to, mainstream society. The X-Men have been likened to outsiders in American society such as Jews, blacks, or homosexuals, and the story is a parable for the dominant egalitarian universalist morality of the present.
Even Captain America, a comic book hero who ostensibly represents the traditional heroic virtue of patriotism, was in fact a subversion of it. The character was originally written in 1940 by Jewish comic creators Joe Simon and Jack Kirby as propaganda designed to encourage the American public to support the United States entering WWII, something which the majority of Americans opposed at the time. The character also served as early purveyor of the contemporary myth surrounding WWII. This is why, despite the guise of patriotism, it’s difficult to imagine Captain America fighting alongside General Winfield Scott in the Mexican-American War. While these works of fiction preach universalism, under the surface, they are laced with the metanarratives of a particular foreign group.
The conception of heroism in the West today exalts weakness over strength and devotion to a vague universal humanity over allegiance to one’s own people. This totally contradicts how heroism was conceived of in eras prior. As a result, the West no longer has heroes today. This is why the establishment today can do nothing but desperately attempt to milk the dried-up cow of the postwar consensus a little more in an attempt to conjure an ounce of inspiration in the public. They are stuck with perpetually rehashing WWII and fear mongering about the return of Hitler, wheeling out the same handful of supposedly inspirational figures from the mid to late 20th century to depreciating effect, and creating infinite remakes of the pop culture of that era.
Not only do we have no heroes today but also attempts at manufacturing new ones consistently fall flat. Despite efforts at establishing individuals like Barack Obama, Angela Merkel, or Greta Thunberg symbols of reverence, none are widely celebrated today. No matter how much the establishment tries to sell them as inspirational, the vapid liberal managerialist globalism they represent is incapable of stirring the human soul the same way mighty rulers, fearsome warriors, and courageous adventurers did in centuries past.
Beyond the universalist egalitarian premises through which virtue is judged in the West today being based on lies, these values aren’t even pursued in earnest. European particularism is vilified under the pretension of these principles, but in reality, this is done in order to serve the particularist interests of other groups whose interests’ conflict with ours. The reason Westerners no longer have any figures worthy of celebration is because we are living in the metanarratives of other peoples in which we are cast as villains.
There’s a 40m tall statue of Genghis Khan standing in Mongolia today, erected in 2008 to commemorate the 800th anniversary of the founding of the Mongol Empire. If he had been European, we would be taught that Genghis Khan was the most evil man ever to exist. However, within the national metanarrative of Mongolians, who are not hampered by the same debilitating guilt and self-doubt as Westerners, he is celebrated as a legendary conqueror and the founder of their nation. What others may think about Genghis Khan is irrelevant. He is a hero of Mongolia and that is all that matters to them.
What the accusation of “racism”, which is recognized as the ultimate sin in the West today, really denotes is European particularism. When formerly celebrated figures in the West are derided as “racists” today, the supposed crime they are accused of having committed is that they were loyal to their own people first and foremost. Prior to this corrupt era which we are living in, loyalty to one’s own had been understood as virtuous. Moreover, this still remains the case outside the West. Our moral code being twisted to the point that our society now sees a virtue in treason is why we no longer have heroes.
My heroes are men like James Wolfe, James Cook, Isaac Brock, John A Macdonald, William Lyon Mackenzie King, and Thomas D’Arcy McGee. I reject the idea pushed today that they shouldn’t be celebrated in Canada but denounced as “white supremacist settler colonialists”. Not only that, but I also refuse to try to shoehorn them into the framework of this universalist egalitarian ideology. I won’t claim that King was an “antifascist” or that McGee was a “minority rights activist.” These are distortions of the truth designed to obfuscate what actually made them heroic.
When these men are labeled as “colonialists” and “racists” today, what those levying this condemnation really mean is that they fought, built, and ruled on behalf of us. Before this delusional and malevolent worldview took over the West in the past few decades, this was the standard through which soldiers, pioneers, and statesmen were proclaimed heroes. And it won’t be until we cast off this disease of the soul and return to a natural and healthy moral order that we will have heroes again.
***
False Fear of the World
By Thomas D’Arcy McGee
The World! The World! why plague it, man?
Why do you shake your world at me? For all its years, and all your fear,
The thing I am I still must be.
I see! I see! fine homes on hills,
With winding pathways smooth and fair;
But let me moil among the mills,
Rather than creep to riches there.
A heather bell on Travail’s cliffs,
Smells sweeter than a garden rose;
The lumber-barge outsails the skiffs,
And saves men’s lives when Boreas blows.
Sure, it’s enough to note the day,
With morning hail, and night adieu,
Nor squander precious hours away
With Affectation’s empty crew.
My friend’s my friend, my foe’s my foe;
I have my hours of joy and gloom; I do not love all mankind—No!
The heart I have has not the room.
But there is half-a-score I know, And her, and you, and this wee thing,
Who make my World, my all, below—
Cause, Constitution, Country, King!
71 comments
We need a new Imperial Party.
This essay is a wonderful explanation of various aspects of the weaponization of universalism, intended to inhibit whites’ desire to advance their own causes. If one recognizes that the world is a clash of particulars, each seeking to defend or expand their spheres, it becomes morally acceptable for all particulars to advance their own interests. If the goal is the universal brotherhood of mankind, then advancing particular interests can be a great sin. The overwhelming evidence is on the side of the particulars—and yet, we conduct our affairs as if universalism was truth.
It is curious how universalism, modern egalitarianism, and exaltation of the other seem to come in large part from one particular source.
A most fabulous essay!
In particular, this paragraph says it all:
🙂
Good article! Hitler is a hero! 🙃
We are being made to live through a manufactured style of the Assyrian occupation of the Israelites. Amongst our conservatives and liberals today there is a sinking feeling that we cannot always love our people; all we are left with now is the nostalgia for those that once did.
It seems to me that one requirement which is needed in order for someone to become a national hero is fame. We have ordinary soldiers who sacrifice their lives for their country but are never publicly acknowledged; but are they any less of a hero for their virtuous self-sacrifice?
Here the tale of the late Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian military officer who served in the IRGC, comes to mind. He was assassinated by the U.S. in 2020 and immediately became a national martyr whose death was mourned throughout the country. (Never mind that people opposing the regime, mainly the diaspora, were glad over his assassination.) But Soleimani had been receiving some media attention due to him fighting off ISIS from the region. The more victories that were gained by him against ISIS, the more media cover he received. Furthermore, the media cover he received expanded more or less to the entire world. My argument is that he would not necessarily have been targeted if he had not achieved a near-celebrity status.
Such was the pandemonium at Soleimani’s funeral that some 56 people were killed in a stampede.
