The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 PodcastsKevin Barrett Archive
Attack of the Nihilists
Did Dostoevsky's Demons Predict Wokeism, Antifa and the Gender-Benders?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“’Are these the Nazis, Walter?’ ‘No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there’s nothing to be afraid of.’” -The Big Lebowski

Since the so-called insurrection of January 6, big media, big government, and big corporations have been demanding the collective scalp of the Trumpian alt-right. If we don’t somehow make those 70 million Trump voters disappear, the subtext goes, American democracy is doomed.

The alt-right agrees that American democracy faces an existential threat, but disagrees vociferously about the nature of the threat. Whereas Democrats and corporate media consider Trump’s cult of personality a fascist regime in the making, and his followers deluded and none-too-bright storm troopers, the deplorables, for their part, view the corporate Democrats as TDS-addled censorship-loving election thieves bent on establishing a “woke” dictatorship.

What does all this sound and fury really signify? What we are witnessing is a clash of barely-coherent yet increasingly frenetic ideologies—something the previous generation never imagined when it famously proclaimed the end of ideology. Its seems that Francis Fukuyama never read his Dostoevsky. If he had, he would have understood that the collapse of the grand récit of modernity would not lead to universal satisfaction under neoliberalism, but instead to ideological extremism, chaos, and bloodshed.

ORDER IT NOW

Dostoevsky literally wrote the book on ideological extremism and its causes and consequences. That book is Demons, otherwise known in various translations as The Devils, The Demons, and The Possessed. The author’s penultimate novel, it details the process by which liberal parents and educators produce radicalized, ideology-maddened children bent on tearing down the world into which they were born. This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth. But all those rebuilding plans are just window-dressing. It’s the destruction, only the destruction, that counts.

Dostoevsky originally envisioned Demons as political polemic, but it expanded into a polyphonic masterpiece in the writing. Horrified by news reports of nihilist leader Sergey Nechayev’s orchestration of a pointless political murder, Dostoevsky set about fictionalizing the story, hoping to shed light on how the sensitive, genteel, well-meaning liberals of the 1840s had prepared the way for the 1860s generation of nihilist lunatics. (Today, we might ask ourselves how the complacent neoliberals of a generation ago, especially their avant-garde academic fringe, managed to midwife the emergence of today’s woke generation of sanctimonious COVID-masked rioters, Antifa thugs, social media censors, gender-denialists, statue-smashers, and others bent on the nihilistic extermination of American and human tradition if not reality itself.)

Demons, published in 1871-1872, predicted the rise of even worse nihilisms—and future developments, including the emergence of Bolshevism and Nazism, seemed to fulfill its prophecy. But what Dostoevsky foresaw was not so much particular events as a recurring pattern: Liberal parents neglect the religious education of their children, who grow up to embrace radical political ideologies as a poor substitute for faith and the spiritual life. That’s why Western culture has been trapped in an oscillating dynamic between liberalism and nihilistic radicalism for roughly two centuries, with no end in sight. The only off-ramp, as Dostoevsky never stopped screaming from the rooftops, would be a decisive return to religion. That seemed a pipe dream in the 1870s. But one hundred years later, the collapse of Communism and the Islamic Awakening would restore it as a conceivable option.

Dostoevsky’s rogues’ gallery of 1860s nihilist intellectuals includes Nikolai Stavrogin, a high-born charismatic rule-breaker with a penchant for cruel and shocking actes gratuites including pedophilia and other experiments that “could have taught the Marquis de Sade a thing or two”; Peter Verkhovensky, a volubly mendacious activist and organizer dedicated to overthrowing his “oppressive” society by burning everything down, BLM-Antifa style; and Alexei Kirilov, who believes he can simultaneously overcome belief in God and fear of death (two sides of the same coin) through suicide. Finally, and perhaps most prophetically, there is the historian Shigalov, who can see where it’s all heading: “Proceeding from unlimited freedom I end with unlimited despotism.”

The liberal Dr. Frankensteins responsible for breeding these demonic intellectual monsters are represented in the novel by Stephan Verkhovensky, Peter’s father and Stavrogin’s tutor. A self-styled freethinker and legend-in-his-own-mind who fancies himself a threat to the status quo, Stephan is in fact pathetically ineffectual in his slavish but worse-than-useless devotion to the modern, Godless, socialistic ideas arriving in Russia from the West. His pupils, the up-and-coming generation of 1860s nihilists, will, unlike their teacher, at least make a real effort to live out the implications of those ideas—with tragic consequences.

Today’s equivalent of the Stephan Verkhovenskys are the postmodernists, who conquered the humanities wing of the academy in the 1990s and planted the flag of nihilistic relativism on its ramparts. Their attack on the real, the true, the absolute, the just, the transcendent—on God, really—was, like Stephan Verkhovensky’s logorrheic effusions, a purely imaginary campaign, conducted within a well-remunerated “safe space,” with few if any direct real-world effects. But their pupils listened, took heed, and eventually acted.

The chief lesson of the Stephan Verkhovenskys of the world, deeply imbibed and put into practice by the Peters and Stavrogins and Kirilovs, is rejection of reality, both natural and social. They are in deep-seated revolt against God, traditional authorities who claim to be His representatives, and anything else that inhibits their freedom to be and do whatever they like. Since the world, its traditions, and its authorities (not to mention God) are constantly frustrating their capricious desires, they are driven by hate even when they profess the most humanitarian ideals. “It is all the fault of the system, the fault of our evil traditions, the fault of the authorities! Burn down the cities! Smash the statues! Defund the police!”

Some even hate their own God-given chromosomes and hormones and genitalia so much that they are driven to extremes of medical self-mutilation. Their carnival barkers, woke ideologues, only slightly less uncomfortable in their own skins, launch ferocious campaigns to “cancel” anyone who refuses to join the game of million-gender make-believe.

The scene in Demons in which an elegant society ball, featuring liberal literary speechifying from the 1860s Russian version of today’s Democratic Party, is organized as cover for Peter’s nihilistic socialist goons to burn down much of the town, reads like something out of today’s headlines. Julia von Lembke, the organizer of the society ball, plays the role of Nancy Pelosi, while Peter and his murderous arsonist friends represent Antifa-BLM.

Another startlingly contemporary concern of Dostoevsky’s 1872 novel is the central role of pedophilia. Stavrogin, the iconic central character or “antichrist” if you will, harbors a dark secret: Many years ago, his efforts to live amorally, as though God genuinely didn’t exist, led him to perpetrate a terrible seduction-rape of an innocent child, who subsequently committed suicide. But though logic tells him that in a world with no God and hence no ultimate basis for morality he had no good reason not to follow his desires to their limits and beyond (shades of Woody Allen) he is nonetheless tormented by extreme remorse.

Stavrogin’s situation recalls not only that of Woody Allen and other accused celebrity sex criminals, but also looks forward to the way pedophilia has become the last sexual taboo and hence the last resort for sexual blackmailers. Meyer Lansky, the mob boss who owned J. Edgar Hoover and (indirectly) almost everyone of consequence in the postwar 20th century USA, didn’t need pedophilia; he could blackmail his targets with photos of just about any non-marital liasons. But today, we are living in a world ruled by Jeffrey Epsteins and their Israeli intelligence bosses, who know too well that “it don’t mean a thing if it ain’t got that underage swing.” Even consensual cannibalism and incest are losing their transgressive luster. Our absurdly “sexually liberated” culture, awash in birth control pills and abortions and pornography and viagra and celebration of almost all varieties of deviance, is still ashamed of pedophilia, a century and a half after Nikolai Stavrogin. Apparently the Antichrist hasn’t quite achieved 100% control of our sex lives…at least not yet.

In a world without God, where is the transcendence? You can’t just get rid of it. Yearning for transcendence is hard-wired into the human soul. In Demons, ideologies of Godless freedom lead to warped attempts at transcendence: Stavrogin transcends morality by raping and suiciding a child; Peter through elaborate orchestrations of gratuitous destruction; and perhaps most interestingly, Kirilov through directly assaulting God by committing an elaborately thought-out suicide.

Today, some seek to transcend the banality of secular materialism through wokeness. By joining an ostensibly idealistic movement attempting to radically change society and make history—or better yet, erase history—the wokester lives for something larger and greater than himself, or so he imagines. Such feeble simulacra of spiritual awakenings pale in comparison to the Kirilov-like planetary suicide attempts currently being engineered by the transhumanist movement and their singularity-seeking allies in genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, artificial life, and nanotechnology. These folks, like Kirilov, think they can challenge God by killing themselves…along with the rest of us. (No, Marvin Minsky, we will not get lucky and they will not keep us as pets; it, not they, will be a self-reproducing toxin, a cancer on the planet and perhaps the universe.)

Dostoevsky couldn’t have foreseen the singularity. But he did see how nihilist revolutionaries were pushing Russia towards the destruction of the old order by way of an unprecedented bloodbath…and how the forces driving the destruction were generational and rooted in the way each succeeding generation cares for, or fails to care for, its children. In Demons, the liberal intellectual Stephan Verkhovensky is the absent father (of Peter) and the irresponsibly irreligious teacher (of Stavrogin), and it is ultimately his failure as a father figure that turns the next generation into demons. We see the same kind of abdication of paternal/religious authority in the erosion of patriarchy in contemporary America. In the black community the socially-engineered destruction of patriarchy and religion (the two are related because only religion gives a man sufficient reason to sacrifice himself to protect and care for his family) has produced unprecedented rates of crime, drug use, and out-of-wedlock birth. Other US ethnic groups, including the white majority, have also been devastated, though quiet desperation and antidepressants and ID-politics idiocy among the middle and upper classes, and opioids and alcohol and Trumpolatry in the working classes, are more common than street crime.

Since the baby boom began after World War II, increasingly absent fathers have produced increasingly disturbed (or “demonic”) generations of children, culminating in the mass psychosis of the Woke generation. Will the Wokesters ultimately stage a new Bolshevik revolution-cum-civil-war, a 2020s American bloodbath? That is what Strauss and Howe’s Fourth Turning theory predicts. As I recently wrote in Crescent Magazine:

Some who expect the worst, including Trump’s sometime advisor Steve Bannon, cite the Fourth Turning theory of sociologists William Strauss and Neil Howe. According to that theory, cyclical generational changes driven by child-rearing patterns have created an 80-year cycle in American history. At the end of each 80-year cycle, a cataclysmic bloodbath occurs, destroying the previous dispensation and opening the way for a new one.

If Strauss and Howe are right, we are right on schedule for a bloodbath. Around each of the years 1780, 1860, and 1940, oceans of blood were shed, generating new American myths that drove new political dispensations. 1780 marked the first American civil war, a bloody series of fratricidal atrocities mythically remembered as “the American Revolution.” 1860 brought the Civil War. 1940 brought World War II and its many holocausts, including those of Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki (and the sacrifice of over 300,000 American lives, a small portion of the global tally of 75 million).

How much bloodshed will emerge out of the yawning chasm opened by America’s internecine conflicts of 2020? All three of America’s previous bloodbaths were won by equivalents of the blues—the people who wanted to tear down the old order. The Revolutionists of 1780 demolished the British colonial order and built a union of largely independent states. The Yankees of 1860 annihilated that loose union of sovereign states and replaced it with federal tyranny. And the pro-war party of 1940—a minuscule portion of the electorate, which overwhelmingly opposed US entry into World War II—put federal tyranny on steroids by turning power over to an unelected military-industrial-banking complex and its permanent Deep State.

Based on historical precedent, we might expect the red-vs-blue war of the 2020s to end in yet another decisive blue victory, erasing all vestiges of tradition and enshrining an even more extreme form of tyranny (if such a thing is possible). But as an Arabic proverb says, “a thing that exceeds its limit turns into its opposite.” If what Alan Sabrosky calls “the Blue Terror” goes too far, stampeding over its opponents and censoring and silencing dissent with excessive hubris, a red reaction might be spurred to some sort of victory, however pyrrhic—whether by establishing its own tyranny of terror, or by breaking the nation into pieces.

