Donald Trump comforts Erika Kirk at Charlie Kirk’s memorial service.
1,215 words
On Sunday, September 21st, 200,000 people showed up at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, for a memorial service for Charlie Kirk. More than 100 million people watched all over the world. The speakers included President Trump, Vice President Vance, Erika Kirk, Stephen Miller, Donald Trump, Jr., Tucker Carlson, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio, and Tulsi Gabbard. Elon Musk was also present, sitting next to Trump.
During an emotional tribute to her husband, Erika Kirk declared that she has forgiven Tyler Robinson for murdering her husband.
Frankly, I was horrified. “What’s next,” I wondered, “foot washing?”
First and foremost, this was bad politics. The murder of Charlie Kirk has stirred up a great deal of righteous anger and the resolve to finally shut down far-Left terrorism. Centrists and Leftists are desperate to head off this backlash by promoting illusions about “unity” and “reconciliation.”
Basically, the Left is trying to divide the Right while unifying around an issue that Trump and Pam Bondi ineptly handed to them: freedom of speech. (Now that Jimmy Kimmel is returning to television, they have lost that pretext, but they’ll invent another. It is not like they are restrained by honesty or a sense of shame.)
Erika Kirk’s talk of forgiveness is an immense gift to the Left, because it supports the delusion that we can continue to exist with the Left within the same community if we’re just nice enough—while the Left merely prepares for more violence. We need to stiffen our people’s spines, not cause them to swoon and wallow in sentimental mush.
As one would expect, Erika Kirk’s message is being applauded and boosted by both Leftists and their cuckservative and centrist enablers. Frankly, she has terrible political instincts and should probably stay home and raise her children.
Forgiveness means that you no longer hold hard feelings toward someone who has wronged you. That’s certainly possible, for instance if the offender sincerely apologizes, asks for forgiveness, and tries to make amends. But Tyler Robinson has not apologized. He hasn’t asked for forgiveness. He hasn’t made amends. He may not even think he’s done anything wrong. So he has given Erika Kirk no reason to forgive him.
Moreover, not enough time has passed for real forgiveness. You can’t turn emotions on and off like the lights. It takes a long time to process, surmount, and let go of such pain—if it happens at all. If I were Charlie Kirk, I would be offended to learn that my wife had forgiven my killer after 11 days. Frankly, I’d wonder if she loved me very deeply at all. How can she love her children and let go of her anger so quickly? I refuse to believe that Erika Kirk has such shallow feelings.
Therefore, I conclude that Erika Kirk hasn’t forgiven her husband’s killer. Instead, she’s lying. But why? Politics and religion are the main reasons for lies like this. I’ve already argued that forgiveness is bad politics. So it seems most likely that the reason is religion. Although Charlie Kirk was an Evangelical Protestant, and his memorial service was very much in the Evangelical Megachurch style, Erika Kirk is apparently Catholic.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Is America Doomed? here.
But on this question, denomination doesn’t really matter, for all the branches of Christianity command certain feelings—love and forgiveness—directed at enemies, as if emotions can simply be switched on and off at will. Since they can’t, but God demands it anyway and people want to be good, Christianity basically teaches people to delude themselves and others about their feelings. Generally, one lies to oneself first, then goes public. When one publicly lies about one’s feelings to show off one’s Christian virtues, that’s what we call “virtue signaling.”
Like Leftists and cuckservatives, Christians on social media were ecstatic about Erika Kirk’s performative forgiveness. Hilariously, they were trying to sell it as “strength.” “See, we aren’t mean people like those Leftists say we are. We have the power of forgiveness. Take that, Leftists!” Of course no Leftist fears enemies who are trying to morally exculpate themselves from cheap insults by performative forgiveness. Instead, they would applaud such people, precisely because they think they are weak. While Christians are going through mental gymnastics to forgive, the Left’s next sniper is patiently taking aim.
Erika Kirk also suggested that giving Tyler Robinson the death penalty is not something Jesus would do. But at least she had the good sense to say that she was personally leaving this in the hands of the government. But that too is just another bit of empty virtue signaling. If Erika is really leaving the death penalty in the hands of the Utah government, then why make any statements at all that would strengthen anti-death penalty advocates?
We are in an existential struggle with people who want to kill us for our beliefs. It’s us or them. Our enemies already have huge institutional advantages over us. When your enemies simply want to kill you, but your side consists of people who are looking to love and forgive their would-be murderers, doesn’t that just burden the Right with one more systematic disadvantage? If people in your foxhole are arguing against the death penalty for the people who are actually killing you, doesn’t that add yet another disadvantage?
Christians, of course, think that they will be rewarded in heaven for such behavior. Which means, on a deep level, they aren’t really concerned with winning this battle. Their kingdom is not of this world. Their heads are not in this game. They say there are no atheists in foxholes. But, frankly, in this fight, can we afford anything else?
Fortunately, when it was Trump’s turn at the microphone, he uttered these words:
Charlie did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That’s where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponents, and I don’t want the best for them. I’m sorry Erika. . . . Charlie is angry looking down at me right now.
Trump has his limits. Trump has his problems. But he’s at least honest about his perfectly natural and normal feelings, even if he is not quite willing to say they are also right feelings. But then, in his heart, Trump isn’t a Christian.
Stephen Miller, another non-Christian, spoke of God in his remarks. But he said nothing about forgiveness. Instead, he spoke of righteous anger and retribution. Miller, of course, is a Jew. But interestingly enough, when he spoke of “our lineage and our legacy,” he said nothing about Jews, Jerusalem, or Christianity, unlike the Christians on stage, who constantly refer to “Judeo-Christianity.” Instead, Miller said “Our lineage and our legacy hails back to Athens, to Rome, to Philadelphia, to Monticello.” Again, this is the fighting spirit we need.
There are Christians in our movement with good sense. We’re not going to win without them. But if we are going to win, they need to police their weak brothers and sisters like Erika Kirk, who would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory to virtue signal about how “above it all” they are.
To win this, we are going to need hate in our hearts. Once we’ve won, only then can we talk about love and forgiveness.
96 comments
Great take Greg. We don’t need just hate in our hearts, but vengeance as well. Trump indicting Comey is a start. Hopefully Tisha James is next, and everyone would love to see Adam Schiff get frog marched out of the senate. These people need to be held accountable. Our biggest obstacle are republican traitors who are most likely compromised in some way. I’m already reading some republicans say that we must be careful about going after our political opponents. No. Strike while the iron is hot.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these Republicans who are calling for restraint have some kind of dirt that they don’t want exposed in the future.
Christianity commands forgiveness if the offender confesses, apologizes, and makes amends (to the extent possible).
Christianity doesn’t command forgiveness for the unrepentant, but it does allow forgiveness for the unrepentant – for instance, Jesus on the cross said “Father forgive them for they know not what they do”, and when Stephen was being stoned he said “Lord, do not hold this sin against them”.
Tyler Robinson is a defeated enemy. He is in jail, no one is defending him, and the law will probably run its course culminating in a firing squad. There is no point in wasting our anger against him.
We should direct our righteous indignation against those who still have the power to hurt us, and who are still exercising that power – Antifa mobs who routinely use non-lethal violence, watchdog groups such as the SPLC and ADL which are in alliance with Antifa, platforms like Reddit and Discord which allow Antifa to plan and coordinate their “doxxing” and “cancelling” campaigns, media outlets like MSNBC which act as cheerleaders for Antifa, Democrat politicians like Senator Schiff who defended Antifa during the 2020 riots, and the big donors who finance it all. They all need to be defeated, like Tyler Robinson already has been.
Christians cope with that idea that you only have to forgive the repentant, but in your post you immediately follow that with two of the many, many stories indicating that Christianity does in fact teach unconditional forgiveness. Frankly, I don’t even find the repentance angle compelling. If someone is a serial murderer, I don’t forgive him because he feels bad about it after the fact. His victims don’t get the chance to reevaluate or have a change of heart, so I actually find the notion of introspection after some horrid act to be a further insult to the victims.