I remember reading that, & thinking to myself, I wonder who would be the equivalent living hero among heritage White Americans these days.
Kim: I think no one living would elicit that kind of outpouring of grief in our countries. Going back on a different track the only ones I can think of are Diana Spencer and John Lennon, both had weeklong public wailing at their deaths (no stampedes, however).
Ah yes. Two high-profile ”’activist”’ Brits.
I remain thoroughly convinced that if Di had stayed married while her kids were minors, her son would not have married the divorced black American feminist that he did.
None living, but for the normie it’ll be a sportsballer, or taylor swift, or some garbage.
Some heroes are more famous because of their deaths, rather than becoause of their lives. If Che Guevara lived till age of 80 and died old, he would not be so popular. Ukrainian nationalist Bandera was killed by a Soviet agent in age of 50 and became a martyrer and hero. If he lived till the age of 80, he would be considered just as one on many exiled politicians.
I would add that JFK’s popularity is also mostly because of his mysterious death, rather than because of his real deeds in his lifetime.
No doubt that happened with JFK, there is no mystique builder like assassination. It happened with Lennon as well, he was an instant martyr and was immediately minted Saint John, much to McCartney’s chagrin, it’s hard to compete with a fallen hero.
And how many of the 27 club, if they’d lived longer or a different time would be a flea fart in a hurricane and not granted nauseating acclaim.
No doubt about that either, if you are not important enough to assassinate either offing yourself or drinking yourself to death is the path to fame and glory. A 60-year-old Janis Joplin would have been a sorry sight, though at 27 she was nothing to look at.
I tend to regard great scientists and physicians a heroes: Anthony Fauci, Richard Feynman, Jonas Salk, John von Neuman. People like that.
I agree with thinking of scientists as heroes in general, but you’re going to raise suspicions with those names.
Think of all the useless eaters they got rid of….
There are ancient men of our race I admire. Spartacus is one of them. There are not many of them.
Most of the mighty heroes of our past gave advice like this:
There are three things, young gentlemen, which you are constantly to bear in mind. Firstly, you must always implicitly obey orders, without attempting to form any opinion of your own respecting their propriety. Secondly, you must consider every man your enemy who speaks ill of your king; and thirdly, you must hate a Frenchman, as you do the devil.
— Nelson’s advice to his Midshipmen
Hate a Frenchman as you do the devil? What good is that to us?
The best men to learn from are those who teach us to guard the interests of our race, our interests as Whites.
I’ll say it again: if there are still Whites in three hundred years there will be statues of Kevin MacDonald. He will deserve them.
Sorry if this sounds rude, but you are viewing history like a lefty. All you’ve done is upend the racial aspect. If you pursue this line of thought to its logical conclusion, then you simply have to write whites off as incapable of racial self-awareness, given that we’ve spent nearly all of our history fighting each other. The alternative is to view history organically. This at least holds out the possibility that whites’ natural (albeit suppressed) ethnocentrism will re-align with their obvious political interests if circumstances, combined with pro-white activism, make this happen. Although we cannot regard this as inevitable.
Be pro-White. Act for the benefit of the racial type of which you are an instance. This is the right ethical standard. It does not depend on the date on the calendar or your location on a map. Fundamental moral standards do not work that way; they are right or wrong.
Yes antiwhite lefties think the opposite of this. They are morally wrong.
Morally wrong yet convinced they’re in the right and unquestionably the smartest one in the room, as all universal stupids believe.
What would JB think 13 years later? Optimism at a racial awakening? I never saw him as a depressed downer, but rather quiet jovial and cheerful.
Good essay. The short version is Whites are not allowed to have heroes unless the heroes are not White.
Even then, Whites must be trained to worship these heroes in the right way so that Whites ultimately demean themselves.
The reason Westerners no longer have any figures worthy of celebration is because we are living in the metanarratives of other peoples in which we are cast as villains.
Yes that’s why.
This whole article is great.
Not exactly recent anymore (man, I’m getting on in years), but do you guys remember Red Adair? For a while, he certainly enjoyed hero status during the Gulf War. My own dad considered him a hero. I don’t know if he deserved it or not; just suddenly remembered him while reading this article.
But yes, struggling to come up with recent German heroes. There have been attempts to sell us these heroic politicians (which sadly might be an oxymoron), but I fail to see it.
The Germans have always been a nation not only of warrior heroes, but also of scientists, engineers, doctors and poets. Maybe you can find somebody of them who is woth to be called a hero? Speaking about poets I would suggest Frank Rennicke, zum Beispiel.
At the beginning of the 19th century Germany had the reputation as the land of poets and thinkers, abstract dreamers with their heads in the clouds. With Bismarck the idea of the German warrior came back to the fore. It was Heine who said that when the talisman of the cross was dispensed with the German Berserker would return. As for poets I’d go for Holderlin in the number one spot, surely he deserves it.
Frau Schnabel wrote about RECENT German heroes, so it would be incorrect to name poets of two centuries ago, like Hölderlin.
You’re back! Where have you been? 🙃
Welcome back. Long time no post.
The German poets-romanticists like von Arndt, Novalis, Uhland, already mentioned Hölderlin, and some time later Hoffmann von Fallersleben have born German national “Geist” and German nationalism. They were not abstract dreamers.
For me, Wernher von Braun comes readily to mind. He died of cancer in 1977, which was the right time, I guess, because the Apollo program had ended and the NBC TV miniseries Holocaust came out the next year. So today, it is hard to find any objective views about him. “It’s messy,” says one Canadian hipster chick and Apollo historian (LINK).
However, I don’t see how von Braun is a “literal war criminal.” That is complete bullshït. I guess because von Braun designed missiles for Hitler or something.
Also, the thousands of prisoners who died at the V2 rocket factory were not actually building the rockets ─ that requires skilled labor ─ but were instead in the process of digging the Nordhausen bomb-proof tunnels at breakneck speed after the RAF bombed the Peenemünde technology park in 1943. The RAF also bombed the Boelcke hospital at Nordhausen just days before its capture by the Americans in 1945 who filmed the carnage for our edification.
Dr. Wernher von Braun was Gen. Walter Dornberger’s chief engineer in the development of the A4/V2 rocket, and neither had anything to do with either building the missile or its operational use, which was taken from the German Army Weapons Office and given to SS-Obergruppenführer Dr. Hans Kammler ─ much to Dornberger’s disappointment.
Dr. Dornberger worked for Bell Aerospace after the war, which contributed to many NASA contracts. My Dad and late Uncle were working for them in 1969 when the Moon Landing occurred. Some of my Uncle’s computer code was actually used on the Lunar Lander.