Is the red reaction, represented by such groups as the Proud Boys, a voice of sanity? Or is it just another “demonic” and ultimately nihilistic ideological movement? If Dostoevsky were a columnist at the Unz Review (the only site that would publish him if he were alive today and participating in the American culture wars) he would undoubtedly argue that the Proud Boys and most of the rest of the alt right are correct about the necessity of patriarchy, but wrong about grounding it in ethnicity rather than religion. You are calling yourselves European chauvinists? he would sneer. Are you out of your minds? Europe is the source of the infection! Come to Mother Russia! Return to the Holy Orthodox Church and to Christ! Work to restore the Czar, and in the meantime make do with the next best thing, Vladimir Putin!

If he could overcome his provincial prejudices, the author of Demons would also look favorably on the Islamic Awakening, especially its manifestation in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Instead of Church and Czar, Islamic Iran is ruled by a clergy headed by the Supreme Leader on one side of the balance of powers, and a democratic-republican government on the other. That kind of balance between religious and worldly authority was the norm everywhere until the illuminati nihilists uncorked the French Revolution and let the demons of totalitarian secularism out of the bottle.

In any case, returning to America and Strauss and Howe’s Fourth Turning, it’s worth noting that although the American nihilist revolutions that occur like clockwork every four generations have always been won by the blues, they also have always succeeded in re-establishing patriarchy, for an all-too-obvious reason: The new regimes emerged from bloody all-out wars that were fought and won by extremely masculine people, XY and even occasionally XYY chromosome people with more high-IQ outliers and an average of 30 times as much testosterone as those other people who are born with XX chromosomes (are we still allowed to say “men” and “women”?) When the the testosterone-crazed hairy-chested killers come home from the wars and shack up, they tend to re-establish masculine authority in the households they form. And thus the four-generation 80-year cycle starts anew.

So if everything proceeds according to schedule, today’s Fourth Turning, the one that started around the year 2020, will presumably turn into some sort of bloodbath, at home and/or abroad, after which the victorious killers will once again re-establish (relative) patriarchy. Can you imagine the Woke generation of gender-bending nihilists doing that? I can’t. So something will have to give. Either the reactionary pro-patriarchy relatively religion-friendly reds will finally win one, or the blues will undergo a bloodbath-catalyzed metamorphosis and emerge as reconstructed patriarchs. (Or, quite plausibly, Strauss and Howe will be proven wrong, and the Fourth Turning will be a dud.)

What could make the Fourth Turning different, and a real pattern-breaker, is the likelihood that the Woke Yankees will finally lose a big war. If the US tries to lead the maritime and rimland powers against a Russia-China-Iran alliance defending the Eurasian heartland, Eurasia may very well defeat Oceana, with catastrophic consequences for the Yankee aggressors. Following the string of victories in the Fourth Turning bloodbaths of 1780, 1860, and 1940, a loss in the 2020s would shake Leviathan to its foundations. Who knows what, if anything, would emerge from the rubble.

It’s hard to predict the future, as Yogi Berra said, because it hasn’t happened yet. But however the red-vs-blue clash plays out, and whatever geopolitical dispensation emerges next, one thing is reasonably certain: People will keep reading Dostoevsky, and even the non-reactionaries will admit that his Demons got a lot of things right.

 
Hide 288 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Robinski says:

    I wonder how future archeologists will interpret our existence? They were driven to suicidal wars by overpopulation. The invisible hand of the Great Reset forced them to take a vaccine that unleashed the maniac killers lurking just beneath the surface. The warming planet released copious amounts of methane gas, rearranging their neurons and turned them into hockey mask wearing Jasons. However this plays out, I don’t think, Dostoevsky would approve.

    • Replies: @goldgettin
  2. Interesting. The current pandemic/vaccine dynamic makes the Fourth Turning paradigm look a bit squiffy. According to Dr. Tenpenny, the vaccines potentially have a “fat tail.” That is, the real problems show up months and years later.

    There is a series on Amazon called Utopia, starring John Cusack. ( cancelled after on season). It dealt with some of these issues.

    A previous version of the series by the same name was made by the Brits. It has the second season.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  3. Nicely done, ma sha ALLAH.

    Shukran.

    was-salaam.

    • Replies: @Jake
    , @moi
    , @moi
  4. Biff says:

    Bunny
    “He’s a nihilist”
    The Dude
    “Must be exhausting”

    The Big Lebowski.

    • LOL: John Johnson
  5. Interesting piece. But please, Dr. Barrett, correct “Stephan” (Verkhovensky) in quite many places. It should be Stepan.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  6. JimDandy says:

    Is the red reaction, represented by such groups as the Proud Boys, a voice of sanity? Or is it just another “demonic” and ultimately nihilistic ideological movement? If Dostoevsky were a columnist at the Unz Review (the only site that would publish him if he were alive today and participating in the American culture wars) he would undoubtedly argue that the Proud Boys and most of the rest of the alt right are correct about the necessity of patriarchy, but wrong about grounding it in ethnicity rather than religion.

    The slavophile Dostoyevsky would sneer at the idea of values being grounded, in part, in ethnicity? I didn’t know that. It’s actually the Alt-Right that sneers at the Proud Boys–precisely because they do NOT focus on the racial component of ethnicity–and the Proud Boys sneer back at them. And the argument that the cornerstone of Western culture is Christianity is not lost on the Proud Boys, many of which are practicing Christians.

  7. Miro23 says:

    But what Dostoevsky foresaw was not so much particular events as a recurring pattern: Liberal parents neglect the religious education of their children, who grow up to embrace radical political ideologies as a poor substitute for faith and the spiritual life. That’s why Western culture has been trapped in an oscillating dynamic between liberalism and nihilistic radicalism for roughly two centuries, with no end in sight. The only off-ramp, as Dostoevsky never stopped screaming from the rooftops, would be a decisive return to religion.

    A fine article by Kevin Barrett. Dostoyevsky called it demonic. The very interesting Ann Barnhardt covers a lot of the same ground and arrives at the same place in this unique video ( 3 hours long – I know – but this is Unz):

    • Thanks: Alfred
    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
  8. The author’s penultimate novel, it details the process by which liberal parents and educators produce radicalized, ideology-maddened children bent on tearing down the world into which they were born. This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth.

    The author is wrong about right-wing ideologies. Fascism does not promise a heaven on earth, only greater unity with one’s countrymen and real freedom, which is to say, freedom from being ruled and exploited by aliens, as Americans are. Leftist ideologies seek to build a heaven on earth because their adherents, by and large, are atheists, so their only hope for heaven is to build one themselves. And what is this “inherited social disorder” the author seems so attached to? In the US of today, it’s the Washington Swamp, and an economy, foreign policy, media, and academia dominated by the aforementioned aliens.

    • Agree: Ugetit, 36 ulster
  9. Franz says:

    Following the string of victories in the Fourth Turning bloodbaths of 1780, 1860, and 1940, a loss in the 2020s would shake Leviathan to its foundations.

    This is where the erroneous reading of history as “cyclical” or “organic” by historians always backfires. Fourth Turning especially: Only reworked Hesiod or fractured Yugas.

    If we take what really happened at each turn, Leviathan wins. Game over

    1780 — Banker-Freemason installation of petit nationalism, allowing London/Amsterdam money men to widen their tactics while covering their tracks. US/Britain split to see which money system will be more efficacious in the long term.

    1860 — Same team as above now goes from petit nationalism super nationalism. States were getting bigger everywhere. Consolidation here allows banks to use LARGE nations’ economics of scale to create waste, the basis of plutocracy. The USA blasts itself together; Germany and Italy consolidate somewhat more peacefully. Etc.

    1940 — Still the same team. NOW showing us national economics of scale is SO DEADLY we need a supranational control system to pacify it. Enter the UN — on Rockefeller property! The nationalism GOOD of the 1800s is nationalism BAD now.

    2020 — At last the gang unveils what it wanted from the start: The whole world in their hands. By the twin tactic of saying some problems are SO HUGE they require global power; on the other hand getting all the citizens to utterly loath each other AND pick fights with various dangerous regimes all over the world. It can only give the very wealthy all they want. And get rid of most of us.

    There was no cycle and there are no turnings. It was a project that’s reaching its end. Each era pushed part of the plan to the next position.

    Nihilism really is the answer in this case: As in a giant, unimaginable solar storm blasting the Earth’s electromagnetic field so horrifically we end up with nihil — nothing.

    Or a successful counter movement based on a realistic view of history.

    • Agree: hillaire, Alfred
    • Thanks: John Fisher
  10. I have never read the Demons.
    But I have read from him the” Oppressed and debased” (That who the White people of America are today.) I do consider this work of Dostoevsky’s to be a peak of Nihilism.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  11. Bill P says:

    Haven’t the “blues” and “reds” reversed roles to a large extent?

    I guess you could say the blues are still “progressive,” but they’ve taken it to such baroque absurdities that it lacks the grassroots appeal previous progressive movements relied on. It’s one thing to riot in cities where the politicians are on your side, but quite another to take it outside the core. I visited Seattle several times during the CHAZ/riots and if I hadn’t deliberately taken a detour through downtown and Capitol Hill I wouldn’t have seen any evidence of “unrest.”

    Antifa’s geographic reach is tiny. They literally cluster around democrat city and state governments, which arguably include public universities, within a radius of about a mile at most. They don’t dare show themselves even in moderate democrat counties.

    The fact that they have so much support in the centers of power is unfortunate, but this is kind of an American “Green Zone” effect. It isn’t because they are all that formidable.

    We are in a sense living in a version of occupied Iraq or Afghanistan. This sounds like a gross exaggeration, but it isn’t, because both occupations were administered by exactly the same arrogant, incompetent, delusional assholes who run the US right now. In fact, some current antifa activists trained with some of the batshit crazy radical groups the US supported in Iraq.

    https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2021/01/19/self-described-hardcore-leftist-who-fought-in-syria-arrested-for-targeting-trump-supporters/

    The regime running this country has a real crisis of legitimacy, which is why they’ve militarized the capital, turned their efforts toward censorship, sought allies on the fringes of society and junked equality under the law. They haven’t done these things because they are strong and secure.

  12. An original and thought provoking article. I will give you that.

    Now let’s get to it.

    This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth.

    So what was the inherited social order doing about Communism? What was the British response? Have some tea and make some witty quotes about capitalism and freedom?

    Germany was under threat of potential invasion. Hitler obviously took it too far but the Soviets had debated invading half of Europe after WW1. What would the British have done? Tsk tsk, what a shame. Pass the tea.

    Your precious social order was exploited by leftists and that continues today. What is a conservative? Someone that drags their feet as the left marches on. Rush Limbaugh even believed that they couldn’t be beaten. What kind of a loser mentality is that?

    You rail against nihilism as if anyone that doesn’t follow traditional Western society must have somehow fallen from grace. The Allies let Stalin take half of Europe and yet they described themselves as liberators. What a joke. Please follow our weak social order that lets innocent people be marched off to the gulags. Oh but we stopped the fascists!

    Hitler blew up the fascist movements out of greed but that doesn’t excuse Western weakness in the face of Communism.

    Some even hate their own God-given chromosomes and hormones and genitalia so much that they are driven to extremes of medical self-mutilation.

    Give me a break. As if everyone would be in a garden of eden if not for those damn nihilists. Some people are born with crossed wires and you guys still can’t accept that.

    The world is not as simple as you want it to be. I wish it was.

    I do know that Western conservatism has proven itself to be too weak to take on the left. Maybe the left is indeed driven by post-religious nihilism but Western society already tried playing nice with them. It doesn’t work.

    Traditional conservatives will have to submit to us. They can go drink tea if they want and exchange their witty musings on freedom and capitalism. Call us whatever you want but traditional conservatives will not be in charge of taking on the left. Their gameplan has been tried and it has failed. Bowing to what you call “the social order” does not work and doesn’t even exist anymore.

    • Replies: @RestiveUs
  13. Anon[256] • Disclaimer says:

    Morality will eventually Prevail over the Love of Money and Power (aka enemy, aka ‘mark of the beast’). Although this sneaky subversive ‘lie and father of the lie’ enemy will dupe many naive degenerate fools into Fighting The Wrong Enemies (aka False Binaries, aka Left/Right, Red/Blue, Black/White, WelfareClass/WorkingClass, etc). The battle is not against flesh and blood, or between different Nationalities Classes Colors or Politics, but between Higher Functional Morality and lower functional morality (aka the love of money power and degeneracy).