This article is not too harsh. Continuing to forgive people who continue to be in favor of killing us isn’t holy or healing; it’s sick, stupid, and counterproductive.
Nietzsche’s psychological analysis of Christian love and forgiveness is much more compelling. He rightly sees that it is mere cover, in the soul of the one experiencing or believing in it herself, for hatred, resentment, and the desire to punish. The trouble is exactly this warped confusion, which our enemies know acutely, precisely without lessons in theology or philosophy, to use against us.
Hi Greg.
On this point, I’m not going to disagree on your overall point, but I’m going to diverge on some of the underlying ideas.
I agree, nobody forgives their killer in less than 2 weeks. But I do think that the HONEST DESIRE to forgive (and to subsequently not allow anger and hate to consume you) is an important mental health and self defense mechanism that Christians wisely adopted as a tenant of spiritual faith. That is to say, in normal life we don’t have huge political consequences to contend with when we forgive people who trespass against us, and in a normal, sane, homogenous society, the type of societies that Christianity grew from, the motivation of your trespasser isn’t political.
Taking politics out of the picture, if a man murders your wife in a drunk driving accident, you are going to be angry, and hate the man. That’s natural. But a wise person knows that in time he will have to let go of that anger and hate. Forgiveness is a step in that process. The drunkard may have had a bad home life himself. He may have just lost his job. He may be depressed. He may not be a Christian, and maybe forgiving him will have an influence on him to change his ways.
This is how a true Christian thinks, and I have strong reasons to believe that Erika Kirk truly believes this. I do mkt believe she actually is in the forgiving stage, and I’m not so naive as to believe that her motivation to publicly announce the forgiveness aren’t political in nature. They are. She is a public figure and this is a politically charged assasination.
So there are two conflicting things going on here. A very real and honest desire to not let hate consume her, and an opportunity, in her mind, to do what she thinks that Charlie’s followers would most respect, which is to hold fast to her values, even when unfair and devastating life circumstances challenge her faith in those values.
Having said all that, I think Christians are allowed to have righteous anger. There is a way to come out and publicly forgive the assassin but not the evil that motivated him. To condemn the society we live in which created a Tyler Robinson and a Lance Twiggs and the leftists who perpetuate it. She should have made that distinction.
Christians can forgive individuals for their evil deeds but also have to courage to condemn the world view that spawns the evil doers.
In so many cases we have seen over the last couple of decades where a parent loses their daughter to a black criminal rapist/murderer, we see the families come out a forgive the murderer. But what is particularly egregious is that those parents decide to make their speech of forgiveness about RACISM, and how bad racism is, and how we shouldn’t make the motivation of the murderer “about race”.
Those people who do this desperately do not want their child’s death to be a political story. They want to mourn and grieve and go through all the healthy stages of that process. They don’t want to be talking to cameras and journalists and becoming “the story”. So in their mind, they’re deluding themselves into believing they’ve removed the politics from the situation, when all they’ve done is fuel it.
Make no mistake, those people should be honest with themselves. They should be smart enough to understand the antiwhite racism that motivates black criminals. They should be appalled at the society that we live in which encourages black criminality at the expense of a white sense of community and safety. They should embrace the opportunity to help make a change that benefits their families and prevents criminal blacks from harming more whites in the future. And the reason I can say that is because we DO NOT live in that sane, healthy, homogenous society in which a Christian sense of forgiveness is a good thing.
I think the difference between Erika Kirk and those other people is that Erika will have an opportunity here to continue to push against the transgender issue because of the obvious mental health problems that transgenders have. She isn’t “forgiving but not making it about transgenderism”. She most certainly make it very much about fighting trangenderism as she moves forward. Her ritual act of forgiveness won’t detract from what she can do in her position to make more people aware of this issue.
I think if the assassin had been an H1B visa holding Indian, and it could be shown that the motivation was anger over Charlie’s stance on H1B visas, I believe she would play a similar game. She would come out forgiving the assassin, but then she would continue to push for reducing immigration, and use the assasination as a political tool.
Make no mistake though. If the murderer had been an African American male, Erika Kirk would have come out with the same old “let’s not make this about race” lines. 1000..%. I will never comprehend this almost holy worship of blacks and their feelings that white people are subjugated to. And honestly, it isn’t even piety toward blacks that motivates such bizarre statements. I think it’s the sensibilities of other white people that most concerns the victim when they trot out those finger wags about racism. It is other white people who are the enemy of our ability to move past this slavery to antiracism that our society has forged into itself.
Thanks for this thoughtful comment.
Thank you for the vote of confidence toward my input. I always appreciate the integrity of your publishing. It is revolutionary without being needlessly edgy.
That’s interesting. For the most part I don’t labor with quandaries of forgiveness and revenge. it’s not like I’m trying to be high minded or Christian or anything, but for the most part, I see other people as animals without any agency who are just living out random genetic programs. Particularly with nonwhites and such.
How do you know she would say let’s not make this about race?
Of course there’s no way to “know”, with any absolute certainty.
But for the purposes of this conversation about ritualistic and performative “forgiveness”, there is a pattern that we see over and over. Give the higher profile that Erika Kirk holds, the pressure on her to say “let’s not make this about race” are even higher than they are for ordinary people. So for the purposes of a conversation about this topic, if you took TEN women of her status and political and religious leanings, I think I can safely say that 8/10 (at least) would give into that pressure to reign in their racist instincts. Of course this can’t be backed up with statistical numbers, but I’m not autistic, so I don’t feel that I need to back a reasonable assumption up with statistics. Not in a comment section of an online journal. This isn’t a research document.
Thank you for your very thoughtful answer on such I very much agree. A pretty safe bet, as the commenter below states. I am very naive, I guess, thinking that a person can choose a third way, and not say anything at all. For sure she wouldn’t point out the violent tendencies of blacks and their habit of targeting Whites, but at least don’t exonerate race either. That is too much to ask apparently. Thanks again, your comments are always spot on.
I’d say it would be a VERY safe bet.
🙂
Cause one week after her husband was murdered before the world she went out there to sparkles like it’s Summerslam to read some script probably written by a tribesman that was barely even about her husband, his contributions, how he may have broken a political apathy in young people, and was basically a loopy religious sermon.
Something I noticed in my life growing up in a rough English, working class town. The weak usually feel the need to forgive those who have wronged them. As if to justify their cowardice and their incapability to get revenge. Those who were capable of committing violence were the ones who sought revenge. They had no ideas of “hoping their forgiveness will change the person who wronged them”. They did not give a damn about his potential “bad day”, or “bad home life” or if “he just lost his job”. What they instinctually knew was that exacting revenge would have a far more impactful lesson on their assailant than an act of “kindness” (weakness). Sure there was personal satisfaction of being square. It’s the way of the world.
New Flyer – That is brilliant observation and rings 100% true to me. It brought to mind memories of the working-class neighborhood I, myself, grew up in the American Midwest. Christian children were thought of as weak because they were so much nicer than everyone else. The unspoken mentality was that there was nothing to fear from them.
I’m behind in my reading, and just now reading the above article. This is the best thing I have read on the entire “forgiveness” phenomenon that seems to exclusively plague well-meaning, often religious, White people.
“It is other white people who are the enemy of our ability to move past this slavery to antiracism….”
Absolutely. Remove every outside influence, and we’d still have for our foe the world’s most curious creature: the self-defeating, enemy-elevating, morally mercurial white man.
For all the “I forgive the killer, let’s not make it about race” speeches, I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of them are being coached into it.
Yes absolutely. I felt extremely sad for Erika and she seems a very nice lady, but I thought it very inappropriate to say she forgave him.
It has a very poor moral foundation, it’s far too soon for this kind of thing anyway, it obviously isn’t grounded in something genuine, and it really disturbed the important political drive on this topic, redirecting into something else.
I guess one say could people may say things at such time that aren’t always coherent.