Anyway, my Dad did the reliability work for the Minuteman Missile booster for Thiokol in 1961 that would have dropped a 1 megaton nuke on some Socialist paradise at the behest of President Kennedy ─ but although Dad preferred working for NASA projects like keeping the Space Shuttle from blowing up in the 1980s, he was not the least bit ashamed of giving his country the ability to send the enemy a “big wallop” on the business end of an ICBM if necessary.
Anyway, in the century before World War II and the “brain drain” that came afterwards, German scientists were paramount. Even today, Germany ranks third for Nobel Prize winners (LINK).
🙂
It’s pretty much assumed that Dr. Strangelove was based on von Braun but Kubrick told Arthur Clarke to pass the word on to Wernher that he was not and, at any rate, no hard feelings. Everyone assumes that Peter Sellers did not feel likewise.
Other possible prototypes of fictious Dr. Strangelove were all Jews, like Herman Kahn, John von Neumann, Edward Teller, and possible, even Kissinger.
***
I regularly see Amy Teitel on History 2 Channel, and I suppose she is a Jewess. She is from Toronto, Canadian Jerusalem.
Many groups, mainly Jewish organizations, have attempted to discredit and tarnish Von Braun’s legacy. Some of these organizations have demanded that any plaque or street that honors him be removed.
For contemporary German heroes I’d nominate an all things considered rather circumspect green eye shade bureaucrat named Thilo Sarrazin. He wrote the seminal book on the race swamping of Germany called Germany Abolishes Itself. It was a top seller in Germany and you know it is powerful as no one has ever seen fit to translate it into English.
Ernst Zündel; Germar Rudolf und andere “Revisionisten”.
There is a 1968 movie with John Wayne called Hellfighters that is loosely based on Red Adair.
🙂
We have heroes. We have white heroes even in Canada. Like the people who organized the trucker protest against immigration and the government. There’s a great contemporary writer and hero in Canada, Ricardo Duchesne. Anyone who rises up against Zog, democracy, degeneracy is a hero!
I am fairly certain that the Canadian trucker protests were against the COVID mandates, not immigration. But you are spot on, they are heroes.
Ideally, hopefully, we can be heroes to our kids.
Dr. Duchesne is another who flipped from leftist Marxism and is quite the impressive academic. His new work is excellent. I doubt he’d accept the title of hero but Jeremy MacKenzie I do consider as a vanguardist for leading the charge in his own way for a greater White Canada.
Joe Gould: August 21, 2025 … The best men to learn from are those who teach us to guard the interests of our race, our interests as Whites.
—
Yes. Seek heroic men out and follow them. Consider this from a living hero of our race: “Of Heroes and Celebrities” at nationalvanguard.org
by Volker Zorn
I’M NO LONGER a young man and I remember what it was like to grow up in White America in the 1950s and 1960s. One of the many things that was different in those days is that we had heroes to look up to.
I define a hero as some who gives or risks his (or her) life to defend others or to advance a worthy cause.
In those days, every young boy aspired to be a hero and every young girl wanted to grow up to marry one.
Some heroes are famous. Back in the days of my youth, we idolized Davy Crockett (who gave his life at the Alamo in defense against a Mexican invasion). On a different level, we admired George Washington, who led men on the field of battle to give this land its political independence. Southerners likewise adored Robert E. Lee. But there were also everyday heroes (as some might call them) such as the firefighter who rushed into a burning building to save a family trapped there, or a soldier who threw himself on a live grenade to save his comrades. Of course, women could be heroes, too, such as the mother who defends her child from a mad dog, or a nurse who risks her life treating plague victims.
But as the ’60s blurred into the ’70s, we heard less and less of heroes (whom the Jewish-controlled media began to depict as “boring” and “corny”) and instead heard more and more about “anti-heroes.” The anti-hero combined behavior that was often admirable with actions that sometimes contravened traditional White morality…
But as the ’60s blurred into the ’70s, we heard less and less of heroes (whom the Jewish-controlled media began to depict as “boring” and “corny”) and instead heard more and more about “anti-heroes.” The anti-hero combined behavior that was often admirable with actions that sometimes contravened traditional White morality.
At some point in the ’70s, we began to hear that, in the Black community, the pimp was a “cultural hero.” Later it became the gangster who was the idol of Blacks. Remember the oversize tattoo that Tupac Shakur had on his torso, proudly proclaiming “THUG LIFE”?
The controlled media also began to describe certain overpaid professional athletes as “sports heroes” — although there is little about playing basketball that is genuinely heroic! The female version of the sports hero was the “supermodel,” who was held up as an aspirational ideal for young White girls. Do you remember Kate Moss and “heroin chic?” These women, many of whom were genuinely beautiful, were known to be unnaturally thin (and hence infertile), using cocaine to suppress their appetites. They were also famous for their sexual promiscuity and were frequently praised for being race-mixers.
But all that is behind us now, for the new idol in popular culture is the “celebrity.” And what is a celebrity? Well, it is simply someone who is famous for being well-known. One does not have to actually accomplish anything to be a celebrity — much less risk one’s life! Simply accumulate followers on social media and get mentioned on TMZ, and voila! — you are now at the pinnacle of the social pyramid….
Remember the oversize tattoo that Tupac Shakur had on his torso, proudly proclaiming “THUG LIFE”? And quite flamboyant in that recent resurfaced video where he makes Richard Simmons look like Stone Cold Steve Austin. I never thought I’d see blacks flip that switch seemingly overnight and be that molded by jewish malevolent influence. As the nerd lost his smarts and devolved into the Williamsburg hipster and insufferable “anti-racist” sjw, the celebrity of 2004 (some of whom can act) gave way to the hated “influencer”.
Unc, I’m proud to say that I haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about here.
—
Uncle Semantic: August 22, 2025 Remember the oversize tattoo that Tupac Shakur had on his torso, proudly proclaiming “THUG LIFE”? And quite flamboyant in that recent resurfaced video where he makes Richard Simmons look like Stone Cold Steve Austin. I never thought I’d see blacks flip that switch seemingly overnight and be that molded by jewish malevolent influence. As the nerd lost his smarts and devolved into the Williamsburg hipster and insufferable “anti-racist” sjw, the celebrity of 2004 (some of whom can act) gave way to the hated “influencer”.
—
Your point in all that, if there is one, sailed right over my head, thank goodness.