    Spoiler Alert: Higher Functional Morality Wins

  14. Nihilism is not an atheist belief. Nihilism is a Christian belief about atheism. Notice the difference.

    How do Christians think this works, any way? Does someone grow up as a Christian, then one morning he perversely decides to have a “meaningless” life from then on by becoming an atheist? Or does he more realistically decide that the Christian theory of the life’s meaning makes no sense, so that meaning becomes an open question?

  15. Nice, thought-provoking article.

    There seems a part of the human brain which involves “faith based” or “evidence-free” reasoning, revelatory thinking that may have been selected for evolutionarily to keep society in line with God and their rulers (God on Earth). Authority. While an important component of Religion, this same instinctual belief system is also strong in Woke individuals, even atheists. We see this mindset dominating in politics (Russiagate). We see this same fact-free acceptance of Covid-19 handling in the West (giving us an understandably huge death rate relative to the thinking if poor third world). Mostly manifest in lack of critical thinking, and choosing groupthink over discussion or valuing dissent/ debate. The Police State and its “Official” Narratives inevitably arise from this part of the brain.

    Of all the problems Religion has caused through history, it seems a safer, benign outlet for this unthinking mindset. At least guilt limits the harm that can be done, and also encourages perspective: “there for the grace of God go I”, and “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

    • Agree: Alfred
  16. The misery of modern day nihilism is not really that it is empty of metaphysics and transcendentalism. People these days say ‘God does not exist’, and un-ironically miss that they themselves state a speculative, unverifiable position about a metaphysical Absolute.

    Al-Hallaj is quoted as saying:

    In my subsistence, is my annihilation,
    In my annihilation, is You.

    , which is pretty nihilistic, and Islam, as well as the other positive faiths, have that ‘reject this world for the next world’ vibe going for it very strong. Nihilism attempts to say ‘reject that world for this one’, but in rejecting any possible constancy it leaves itself naked in the wind. At least for positive faiths, even if errors also occur, there is a hope for consistency.

    As Wittgenstein said:

    6.371 At the basis of the whole modern view of the world lies the illusion that the so-called laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena.

    6.372 So people stop short at natural laws as at something unassailable, as did the ancients at God and Fate. And they both are right and wrong. But the ancients were clearer, in so far as they recognized one clear conclusion, whereas in the modern system it should appear as though everything were explained.

    The real problem imo is more down to what Michel de Montaigne wrote in his essay XXV https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2HCH0025: that a child not taught philosophy is a child who does not really receive an education.

    Philosophy/theology – they are very similar imo, one statistic from some survey I heard long ago was that 60% of philosophy professors believe in Platonic Forms – is what really teaches critical thinking, and encourages the love of all learning perhaps.

    The scientific method of direct observation/measurement is really that a-transcendental epistemology, but even then, whilst the tool offers the ability to verify experience, there is no way to verify the method completely in and of itself, there is some faith that needs to be placed on the scientific method too. Since it depends on the observer to be observed, there is no thing that science says about ‘the All’, other that it is blind to it.

    And the method is now being turned into a true faith called Science, which is less about the method, and more about wise men (Fauci), and inference (global warming models). Again, scientists do not study philosophy – they think that it is beneath them mostly. Certainly physicists thought that through the 20th century, and it’s therefore taken them in roundabout circles with the interpretations of quantum mechanics.

    I think the scientific method should really be called the philosophical-scientific method of observation/measurement, because it is always a combination of idea – hypothesis, and experience – experimental observation. You can’t have one without the other. Well, lacking the experience gives you an unverifiable mind made faith (which is where we are heading), lacking the idea and keeping just the direct experience gives you the Pali canon I would say.

    Anyways my son is now 5 years old, he is learning to read and think, we enjoy reading some ‘confuse books’ as he calls them, and we are for now discussing absolutes vs relatives. Staying eastern for now, very similar ideas as around the world, but presented simpler imo. The elephant and the blind men is a favourite. Aesop is always great for some critical thinking too.

    But I have printed off Montaigne’s essay for my friends with children (granted it is a difficult read), and none of them read it, nor are even willing to consider the opinion it presents.

    • Thanks: Peripatetic Itch, Shamil
    • Replies: @moi
  17. Toza says:

    Very good understanding of Dostoevsky’s Demons and an interesting comparison with the present United States. Whereas all the three nihilists from the book mentioned did emerge as a consequence of the liberalism and atheism of the previous generation, I would say that the destructive tendencies apply only to Peter Verkhovensky and his “Bolsheviks,” who, nevetheless, being the most aggressive, always do prevail. Kirillov’s desire to become God through suicide has not really manifested itself openly so far, it seems, but it can be detected in the French Existentialists’ loss of meaning in life and the haunting search for the reason not to committ suicide. And, whereas Peter Verkhovensky was neglected, Nikolai Stavrogin was deified and pampered by his mother who was always ready to justify and cover his debaucheries. His problem, as he confesses to Father Tikhon, is indifference, to which we all — spoiled by our parents and desensitized by the media — are now prone. Having gone through American higher education in the 1990s, I do see the similarity of what Mr. Barrett is saying with the cynicism and desired rightousness expressed through socialism in most of my professors.

  18. only religion gives a man sufficient reason to sacrifice himself to protect and care for his family

    You do yourself no favors by making such insane boomer bible thumping claims. Pedophiles in dresses buggering alter boys and sanctimonious cunts passing the begging bowl to fund their whoring pursuits aren’t going to restore the family.

    And if you’re so limited that you cannot logically conclude that care of your progeny is your singular purpose, without an imaginary sky fairy overlord so commanding you, the validity of my support for eugenics is only further confirmed.

    • Thanks: Alfred
    • Replies: @onebornfree
    , @DanFromCT
  19. Sean says:

    Dostoevsky had serious illnesses and so did many of his key characters. As I have already mentioned inflammation (immune system activation) has a pro depression effect. There is also a theory that (as a group selection self quarantining adaptation) it leads to people separating themselves from their society. I suppose getting odd ideas about that society are part of the auto-isolation mechanism. The post’s picture of the real world is loosely argued. To be specific, Meyer Lansky is an unlikely boss of even the underworld at a time when it was 100% men with Italian names who were members of what they called la Cosa Nostra (our thing).The money went up to the Godfather, and any use of violence had to be cleared with him.


    It was a highly technical and strictly hierarchal world in which only the ‘made’ members and Dons counted, and failure to respect their rules meant death. Lansky may have had involvement with gambling rackets, but he was not part of the, so to speak, military wing of the Mob and so had no power over the Boss betond as an earner paying tribute. Why does Barrett take assertions of Lansky’s supreme stature at face value?

    Dr Ó Súilleabháin explained: “We found that part of the reason why people who score higher on the personality trait of conscientiousness live longer is as a result of their immune system, specifically due to lower levels of a biological marker called interleukin-6. There are likely further biological mechanisms that are yet to be discovered which will give a clearer picture of all the different ways that our personalities are so critical to our long-term health.

    • Replies: @R2b
  20. – Ja, we believes in nothing.

    – We believes in nothing, Lebowski. Nothing!

    – And tomorrow we come back and we cut off your johnson.

  21. Schuetze says:

    That was a good, thought provoking read, thank you Kevin Barrett.

    Although “Nihlistic” tendencies are certainly at play here, Thelema’s famous diktat “Do what thy wilt” seems to me to be the more powerful force, and this force is not just tending towards nihl, but a place far more sinister.

    The French Revolution, the first of these Howe fourth turning’s listed here, was at its root a Masonic plot with Weishaupt and Rothschilds as the main perpetrators. The Jacobins were at their root a Masonic lodge. The Illuminati had already infiltrated all the main lodges of Europe, and this is likely when Kabbalism really took over as well. Jon Robinsons “Proof of a Conspiracy” exposed this entire plot. Ben Frankin was a member of the Hellfire Club in England that delved deeply into sexual deviancy and Gearge Washington was a 33 degree Freemason.

    The next turning discussed, the US “civil war”, was also a highly Masonic operation on both sides of the Mason Dixon line. By this time Bnai Brith had been formed and became an umbrella lodge for all the goyim masonic lodges. Here is a fascinating article that provides much insight into the antics of Judah Benjamin, Jefferson Davis in provoking the war and the assassination of Lincoln.

    The 1848 revolutions in Europe, and the 1870 Paris commune were also “4th turning” staged Masonic events. Napoleon III was as much a Masonic ruler as his uncle Napoleon I who came to power in the aftermath of the previous turning.

    The WWI time frame does not fit into the 4th turning pattern, but WWII was once again a highly staged masonic genocide. One important unanswered question here concerns Hitler’s, and the NSDAP leadership’s, true motivations. Like Trump, and both Roosevelt’s, there is tons of evidence that Hitler was just a Masonic Judas Goat.

    All this nihlism seems to me to revolve around Kabbalism, and todays androgynous version makes me suspect that the transgender movement is really just worship of Baphomet, which is also very masonic.

    • Thanks: John Fisher
  22. A horror vision, what might happen in a dystopian nightmare, even worse than Fahrenheit 451: Dostoevsky’s oeuvre still existing, but only in a heavily censored e-book version…

  23. Hmm… Dostoevsky was getting old. Surely a system which sentenced a young man to death for reading forbidden books would have produced all sorts of radicals wanting to tear it down including a few lunatics. So the anger, rage and fury of the nihilists was unjustified?

    • Agree: Wielgus
  24. Schuetze says:

    The Protocols of Zion, handed out as marching orders at the First Zionist Congress in Basle in 1897, are more proof that all this “nihlism” is not just some random groups of liberals across the planet simultaneously neglecting the education and upbringing of their children.

    This plan goes back to the 17th century with the Sabbatean Frankists rise to power, and is being carried forward by Freemasons and Chabbad Lubbowiters today. It is about the judaic lust for vengeance and the destruction of all religions, but especially Christianity.

    The fact that Jews are only mentioned twice in the Protocols, and the fact that Jews have expended so much effort and Jewish Power trying to discredit the Protocols and annihilate anyone who possesses them is proof of their authenticity.

    Nihlism is really nothing more than the outcome of the application of unbridled Jewish Power.

    • Thanks: stevennonemaker88
    • Replies: @Henry's Cat
  25. All of this tyrannical shite will come to a halt when a few dozen carefully placed assassin’s bullets are coming from the red, putting to rest the blue.

  26. @Robinski

    How will there be archeologists to interpret our existence?
    The suicidal wars of the past are so Neanderthal. I think I heard
    a-bombs are now up to 10-100-1000 times more powerful than 80 yrs.ago?
    How many times over can we destroy life on this planet already?And BTW,
    we should stop seeking the approval of dead men and their RELIGIOUS

    BE LIE FS. That may be what got us to this point…

    In any case,as the proverb states,”a thing that exceeds its limit turns into
    its opposite” and hopefully this blissful reality will stop repeating itself.

  27. GeeBee says:

    The alt-right agrees that American democracy faces an existential threat, but disagrees vociferously about the nature of the threat.

    Leaving Dostoevsky on one side for the moment (as well as the fact that I cannot recall anyone talking about ‘the Alt-Right’ since Charlottesville), I am puzzled to read that those of us on the ‘Dissident Right’ (as the loose and always amorphous ‘Alt-Right’ might better be known) ‘agree’ that ‘democracy’ faces an ‘existential threat’, the implication of your words carrying the corollary that this would actually be something terrible. Many, if not most of us regard ‘democracy’ as a curse; a cruel trick perpetrated upon ‘the people’ by the oligarchy of the financial and corporate elite in whom real power resides. Thus, to conclude that we who detest ‘democracy’ are ‘vociferous’ in our discussions of any so-called ‘threat’ to that which we despise is like prisoners in gaol fretting about a plan to set them all free!

    As if any such plan has the remotest chance of coming about in the prison in which we all find ourselves. The oligarch’s grip on power is total, and as ‘democracy’ is one of their chief weapons of subjugation, there is zero chance of us being freed from this curse of ‘democracy’ any time soon.