On Christianity: Western Christianity in the West, because I think that’s what we are talking about, needs some small updates to bring it in to line with modernity. Because if you take certain things literally as a calling, you can rapidly end up washing the feet of another flood of rapefugees. You end up doing evil. It’s a mockery of virtue and justice, and in my view God. And it needs some brave, intelligent reformer to deal with this.
Thank you. This is very well put.
Any virtue taken to excess, becomes a vice. We know the practice by what it produces. It should also be noted that no religious practice on this planet may transform a limited intelligence individual into a wise man or wise woman, but religion may temper the worst qualities, and enhance the best qualities of some people.
Inexplicably forgiving the killer is a reoccurring theme in emotionally-charged high-profile murders. I’ve wondered if someone from the establishment comes around and tells people to say that.
You don’t know how right you are. Look up the Community Relations Service.
Yes, Oswald is 100% correct.
Personally, I absolutely yearn to see appropriate anger expressed. However, tactically, this would be weaponized against us, because feeling anger and not losing temper/control seems to be a trait mostly unique to Whites. Nobody in the media, or non-White public expects or understands how angry people can quietly suffer in silence, like Whites have been trained to, for our entire lives.
IF non-whites heard Charlie’s widow say, “I trust that God will have appropriate levels of mercy on his soul, while I, myself, look forward to strict & swift justice being served by our legal system for this heinous killing,” the lügenpresse would have an absolute field day: Her rage & rhetoric are riling up the armed & angry Whites! Things are bound to pop off at any minute. Everyone stay on high alert!
This meme has become so widespread that the whole cultural environment sustains it. We don’t need some sort of central office to do so. Every preacher, psychologist, grief counselor, and political hack would advise the exact same thing.
Last year a driver speeding at about 110 mph on a 25 mph street slammed into the side of a minivan carrying children from two families from my small homeschooling co-op. Four were killed and the others were badly injured.
The speeding driver survived. It was the third time he had done this, although there were no deaths in the previous two crashes. He showed zero remorse, and if I remember correctly he even complained about the inconvenience to himself.
The family that lost three members quickly came out to say publicly that they believe in unconditional forgiveness. I was aghast. So what should we do? Drop the charges? Let him do it a fourth time? Forgiveness in such a case is immoral!
And people kept talking about “the accident”. It was not an accident. You don’t accidentally find yourself driving 80 mph over the speed limit. It was a crime! And excess mercy to criminals is cruelty to their past and future victims.
The driver should have been summarily executed. It’s stupid to forgive this driver, after he just killed four kids. He did it on purpose. He’s another illegal alien. It’s part of the race war to kill Whites.
God didn’t say forgive only the mean people who apologized to you personally and to your liking, no he commands you to forgive ALL transgressors lest he not forgive YOU so if you wanna be in hell with the bad guys definitely keep hating. Or you can just forgive and be more like Christ and less like those who know not what they do.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Should be avoided.
But God didn’t forgive all his enemies. How many people did he smite and pour out his wrath upon? How many peoples did he lay low or order the Israelites to slaughter? He didn’t forgive Sodom and Gomorrah. He drowned the entire Earth and all that was in it, save those in Noah’s ark, because they had become wicked. It’s not so simple as “forgive everyone because that’s what God would do”.
As is typical with this argument, every example of a sensible response to evil that you can find originates in the Torah. What you’re describing is the distinction between Jews’ morality for themselves and the morality they prescribed for gentiles via Christianity. For themselves, Jews say “God loves us and his purpose is our continued existence and power, so he commands us to destroy our enemies.” For gentiles, Jews say “God loves everyone and his purpose is unconditional love, so he commands you to love your enemies.”
Exactly. They wrote a religion where “god” chose them and then gave it to the rest of the world to adhere to. Their version allows them to loot, steal, pillage, rape and murder. The version they gave to the gentiles demands unconditional forgiveness for looters, thieves, rapists and murderers or hell awaits them AND that “god” chose the jews.
Forgiveness is an act of evil. To forgive evil is evil. (You can replace the word evil with ‘heinous’ if preferred).
God does not forgive Satan. Anita, BLM and the rest of the “woke” left are pure evil. They are the spawn of Satan.
Neither can God and Satan have the much-called-for unity without one or both ceasing to be who they are.
Luke 23:34
Jesus said, “Father, [You] forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
What he does not say: “I, Jesus, forgive them for killing me.”
I’m pretty sure Christ’s words referred to the Romans, who spoke Latin and had no idea, nor any way of knowing, who they were putting to death. I’m pretty sure he was not refersing to the Jews who said, “His blood be on our hands forever.”
The New Testament is pretty clear that you only go to Hell if you reject belief in Jesus Christ. No works needed, no performative speeches, only repentance of your sin and belief in Jesus. It definitely does not say that you go to Hell if you are not as perfect as He is. Saying what you just did is what makes people reject Christianity. My faith in Christ is 100%, my forgiveness of Charlie’s assassin is ZERO, and I never even met Charlie. Like your post, his widow doesn’t make Christianity look any more attractive with her weak words. I would be hard pressed to believe she converted a single person with that stupidity and neither will you by making it a confusing and unattainable goal.
Thank you. It is really important for Christians like you to keep the Erika Kirks from going off the deep end.
Greg Johnson: September 30, 2025 … It is really important for Christians like you to keep the Erika Kirks from going off the deep end.
—
It’s too late. She and her followers have already jumped. Good. Let them have their Jesus.
Just heard it’s now up to 121,000 applications from folks — mostly Whites, I presume — to open TPUSA chapters since Christian Zionist evangelical Erica rededicated TPUSA to Jesus.
It’s important for sane Whites to help keep more kinsmen from going off that deep end.
God DID say to forgive ALL. But (as I think you know), he wants us to forgive in our hearts. It’s a private thing between God and the person who forgives. It’s not about external actions.
If you are a legally-appointed executioner who pulls the switch of the electric chair on a convicted murderer, and you think to yourself “I don’t care what circumstances this person went through, if I had been in his shoes I would never have done any of that. This POS deserves to die and suffer in hell. I’m ENJOYING this,” then according to Christian doctrine you have sinned.
But if instead the executioner is thinking, “I don’t know what happened with this guy – only God does. As a Christian I am not allowed to judge – only God can. But by doing this I will make sure no one else will ever be killed by this person again. And by the threat of this action I may deter other murders,” then you have NOT sinned.
Exact same action as seen from the outside in both cases.
Hatred is a part of love. God gave us hate to Marshall the will to destroy those who would destroy us and all that we love.
To forgive unconditionally is to invite destruction by predators. This stupid woman should be home letting men with live for her and her children showing her young ones how channeled hatred can be used to protect all that you love. This stupid woman should have given a lecture on live and how hate was given by our creator to bolster our love.
To hatred in service of love!
Hate is good. Hate is normal. Without hate, you and you race will perish. The “woke” left is pure evil. Forgiveness is a sucker bet.
Generally, one lies to oneself first, then goes public.
Great article! That observation sums up Christianity succinctly, but it can also be applied to any religion. 🙃
Great minds think alike. I agree absolutely, and have written many of the same thoughts in “Rejecting Forgiveness: Denouncing the Christian Rhetoric of Erika Kirk and Others.”
It is no coincidence that this sort of talk has coincided with how the momentum and outrage over this matter have dropped like a stone. Those of the Christian peruaaion can play whatever semantic games they want, eg forgiveness is not the same as reconciliation or that forgiveness does not mean justice will not be sought, but this sort of rhetoric saps the will of ideological focus and zeal. Unfortunately, it is unlikely to end anytime soon.
That’s a hell of an article, Richard (Rejecting Forgiveness). I need to reread it to grasp everything. Your accounts of crimes and the ensuing knee-jerk meretricious forgiveness are unforgettable. But I still say that forgiveness isn’t something you do, it is something that happens to you when the time is right (life experiences, passage of time) and after you’ve allowed yourself to entertain feelings of vicious revenge. “Feel your feelings”, as they say.