To bring the discussion back on the topic of heroes, here is a piece from the National Alliance’s Attack! tabloid in 1977: “The Men of the Alamo” at nationalvanguard.org by Dr. William L. Pierce
AS THE DUSK gathered in the early evening of March 5, 1836, William Travis mustered the 183 men under his command on the dusty plaza of the Alamo, a fortress-like former Spanish mission. As the assembled Texans listened intently, the lanky officer outlined the situation. He made explicit what everyone already knew: there was little hope of surviving the onslaught of the 4,000-strong Mexican army which surrounded the fortress. They could hope for no further relief…
…The more than 1,500 Mexican casualties were attended to. The dead were buried under the supervision of San Antonio’s Mexican mayor, Francisco Ruiz, while the wounded were ministered to by the city’s Mexican population. But the Texan dead Santa Anna sought to dishonor by denying them burial. He ordered the bodies of every one of the Alamo’s 183 defenders burned.
And so the great funeral pyre was enveloped in flames, and the fire consumed the men of the Alamo — just as countless times a thousand years before, it had consumed the fallen heroes of whom their ancestors had sung in the longhouses and the great halls of northern Europe. Like all the champions of their race, the Texans treasured honor and courage above life itself. The echoes of their heroism reverberated at San Jacinto six weeks later, when Sam Houston’s men avenged them on Santa Anna, and for a century afterward their memory gave Americans the strength to face hopeless odds resolutely.
Now, as the alien subverters stealthily work their will behind the scenes, few White Americans hearken to the lessons of the Alamo. Throughout the whole American Southwest, the mestizo descendants of Santa Anna’s horde bid to win back what he lost, as the brown flood streams unchecked across our borders.
It is time to renew the pact between the living and the dead: that they shall live on in the memory of their race, and that we, remembering, shall have their example always before us, exhorting us to carry out unflinchingly whatever the future of our race requires.
Easy: “Us” Whites aren’t allowed heroes – a further Jewish tactic to dismantle our history, traditions, holidays and culture.
Hell, the Jewish media are now replacing traditional White characters with blacks, the BBC is particularly guilty of this tactic.
The erasure of White history, and obfuscation of its heroes began over 2,000 years ago when an alien creed, and its heroes were forced upon our race. Most White Christians are so damn dumb, they think that the characters in the Bible are White. 🙃
On Bill O’Reilly today, someone named Joy Reid declared that White men are mediocre, and that without black, and brown people there would be no American culture. In his rebuttal Bill listed a number of jewish men beginning with Steven Spielberg. It is depressing beyond words; White peoples are just shadows in this world; we have become an anachronism. If you are White, when you walk out your door, you are on your own, don’t expect any help if you get into trouble, there is not an ounce of racial loyalty out there. 🙃
Peter Quint: August 21, 2025 … On Bill O’Reilly today… In his rebuttal Bill listed a number of jewish men beginning with Steven Spielberg.
[T]here is not an ounce of racial loyalty out there.
—
Sure there is, Peter. You’re just looking for it in the wrong places. Speilberg and those other Jews look White to Bill O’Reilly. They sign his checks so he overlooks their haken nozzles.
If there is any racial loyalty, don’t look for it in White Christians, or their churches, all they care about is “virtue signaling,” and marrying off their young people to muds. 🙃
Peter Quint: August 21, 2025 ...If there is any racial loyalty, don’t look for it in White Christians, or their churches, all they care about is “virtue signaling,” …
—
Defeatist!
I do not even know what “virtue signaling” means, Peter. But I know what racial loyalty among Whites looks like because I decided a long time ago to become a racial separatist. It’s easy once you have the will to associate exclusivly among your own, come what may.
I put the Christian bullshit behind me at the age of 12.
“Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so. Eei-eei-o!”
Re: “I put the Christian bullshit behind me at the age of 12. “Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so. Eei-eei-o!”
Mr. Williams, you sound very bitter and cynical. All childhood Christianity is not the same. As a youngster, I also couldn’t stand any nonsense games, plays & songs with no point, games with no rules, or those with instantly changing rules. Being loved (or not) by supernatural beings was completely irrelevant. Roman Catholicism offered solid instruction to me: Do not take your own life. It is a mortal sin, for which you will never ever be forgiven, and it is a great shame on your family. There are behavioral rules & there are consequences. No abortions, no divorces, no suicides. Go to church every Sun, & observe the golden rule (<– which I personally believe is rendered void when interacting with others who do not share this same sentiment.)
You request apologies for criticisms of Cosmotheism beliefs, yet you can really dish out criticisms for Christianity, even for small kids who sometimes require old fashioned fear for motivation for survival. I don’t believe your attitude will ever convince many adults to choose Cosmotheism. You do not sound at peace.
joy reid is an insufferable pampered black bitch known for making the most repulsive comments about Whites who her worthless life depends on for everything. She’s the moron who said Whites shouldn’t be allowed in the trucking industry. My raceless boomer father would watch oreilly with the other george bush-voting old fart bags during the tucker bowtie days. Who the hell watches fox, cnn, or msnbc anymore? Cancel stern and colbert but not that trash or bill maher? However, it was funny when that unstable idiot keith olbermann called him ‘bill orally.”
It would be good if The View winds up being cancelled just like Stephen Colbert’s show did.
Joy Reid reminds me of a bumper sticker that I see occasionally, even though it doesn’t mention race. It says,” Hate the Patriarchy, then give us back our electricity.”
I was recently at the grave of William Cody, a.k.a. Buffalo Bill that has a museum dedicated to his memory next to the grave. I think the reason for his notoriety is that he is an embodiment of the American folk myth of the wild west and the last frontier. No one living the suburbs is going to have that aspect, I hate to say it. Despite the comfort of the American suburbs many enjoy, especially many whites, it has come at the expense of the Faustian spirit.
Nice museum in Cody. They have an excellent and most impressive gun collection.
🙂
Peter Quint: August 20, 2025 Good article! Hitler is a hero!
—
Yes, Peter, Mr. Hitler, by Volker Zorn’s definition, was, is and shall forever be a hero of our race;
A hero is one who gives or risks his (or her) life to defend others or to advance a worthy cause.
The Leader is a wrongly convicted “unpopular figure” — a conviction that true history has overturned. Hitler’s final statement prior to committing suicide:
Above all I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, International Jewry. Given in Berlin, this 29th day of April 1945, 4:00 A.M. -Adolf Hitler
Kim: August 22, 2025: Mr. Williams, you sound very bitter and cynical… you can really dish out criticisms for Christianity, even for small kids who sometimes require old fashioned fear for motivation for survival… You do not sound at peace.
—
You’re right, Miss Kim. I can hardly be at peace when my race is in an all out war for its survival, while some members of my race — like you, apparently — believe in and worship our enemy’s mythical tribal god, and even believe we should lie to small children and make them fearful. Fearful of what?
Why lie to children? At what point in a child’s life do you stop lying to him? Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, Jesus, Jehovah, human equality, the Holocaust?