    What we are witnessing is a clash of barely-coherent yet increasingly frenetic ideologies—something the previous generation never imagined when it famously proclaimed the end of ideology. Its seems that Francis Fukuyama never read his Dostoevsky. If he had, he would have understood that the collapse of the grand récit of modernity would not lead to universal satisfaction under neoliberalism, but instead to ideological extremism, chaos, and bloodshed.

    Absolute rot. There is no ‘clash’ of anything. Quite apart from the fact that genuine political conflicts require clear-cut policies and, more importantly, strong and popular leaders (name me one), any ‘ideology’ not totally signed up to the oligarch’s wishes would be infiltrated, ‘de-platformed’ and swept aside in a moment. What we are seeing is a mere charade, in which the sly policy of divide-and-rule, by which Marx’s ‘oppressed’ proletariat is replaced by an endlessly fissiparous pantheon of ‘oppressed’ ‘communities’ (in effect, non-whites, sexual perverts, women and Jews), is used to divert attention away from the gigantic elephant in the drawing room, which is to say grotesque wealth inequality and the barefaced theft of the fruits of the productive sector’s toil, by the idle ‘middle-men’ and usurers.

    Dostoevsky…details the process by which liberal parents and educators produce radicalized, ideology-maddened children bent on tearing down the world into which they were born. This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. [They] all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth.

    Or as we see today, parents who have swallowed the bait of divide-and-rule hook, line and sinker, produce pseudo-ideologue offspring who are every bit as ready and naïve to swallow the same bait, and dutifully (if blissfully unwittingly) serve their (((masters))) as were their supine parents.

    It’s the Modernist merry-go-round and there is no longer any way out of it. At the risk of repeating myself, 8th May 1945 etc. etc.

    • Agree: Rocha
  28. Adûnâi says: • Website

    Russians love to talk about sverhtsennostee – the “supervalues”, the absolute values, the fixed ideas of French psychiatry. That is the opposite of nihilism. Calling it nihilism is a trick of the centrists who want to preserve the rotten edifice of the status quo.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Сверхценная_идея

    I never understood the nihilistic Western distinction between religion and ideology. The former is but a kind of the latter. A set of beliefs expected to ensure a higher degree of survival to the population. Communism, for one, is based on the faith that economic relations determine culture. Christianity is based on worshipping the Jewish god of universal love. Liberalism is a mutation of Christianity which expands said love onto transvestites and removes Jesus as outdated and counter-productive.

    The only part I would agree with is in recognising the folly of the neo-Christians – the Aryan frog must have been boiled slowly! The race was dying just fine. But the recent excesses of the BLM and of Biden’s transvestites might have been undue sparks for a potential Aryan revolt. Which can only be explained as the gloating of a moustache-twirling villain.

    • Replies: @dindunuffins
    , @ValMonde
    , @Malla
  29. anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:

    Turn to the Christ? That nihilist Jewish Rabbi himself was driven to extremes of medical self-mutilation, saying, “There be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” His Antifa-like Jewish breakoff cult was founded on anti-family social destruction, as noted in Eric Hoffer’s text The True Believers. An excerpt follows:

    Still, not one of our contemporary movements was so outspoken in its antagonism toward the family as was early Christianity. Jesus minced no words: “For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.”14 When He was told that His mother and brothers were outside desiring to speak with Him He said: “Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother, and my brethren!” When one of His disciples asked leave to go and bury his father, Jesus said to him: “Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.” He seemed to sense the ugly family conflicts His movement was bound to provoke both by its proselytizing and by the fanatical hatred of its antagonists. “And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.”

    Hoffer, Eric (1951) The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. Harper. Section #32.

    Our batshit crazy society is right where the radical Rabbi wanted it: “Children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.” The attack of the True Believer children is on.

    • Replies: @Rocha
  30. bobby sox says:

    god too is a singularity, like a black hole or monogamy, or like the great yogi himself once said “it’s like déjà vu all over again”

  31. This article, in essence, claims that humans, & their evolutions of civilisation are in essence, suicidal. Perhaps that’s correct…?
    “This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth. But all those rebuilding plans are just window-dressing. It’s the destruction, only the destruction, that counts.”
    What the author never addresses is that humans are reasoning animals. Obviously, frequently unsuccessfully.
    As human culture evolved rationality, one step forward, two back, also evolved. We learnt about the natural world (the Enlightenment etc). We learnt about philosophy & metaphysics & cosmology.
    Inevitably, contradictions began to appear between metaphysical views (Christianity, say) & materialist views (science, say) .
    Many found it impossible to make these different views cohere. Although, great effort was expended to save religion — by “faith alone shall you be saved” & the “God of the Gaps” etc — the difficulty was not removed.
    The author here implies that materialists deny God out of some vicious impulse. Never does he suggest that materialism is the outcome of a logic associated with beliefs of equal validity. Not merely “nihilism” & a deep desire to destroy.
    All the horrible ideologies the author quite accurately identifies are the outcome of materialism. But they are not the ONLY possible outcomes. Arguably they are the easier, the more impulsive outcomes.
    There is no contradiction in theory or practice between living a moral life & not believing in a god. Perhaps materialism makes moral life harder — perhaps not. Perhaps no God above does give certain people a feeling of “Licence”…..Well they are wrong.
    Your own humanity implies a moral code –– perhaps stricter than a religious foundation.
    Materialism is NO excuse for many of the ideological abortions poisoning the cultural (& physical) landscape at the moment.

  32. It was stronger than I 😛

    but seriously … all those mind flatulences stem, in the final consequence, from not being hungry enough – and l´âme slave and the flickering twilight of the ikonostas have not exactly bedecked themselves with laurels either.
    Letting it all burn down
    (read: making healthy and intelligent individuals advantaged again)
    may well prove to be the more humane way.

  33. El Dato says:

    No, Marvin Minsky, we will not get lucky and they will not keep us as pets; it, not they, will be a self-reproducing toxin, a cancer on the planet and perhaps the universe.

    Strong words, gramps.

    Well, just teach them Buddhism and keep them away from Abrahamic Religions’ fire & brimstone poisons.

    Antibodies by Charles Stross (although sorry Charles, but in this oubliette-like universe P is very much contained in NP and will stay that way)

    Anyway, these AIs are not only not supernatural or all-powerful, they don’t even exist. Yet. Definitely not for a LONG time yet.

    And if they do, they will have an East Asian outlook on life.

  34. Thanks for the article and the precis of a Dostoevsky novel I haven’t read.

    One question though:

    1780 marked the first American civil war, a bloody series of fratricidal atrocities mythically remembered as “the American Revolution.”

    I occasionally hear things like this, but generally without much in the way of citations. Got any?

    • Replies: @Observator
  35. Albert Pike sure predicted such insanity:

    “We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.” – Private letter to Giuseppe Mazzini. August 15, 1871.

    • Thanks: Schuetze
    • Replies: @Jake
    , @hillaire
  36. Muslim: “Leftists are destroying things because they love destruction. See, they’re tearing down statues, burning down property,….”
    Trump supporter: “You are right, but Muslims are worse. They’re blowing up places, beheading teachers, shooting people in dance halls, etc.”
    Muslim: “Those people do not represent us. Islam is a religion of peace.”
    Social Justice Warrior: “Same with us. Our protests are mostly peaceful. A few extremists do not represent our movement.”
    Muslim: “You guys are degenerate. You promote sexual deviation and even pedophilia.”
    Trump supporter: “Well, look who’s talking. Mohammed married Aisha when she was seven.”
    Social Justice Warrior: “Well, some sources say she was nine, or even in her teens. And there’s controversy as to the date of consummation.”
    Trump supporter: “Go ahead, defend the guy. Are you a masochist of some sort?”
    Social Justice Warrior: “I’m for religious freedom.”
    Muslim: “You guys have too much freedom. Oops… I mean… AGREED!”

    • Thanks: Levtraro
  37. In a world without God, where is the transcendence? You can’t just get rid of it. Yearning for transcendence is hard-wired into the human soul.

    Those who dismiss or mock religion fail to understand this, especially how the implication of this truth plays out on a civilizational level as opposed to the individual level where one can doubt or disbelieve without destroying everyone and everything around them.

    Excellent piece, Mr. Barrett.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  38. Wielgus says:

    I have always found Dostoyevsky a bit of an enigma. It was the Tsarist state that kicked him around, subjected his friends to mock execution, one of them apparently going mad as a result, then sent him and others off to Siberia for years. But in later years it was liberals he thought were dangerous. Odd, that.
    He is sometimes compared to Solzhenitsyn but at least Solzhenitsyn did not thank the Soviet state for kicking him around.

  39. Wielgus says:
    @John Fisher

    Well, the worst European war before WW2 was the Thirty Years’ War, in part a Catholic vs. Protestant conflict.

  40. Ugetit says:

    No doubt a fine article by a decent writer, but the poor dude seems deluded about the “Nazis.”

    Anyone with the ability to gum his oatmeal without assistance knows that the “Nazis” were existentially threatened by hideously vicious nihilists so why include them in the charge?

    Millions of Ukrainians, Russians, Lithuanians, Belarusians, and others who had already been freed from Soviet rule were, with German support, opening churches and restoring the traditional religious life that had been so brutally suppressed by the Stalinist regime.

    During the war years, Germany’s Protestant and Catholic churches not only received government financial support, they were packed with worshipers. In Catholic regions of the Reich, notably in Bavaria and Austria, crucifixes were displayed in many public buildings, including courtrooms and school classrooms. The government of one country that was closely allied with Hitler’s Germany during World War II, Slovakia, was actually headed by a Roman Catholic priest.

    – Mark Weber, Collusion: Franklin Roosevelt, British Intelligence, and the Secret Campaign to Push the US Into War

    http://ihr.org/other/RooseveltBritishCollusion

    Since mindlessly parroting propaganda is never a respectable thing, my respect for Barret’s thinking has been taken down a bit.

    • Agree: Schuetze
    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  41. Jake says:
    @AnonStarter

    This pattern is not a mere 200 years old. It is as old as the first Gnostic groups claiming to be the true Church or the true answer to the falseness of the Church. It includes, it features, Islam, which could not exist without both Gnostic Judaism and Gnostic Christian heresy. The Qur’an is best understood as a Gnostic ‘gospel’ that was unique in that it replaced the Rabbinic Jewish assertion of the lineage of Isaac as the Sacred Semitic Race with the lineage of Ishmael as the ‘true’ race of sacred Semites bringing a type of universalism to the world via pillage and plunder.

    That pattern includes the Reformation and all resulting social and political movements, those that saw themselves as Christian (such as the arch-Judaizing heresy Anglo-Saxon Puritanism) and those that saw, and see, themselves as replacing Christ and Christendom.

    Islam is still the latter.

    • Thanks: ivan
  42. Jake says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    Mazzini and Garibaldi, like Karl Marx, both saw Abraham Lincoln as a necessary man to the worldwide success of their political and social ideas.

    What does that say about the Republican party at its origin? About WASP culture generally?

    • Replies: @ivan
  43. @Adûnâi

    Yes , yes..but blacks were dying of just fine in Africa and we Aryan White Western Civilization should have left nature alone and allowed nature to cull this useless sub-species as was intended by nature. Evolution left blacks behind for a reason. And White’s suicidal altruism has doomed our race.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  44. Deep Soul vs. Deep State
    A nice reminder that reading good classic literature is still educating (vs blogscrolling for information). I always loved Dostojewski, his characters and ambientations. As a good cultural marxist that I was in my student times, I shied away from the religious ground lines, but the nihilistic arrogance of some characters was appalling even for me. In “Crime and Punishment” Dostojewski shows a way out. Raskolnikov feels remorse, does confess and is accompanied in his recovery in banishment, by Sonia (forced by hardship into prostitution) and Razumíkhin, a loyal friend. Two chaste souls, deep souls, not affected by the nihilist virus.

    A reminder as well that Russia is so much part of European Culture. Putin said, Russia wants to be part of Europe, but for partnership you need two, the other must show interest likewise. I’m afraid our politics here in Europe don’t want to recognize its Eastern part. Wouldn’t it be beneficial for all to share peacefully economy, industry, technologic knowledge, science, resources, an enormous culture and religion on both sides? At this moment I can’t see the evil danger coming out of Russia (not even China, with some reserve: at the end, these are all empires with vital interests, same with Europe and USA).