I do recognize two things in this business, though: one-on-one crime (in the legal sense, or just a moral crime) is not the same as entire cultural groups trying, for generations, to wipe you off the face of the earth. Second: let’s keep in mind that our own weakness is at the bottom of repeatedly getting hurt one way or another. “Hurt me once, shame on you; hurt me twice, shame on me.”
Thank you for your kind comments. Please consider subscribing if you have not already. I think the problem with your comment and this aspect of Christian theology is that there are some things that are unforgivable. What I call The First Law, drawn from my own experiences, strikes the right balance. It is not healthy to never forgive no matter what in all instances, but this sort of demonstrative nonsense is not good either.
There is a belief in Dharmic religions that fighting back against an evil enemy – with a sense of dedication to one’s duty – can be a moral positive. This is part of Dharma Yuddha (the Dharma of warfare). A soldier can achieve excellent karma by completing his duty of stopping those who are promoting adharma (unrighteousness).
And doesn’t the latter description fit Antifa? They stalk and attack innocent people. They wage ideological war against the principles that allow people to live healthy and fulfilling lives. They subvert their own nations. They place their own egos above the greater good.
One could therefore argue that the morally correct action (if one has these spiritual beliefs) is to swiftly and efficiently fight these people. It would be a disservice to morally righteous people to ignore Antifa’s crimes by depolarizing and giving them breathing space. They must be defeated so they can’t continue to spread evil and chaos.
Interesting post. In my younger years I came face to face with antifa/anti-racist action at what was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration. I learned that these rabid creatures were not merely “drug addled youths”, but highly motivated enemies.
Not worrying about karma, heaven or hell is most liberating. I’m quite content with being concerned about my own well being and that of my own kind here and now.
“Frankly, I was horrified. ‘What’s next,’ I wondered, ‘foot washing?’”
Same here. I saw her winding up for it, braced myself, then cringed so hard I almost hid under the table.
Not all Christians are just cucks and cowards. They have a sense of justice. But they also really believe in damnation for those who won’t forgive (“lest your father in heaven not forgive you.”)
Dangle someone over Hades and he can get pretty creative. For this type of Christian, the supposedly mighty and courageous gesture of forgiving becomes a way to triumph over his enemies, as he sees it. It’s defiant, as if to say, “no matter what you do, even killing someone dear to me, you cannot knock me off of my devotional pillar.”
The problem is, practically everyone who sees this, unless he’s a Christian of some stripe or another himself, takes the forgiveness offered as weakness, indifference about justice, and the worst kind of apathy imaginable.
One profanes his or her loved one by offering forgiveness, unless that forgiveness means not allowing a person’s act (e.g. murder) to also kill the surviving loved one, indirectly, with an all-consuming fixation. And if this is the kind of forgiveness one can somehow muster, it’s something he should never talk about, to avoid having it mistaken for the other kind.
It begs the question when Christians became all “let’s forgive everyone, even those who horribly wronged us!” Christian Europe back in the day had no problem going to war with one another and I’m sure many of the prisoners of war were shown no mercy.
The forgiveness angle reminds me of what happened on the Viking series. One of the pagan Danes who was the mortal enemy of the Christian Saxons was granted forgiveness in the form of not being executed if he became Christian. In this case, the forgiveness had both religious and political means. I don’t think Erika really had a choice at a big venue such as this but to do the public declaration of forgiveness; it was sort of expected being Christian and all. There is a sort of a deadpan humor to it as well. She forgives him, but that doesn’t change the fact that Tyler, if found guilty, will either get death by firing squad or a lifetime of prison sodomy.
I doubt Erica’s statement had much effect on most people, particularly non-Christians. You’re correct that she’s required to say what she said.
I never really paid much attention to Charlie Kirk because he was one of those Christians who thinks his sense of morality comes from believing in Christ and the Bible. It’s as though, from his point of view, he couldn’t be moral or reasonable without that belief. Maybe that’s true for him but it’s a side issue that isn’t really relevant or necessary for everyone.
I guess I just see that as more of the whole “judeo-christian values” nonsense and it always rubbed me the wrong way.
He obviously touched a lot of people though, and his assassination certainly impacted many more in very deep ways.
I’ve been browsing around the web in places I dont usually go to assess the reaction to recent events.
Here are two commentaries worth listening to:
Debunking The Biggest Lies Told About Charlie Kirk
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N14ywRyTWVI
These People Are Sick
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eJENP0Rr8p0
All sorts of people are coming to terms with what we’re facing and that has more weight than what Erika Kirk says out of her perceived religious/political obligation.
Here’s another one by some random Star Wars Fangirl – turned out way more epic than I had expected. She also mentions the Iryna Zarutzka killing.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JrnP1v5OKao
I believe we really are at a turning point. We need to set forth a path for our people to follow. If we aren’t even visible to most of the population they’ll choose another path…
Hi, I didn’t watch much of the memorial, but I have a somewhat different take. I have no real disagreement with Greg’s analysis but I wonder if he’s taking Erika’s “forgiveness” too much at face value, rather than considering it a sort of pious window dressing. What I “heard” from Erika was “I forgive you (but we will utterly destroy you).” But like a good Christian she didn’t say the last part out loud. Maybe wishful thinking on my part but there must be some historical precedent. I don’t think Christianity spread primarily through forgiving enemies. So if viewed as a sort of pious throat-clearing if you will, maybe there’s a smart political/strategic element at play that we’re missing. I’d be interested in your thoughts.
It’s basic logic. If you hurt me with X and the effect on me is N, then you should atone for it to the same degree for forgiveness to be possible. With minor damages, it is possible to reverse the damage that has occurred. But you cannot undo major damage like the effects of murder.
Great article. Great points.
Couldn’t agree with you more. As far as Erika Kirk goes, I find it hard to criticize any woman whose husband was so violently taken away, but you’re right. She needs to stay home out of the spotlight and grieve and raise her kids instead of allowing her self to be used and spout nonsense.
On another note. I don’t think Tyler Robinson did it. There’s no exit wound and no bullet hole in the backdrop and that means Kirk was NOT shot from the front with a 30-06, the bullet of which would have absolutely penetrated the four inches of soft tissue of Kirk’s neck. He was most certainly shot from the side, not from the front. Just as 11 days of grieving time in insufficient for a grieving widow to forgive a murderer, so is 11 days of questionable reporting and investigating too short a period to hang out to dry someone who has most certainly been framed by the deep state.
You’re also right about our feckless, Christian GOP leaders/allies who have for decades squandered every single political advantage and victory. Anyone who tells you to love your enemy…is your enemy.
There was one proverbial lone gunman, like Lee Harvey Oswald, and he got into an excellent position almost unseen and did his exalted work (in his own mind).
With respect ─ I am not trying to pick on anybody ─ Tyler Robinson still enjoys the presumpton of innocence. But there is little doubt about it, and the authorities have released the video of his egress and a photo of the abandoned rifle with his DNA on it, plus a screwdriver on the roof that he lost with his DNA on it. In messages to his Tranny boyfriend, Tyler knew that his goose was cooked when he failed to retrieve his rifle which might have his fingerprints on it.
I’ve studied a lot of grainy Charlie Kirk video and seen what some clickbait YouTubers have posted, and the idea that the bullet came from somewhere else is complete büllshït.
The word is that the bullet did not penetrate through the neck which is not what would be expected.
However, they have not released the autopsy report and we are not likely to see it before the trial.
We assume that they collected the bullet, but we do not know that for sure. The authorities are being somewhat tight-lipped about the investigation, as is typical ─ although they have also been unusually transparent as well. The public knows a lot more about Tyler Robinson now than Lee Harvey Oswald when he was assassinated by Jacob Rubenstein two days after his capture.
We also do not have a full police report and we do not know very much about the rifle itself.
We do not know what bullet was used, in fact, other than that they have been saying a .30-06 with a Mauser bolt-action.