I like this from your Big Jew Book of Lies: 1 Corinthians 13:11 — When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
My daddy taught me to tell the truth, even when it hurts. I had already put away many childish things before I became a man.
Today, 22 August, is Lana’s and my 22d wedding anniversary. She likes that I’m honest — “pathologically honest,” she says. Cosmotheists like honesty and truth; Christians accept many lies unquestioningly.
“while some members of my race — like you, apparently — believe in and worship our enemy’s mythical tribal god, and even believe we should lie to small children and make them fearful. Fearful of what?”
I do not worship anyone/anything, let alone an ancient man that should have never been executed (& on my behalf??) I didn’t ask to be born. And I take personal objection to the notion that I was ‘born guilty’. I’m particularly annoyed that generally every Christian authority agrees that I will be damned in hell for eternity, if I do not worship Jesus. HAVING to have certain thoughts/beliefs in my mind, as opposed to being judged on my actions, behavior & good deeds, frankly, seems to lack an important essence of humanity. I’d be lying if on my deathbed, I announced, “I accept that Jesus’s death was necessary to save my soul.”
“Why lie to children?”
Do you have kids? You need to put things in terms they will respond to. You need to stop them from making irreversible mistakes in their lives, because not all things can be fixed. It is also important not to demoralize them with hard & horrible truth, or exaggerations, spreading total hopelessness that will crush their very will to live.
“At what point in a child’s life do you stop lying to him?”
I’ve always tried to be truthful. We know the storybook character of Santa Claus. Let’s talk about who St. Nicholas was. The mythical & legendary fat-man-in-the-red-suit was referred to as a modern St. Nick in the famous tale.
“I like this from your Big Jew Book of Lies: 1 Corinthians 13:11 — When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”
The Old Testament + New Testament is a collection of stories that are often contradictory & like poems, can be interpreted any way someone wishes.
“My daddy taught me to tell the truth, even when it hurts.”
Did he also not teach you to act civil and in a compassionate manner?
“Today, 22 August, is Lana’s and my 22d wedding anniversary. She likes that I’m honest — “pathologically honest,” she says.”
Happy anniversary. It’s great to hear that your wife loves your unsolicited brutal honesty 24/7. You two are perfect for each other.
“Cosmotheists like honesty and truth; Christians accept many lies unquestioningly.”
My Protestant husband tells me I (rather, my existence,) makes him question his faith in Christ every single day, lol.
Kim: August 22, 2025 …Happy anniversary.
—
We thank you, Kim.
You’re welcome.
Mr. Williams, thank goodness for free speech here at Counter-Currents. I have to tell you that I can’t be a member of NV, nor can I make a large donation to NV, because of your my-way-or-the-highway viewpoint(s). ALL WNs agree, race first. This should be sufficient, because many White Americans were baptized Christian, or were raised in culturally Christian homes as children.
Because “Xianity” elicits such a visceral & distracting reaction, I’ll make a comparison to share how detrimental your caustic opinion is of those Whites who admit to having received some benefit of Christianity (& I use that word very loosely) at some point over the course of their lifetime.
I happen to be pretty anti-military, believing its chief function is to kill people & break things, all in support of ZOG. As a young adult, you chose to enlist. Looking back, you’ve changed your opinions. In spite of having changed your mind on supporting American armed services since serving, you gained some personal skills from your experience– self-discipline, etc.
If you happen to mention, “This morning, I got up & made my bed, and then…” WTF?! You made your bed?! That’s some ZOG brain washing on display! You’re still a slave to their system/brainwashing.
Your constant denigration of those who admit to having had any beneficial experiences from interacting with principled people who were inspired by the golden rule, is very off-putting. I could never fathom ever relaxing around someone who shares your current opinion. It’s December & you want to make a plum pudding?? You @#$%^& Christcuck you! I am an agnostic, though & through. Likewise, I’m a big fan of WLP’s work, but I happen to disagree with Dr. Pierce’s unique religious/spiritual beliefs. You seem to think, I must accept everything he said, or I do not really appreciate him. No. As with all religions, theologies, philosophies, there’s stuff I agree with, & stuff I don’t agree with. And I believe this is true for a large swath of White nationalists.
Some people consider certain black figures heroes. If you were to remove the ones who are athletes, entertainers, politicians, and activists, there would be very few to consider.
Over the years, many wise things, and great articles have been published on this site, however there are four comments that I would class as profound:
1. No jew would last five minutes as a White!
2. We live in an Orwellian society, every conversation is analyzed, and every comment scrutinized!
3. The primary purpose of the military is to beat White men down.
4. We are living in the metanarratives of other peoples in which we are cast as villains.
These observations deserve remembrance! 🙃
This was an enjoyable essay, and the meditations on heroism are thoughtful in the context of the conflict between a nation/race and the “universal man.”
Perhaps the first universal hero was Alexander the Great, and Hellenistic Greece the result of a try at universal order, which Rome took from Greece.
it’s interesting that Hitler, as he grew in power, cared less about the Volk but wanted a universal order. Note that on his fabled great dome, the swastika was replaced at its top by the eagle. Hitler had very definite echoes of Roman power. Yet, to quote Harold Covington, he considered Hitler a true avatar, a force that nature brought up…in this case, to take on Stalin and buy time for the West. Harold posed that in the thirties, Stalin and the communist movement could easily have overwhelmed the west, as communism was in great sympathy, even in the US. So here, heroism becomes a cosmic dimension. In retrospect, it was very close to getting power here and there, the communist movement then.
I was very intrigued by the author’s references to Canada. I recall a very good two volume book, Flames Across the Border, written by Canadian Pierre Berton, discussing the war, its horror, and heroism in Canadians uniting to resist American invasion. Berton believed the war created Canada as a people. English, certainly, but also an alliance of Quebecois, Indians, and Catholics. All three knew that if the Yankees took over, they were through.
He also noted how the Canadian ethos is to go along with the system of law and not form republics. Readers might like to find a six-part graphic novel, from 2015, We Stand on Guard, where the US invades Canada essentially to grab its water, and local Canadians resist. Sort of like Red Dawn where Canucks whack Yanks. As late as 1920 there was War Plan Red, a plan for the U.S. military to invade and seize Canada if war with Britain came.