    I’m not sure if the traditional religion can be the solution. Don’t forget that we’ve fought for centuries for our civic rights and individual liberties (not necessarily libertinage) mostly against religious dogmatism. Now, looking back, we see that we’ve destroyed like an antibiotic maybe not all, but important parts of our culture, not only the corrupt. Social structures and authorities got destroyed. They are lost, bad ones like positive ones. And it’s going on. But I find it difficult, maybe impossible, to come back to church, be it muslim, christian, jewish, buddist philosophy, whatever.

    I understand Barretts point on traditional values and leadership. I share it to some extend but I’m a bit skeptical if we, the western world, can just go back to tradition, with its corruption on the one hand and its overbearance on the other. Maybe you find there spirituality, of course there is, but I would hesitate to entrust myself to tradition completely.
    Even the existent traditional cultures have to find a balance between given structures and modern life.

    Religions teach man humility. That’s a start, like Razkolnikov feels his nihilist hubris and bows to a greater ethic, beyond pure human will and power. It is his decision and he finds “deep souls” on his way, who are just what they are, emphatic human beings.

    I hope we can find a way to reconcile our rational thinking (a wonderful gift) with a wider spirituality (man is more than a machine: an even higher gift).

    If not, any criticism will soon be recognized as a deadly danger and will be treated like a virus.

    Thanks, Kevin, for your thoughts, and to the Unz Report, for giving dissident thinking a platform, in difficult times.

  45. Rocha says:
    @anonymous

    That batshit crazy society built the best civilization that the world has ever seen in terms of intellectual achievements, care of community, art, music, architecture etc. The civilization that has been under attack since the Protestant Reformation which legalized usury and privatized the issue of the currency resulting in the debt based financial system which has enslaved us and the world.

  46. Ugetit says:
    @Franz

    Nice job. Very nice.

  47. Maybe the “unquenchable thirst for destruction” is a reasonable reaction to a system that has seduced and abandoned us. Societies come apart when the wealth that had been at least somewhat equitably distributed becomes concentrated in the hands of a very few. Some realize that such a structure is beyond reform, cannot be repaired by “voting the bums out”, has to be removed in order for something more functional to replace it. The mirror image of this impulse is the yearning to return to an imaginary golden past, dreaming that forcing conformity to highly romanticized “traditional values” will somehow redeem us. If such values had retained some usefulness, they would not have been so enthusiastically jettisoned by so many. The western world began the transition out of its intellectual childhood of faith five centuries ago; we are now perhaps finally standing at the edge of responsible adulthood, experiencing all the anxiety and the tumultuous growing pains of late adolescence.

    • Replies: @John Fisher
  48. Another excellent essay from Dr. Barrett!

  49. ValMonde says:
    @Adûnâi

    At the final hours of dusks, low rank demons gather to celebrate a major victory for the beast.
    They are not here for the fight. The fight has been won. They are here to make surrender and humiliation complete and irredeemable.

  50. onebornfree says: • Website

    “What we are witnessing is a clash of barely-coherent yet increasingly frenetic ideologies”

    Wrongo!

    It is simply two [imagined] “sides” of the exact same ideological coin- statism, aka: worship of the state. Simply,”right” statism versus “left” statism.

    Regardless of who “wins”at any particular point in time, we always end up with: more government. Either way, a loss for individual freedom.

    This just in [something both right and left statists are apparently incapable of ever grokking]:

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”or “improved”,simply because of their innate criminal nature.” onebornfree

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure” Robert LeFevere

    “regards” onebornfree

  51. @Almost Missouri

    This is a good introduction, Smithsonian historian Barbara Clark’s book “The Freedoms We Lost: Consent and Resistance in Revolutionary America”. Also suggested is Jasanoff’s “Liberty’s Exiles”, which chronicles the American diaspora, the ten percent of colonists who fled into exile rather than accept the result of the War of Independence.

    The American Revolution was as much a civil war among colonial rivals as a challenge to British authority; the stakes were the ownership of the immense natural and human resources of North America and eventually of the entire western hemisphere. On the eve of independence the American colonies were, ethnically and ethically, four separate nations, as diverse as any in the Old World. The ideals of Puritan New England could not have contrasted more vividly with those cherished by Virginia’s planters (their ancestors had fought one another in the English Civil War over these differences; their descendants would restage the conflict one final time in 1861), while Pennsylvania Quakers and Scots-Irish immigrant communities held strikingly antagonistic viewpoints of what defined freedom and virtue in the New World.

    In his highly overrated “Common Sense,” Tom Paine shaped these varied elements to common purpose, by melding the practical political philosophy of the Scottish Enlightenment with the mystical evangelical Protestantism that saw Americans as the new chosen people. Paine derived, as one historian put it, “a politics of liberty from religious principle in order to make a religion of politics.” In the process his rhetoric transformed the rebellion into a holy war, and all who remained loyal to the old king and church into allies of evil.

    • Agree: Ugetit
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  52. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Stan d Mute

    “And if you’re so limited that you cannot logically conclude that care of your progeny is your singular purpose, without an imaginary sky fairy overlord so commanding you”

    Thanks for that. 😎

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Agree: Levtraro
  53. Ann K. says:

    Orthodox Christian Fr. Stephen Freeman has provided much food for thought on Dostoevsky over the years (click on the post titles to go to the post—some text in this view might be garbled): https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/?s=Dostoevsky+

    • Thanks: Kevin Barrett
  54. DanFromCT says:
    @Stan d Mute

    Stan, you’re comment is meant as a parody of taking out one’s personal inadequacies as a soy boy in a man’s world by engaging in nihilism, right? No skyfairies for soy boys who can’t compete and so march in the street, right? As Kevin Barrett puts it, it comes down to “feeble simulacra of spiritual awakenings . . . ” I also like you final sentence parodying the soy-boy nihilist’s unawareness that Nazi-like eugenicists have him in the cross hairs.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  55. @Ray Caruso

    The author is wrong about right-wing ideologies. Fascism does not promise a heaven on earth, only greater unity with one’s countrymen and real freedom, which is to say, freedom from being ruled and exploited by aliens, as Americans are.

    What he doesn’t recognize is that fascism did not manifest itself at some random moment. It was not some force of aggression that resulted from a decline in religion.

    Communism and conservative weakness led to fascism.

    The revolutionary Communists of Spain were raping nuns and killing priests. What was the response of the “good boy” conservatives?

    The social order he seems to think can solve our problems had no answer to the Bolsheviks. In fact the Bolsheviks sent those social order leaders to the gulags.

    Today it has no answers to some of our most pressing problems. When it comes to race the “good boy” conservative tries to avoid the subject which just plays to the left.

    God and Country conservatives just want everyone to go to church and wave flags but that doesn’t address sticky problems like race. What is the source of racial inequality? Conservatives can’t talk about race existing on a natural level and in comes the left to tell us how it’s all the fault of Whites. The left perfectly exploits the conservative reluctance to address race in favor of being polite or religious. They dishonestly claim to be “progressive” and pretend to study race. Oh look we decided it doesn’t exist and evil Whites need to be taxed/denigrated/overran. Conservatives have no response other than fall back on their principles which while idealistic still doesn’t address the issue.

    • Agree: Ray Caruso
  56. @Anon

    Let me finish your sentence for you: Higher Functional Morality Wins not usually in this world, but in the Afterlife.

  57. ivan says:
    @Jake

    The more one hears about Lincoln, the more one is convinced that he was a bloodthirsty Yahwist. I mean was it ordained by God that both the Yanks and the Confederates had to live as one nation?

    • Replies: @John Fisher
  58. moi says:
    @AnonStarter

    “O mankind we have created you from one male and female and made you into nations and the tribes that you may know one another. Surely the most honorable among you with Allah is the one who is the most righteous. Verily Allah is all-knowing all aware.”

  59. moi says:
    @AnonStarter

    Islam is the perfection of religion.

    • LOL: follyofwar
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  60. “But all those rebuilding plans are just window-dressing. It’s the destruction, only the destruction, that counts.”

    The destruction of the White Christian America is in the offing and unless the majority wakes up to the wokism to prevent it, by hook or crook, it would be too late.

  61. @Franz

    1914 – Anglo-Zionists repeat their Boer War Template on a massive scale. They prepared for WW1 ten years in advance including putting Woodrow Wilson in as President to sign the 1913 Federal Reserve Act and the income tax to finance WW1 and the forever wars thereafter. Herbert Hoover helped them write history’s false narrative in the 1920s by accumulating almost all of the WW1 documents from desperate European governments in exchange for food. They had special scholars at Stanford to hoard trainloads of these documents and manage history’s narrative. Hoover was awarded the Presidency for his service to the deep state. Why the lies? Secrecy is their Achilles heel. They can no longer control it due to the internet.

    1940s – The team learns of the effectiveness of propaganda through the control of Hollywood. Later expands this to mass mind control of the whole country. Their secrets are getting out. They are getting desperate, so they take desperate actions: 9ll; manufactured financial catastrophes to loot the treasury; the manufactured COVID/lock down crises and and loss of freedoms; BLM/antifa/Capitol Insurrection and the new war against “domestic terrorists.”

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
  62. moi says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Sorry, but Al-Hallaj is hardly nihilistic. He is saying only in God is perfection, reality and truth–and you can’t get there without first extinguishing your ego. In Islam, all reality comes from God and the reality we see is God’s self-disclosure and is dependent on God.

    Incidentally, I understand that extinguishing the ego is also there in Hinduism. Christians have a problem by raising Christ to godhood, although Christ himself never claimed to be God.

  63. Hilaire Belloc, The Great Heresies, Chapter III., The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed…

    “Both in the world of Hither Asia and in the Graeco-Roman world of the Mediterranean, but especially in the latter, society had fallen, much as our society has today, into a tangle wherein the bulk of men were disappointed and angry and seeking for a solution to the whole group of social strains. There was indebtedness everywhere; the power of money and consequent usury. There was slavery everywhere. Society reposed upon it, as ours reposes upon wage slavery today. There was weariness and discontent with theological debate, which, for all its intensity, had grown out of touch with the masses. There lay upon the freemen, already tortured with debt, a heavy burden of imperial taxation; and there was the irritant of existing central government interfering with men’s lives; there was the tyranny of the lawyers and their charges.”

  64. Ugetit says:
    @dindunuffins

    Yes , yes..but blacks were dying of just fine in Africa and we Aryan White Western Civilization should have left nature alone and allowed nature to cull this useless sub-species as was intended by nature. Evolution left blacks behind for a reason. And White’s suicidal altruism has doomed our race.

    Kinda reminds me of what’s been going on in Palestine for some time now. As I understand it, the area was fairly free of Zionists and Bolsheviks until the White’s suicidal “altruism” ( dubshitism, really) doomed the place and our race.

    And we all know dat dem innosint vicktumsz, da eternally poysekyootid Zs and Bs, dindonuffin.

  65. @moi

    Islam is the perfection of religion.

    Right.

    So perfect that people kill each other over various interpretations.

    Can’t have a dog indoors, can’t eat pork and single men are expected to not drink or look at porn.

    Will never be popular with Whites. Can only be forced but good luck with that. Whites will probably just create another Vlad if that happens again.

    • Replies: @moi
  66. Ugetit says:
    @DanFromCT

    …Nazi-like eugenicists have him in the cross hairs.

    Nazi-like?”

  67. @Ugetit

    While I agree that Nazism arose as a reaction against commie nihilism, it borrowed nihilism’s immorality (“if you can’t beat ’em join ’em”) and embraced its materialist messianic-millenarian idolatry, transposed into a different key. So at the end of the day it was just another flavor of post-religious nihilism. Dostoevsky’s nihilist characters could have been Nazis or fascists as easily as communists.

    • Disagree: SolontoCroesus
  68. Wrong analogies.

    Dostoevsky’s Demons are literally demonically possessed intellectuals; most characters are highly powered, if, on closer inspection, immature minds who want to life their lives in extremis.