We do not know the length of the barrel. An 8mm G98 German Mauser from WWI has a 30 inch barrel, whereas a K98k Mauser from WWII has a 24 inch barrel, the same as a Model 1903 .30-06 Springfield, the kind that Sgt. York used. A Model 1917 U.S. rifle from WWI has a 26 inch barrel. Most “sporterized” .30-06 rifles have barrels between 22 and 24 inches.
Lots of details we don’t yet know.
Assuming that we know the caliber, we do not even know the loading of the bullet nor its source; for all we know Tyler fired a 100+ year old surplus Mauser round made in Turkey. Or he could have fired a frangible .30-06 round used to keep wild dogs out of the chicken coop, or for aerial gunnery practice.
(IMAGE)
The distance of the shot was about 130 Meters or 426 feet, which is a pretty basic deer hunting distance, especially with a scope. Southerners and Flyover kids can pretty much do this easily if they have ever fired a high-powered rifle before.
It is hard to say how good a marksman someone is if you only have one shot to evaluate. You can get really lucky or really unlucky.
Lee Harvey Oswald hit his target two out of three times, and severely wounded the Texas Governor as a bonus. Oswald’s longest distance was 81 meters or 266 feet, which was probably his easiest shot because there was little angle of deflection since the JFK limousine was driving away in a straight line without any perpendicular or sideward motion, and it had slowed to a crawl after the first two shots. Oswald’s poorly-mounted scope was a little dodgy but I think he knew this after missing General Walker on an earlier occasion and used his iron sights for JFK instead.
In Tyler Robinson’s texts and phone calls to his tranny boyfriend, Lance Twiggs, who I am sure will be featured on the witness stand, the scope on Grandpa’s gun cost about two-thousand dollars. Nice.
The Discord texts and phone calls discussed in the Probable Cause Report are extremely damning, but will be backed up in trial with sufficient electronic metadata to prove them genuine. Robinson probably thought his chats were encrypted. Maybe so, but only against casual eavesdroppers.
What must be done is to ensure that the authorities hold out for the Death Penalty. No waffling on this! The usual mutants are already planning the protests, and they practically win the propaganda war for our side whenever they are seen in public.
🙂
With respect, my opinions are not based on You tube “clickbait” but on a lifetime of hunting and decades of killing and observing game animals killed with the 30-06 and other rounds as well. The 30-06 shown is a pretty standard 98 mauser (of which approx. 100 million were made), millions of which were imported into the US after WW2. It’s been re-stocked and rebarreled, has been drilled and tapped for a scope and its safety and bolt handle have been altered in order to accommodate the scope, mounted directly over the axis of the bore as it is.
In the recent Alec Baldwin shooting of Halyna whomever, he shot her in the chest with a .45 colt, the muzzle velocity of which was approx. 800 fps (feet per second.). It sailed right through her and wounded the director standing behind her. He survived a shoulder wound, but was seriously injured.
The well known .357 magnum pistol round, introduced in the 1930’s, was and is a famous (or infamous depending on your perspective) penetrator, shooting through cars and hitting people in side and invariably shooting through people who were not inside cars. It’s muzzle velocity with a 150 grain bullet is approx 1,200 fps, depending on barrel length, load, etc. The 9mm parabellum with a 115-124 grain bullet at 1100 fps is a also well known penetrator, easily passing through people. Kirk was not wearing any body armor or clothing that would slow down or deflect a bullet. The purported entrance wound is in his n uncovered, unprotected neck.
The 30-06 most common bullet weights are 150-180 grains and their muzzle velocity is from 2900 to 2700 fps. The standard military load was 2,700-2,800 fps. At 200 yards, remaining velocity is from 2,300 -2,400 fps. This is more that double the velocity of the .357 magnum and three times the velocity of the old .45 Colt, both rounds of which routinely produce penetration on human beings, frequently wounding bystanders in the line of fire as in the Alec Baldwin case.
Over a life time of hunting deer, hogs and other game animals, I’ve observed that complete pass throughs on broadside shots with 30-0t6 level rounds out to 200 yards are the rule, not the exception. Deer and hogs are much thicker than any human’s neck and contain major organs and ribs on both sides.
If there is no exit wound from Kirk’s neck and no bullet hole in the backdrop hanging behind him, then he was NOT shot with a 30-06 from the front. Period.
Our government hasn’t told the truth about anything since the Civil War and it is not telling the truth about this murder. Again, I do not based my opinions on You Tube but on a life time of shooting, hand loading, hunting and personal observation.
I’m not disputing that rounds like 9mm ball will usually pass through a human at close ranges. This is true of .45 ACP ball as well.
I am also not disputing that the deadly bullet, said to be .30-06, which is about all the government has said, should have passed through Mr. Kirk’s neck.
About all we know from grainy slow-frame rate digital video and stills from UVU is that Charlie’s left jugular exploded and he was killed almost instantly. There is no wounding at all on the right side of his body that I can see in other video, nor a credible theory where any other shot could have come from.
From dodgy cellphone audio we hear a firecracker sound and a hard crack as the supersonic bullet passes overhead the crowd, and the the copious blood squirting from the Right side of Charlie’s neck.
We don’t have any bullet recovery mentioned in those nefarious government lies, or the autopsy report, a full police report, let alone a basic ballistics report.
I used to be a Federal Firearms License holder and I’ve owned lots of .30-06 and 8mm rifles. I understand ballistics and wound ballistics and penetration.
What I am disputing is the notion that the Kirk bullet did not pass through (an Internet claim and some hearsay). We know what should have happened, but how can we even know? That evidence has not been released.
The notion that “we can’t trust the gubbamint” on anything is what I call “epistemological nihilism,” sort of like a “Fake Nukes Phil” approach to knowledge. This does not serve us well.
It is a büllshït way to evaluate what is true and what is not true, and the inevitable misinformation. As a historian, I am very much concerned about historiography and methods of investigation beyond what “Court historians” say.
When Jack Ruby assassinated the smirking Oswald in the police parking garage standing with the crowd of reporters, he used a Colt Cobra snubbie revolver in .38 Special caliber. The Dallas Detective Jim Leavelle was escorting Oswald, who was between him and Ruby ─ a little behind Oswald on his right side (IMAGE).
The bullet went into Oswald’s Left torso and nearly penetrated his entire body, lodging visibly just under the skin on Oswald’s Right torso ─ with Det. Leavelle dangerously close to being in the path had the bullet continued further.
The so-called Magic Bullet fired by Oswald at Dealey Plaza two days earlier ─ the second one fired according to the majority of the members of the Warren Commission ─ hit Kennedy in his upper back to the Right of his neck, exited close to his larynx at his necktie; then the bullet keyholed and hit Governor Connally in the back and completely penetrated his torso, breaking a few ribs along the way.
The bullet exited his chest and contined, hitting the Governor’s Right wrist, which got broken, and then it hit him in the Left thigh, penetrating and lodging in his trousers but not penetrating his flesh.
The Magic Bullet was found later on the hospital gurney used by Connally, likely coming loose there when they cut off his clothing at the hospital. The full-metal-jacketed bullet found was intact but hardly “pristine.”
The Warren Commision Report errored in that its simplistic drawing showed Connally sitting in the seat in front of Kennedy and does not accurately depict the bullet path. In reality, the trajectory of the bullet is not hard to understand because Gov. Connally was sittting on a jump seat in front of Kennedy a little to the side and below ─ which means that the bullet path forms a nearly straight, (laser pointer) line back to the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository building.
There was nothing “magical” about this bullet at all, which wounded both the President and the Governor. It did not make the wild course changes as depicted by Kevin Costner in the 1991 Oliver Stone film, JFK. The 6.5 mm Italian military bullet penetrated exactly as it was designed to do.
I hope they release a Kirk autopsy and ballistics report soon, or at least after the trial. But until they do, any wild conspiracy notions about Magic Bullets are misguided.
🙂
I have just received this reply to a comment I posted on an Aporia article: “Friend-Enemy is Bad Politics”.