Remarks on comic books were also interesting, especially Jewish control. Jews LOVE superheroes. I once offered a discussion on graphic novels and its many American and European types, but a Jewish guy took over the lecture and simply went on…Marvel, D.C., D.C., Marvel. Superheroes and nothing else. jew used to cover their preferences, but that changed. In one X-Men Kitty Pryde, one of their leaders, refers when she dated a guy, and he said nasty remarks about Jews. She said “My blood boiled.” Then: “I am Jewish. I am a mutant. And I want people to know who and what I am.” All the “Americanism” of earlier years isn’t needed anymore. In one part, the action stopped so an X Man could remind readers that there are no “mutants,” only “humans.” I can imagine how they transfer this to the new transgender movement and whatever. One Jewish cartoonist gave a lecture arguing that the “decent” comics in the early fifties were killed by “McCarthyism,” and that Superheroes rose as a response. Yeah, Jews REALLY hate McCarthy as well.
Kim: August 25, 2025 Mr. Williams, thank goodness for free speech here at Counter-Currents. I have to tell you that I can’t be a member of NV, nor can I make a large donation to NV, because of your my-way-or-the-highway viewpoint(s). ALL WNs agree, race first. This should be sufficient, because many White Americans were baptized Christian, or were raised in culturally Christian homes as children.
—
“My way or the highway”? Ha! I’ve always said NA is not for everyone, but for the few, the very few at this stage in the racial revolution. It is not for you.
You don’t pay very close attention, Kim. National Vanguard is merely the online magazine for the National Alliance. People do not send donations to our magazine, only to the organization William Pierce founded more than 50 years ago. Kevin Strom maintains our Websites and hosts our weekly radio show, American Dissident Voices. I pay Kevin’s salary to do that for the Alliance..
—
I’m a big fan of WLP’s work, but I happen to disagree with Dr. Pierce’s unique religious/spiritual beliefs.
—
That’s unusual since there is a consistent Cosmotheist thread that runs through nearly everything he wrote or recorded.
—
You seem to think, I must accept everything he said, or I do not really appreciate him. No. As with all religions, theologies, philosophies, there’s stuff I agree with, & stuff I don’t agree with. And I believe this is true for a large swath of White nationalists.
—
You and I would do better to not discuss Dr. Pierce’s beliefs, though you say you’re a big fan of his.
You’ve got what Pierce called “spiritual baggage,” as does that “large swath of White nationalists” you mention.
I know that when there are more Whites who understand Pierce’s philosophy and embrace it than there are Whites whose beliefs are all over the board — unfocused — as they are presently, our racial struggle will be half won.
Imagine Jews not having their “us vs. them”cohesive ideology. Then imagine Whites having it, based on Pierce’s unique separatist racial philosophy.
Kim, you think I am mean and hard and crude. Maybe you’re right. I have always been a fighter, not a writer. I follow Pierce, the writer.
But I was baptized a Presbyterian. What went wrong with me? Why don’t I accept the mythical Jew Jesus as my personal savior? Pierce was also a baptized Presbyterian. What went wrong with him? Why didn’t he go along with the Christian herd?
You seem to think Dr. Pierce was more genteel and reasonable than I. You’re right about that. He was a genuine gentleman; but, he was as serious as a heart attack when it came to preserving our race and it comes through clearly to some of us in his Nature-based, scientifically evaluated Cosmotheism. It takes a very dim view of Christianity to those who pay close attention.
Note this from him 24 years ago: “To Be, or To Be Nice” at nationalvanguard.org.
by Dr. William L. Pierce
… I have reported to you from time to time on the situations in Rhodesia, now officially known as “Zimbabwe,” and in South Africa. It is depressing to me to talk about these things. It is depressing to me to see the predictions that I made long ago coming true. And it has been even more depressing than usual recently as the deterioration of conditions in those countries has accelerated, as the ultimate horror that I predicted has become visible.
Two weeks ago, we talked about the growing phenomenon of the gang rape of White women by Blacks in South Africa. It has been a little over a year, however, since we talked about the seizure and looting of White farms in Rhodesia and the killing of White farm families there by mobs of Blacks. President for Life Robert Mugabe wanted to enhance his popularity among his followers by taking land away from White farmers and giving it to Blacks. When he began this activity Mugabe had to use a certain degree of caution for two reasons. First, virtually all the agricultural product of Rhodesia came from the White farms; Blacks engaged only in subsistence farming, and White farms that were turned over to Blacks essentially went out of production, weakening the country’s economy. Second, a substantial portion of White Rhodesians were British citizens, and the British government was protesting the dispossession and mistreatment of its citizens.
It soon became clear to Mugabe, however, that the British government of Prime Minister Tony Blair really didn’t care what happened to Rhodesia’s Whites and that the government’s protests were merely empty words. Furthermore, as the Rhodesian economy, badly damaged by the earlier seizures of White farms, sank further toward chaos, jobless Blacks clamored for even more White land. A government of reasonable men might have salvaged the Rhodesian economy by a combination of austerity measures and strict law enforcement, but that is not the African way. The African way — more generally, the Black way is to kill the goose and get all the golden eggs now. So Mugabe, in order to maintain his popularity, has continued to let the mobs of jobless Blacks seize White farms and despoil them.
The process is now spiraling out of control. Last week a group of White farmers fought their way through a mob of squatters who were attacking a White farm. They rescued the besieged White farmer, but they injured a number of the Black squatters while doing it. The Mugabe government in turn arrested 23 of the White farmers who had been involved in the rescue, denied them bond, and threw them into prison in chains, where they now are at the tender mercies of Black jailers.
It is mid-winter in Rhodesia, and the unheated prison cells where the White farmers are being held are freezing. When three jailers in the prison responded to a request from the Whites for blankets, Mugabe promptly had the jailers themselves arrested. The Whites are not to be “coddled,” he announced, sending a clear message to the other jailers and to policemen that Whites could be abused with impunity. Mugabe has, in effect, declared all White Rhodesians to be outlaws. Blacks may attack them and steal their property, and they may not attempt to protect themselves. In order to make things perfectly clear, last Saturday Mugabe’s second-in-command, Vice President Joseph Msika, announced: “Whites are not human beings.” In the past year only nine White farmers have been murdered by Blacks during the seizures of White farms, but the death toll is now certain to increase rapidly.
Also last Saturday, Mugabe steeply increased his goal for the dispossession of Whites when he revealed a new plan calling for 95 per cent of all White farmland in Rhodesia to be turned over to Blacks. That, on top of the imprisonment of the 23 White farmers, caused a mass exodus of White families from farms in the area of northern Rhodesia where mobs of Black squatters have been most active recently. Three hundred women and children were evacuated from 130 White farms over the weekend, and more than 60 of those farms already have been invaded and ransacked by squatters, who routinely slaughter all pet cats and dogs left behind, carry off everything of value, even ripping out bathtubs and other plumbing fixtures, and destroy the rest. White evacuees in the town of Chinhoyi were attacked on the streets by Blacks, and White women who attempted to take food and warm clothing to their imprisoned husbands were beaten outside the prison.