    Woke people are, on the other hand, a product of decades-long indoctrination, of fractured families, of hedonistic counter-culture of the 60’s, of media zombification. Dostoevsky’s characters sin because of, so to speak, intellectualized depravity & spiritual satanism combined with boredom & dissatisfaction. They want all or nothing.

    If we take a look at a woke herd, all we can see are obese, vacuous or illiterate punks repeating their mantras indefinitely & aiming at … nothing. White woke people are dumb & stoned opportunists; blacks are simply following their atavistic instincts. And, Dostoevsky’s nihilists are modeled on serious revolutionaries (Bakunin, Nechayev), people ready to kill or to get killed. Removed light years from absurd woke crowd.

    Wokes are just punks, nothing more.They are degenerates, not an embodiment of destructive diabolical energies.

    • Replies: @InnerCynic
    , @Vigilius
  69. Che Guava says:
    @Ray Caruso

    By nature he is wrong even when correct:for whatever bizarre reason, he is a Mussulman.

    That aside, some good points, but not to be trusted, unless you are the fellow muslim.

    • Agree: Ray Caruso
  70. psbindy says:
    @moi

    Before Abraham was, I am.

  71. Malla says:

    The author’s penultimate novel, it details the process by which liberal parents and educators produce radicalized, ideology-maddened children bent on tearing down the world into which they were born.

    Liberalism would have worked if it had known where to stop, the sensible borders. Lack of understanding of human nature leads to this.

    This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism:

    Why put National Socialism and Fascism with that rotten lot. National Socialism and Fascism were partly a reaction to Communism as Democracy was not up to the task to stop eventual Communism, as we can clearly see today.

    Also both extreme liberalism and Communism drives people with the desire of Utopia, a heaven on Earth. Which is impossible!! Human nature, the nature of life itself and this Universe will never allow it to come about and even if they somehow manage to get there it will not last long. They were born in the wrong Universe.
    Communism, in its early stages, is also driven by jealousy and envy and to destroy the objects which creates these emotions in their hearts. It may be civilized people, Westernised people, Beautiful people, posh people, Blue eyed-Blond people, well mannered people, people of good taste, you name it. Envy and hatred for all that is beautiful and noble. This is of course for true believers only, the cannon fodders, not the leaders of these movements, at the top, who are too shrewd to believe such nonsense like equality of Man.
    However, the real aim of Global Communism is NWO One World government, the dream of Zion.

    Both the Left and the Right look for or promise, a perfect World. Both may be disappointed. The Left promises a perfect World in the future, a Utopia so to speak.
    The Right wants to bring back a mythical perfect World from the past. Hinduvadi rightwingers dream of bringing back “Ram-Rajya’ translated as “Ram-Reign”, the supposedly perfect era of the God King Ram, avatar of Lord Vishnu (Major God). Lord Ram, the hero of the Hindu myth Ramayan. He is the one who defeats the demon King Ravan of Sri Lanka. Whose reign was supposedly perfect, when all were happy, there was no poverty and sadness.
    Many Muslims dream of the perfect period of early days of Islam during and just after the Prophet Mohammed. Christians dream of the re-coming of Lord Jesus Christ and his glorious rule on Earth.

    Jews on the other hand are like leftists, they dream of the coming of Moshicah, when they will rule over all the lowly Goyim, coming Utopia for Jews.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  72. Johan says:

    The author engages in the usual blaming along political lines, which is the typical democratic game.

    That unlimited freedom (which comes along with democracy) leads to it’s opposite is already noted by the best ancient Greek philosophers…

    ‘In a world without God, where is the transcendence? ‘

    In a world governed by ‘the people’, meaning democracy, meaning mediocre majorities, meaning massive quantities, meaning mediocre representatives, where is the transcendence…

    Plato’s Republic (a hidden criticism on democracy) went before Dostoyevsky. In fact, like said, Western philosophy including Dostoyevsky’s novel is a footnote.. Hence the author engages in a form of ‘democratic Platonism’ suggesting a revival of values based on religion. (Christianity, like Nietzsche wrote is Platonism for the masses).

  73. @Jake

    “Gnostic Judaism and Gnostic Christian heresy”

    Didn’t the Gnostics believe the demiurge was the god of this world whilst the true God was remote and unknowing of human existence? Isn’t the demiurge another version of Yaweh? Given the pageantry of cruelty that is the predominant human theme the Gnostic vision of a bloodthirsty god that rewards evil acts seems plausible.

  74. @Schuetze

    The fact that Jews are only mentioned twice in the Protocols, and the fact that Jews have expended so much effort and Jewish Power trying to discredit the Protocols and annihilate anyone who possesses them is proof of their authenticity.

    This line rings a bell. Is it a cut & paste?

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  75. @Franz

    By the twin tactic of saying some problems are SO HUGE they require global power…

    That’s hitting the nail on the head, I think. It’s why they are pushing climate change and the pandemic so very hard. Both are issues arguably global in nature, at least if we can be persuaded they are real and not the scams they appear to be.

    The lock-downs are shutting down global travel and keeping us from talking to our nearest neighbors at the same time. We are becoming more and more reliant, as a society, on what they choose to tell us. As you say, all understanding between peoples goes out the window when you stop social intercourse.

    Up here in Canuckistan, our dearest leader won his court case with Alberta regarding the carbon tax by arguing the issue was too big for the provinces to address individually. The argument will come back to haunt him, and all of us, when Billy Gates as next secretary-general of the United Nations makes the same argument against country-level decisions.

  76. It’s hard to imagine who will come out of this as our modern-day Bonaparte after the last of our modern-day Committee for Public Safety have been sent to the guillotines, but there will be one, and he won’t make things better in the long run.

  77. Malla says:
    @Adûnâi

    Liberalism is a mutation of Christianity which expands said love onto transvestites and removes Jesus as outdated and counter-productive.

    Remove Christ and all that mythology from Christianity and you end up with liberalism. As they say, “Communism is more Christian than Christianity itself.”

    And even better by Prof Revilo Oliver
    “Jews whine about being persecuted as automatically as a mosquito whines about your ear before he alights to suck your blood.”

  78. Ugetit says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    It’ll take substantially more than that to convince me.

    • Agree: Schuetze
  79. hillaire says:
    @Ray Caruso

    Barret is a cultist who believes in theocracy delivered by the working end of sword, in his paradoxical world men as diverse as john brennan and saladin are brothers under ‘allah’….

    what he chooses to believe is his business, but I doubt his solutions to our ‘demonic’ tribulations would be any more preferable to grasping financial schmata men, blue haired gender benders and jungle savages…

    still. at least he is promoting excellent literature and pertinent ideas from better men in better times even if the ‘fourth turning ‘ nonsense fails to take into account the real engine of social change.

    • Agree: Ray Caruso
  80. Thanks for sharing interesting thoughts. I propose, however, that the fatal flaw in your argument lies in the opposition you pose between religious belief and post-religious belief, particularly as it relates to overturning the old system, railing against established secular authority, and believing that the existing world is a bad place that needs to be redeemed or fixed via revolution. The hatred of the one real, actually-existing world and the concurrent longing for a utopian world is deeply rooted in Christianity.
    Dostoevsky’s beliefs aside, the analysis would clearly work better if you backed the story up a bit so that the hatred of the world and the otherworldly nihilism that leads to political extremism begins with the displacement of our native European pagan beliefs. It was the rise of JudeoChristianity that saw the first political ideology that called for people to forsake their own families and people for the sake of ideology, uprooting the person from the family and tribe and leading to nihilism – i.e., the desire to die so that they could go to an otherworldly utopia and spend eternity on their knees worshipping an iron-age middle eastern tyrant-god.
    I believe if you begin your analysis there, the story makes a lot more sense.

  81. Schuetze says:
    @Henry's Cat

    I heard it on a podcast recently, on ACH. He said that if the the protocols were a forgery, then why did they go to such effort to never name the jew. If it was a frame-up forgery, there would have been plenty of smoking guns pointing at jews, but there are none.

    He also made the point about jews expending all that effort to claim that they are a forgery. Mere possession of the Protocols was an instant death sentence in Judeo-Bolshevic USSR. The Jewish reaction to the Protocols is also very parallel to the holohoax where jews have made mere “denial” a criminal offence all across the west.

    • Thanks: Peripatetic Itch
  82. Schuetze says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    “it borrowed nihilism’s immorality (“if you can’t beat ’em join ’em”) and embraced its materialist messianic-millenarian idolatry, transposed into a different key. So at the end of the day it was just another flavor of post-religious nihilism.”

    Word salad served with Dostoevsky dressing. The NSDAP was about building a Third Reich using the the best that all German could offer. That is hardly “nihilism”. The NDSAP was about strong families and children brought up with high social capital and trust. That is hardly “nihilism”. The Catholic church endorsed the NSDAP and Hitler saved Catholicism in Spain. That is hardly “nihilism”. Despite all the bad things written about the NSDAP, they never tried to turn Germans against the church and instead reinforced that relationship. That is hardly “nihilism”.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  83. hillaire says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    Indeed the letter held by the british museum library and which was on display, a letter which incidentally no longer exists and probably never did…

    according to the british museum…..

    presumably ‘they’ needed their blueprint back.

  84. Fox says:

    I think that ‘democratism’ should have been included in the list of isms. It was and is in the first place the Democracies which laid waste to the world, they led the way of imperial expansion, of ideological interventionism. No “right wing” ideology ever made plans as grandiose as Democracy or Bolshevism to subjugate the whole world to their system. Hence, the term Nihilism ought to be reserved for them in following the ideas developed in the article.

  85. Word salad served with Dostoevsky dressing. The NSDAP was about building a Third Reich using the the best that all German could offer.

    Well the original NSDAP was a clever trick against the globalist left that today’s Western conservatives still don’t understand.

    The founder realized the limits of Western conservatism. You can’t just run on minimal government or Christianity when the poor and disaffected are willing to take a chance with the left for economic reasons.

    So you go left on economics while staying nationalistic and maintaining conservative values. This is much smarter than stomping your feet and murmuring about “minimal government” which is what the GOP and European conservatives try to this day. In fact I have no doubt that Trump would have won if he moved to the center on health care.

    This strategy of digging in on “minimal government” just favors the left. They only need a few elections cycles and they start doing things like importing third worlders or changing institutions. So they lay the groundwork to make it harder for traditional conservatives to win again. This is what Biden is doing right now. He wants to legalize millions of illegals to create new voters.

    GOPers that scoff at USA-first populism need to be asked if they like losing. This idea that the government can’t do anything for the poor needs to end. It just sets up a pathway for the left.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  86. Rocha says:
    @Jake

    Isn’t the essence of gnosticism the idea that the material world is evil?
    Whereas it’s a dogma of the Catholic Faith that God created a good world and that the source of evil is not the material world but the warped will of mankind to abuse the good things that God provided for us.
    In his book the Great Heresies, Belloc states that all religions, except Catholicism, are gnostic to a greater or lesser extent.

  87. @Schuetze

    Indeed the Reichskonkordat with the Vatican was the first international treaty
    the National Uprising ratified …

    – when Josef II liquidated the “contemplative” orders
    (= those who did not run schools or hospitals) as compensation the secularized estates were made into a fund dedicated to covering the Church´s operating expenses; that fund was gone, and apart from mutual non-intervention the Konkordat entitled the Church to levy a state-sanctioned tax on believers.

    The fun part is the Konkordat is still in force in Germany and Austria
    which technically puts the Church in breach of anti-Nazi laws 😀

  88. Schuetze says:
    @John Johnson

    “This strategy of digging in on “minimal government” just favors the left.”

    “left” = Talmudic deception. You can have jews, or you can have libertarian minimal government and goy prosperity. You cannot have both. This is not to say that expulsion of the jews is sufficient, but it is necessary. How many times in history have countries and civilizations come to this realization?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  89. Ko says:

    Wow, what an excellent and riveting read. I suppose everyone feels a storm will blow an order of unknown and impossible shape to predict or take form, maybe. Or we’ll descend into tribalism and conquest yet again.

    I’m no Burma / Myanmar expert, but I lived there for a decade, a half a decade before reforms and Suu Kyi’s ascendance to the State Counselor’s position. What’s going on there now is a repeat of past horrors. The military-led by warlords comprises illiterate, superstitious rapists and murderers, politely called soldiers in most armies across the world. Civilians are unarmed and at the mercy of those “soldiers” whose campaigns of rape and massacre in the hinterlands are legend.