Beyond some comments posted online in a country of 340 million people, what evidence is there that “leftists” want “us” dead? Even if there were as many as 10,000 comments, that it is still much less than 1% of the population. Most mainstream leftist and liberal commentators publicly condemned the murder [of Charlie Kirk].
Is this a fair point?
As most mainstream leftist and liberal commentators publicly condemn the murder, “Left’s next sniper is patiently taking aim”.
Go to any Conservative or Rightwing-adjacent speech or rally on a University campus anywhere in the country. What you will find is AntiFa, BLM, and whatever scruffies, all trying to shout down and exercise the so-called “Heckler’s Veto.” The last thing they want is free-speech for the Right. Tyler Robinson just went a little more “ballistic” with his argument, that’s all.
And the costs in security for a campus rally will be astronomical. Ask Jared Taylor when he spoke at Arizona State University in 2022.
This TP USA rally at UVU (77 percent White, 12 percent Hispanic of any race, 1 percent African, etc.) had minimal security because neither AntiFa nor BLM showed up in great numbers to protest.
🙂
In response to sweeping claims that “the left wants us dead”, I think it’s a fair point. There is a minority of the left that wants us dead. But I think the portion of the left that would vigorously oppose that murderous minority is itself a minority.
Only a minority wants us dead, but a majority would let it happen. That’s my feeling, anyway.
Fine piece. I’m of the mind that there should be a longer period of grieving, but she was likely put on the spot by less enlightened advisors. I’m an out of practice Catholic and I’ve never forgiven the black murderess and her accomplices that killed my brother. But even in my rage I was unable to accept a sincere offer to kill the killer. They would never repent or ask for forgiveness and none would be given from me or most people I know. I do know some who would fall along the line with the grieving parents stating they don’t want to demonize the killer of their child. It’s something I’ll never understand. It doesn’t make you holier than thou. It makes you appear weaker. Losing Charlie Kirk is a massive blow and she should have been able to express anger. I’m not surprised she didn’t.
When I was in my teens a movie called “300” came out. A scene which never left me to this day and felt so right even when I was young. Leonidas’ general witnesses his own son die in the most dishonorable fashion.
Leonidas tells his loyal general “My heart breaks for your loss”. His loyal general replies “Heart? I’ve filled my heart with hate”.
Leonidas. “Good”.
“Let the hate flow through you!” – Emperor Palpatine.
The Empire were always the good guys, anyway. They brought law and order and shiny uniforms to Outer Rim shitholes like Tatooine and Geonosis. Spice mine drilling infrastructure on Kessel, providing much needed jobs and skills. They cracked down on violent crime and deathstick dealers on Coruscant and executed terrorist-harbouring criminals (and droid smugglers) like Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru. And before you pipe up with your “Alderaan” – Alderaan was a hoax. There is no laser can destroy a whole planet. They’re saying 6 billion – I’m saying 200k max, mostly of space measles and starvation brought about by Rebel Alliance bombing of trade routes.
Yeah, despite the Sub-Saharan voice of Darth Vader, my favorite part of the Trilogy was the Empire Strikes Back, because they prevail in that one. I could not stand Lucas’ later juiced up and indulgent versions of the classics with the CGI and enhanced multikulti puppets.
In fact, when I was a teenager and saw the first Star Wars movie in 1977, I thought the effects were cool but the goofy robots were kinda stupid, which I guess is what the story is sort of told around. Then the protagonists went into the cringey Mos Eisley Cantina Bar and I was ready to take the safety catch off of my proverbial can of fumigant.
🙂
There is no laser can destroy a whole planet. They’re saying 6 billion – I’m saying 200k max, mostly of space measles and starvation brought about by Rebel Alliance bombing of trade routes.
That is very clever how you criticize the jew’s holohoax. At first, I had thought you had lost your mind, going on about Star Wars—well done! 🙃
If you’re the same dude who wrote 17 Dangerous Traits to Avoid in a Woman on RD, well done. I sent it to a few pals and all thoroughly enjoyed and found it refreshingly enlightening. I hope you don’t mind if I steal the Star Wars references next time I’m in a squabble with some leftist vermanthrope. Not written, only verbal jousting.
This is why I love you Greg.
You are very kind. Thanks
Good article Greg!
Yes, forgiveness can be granted to those who repent and try to make amends for the damage they have caused. Spiteful mutants cannot be forgiven; they are not people like us. They are evil, degenerates, and must be defeated. They are evil at heart and respond only to violence. They need a firm hand, and after our victory, we need something like Christian monasteries, so that they do not multiply and can be isolated from good white people. We can generously forgive our enemies only after our total victory.
They need a firm hand, and after our victory, we need something like Christian monasteries, so that they do not multiply and can be isolated from good white people. Perhaps a trip to the Tuol Sleng-Ishii Unit for the worsts of the worst.
Greg: Frankly, I was horrified. “What’s next,” I wondered, “foot washing?”… [Erika] has terrible political instincts and should probably stay home and raise her children… Generally, one lies to oneself first, then goes public. When one publicly lies about one’s feelings to show off one’s Christian virtues, that’s what we call “virtue signaling.”
—
Good points, Greg, and timely, considering what’s dominated the news cycle since 10 September.
So that’s what “virtue signaling” means. Why not just say “lying about one’s beliefs to others — especially false Christian beliefs?
Erika is no leader of any White resistance cause and neither was her husband.
—
Christians, of course, think that they will be rewarded in heaven for such behavior. Which means, on a deep level, they aren’t really concerned with winning this battle. Their kingdom is not of this world. Their heads are not in this game. They say there are no atheists in foxholes. But, frankly, in this fight, can we afford anything else?
—
Atheism has little to do with TPSU’s otherworldly, supernatural, “conservative,” evangelical Christian Zionist bullshit. Like Klassen said, “Atheists simply do not believe in the other fellow’s spooks. They believe in nothing.”
Can we afford anything else in this fight for our race’s survival and preservation? Yes. Our people should look hard at Willian Pierce’s non-Semitic belief system for our race, Cosmotheism — explained in today’s American Dissident Voices broadcast without mention of this media-driven Charlie and Erika Kirk/TPUSA anti-White Christian Zionist nonsense. Listen or read, here: “WLP92: All His Waking Hours, part 4” at nationalvanguard.org
Pierce described Cosmotheism as being based on “[t]he idea of an evolutionary universe … with an evolution toward ever higher and higher states of self-consciousness.” His political ideas followed from this, and were centered on racial progress through self-selection, eugenics, and struggle as the means of advancing the White race toward what he sometimes called Higher Man. In his view, the White race represented the pinnacle of human evolution thus far — and therefore it should be kept genetically separate from all other races.
Readers should consider reading Pierce’s “Set Your Sights on Eternity Our Cause” on C-C, that you recommended here in 2011.
—
CC Reader: September 26, 2025 How do you know she would say let’s not make this about race?
—
Becaus Erika, Bible-believing, former beauty queen, is not a race thinker at all. Imagine what her PC answers would be if quizzed during the Miss Arizona competition, “Do you believe all humans are equal?” followed up with, “Are Jewish people special, chosen by God? Would she have been crowned Miss Arizona if her reponses had been “no ” and “no”? Or would she have “virtue signaled” with “yes’”and “yes, for the Bible tells us so.”?
I first heard of the term “ Virtue Signaling” a few years ago and always consider those who use it as incredibly cowardly. Those that virtue signal today will not have the moral strength to say what’s needed when the conditions in our nations become worse, and they will become worse. As Dr. Pierce said in his truly timeless broadcast, Truth Before Fashion, “ In the long run, everything depends on our preferring what is true to what is fashionable, preferring it enough to speak out for it…It doesn’t take everyone to make a difference. It only takes a few.”
When I saw Ms. Bible Thumper make that incredibly moronic statement that she forgives the killer and that she is using her belief in a dead sky Jew to help her move on; I felt incredibly disgusted that someone who supposedly cares about our society would place so much faith in a crackpot faith. Christianity continues to demonstrate its grasp on the weak willed and gullible.