And the controlled media here are silent. The politicians are silent. The Christian ministers, who used to preach crusades against Rhodesia when it was a White country, are silent. The various bleeding-heart types, who are terribly distressed over what AIDS is doing to the Black population of Africa and always are running around organizing international conferences and lobbying the government to provide more medical assistance to AIDS-stricken Blacks, are silent.
The media bosses are silent because they are happy with the present situation. This is the way they planned it. The politicians and most of the rest are silent because they really don’t care. Those who are a little uncomfortable about the stepped-up genocide being waged against Whites in Rhodesia are afraid to say anything lest they be accused of “White racism.” Everyone with any sense at all of Political Correctness understands that any expression of concern or sympathy for White people engaged in a conflict with Blacks is racist. The details are irrelevant: in any racial conflict, one must support the non-White side in order to be Politically Correct. It doesn’t matter what the Blacks are doing to the Whites: if you complain about it, you will be accused of racism.
I’ve seen this happen many times. My organization, the National Alliance, distributes leaflets and stickers with the message, “Earth’s most endangered species: the White race help preserve it,” and then our address. That’s all: no mention of Blacks, Jews, racial conflict, or anything else, just a call for concern about preserving our own kind. And yet every time we distribute this message, the news media begin shrieking hysterically about “racism” and “hate”: every time. Some of our “Earth’s most endangered species” stickers show up in a school or on a university campus or posted on traffic signs in a community, and the local media people begin shrieking about “hate propaganda” and urge local citizens to call the police if they see one of our stickers.
The big Jewish media bosses have everyone who works for the media, Gentile as well as Jew, so thoroughly conditioned, so thoroughly indoctrinated with anti-White propaganda, that any expression of concern for White people is denounced immediately as “hate” and “racism.” I’ll guarantee you, if the White Rhodesians were mopping up the Blacks over there, running the last of them out of the country and reclaiming their farms, there would be non-stop anti-Rhodesian coverage on every television news program in America and in Britain. There would be calls from the politicians in the Congress for our government to send in the U.S. Army to save the Blacks and punish the wicked White Rhodesians. A strict embargo on all trade with Rhodesia already would have been imposed. That idiot we have in the White House wouldn’t have to study the matter the way he did before issuing a statement on stem cell research; the Jews would have him on television immediately denouncing the Rhodesians and threatening grim reprisals. And his British counterpart, Tony Blair, would be shaking his fist and foaming at the mouth as he raved against the evils of “White racism.”…
continued at the link
“To Be, or To Be Nice” at nationalvanguard.org by William Pierce — continued for you, Kim
And do you know what the British and U.S. governments have done to discourage Mugabe in his current war against the White population of Rhodesia? The Brits are threatening not to let their cricket team play in Rhodesia when it goes on tour next year. Last week the U.S. Senate passed something called the “Zimbabwe Democracy and Recovery Act.” It couples additional monetary handouts from the U.S. Treasury for various programs in Rhodesia to visa restrictions on those charged with violent repression of civil rights. Visa restrictions! That’s what’s supposed to make Mugabe behave himself!
Of course, there’s no hint in the “Zimbabwe Democracy and Recovery Act” of the genocide being waged against White Rhodesians. Really, the whole idea of the thing is to provide money for the so-called “democratic opposition” to Mugabe’s dictatorship: money to finance Black democrats, not to save White Rhodesians. Even so, the whole business is being handled very quietly, lest the media make a fuss about it and claim that it’s a “racist” act because by helping Mugabe’s opponents it may help the White farmers. But really, there’s no danger of the media making a fuss about it because the last thing the Jewish media bosses want to do is alert the White lemmings here about what’s going on in Rhodesia.
Well, as I said earlier, I don’t like to talk about what’s going on in Rhodesia and in South Africa, and believe me, what’s happening in Rhodesia now will be happening in South Africa soon. It depresses me to talk about this. I talk about it because it is a powerful lesson for us. It was only a few years ago that both of these countries were White countries. They were good, decent places for our people to live. I knew South Africans and Rhodesians. They were better people, on the average, than White Americans: better looking, healthier, better racially, better genetically. They had a small problem with Black terrorists, but it was a small problem. Fewer Rhodesians and South Africans were killed each year by Black terrorists than were killed in traffic accidents. Many, many more died each year from smoking cigarettes than from fighting a bush war against Black communists such as Robert Mugabe. And yet both countries now are under Black rule and are sinking rapidly into savagery and chaos.
How did it happen? The short answer is that it happened because both countries were persuaded to commit collective race suicide. I knew Rhodesians more than 20 years ago, before they all decided to commit suicide. I have known South Africans both before and after their collective suicide in 1993. They had some weaknesses that I noticed from the beginning. For one thing they were far too strongly under the influence of their churches and of Christian doctrine. This was especially true of the Afrikaners, the Boers, but I also noticed it to a lesser extent among Rhodesians and among the English portion, the Anglican portion, of the South African population. The Christian churches trained every Black terrorist leader in Rhodesia and in South Africa, but this fact seemed to make no impression on the Whites there. The churches were a part of White society. The Whites believed the churches were on their side: White, Christian civilization versus Black savagery and superstition, that sort of thing. Even after the churches betrayed them to their enemies, most of them still believed that.
Well, actually, there was more to the psychological weakness of the Whites than subversive Christian “brotherhood” teaching. In a sense, the Whites were too civilized, too genteel. I used to tell my South African visitors, “It may be that the Black terrorists are no real military threat to you, but the only viable long-range solution for you is to get rid of all the Blacks and other non-Whites in your country. Do whatever you must do: force them out, sterilize them, kill them — otherwise you will lose your country. Of course, it was easy for me to say that and much harder for the South Africans to implement it, with their economy making such extensive use of Black labor. There would have been very tough economic, political, and diplomatic problems to solve.
But the negative reactions of my South African guests to my advice went beyond these practical difficulties, beyond their reluctance to give up their Black gardeners and cooks and cleaning women and their reluctance to face the economic problems of restructuring their economy to use White labor only. They were shocked by my advice. Most of them, I believe, regarded Blacks as fellow human beings who were merely at a lower stage of development and still needed guidance and help from Whites. “Blacks are like children,” they told me. “They need our help, and most Blacks know that. They know that they are better off under our guidance than they would be without it. That’s why we don’t have to worry about their ever trying to take over our government and run it themselves. They know that they need us. It’s only a few terrorists who are a problem, and we can deal with the terrorists.”