    The Rohingya, those unfortunate poor people who’ve been used by power-seeking opportunists, the plagiarist Dr. Zarni Maung (so-called doctor though he didn’t earn the title), and Pakistani jihadi stooge Atta Ullah, who led the Rakhine Muslims to believe they aren’t just Muslims (many of them spilled over into Burma from Bangladesh) but saintly “Rohingya.” Rohingya lack remarkable cultural traits, artifacts, heroes. They’ve got a recently made up language comprised of Bengali, Arabic, and Burmese, so essentially, they are a fake ethnic group and were on the short end of the Burmese warlords stick when not genocide occurred, but a counteroffensive was made, and they were hustled off the land not by the Burmese, but by Dr. Maung and his Jihadi buttfuck buddy, Atta Ullah.

    Well, now the Burmese criminals in army uniforms rampage across the land once again, and so far, they’ve had free reign to be the devils they love to be. There will soon be pockets of armed resistance; how effective they will be remain to be seen, but if they are smart, there will be a civil war that will reach all areas of Myanmar, it will be a horror. If what the author says about the fourth turning coming in as predicted, America may very well end up like Myanmar is today.

  90. Mefobills says:

    Kevin says this, and it is mixture of truth, which makes it dangerous.

    This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth.

    There are degrees of socialism. For example the founding fathers of the Americas inherited the American System of Economy from the Colonials, and it was a form of socialism. State credit funneled into schools, libraries, public health, roads, canals, the commons, etc. The new social order was a form of mixed economy with state credit and socialism. The general welfare clause is proof of their intent.

    Nazism was a resurrection of the mixed economy/industrial capitalism/state credit/socialism of Kaiser Wilhelm (1871), which had been transmitted to him by Frederick List, who in turn learned it from Henry Carey and Henry Clay.

    In 1843 List established a newspaper, the Zollvereinsblatt in Augsburg, in which he advocated the enlargement of the customs union. The Zollverein customs union, to where it unified Germany economically was due largely to his ideas being transmitted through his newspaper.

    NSDAP was an attempt to recapitulate German Civilization, which at that time had memory of List’s methods. Also, German historical tradition goes back many centuries, and evolved separately, especially as they were never conquered by Rome.

    Germany had been busted out by outside predators, who started WW1, and then attached Versailles debts in the interwar years, which then led to the hyperinflation, which then created more Chaos as Germans lost their livelihood and their assets which had been built up for generations.

    Recapitulating what was lost is not a thirst for destruction. The attempt to shake off the yoke of usury and clown world finance speculative capital is exactly the same today, as it was during the interwar years, which then led to the rise of NSDAP.

    Recapitulation of what worked before is not destruction, it is conservative… trying to conserve and return what was lost.

    Americans would do well to remember that the economy type, money, and religion we all operate under today (I’m American), is implanted. It is a foreign virus.

    We are liberal because we are Jewish. We have Jewish economy, which is finance capitalism – an economy type implanted from Britain, especially by 1912.

    We have corporate private bank credit as money instead of state credit. Private banking with hidden Jewish stock owners gained power with the advent of Bank of England in 1694.

    Our religions are increasingly Zionist Christian, and hence Jewish.

    A little NSDAP socialism would be a good thing, as it would return America to its founding principles; it could be used to pay off or erase debts, and to lower the access price to life.

    • Agree: GeeBee
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  91. RobinG says:
    @Malla

    ….. the leaders of these movements, at the top, who are too shrewd to believe such nonsense like equality of Man.

    Enter Kamala-mala-fee-fie-foe-fala……. declaring for “not just equality, but equity.” She smiles and giggles from her Cheshire-cat bird seat.

    • Replies: @Malla
  92. This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth. But all those rebuilding plans are just window-dressing. It’s the destruction, only the destruction, that counts.

    In revisiting this, I’d say that there are actually “true believers” in those and other ideologies, though typically, they lack both reason and the requisite will to affect an enduring establishment of an ethos premised upon their convictions, a reality that makes them quite vulnerable to extremism.

    So many sincerely assert the superiority of ____ism, envisioning its reification will bring about a superior environment, yet they fall prey all too easily to the maladies of myopia, hubris, and impatience.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  93. An interesting article, Mr. Barrett – it makes me want to read the novel, and I think it is close to the heart of the matter.

    Indeed, I am convinced that the matter of the worlds problems must approached in moral and spiritual terms, and that they can only really be improved through these channels, and by exposing the moral and spiritual rot and hypocrisy, which again, can only be done by those who have a genuine moral and/or spiritual practice.

    The reason being that: the mind, when devoid of transcendent concepts, becomes easy prey to delusion. If it is not made to revolve around genuine transcendent ideals or qualities – such as Love, Truth, Beauty, Justice, God – it becomes deranged, and instead begins to revolve around material, subjective, and egotistical matters, with all the trouble and harm that follows.

    For some, it goes so far that they become actual hosts of evil – worshipping fantastical personifications of it, such as Satan, Lucifer, Moloch, idols of unbridled power, deceit, domination, greed, and excessive, perverted lusts. In the process making a mockery of transcendence, by symbolizing transcendent evil!

    For others, such as the woke, the staunch materialism that has been implanted in them makes them easy to fool and mould. They seek an impossible egalitarianism, impossible because nature is differentiation. If they thought it through, they would see that their goal could only be achieved by complete stagnation, or death.

    However, the immense energy and fervour with which they pursue this unachievable and insane objective stems, I think, from their souls longing for an “undifferentiated” state, the wholeness, completion, and unity that mystics speak of. Their souls, and ours, remember this state, and deep down wishes to return to it with all the desperation of a man lost in the desert and seeking for water. This is why they seem to border on the religious. In this sense, their quest can also be said to be a spiritual quest, albeit woefully misguided. Even though they allegedly work from noble intentions, they are mentally lost since they have no real higher concepts to look to, and all their energy easily devolves to confusion, elemental chaos, and destruction.

    Truly, these are strange times.

    Whatever else, Transcendent Goodness, Truth, Conscience, God, or however else one prefers to conceptualise it, must be in the center, all else is madness.

    • Agree: Kevin Barrett
    • Replies: @InnerCynic
  94. @Schuetze

    “left” = Talmudic deception. You can have jews, or you can have libertarian minimal government and goy prosperity. You cannot have both.

    The Libertarian ideology has more Jewish founders than the left. Of course this is never discussed on Unz where anything to the left of Attila must be Jewish in origin.

    The theory that minimal government can fix anything is incongruent with history.

    The GOP will continue to lose by embracing this poisonous ideology.

    Iceland doesn’t have Jews and they have public health care along with a prosperous economy.

    Libertarianism is a destructive cult that corrupts mainstream conservative thinking.

    • Agree: Brás Cubas
    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @Brás Cubas
  95. @advancedatheist

    Indeed. The whining about the heartbreak of “nihilism” on the Right is pretty much entirely projection (a trait they like to ascribe the Jews, in a typical act of projection); when, that is, it isn’t an entirely phony attempt to impose some kind of theocratic dogmatism. (You find this especially among the Dissident Rightist who idolize Putin/Dugin and their Russian Orthodox “Third Rome” (while at the same time sneering at Leftist “utopian thinking”.

    I am reminded of a story Alan Watts told of a clergyman at a boys school, overhearing a couple lads making shocking admissions of atheism. “Well, if you don’t believe in God,” the padre huffed, “why don’t you go out and have a high old time of it? That’s what I’d do.”

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  96. @Bardon Kaldian

    Today’s “demons” would be the technocrats, politicians, the uber wealthy and thus uber disconnected.

  97. @Mefobills

    We are liberal because we are Jewish. We have Jewish economy, which is finance capitalism – an economy type implanted from Britain, especially by 1912.

    I really find it amusing that so many here seem to think that our problems with egalitarians started after the waves of Slavic Jewish immigration.

    As a reminder a very tall and homely Anglo president told all kinds of egalitarian fibs and launched the country into a civil war. Then he suspended the constitution and rounded up the press and put them in jail cells. Oh but that isn’t discussed as we must remember him as the Great Liberator.

    He loved White Americans so much that he took their sons and littered the battlefields with them.

    Then there was Woodrow Wilson who privately didn’t believe in racial equality but supported lying to the masses and also launched the country into a needless war.

    A little NSDAP socialism would be a good thing

    I just showed here that you can’t even explain that strategy to the American right. Rush and Co has them trained like pavolovs dogs and they will bark at anything with the word socialist in it. I guess they like losing. Or I guess you could call it something completely different and just bank on the fact that they don’t read much history.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  98. Ugetit says:
    @AnonStarter

    …yet they fall prey all too easily to the maladies of myopia, hubris, and impatience.

    And, typically, lack of funds.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  99. Schuetze says:
    @John Johnson

    “The Libertarian ideology has more Jewish founders than the left.”

    You are talking about what jews have distorted and perverted “libertarianism” into meaning. Small government and low taxes has nothing to do with jewish power. It is a universal, natural right. It is one of the few things that the “founding fathers” got right.

    Iceland doesn’t have Jews and they have public health care along with a prosperous economy.

    Why would any sane person want the government to control “health care”? Can’t you see that this plandemic is exactly where “public health care” leads? Scandanavia in general, including Iceland, is hardly the model I would want to follow. It is what happens when women get power and cuck their men. Feminist man haters are not conducive to strong families and stable children with dedicated fathers. Feminism is a byproduct of nihilism.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  100. @James J O'Meara

    Indeed. The whining about the heartbreak of “nihilism” on the Right is pretty much entirely projection (a trait they like to ascribe the Jews, in a typical act of projection); when, that is, it isn’t an entirely phony attempt to impose some kind of theocratic dogmatism.

    I wouldn’t mind the whining if they had an actual strategy.

    Getting on AM radio or Fox News and talking about abortion or the founding fathers isn’t a political strategy for dealing with the left.

    They are pissed off that theocratic dogmatism no longer dominates. That is really what it comes down to.

    They don’t feel that they should have to engage in political strategy. In their minds if we all just went to church and bowed our heads then everything would be fine. They seem to resent the “nihilistic right” just as much as the left even though the former is willing to work with them while the latter would send them off to re-education camps.

  101. But what Dostoevsky foresaw was not so much particular events as a recurring pattern

    Before (by 10 years) Dostoevsky it was Turgenev who described nihilism and scientism of Bazarov in Fathers and Children (aka in the West Fathers and Sons). Nihilism is generally a recurring theme in Russian literature.

    • Agree: chris
    • Replies: @Ugetit
    , @Kevin Barrett
  102. @Thomas Faber

    Wokeism is egalitarian suicide.

  103. @Schuetze

    You are talking about what jews have distorted and perverted “libertarianism” into meaning. Small government and low taxes has nothing to do with jewish power.

    It’s actually a somewhat recent idea that the government can’t fix anything or that it is inherently corrupt. The Romans certainly didn’t believe that.

    That idea comes from Ayn Rand. She was Jewish and so was Von Mises and the Chicago school of economics. Libertarianism is inverse Marxism and just as dumb. Unless you think open borders and legal crack will fix our problems.

    You are the one that is ignoring Western history in favor of some deluded fantasy where “minimal government” can fix a problem as complex as health care. That doesn’t hold up in a debate and we saw that when Trump was pressed on the pre-existing conditions problem. I knew this would sink the GOP years ago but they didn’t listen to us populists. Just wave a flag or something and pretend our health care problems don’t exist.

    Why would any sane person want the government to control “health care”?

    Because the private market leaves people uninsured. It’s really that simple.

    Lemme guess your response:

    OH WELL THATS CAPITALISM. DERP.

    Nationalists in other countries have zero intention of adopting our profits above all health care system. They think it is stupid. We are the only country that thinks it is acceptable to leave working people uninsured in favor of profit.

    It is what happens when women get power and cuck their men. Feminist man haters are not conducive to strong families and stable children with dedicated fathers.

    How is it pro-family to leave working men uninsured?