She and Kirk offered nothing more than the Christian Conservative solution to our societal problems. We need total racial separation. We need to adopt a new religion that will guide our race, not towards next year or next election but instead towards eternity. Dr. Pierce and Cosmotheism offer our race what it needs. Not some Zionist looney who died a servant of the system.
I think I first came across the term “virtue signalling” from Jim Goad’s amusing article “Virtue Signalling Yourself To Death”, when in his inimitable way he gave us a brief run down of a few naive (to say the least) dummies who had done just that. Some of these strange terms take a while to come down to where I live in Australia, but my first thought was that these people were just “Bullshit-artists” as my old Dad used to say. Sure enough, that’s what they all are. I grew up in a Catholic family that went to church every week, but I can tell you that my old Dad would be out for blood if any nutcase harmed any member of his family.
“I first heard of the term “ Virtue Signaling” a few years ago and always consider those who use it as incredibly cowardly.”
It’s a catchphrase to describe someone signaling his lack of even comprehending true virtue, let alone understanding the critical importance of having high character and integrity. It quickly displays to us what superficial people we’re dealing with. As Devon Stack has described, tolerance is not a virtue whatsoever. Tolerance is a condition where you allow yourself take in bad, even poisonous, stuff. We “tolerate” having to remain in crowded or noisy places. We’re told to “tolerate” foreign people in our homelands, who will harm us. Tolerance is always related to something bad. Just like with alcohol abuse– on a daily basis, tolerance is what will cause us to unknowingly ingest larger & larger amounts of addictive and toxic substance, until we’ve allowed ourselves to accept the final fatal dose.
“Dr. Pierce said in his truly timeless broadcast, Truth Before Fashion, “ In the long run, everything depends on our preferring what is true to what is fashionable, preferring it enough to speak out for it…It doesn’t take everyone to make a difference. It only takes a few.”
Yes. We teach our kids to speak, “But the Emperor is wearing no clothes?!”
“someone who supposedly cares about our society”
None of our allowed showy, high-profile leaders or elected politicians do. They care about appearances, and coming off as principled people. And it seems a good majority of the public, lack critical thinking, and are quite content with the appearances, and maintaining status quo.
“We need total racial separation. We need to adopt a new religion that will guide our race, not towards next year or next election but instead towards eternity. Dr. Pierce and Cosmotheism offer our race what it needs.”
I agree on race, but not the need to personally adopt Cosmotheism. It’s not good for us to be preoccupied with things which are totally out of our control like the afterlife. I get wrongly accused of not “authentically” admiring Dr. Pierce, because I can’t go along with his unique outlook on eternal life, but this is the case. (I’m an agnostic, who was raised Catholic.) Maybe when I get very old, I’ll have the desire to more closely adhere to a specific religious theology.
I’m not familiar with Devon Stack or his definition of virtue signaling. I pulled this from Wiki-Jew, “ Virtue signaling is the act of expressing opinions or stances that align with popular moral values, often through social media, with the intent of demonstrating one’s good character. “
To me this definition is of someone who is weak willed and a suck up to popular culture. I couldn’t trust a “ virtue signaler” with standing up in the hard times. Currently, at least in the West, we have it pretty good. But even if we didn’t it is still our moral duty to stand up and be truthful. Otherwise that is how we lose, by bending the knee.
Yes, the Emperor Wears No Clothes. It’s a story that basically shows how one or a few people can stand up and call a lie out for what it is. When I was a child, I remember seeing that queer Bruce Jenner “ come out” as a trasgendered on the television. As this was my first experience seeing one, I asked “ Why does that guy look so weird.” and in response to being told what “ transgender” meant, I said “ That makes no sense, he’s a freak.”
Yes, all politicians that are allowed to have any sort of power or popularity nowadays all have very kosher views on the world. That is why Ms. Bible Thumper Kirk was allowed to say that on global media without being de-platformed. All are bought and paid for by the Jews. The only real difference between conservatives and liberals is that one group wants to pass a law before killing us and the other doesn’t wait.
I’m glad you agree on race. Our race has currently lost its path, and something needs to put us back on it. I believe that to be Cosmotheism. Some call it a philosophy or worldview. I recognize it as a religion, but whatever you want to call it, we need it’s teachings.
Cosmotheism doesn’t put such an emphasis on death that the Abrahamic cults do. This quote comes from an old Norse poem and it is something that Dr. Pierce said often. “ Cattle die, and kinsmen die, And so one dies oneself; One thing I know that never dies: The fame of a dead man’s deeds.” We don’t need to think about death, but we must live our life in service to our race. So then, in some small aspect, we can live forever.
Christians are nothing if not “Virtue Signallers.”
🙂
Chairman Will,
I just read “All His Waking Hours, part 4” this afternoon and some of Douglas Mercer’s “The Order” pieces. Superb material. Cosmotheism sounds very good to me; ever evolving racial consciousness towards a greater goal. The greatest goal, you could say.
I read “The lightning And The Sun” last year and I detected a similar Comic view.
NS Crusty: September 28, 2025 Chairman Will, I just read “All His Waking Hours, part 4” this afternoon and some of Douglas Mercer’s “The Order” pieces. Superb material. Cosmotheism sounds very good to me; ever evolving racial consciousness towards a greater goal. The greatest goal, you could say.
I read “The lightning And The Sun” last year and I detected a similar Comic view.
—
Ha! I take it you meant to write “Cosmic view” instead of Comic view.
Dr. Pierce first translated Savitri Devi in Issue Number 1 of Rockwell’s ideological journal, National Socialist World in 1966, so he was already thinking Cosmotheisticly 60 years ago.
Crusty, you might enjoy this essay, “Cosmotheism in Savitri Devi” at nationalvanguard.org where you’ll find her famous quote, “You cannot ‘de-Nazify’ Nature!”
Jay-zuz! That’s my best typo ever! I don’t think I can top that one.
Thanks for the reading recommendation Will.
” Like Klassen said, “Atheists simply do not believe in the other fellow’s spooks. They believe in nothing.” “
As an Atheist myself, I would not say that they believe in nothing. In fact, they do have values. It is just that they do not obsess about supernatural nonsense, make-believe, and wishful thinking.
🙂
Scott, responds to me: September 28, 2025 ”Like Klassen said, “Atheists simply do not believe in the other fellow’s spooks. They believe in nothing.” “
As an Atheist myself, I would not say that they believe in nothing. In fact, they do have values. It is just that they do not obsess about supernatural nonsense, make-believe, and wishful thinking.
Scott, even WikiJews tend to agree with Ben Klassen: Atheism – Wikipedia
Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities [spooks in the sky]. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
Find who else are atheists, here: Atheism in the United States – Wikipedia None there are listed as White racists/separatists. Lots of Jew atheists listed here: Lists of atheists – Wikipedia
American Atheists has more than 230 local affiliates nationwide.
Millions of people who no longer believe stay in their churches because of the community and support the churches provide. Our local affiliates stand ready to help and are vibrant communities full of people just like you who have left behind religion.
Find your local group of atheists… Home – American Atheists
Sticking with the WikiJews, see: Pantheism – Wikipedia
Pantheism can refer to a number of philosophical and religious beliefs, such as the belief that the universe is God,[1] or panentheism, the belief in a non-corporeal divine intelligence or God out of which the universe arises,[2][3][4] as opposed to the corporeal gods of religions, such as Yahweh. The former idea came from Christian theologians who, in attacking the latter form of pantheism, described pantheism as the belief that God is the material universe itself.
It’s said that Cosmotheism is an advanced pro-White form of Pantheism.
Scott, you would have a better chance to convert a Pantheist group to our way of racial thinking with Dr. P’s nature-based belief system that is grounded in reality, than with a racially-mixed atheist group.
Pantheism can refer to a number of philosophical and religious beliefs, such as the belief that the universe is God,[1] or panentheism, the belief in a non-corporeal divine intelligence or God out of which the universe arises,[2][3][4] as opposed to the corporeal gods of religions, such as Yahweh. The former idea came from Christian theologians who, in attacking the latter form of pantheism, described pantheism as the belief that God is the material universe itself.