You know, that sounds a lot like the sort of foolishness that I used to hear from my fellow Southerners back in the 1950s and even into the 1960s. None of the Southerners with whom I discussed the matter believed that Blacks were equal in intelligence to Whites or in their ability to build or to maintain a civilization, but they could not quite bring themselves to regard Blacks as vermin to be eradicated. That just wasn’t Christian. And even those who were relatively free of Christian influences felt that I was going too far. “Help the Blacks along,” they told me. “Make a few concessions to them, show them that we aren’t interested in oppressing them, and they will behave themselves. They will see that it is in their interest not to wreck the society that has given them so much more than they could obtain on their own. We can’t just exterminate them or force them all to go back to Africa. That would be barbaric. That would be stooping to their level.”
Foolishness. Suicidal foolishness. We really have become too civilized and have forgotten one of Nature’s most basic rules: Two different types of animal cannot permanently occupy exactly the same ecological niche. One eventually must drive the other into extinction. That is what is happening now in southern Africa. And in fact, it also is happening in America.
We accept the truth of this when other species are involved. Why is it so difficult for many of us to apply the rule to ourselves as well? Why do some of us believe that it is un-civilized or un-genteel to deal with our race problem in a rational way?
I’m sure that everyone has heard the propaganda slogan promoted by the Jewish media and their collaborators to the effect that racists are made, not born. The Politically Correct party line is that children are born without any racial feelings or predispositions at all, and that if we don’t teach them to be racists, they will grow up loving everyone equally, and that will be a desirable state of affairs. That’s the way to avoid racial conflict, and so we should be very careful to shield our children from any influences that might make racists of them.
Well, for one thing that propaganda is based on a lie. And for another thing the lie is calculated to weaken us and to hasten our annihilation. The fact is that children, while not born with an explicit set of opinions about racial matters, are born with a strong tendency to regard their own kind as friend and those who are not their kind as foe. To this extent, racism does not require deliberate tutelage. Children become racists, which is to say, they develop a strong preference for their own kind, through a natural process known as “imprinting” very early in life. Nature gave us this tendency because it is a survival trait. We developed the trait over millions of years of evolution, because those of us who had it were more likely to survive than those who didn’t have it. And the media bosses and their allies, who are saturating us with the lie that racism is unnatural and evil, don’t want us to survive.
If you want to read more about the evolutionary basis of so-called “racism,” I recommend that you read some of the works of the very distinguished anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith, especially his book A New Theory of Human Evolution. It’s a bit hard to find these days because it’s Politically Incorrect and has been purged from many libraries that formerly carried it. Sir Arthur Keith was a very civilized and genteel man, but he also was a perceptive and honest student of Nature.
As for me, I make no pretensions to gentility. I tend to be crude and simple and direct. Sir Arthur Keith explains it all in very polite terms, but I say it simply this way: If we want our kind to survive on this planet longer than another generation or two, then we must clear the cobwebs of Christian superstition and Jewish propaganda from our minds and face the facts without being squeamish. One fact is that we must have exclusive possession of those portions of this planet that constitute suitable habitat for us. Another fact is that in order to obtain and maintain that exclusive possession, we must be prepared to kill, to annihilate, any and all competitors. A third fact is that racism is God’s gift to any race that wants to survive. Racism is healthy and natural and essential, and we had damned well better clear of minds of the Judaeo-Christian lie that it is evil and wicked and nasty and low-brow.
To sum it up, the law of life is: kill or die. That’s still the law, no matter how civilized and genteel we become. We do not invalidate the law by wearing the latest fashions, by being computer whizzes, and by attending very polite tea parties. The law does not say, of course, that we cannot cooperate with our kind, that we cannot collaborate constructively with other members of our own race. It does not say that we cannot design and build a society in which we can work and play and breed and live at peace, more or less, with other White people. Not at peace all the time, but most of the time: enough of the time to still continue building and developing and improving our civilization, and, make no mistake about this, it is our civilization and no one else’s.
But the law of life does tell us that if we believe that being nice to members of other races will persuade them to be nice to us, then we are on the way out, just like the Rhodesians. It does tell us that if we deal with Blacks and mestizos and Asians under the assumption that they are like us because they have learned to speak English and to mimic our manners, or that they have the same aspirations and ideals and standards and values and way of looking at the world that we do, then we will doom our posterity to oblivion. If we take the paternalistic attitude, as the South Africans did and as many American Southerners did, that the Blacks are like children, whom we should protect and promote and assist, and think that they will appreciate our help, then the fate of our race will be that of the dodo…
More at the link.
Remove. Hit button by mistake
Endeavor: Not only do we have no heroes today but also attempts at manufacturing new ones consistently fall flat. Despite efforts at establishing individuals like… Greta Thunberg ….
—
I cannot say why “climate campaigner” Greta Thunberg is famous or infamous, but this is the latest C-C essay I could find, mentioning her name, where comments are not closed. Those of you familiar with Greta might find this report about her treatment by our “best democratic ally” of interest. Greta might become a heroine to Gazans, at least.
—
Israeli forces abused Greta Thunberg after
intercepting Global Sumud Flotilla: Turkish activist
“…An activist with the Gaza-bound Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF) says climate campaigner Greta Thunberg was physically abused and forced to kiss an Israeli flag after regime forces raided the Gaza-bound vessels and detained those on board.
“They dragged little Greta by her hair before our eyes, beat her, and forced her to kiss the Israeli flag. They did everything imaginable to her, as a warning to others”, journalist Ersin Celik said in a Saturday post on X, formerly known as Twitter…”
Source: https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/10/0 … -Thunberg-
—
As for heroes, this excerpt from master wordsmith Thomas Goodrich touches on America’s relationship with those who mistreated little Greta – “Heroes” at nationalvanguard.org:
… Of course, the endless wars we witness today have absolutely nothing to do with “freedoms” here in America but they have everything to do with making the world safe for Israel to continue its crimes around the globe without fear of punishment.
I can think of no other nation on the planet — save Israel — that is more geared toward war, destruction, torture, assassination, and unmitigated evil than this one! And the sad fact is, the United States has been taken over so thoroughly by AIPAC and its horde of Jewish lobbyists that we are now little more than Israel’s private bank and personal army, ready to go wherever we are told to go — and pay for it ourselves, mind you — whether it is to the hot sands of Sudan or to the green fields of Ukraine. The US military and its endless wars to defend Israel neither defines me nor speaks for me. Had I the power I would bring home tomorrow all American troops from around the globe, find them good civilian jobs or place them on our southern border with Mexico with orders of “shoot to kill.” Not only would this move save US taxpayers trillions and trillions and stop millions and millions from invading us, but it would help heal all the angry scars we have created around the world…
More at the link above
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.