After giving what WikiJews say is the history of Cosmotheism, they say, here: Cosmotheism – Wikipedia
The term is separately associated with William Luther Pierce, an American white nationalist political activist who founded the National Alliance. His cosmotheist ideology espoused that evolution was on an upward path to oneness with God; Pierce said that whites had a “divine spark” that set them on the best path for this syncretic belief.[2]
But do not click on Pierce’s name or that of the National Alliance unless you first brace yourself for the most outrageous WikiJew smears on the Internet, even to this 18 July 2025 article in the anti-White Atlantic magazine by “hate” expert James Shaparo about Pierce’s 50-year-old novel The Turner Diaries: “What to Do With the Most Dangerous Book in America.”
The Most Dangerous Book In America–that’s quite the accolade and would work well as a cover blub. James Shapiro is Jewish, naturally. In his essay he calls TTD a “vile-racist fantasy” and tries to link Trump’s policies to the book. He also mentions Cosmotheist Books and the National Alliance.
Douglas Mercer: September 29, 2025 The Most Dangerous Book In America–that’s quite the accolade and would work well as a cover blub. James Shapiro is Jewish, naturally. In his essay he calls TTD a “vile-racist fantasy” and tries to link Trump’s policies to the book. He also mentions Cosmotheist Books and the National Alliance.
—
Hate Pierce Now, Hate Pierce Forever could have been the title of Shapiro’s article. The Atlantic rag is simply parroting what the ADL and our lovely FBI have been saying about TD for decades. Its readership expects such propaganda. I can imagine what Shapiro, the alleged Shakespeare scholar, has to say about NA and Cosmotheism — probably sourced from WikiJews.
When Atlantic readers search to purchase TD online to see what all the fuss is about, they’ll find it is banned on Amazon, or may find some used second edition. But if Shapiro slipped up and mentioned our CosmotheistChurch.org bookstore they can purchase the expanded third edition that has the author’s afterword, explaining why he wrote TD, Proceeds from the sale go to Alliance-building instead of to others.
30 years ago, in an interview Pierce granted, he answered the question that Shapiro raised:
Jeffrey Stewart: Dr. Pierce, is The Turner Diaries the most dangerous book in America?
William L. Pierce: For some people, it might be. I wrote the book not just as entertainment, not just as an attempt to predict what would happen in America in the next 20 years, but I also had a message. I think that message is a dangerous one for the people who are controlling the American government, and for the people who are setting the propaganda line of the mass media in this country. I think it’s very dangerous for them. I think they should be very concerned because, if that message reaches a large enough number of people in this country and is taken to heart, they will be in a very dangerous situation indeed.
JS: Occasionally in the history of Western civilization, a book has accomplished that — raised the consciousness of individuals and changed the social structure. Why don’t you sum up the central message of the book for us?
WLP: The central message of the book is that every self-respecting adult has to accept his responsibility for what’s going on in the world around him. He has to accept his responsibility as a guardian, as a caretaker, of his people’s heritage. He has to accept his responsibility for what the future will be like, for the type of world that his children and grandchildren will live in. He has to start being a participant instead of an observer. And I think that if a large enough number of people take that message to heart, this whole house of cards that has been misgoverning and misinforming our people for so long can be brought tumbling down….
Read the rest of Pierce’s interview about the “most dangerous” book he wrote in 1985, here: “WLP91: Behind The Turner Diaries” at nationalvanguard.org
Pierce described Cosmotheism as being based on “[t]he idea of an evolutionary universe … with an evolution toward ever higher and higher states of self-consciousness.” His political ideas followed from this, and were centered on racial progress through self-selection, eugenics, and struggle as the means of advancing the White race toward what he sometimes called Higher Man. In his view, the White race represented the pinnacle of human evolution thus far — and therefore it should be kept genetically separate from all other races. In Carlos Videla’s book The Philosophy of National Socialism, he says struggle, selection, fertility, and inheritance are the four pillars of the Swastika faith and that NS sought to increase the hereditary value of biological traits towards evolutionary improvement of a people over time, it’s prerogative being the blood-as-folk while its cousin Fascism, Robin to Germany’s Batman, sees the fasces’ prerogative as the State whose citizenry is modeled on soldierly values. A goodgoy amerikan says ‘I want.’ A national socialist/ fascist says ‘we must’ and spits on the ‘values’ of the judaized anti-cultural junkyard this place has been for far too long.
Just popping in to say that that picture of Trump and Erika could be an Italian Renaissance painting
The Charlie Kirk memorial looked like it was majority White so it was disappointing that they all readily applauded when she said she forgave the killer. I think this virtue signaling is what the Church of Satan refers to as putting on a Good Guy badge.
If Trump was smarter he might’ve said, “I forgive Charlie’s killer too…” while sending out law enforcement to crush Antifa and related groups once and for all. Kind of like the scene at the end of the Godfather where Pacino attends the christening while his hitmen eliminate his enemies. But I may be misremembering the scene. Anyway, I still think it’s plausible to hear Erika’s remarks as “I forgive you [but you and your ilk will be utterly destroyed.]” You just can’t say the bracketed part out loud.
One can forgive one’s enemies (they know not what they do) but still wish to destroy them because it must be done. Just like one can poison rats without having hatred of the said rats. The leftists must be dealt with for the West to prevail with all its beauty and glory, but it isn’t necessary to have any passionate hatred to do that. All it takes is the clarity to see what must be done and then doing it.
Or as Kurtz from Apocalypse Now puts it…
You have to have men who are moral…and at the same time who are able to
utilize their primordal instincts to kill without feeling…without passion…
without judgement…without judgement
But if you truly forgive someone, can you really go ahead and punish them afterwards? That would seem to imply that you hadn’t forgiven them. I think you can punish first, and then forgive, but not the other way around…
Even if Erika Kirk “forgives” Tyler Robinson for the murder of her husband ─ assuming that he is guilty, of course, as Robinson still has the presumption of innocence ─ the State is still owed its justice and retribution as the sovereign authority of the land.
Already the usual suspects are trotting out their Libertarian and “budget hawk” arguments and complaining about how much Utah County is going to have to spend above the norm to pursue a Death Penalty case (oy vey!).
However, the Utah County Prosecutor, who attended Brigham Young University and is presumably LDS, seems resolved to stay the course ─ unlike the dippy hippie Latah County Prosecutor in Idaho who dropped the Death Penalty for Bryan Kohberger, who thereby avoided a comprehensive trial in Boise and ultimately the firing squad by confessing to stabbing four University of Idaho students to death in their beds back in 2022.
🙂
“One can forgive one’s enemies (they know not what they do) but still wish to destroy them because it must be done”.
Maybe. but that is not what they mean when they say it on TV for millions to see.
Rats or other pests which require extermination due to infestation are not consciously trying to harm us. And to be honest whilst it necessary it still effects my feelings and consciousness when having to to do it. I would not feel the same against a group who has decided to wage an existential war with me, my family and folk. And while we’re on the subject, I wouldn’t feel a thing aside from satisfaction in exterminating humans who have decided to abuse children (and animals) who are strangers to me. That feeling (or not feeling) I’m sure is an instinctual duty that I can not control.
I can speak to this with more authority than you all can (I sincerely hope.) My mother was murdered in 1996. Her murderer(s) were never caught. Even now, if I caught the people who did this to her, I would consider it my duty and pleasure to deal out revenge on them. Were things reversed, she would want to do as much for me.
I like to say that it’s not my fault—I suffer from a bad case of Corsican Alzheimer’s. With that, you forget everything but the vendettas. I also like to point out that my college nickname was “Sweeney,” as in “Sweeney Todd” and I did not get it for being a sweet nice forgiving soul. “The more they bleed the more I live, I never forget and I never forgive.” I figure as long as I’m not making them into tasty meat pies, I’m still on the side of the good guys.
it would be nice if comments were preserved when we click the “print this article” button
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.