    • Replies: @John Fisher
  104. anon[206] • Disclaimer says:

    I see the 2020 internecine conflicts in the US as the chicken coming home to roost. The US, via the CIA, State Dept. and the MIC, has been meddling in practically every country’s internal politics for over a century, from propping up brutal dictators, uber corrupt puppet regimes to inciting color revolutions and even civil wars. We are finally getting our comeuppance. Karma’s a biatch.

    Perhaps the world will be better off without this “benevolent superpower”, which is now controlled by a group of money hungry, power hungry Satan’s spawns completely devoid of morals. Maybe the world can’t survive, or at least see peace, until these Satan’s spawns completely self-destructs.

    • Agree: Rocha
  105. @Observator

    If such values had retained some usefulness, they would not have been so enthusiastically jettisoned by so many.

    It is difficult to have a realistic view of history if one does not understand that people can be maneuvered without realizing it. A purely materialistic interpretation misses the main battle.

  106. @Ugetit

    And, typically, lack of funds.

    What will money do you when those maladies persist? Sooner than not, it’ll only go to waste.

    • Agree: Ugetit
  107. Anyone who even hints that white people should continue to try to make common cause with non whites is nothing but anti white trash. There is no longer room to think these people are anything but malevolent towards white people and want to see us gone. The verdict is in. The non whites know they are here to replace white people and they love the idea. Civic Nationalism is simply anti white nationalism and again there is no room to pretend its not anymore.

    If you still believe anyone can be an American then you are an anti white leftist no matter what you tell yourself.

    • Agree: dindunuffins
  108. @ivan

    The more one hears about Lincoln, the more one is convinced that he was a bloodthirsty Yahwist. I mean was it ordained by God that both the Yanks and the Confederates had to live as one nation?

    The fact that Freemasons were so prolific in leadership positions on both sides is another tell.

    • Replies: @hillaire
  109. Ugetit says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Being the uncouth ignoramus that I am, I am embarrassed to admit that I never heard of him so I looked him up and came across this quote of his…

    “A nihilist,” said Nikolai Petrovich. “That comes from the Latin nihil, nothing, as far as I can judge; the word must mean a man who… who recognizes nothing?”

    “Say — who respects nothing,” interposed Pavel Petrovich and lowered his knife with the butter on it.

    “Who regards everything from the critical point of view,” said Arkady.

    “Isn’t that exactly the same thing?” asked Pavel Petrovich.

    “No, it’s not the same thing. A nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered.”

    Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, and again I admit I know nothing about Nietzsche, but didn’t he claim that Christianity was nihilistic?

    Turgenev again,

    “Well, and is that good?” asked Pavel Petrovich. “That depends, uncle dear. For some it is good, for others very bad.”

    • Replies: @dindunuffins
  110. @John Johnson

    Why would any sane person want the government to control “health care”?

    Because the private market leaves people uninsured. It’s really that simple.

    You’re conflating an administrative system known as “health care” with health.

    ‘“Let food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food.”

    Those that control government don’t just administer so-called “health care”, they now administer so-called “food” and so-called “medicine” as a self-feeding system of complete control. It is a death cult.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  111. hillaire says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    Haha, I think magnus hirschfeld, wilhelm reich etc etc would have disagreed with that rather dubious assertion….

  112. @advancedatheist

    I’d be curious to know what you think of process theology/philosphy — espoused by those from Alfred North Whitehead to David Ray Griffin.

  113. hillaire says:
    @John Fisher

    It’s highly likely Lincoln was jew…. it’s a jew name in blighty due to the preponderance of forlocks historically in Lincoln… having no surnames they became solomon of lincoln etc there are red flags all over his genealogy, mind, it seems most of your presidents have been four by two’s..

    he certainly looked like one.. a face only a yenta could love.

  114. anon[206] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Henry Ford has warned about the Jews’ seduction of the masses through money and low class entertainment leading to degeneracy since 1920. Needless to say things have gotten much, much worse since. So it would appear Higher Functioning Morality has been losing for over a century. When do you predict a turnaround? And how?

    IMO America’s moral descent took a nosedive when (((the left))) took over our education system in the 70’s, starting from the universities. Today the left has a stranglehold on education from K-PhD. Our schools have become the biggest incubators of this degeneracy. The only way to get out of this moral rot is by parents taking their children out of school and homeschooling them in droves. That is why I see Covid19 as a gift to the conservatives, to encourage more people to homeschool their kids, and move away from the liberal urban centers on the coasts. Instead of seizing this opportunity, conservatives became the leading voices for reopening of schools, talk about dumb.

    Conservatives are becoming too much like liberals, they no longer know what they want, they just know what they don’t want, which is whatever they think the other side wants. The (((same people))) control both the left and the right media and are sniggering at how easy it is to lead the dumb masses into fighting each other, so no one pays attention to what they are doing which is warmongering, mass immigration and looting the country blind through the Fed and Wall Street.

    • Agree: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @dindunuffins
    , @Anon
    , @Anon
  115. anon[164] • Disclaimer says:

    I will put my money on the relative conservatives. Strauss and Howe say much but they hardly say it all. There are longer periods to consider. Most have forgot Spengler. We are coming to the end of Modernity. A 250 year period prior to the establishment of civilization specific universal empire.

    In the Western case this would be the period after the fall of Napoleon. Roughly 1814+250 years arriving at 2064. This means that Modernity has roughly 33 years to run. During this last period we can expect the overturning of ‘liberal’ values for ‘conservative’ ones. This may be because the need for testosterone will become more important. Politically, Modernity is the search for more stable forms of social order.

    The end of Modernity will bring civilization consolidating war which in this case could well be all out world war employing the most destructive of available weapons. Also, the approaching end of Modernity will not be particularly peaceful either. The disturbances you expect are likely what you will get. Indeed, the US may even lose a major war.

    One of the interpretations of an end of Modernity conservative victory is the elimination of the social justice legislation of the previous century because the results were simply not as expected. I have been skeptical of this but having discovered the Woke I think such a result now more than likely.

    Modernity , the entire 250 years, is a fever dream. A phantasmagoria of ideas and events from which people will awake to discover the drive of historical events not to be what was anticipated. Democracy will survive mostly as image rather than as substance. The Modern Era and its passions will be forgotten for the most part in later centuries as people turn to more basic concerns.

  116. . . reminded me a lot of this essay by Jung,

    https://ia802806.us.archive.org/34/items/TheUndiscoveredSelf/The%20Undiscovered%20Self.pdf

    really worth reading (free online).

    • Replies: @gar manar nar
  117. @gar manar nar

    . . an excerpt from the first pages :

    Today, as the end of the second millennium draws near, we are again living in an age filled with apocalyptic images of universal destruction. What is the significance of that split, symbolized by the “Iron Curtain,” which divides humanity into two halves? What will become of our civilization, and of man himself, if the hydrogen bombs begin to go off, or if the spiritual and moral darkness of State absolutism should spread over Europe?

    We have no reason to take this threat lightly. Everywhere in the West there are subversive minorities who, sheltered by our humanitarianism and our sense of justice, hold the incendiary torches ready, with nothing to stop the spread of their ideas except the critical reason of a single, fairly intelligent, mentally stable stratum of the population. One should not, however, overestimate the thickness of this stratum. It varies from country to country in accordance with national temperament. Also, it is regionally dependent on public education and is subject to the influence of acutely disturbing factors of a political and economic nature. Taking plebiscites as a criterion, one could on an optimistic estimate put its upper limit at about 40 per cent of the electorate. A rather more pessimistic view would not be unjustified either, since the gift of reason and critical reflection is not one of man’s outstanding peculiarities, and even where it exists it proves to be wavering and inconstant, the more so, as a rule, the bigger the political groups are. The mass crushes out the insight and reflection that are still possible with the individual, and this necessarily leads to doctrinaire and authoritarian tyranny if ever the constitutional State should succumb to a fit of weakness.

  118. Vigilius says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Bardon Kaldian
    Good point . There are similarities but difference is also important . Today’s “nihilists”are parody , caricature of “original”ones . Yet toxicity , harmfulness of modern“Nihilists” is even higher due to technology and social homogenization with poor education and disoriantations of the people .

  119. @JimDandy

    WHO CARES!! IT’s WHITE Western Civilization that made it all POSSIBLE…you F’in MORONS!!!!

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  120. @anon

    “Henry Ford has warned about the Jews’ seduction of the masses through money and low class entertainment leading to degeneracy since 1920.” Yeaaa , and Uncle Adolf…why do you think he did the right thing. Moral descent from Juden and blacks. blacks are the most sexual deviant degenerate morally broken peoples on the planet!

  121. @Ugetit

    Man, I should have waited to post this….

    – Ja, we believes in nothing.

    – We believes in nothing, Lebowski. Nothing!

    – And tomorrow we come back and we cut off your johnson.

  122. Malla says:
    @RobinG

    It is all about thirst for power and envy, for our Lotus flower (Kamala).

  123. First of all, Woody Allen is a poor scapegoat for paedophilia, when the accusations against him were so plainly concocted by his vengeful wife after he pissed off with their adopted daughter. Why not choose the most celebrated and active paedophiles of our, and former, times, priests? Would it complicate the argument about ‘returning to God’?
    And what of the parable of the Gadarene swine? Who are they today? Pompeo must be the Napoleon of really existing Gadarenes, surely. Walks on two legs as well. And the demons which infested the swine, what be they? Religion has harboured many, many, such demons over the millennia, and does so today. Religious fundamentalist xenophobia and rage surely at least equal ideological. Peter Verkhovensky-Zuckerberg, and Stavrogin-Obama. How’s that for a parlour game?

    • Replies: @ivan
  124. @si1ver1ock

    ALL vaccines have a ‘fat tail’, never investigated. As far as I know no long-term cohort study has investigated health outcomes for the ‘fully’ vaccinated, the ‘partially’ vaccinated, the late vaccinated and those who relied on alternative medicine, or none at all. And there never will be, or, if so, like much of current ‘medical research’, it will be rigged.

  125. @JimDandy

    Patriarchy is the root of most of our existential crises. Papa God said ‘subdue the Earth’, but the Big Daddies down below kinda overdid it. Oops!

  126. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    I really find it amusing that so many here seem to think that our problems with egalitarians started after the waves of Slavic Jewish immigration.

    There was a battle from the very beginning. In Massachusetts Bay Colony, there were the usual usurers, who wanted to turn everybody into debt slaves to their metal money. Supply and demand right? No precious metal was to be had, so the Colonials had to figure out other tactics to put everybody to work.

    The Jews that did come in, especially the wave starting in the late 1800’s has done a lot of damage. The 1924 immigration cut-off didn’t just happen; our (((friends))) were indigestible immigrants, then and now.

    As a reminder a very tall and homely Anglo president told all kinds of egalitarian fibs and launched the country into a civil war.

    The Civil War was about the Morrell Tariff, and the fact that the South and West was turning into negro-landia. A British/Jewish extraction economy was developing in the south, where raw materials, including cotton, were pulled out of the land, and then the increment of production was taken in England.

    The North was wrong to not return some of the tariff tax gains back to the South. The industrializing north was tariffed up, and in competition with England, and wanted the south to buy the North’s industrial goods.

    Then there was Woodrow Wilson who privately didn’t believe in racial equality but supported lying to the masses and also launched the country into a needless war

    Woodrow was handled by (((Colonel House))) and was installed by English/German Jewish banking interests. The election of 1912 was funded by finance capital to then split the vote from Taft. Taft in turn said he would never allow the Aldrich amendment to pass. Teddy was funded to come out of retirement by the Bull Moose party. Who funded the Bull Moose Party?

    Woodrow was simply a dupe- the usual professor type that believes in B.S. Their type is all around in academia if you look.

    Your right about Rush and Co., and Conservative Inc. They suffer from Amnesia, and the things that spout out of their lips is implanted memories. They are actually Jewish memories, and the parasite is puppeteering, and making their lips move.

    A people that have amnesia, and are gas-lit on a daily basis have no future. The rank gas-lighting that you see today, might make you a little more sympathetic to Lincoln, and why he jailed journalists.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  127. @John Fisher

    You’re conflating an administrative system known as “health care” with health.

    I’m not conflating anything. How about answering the same question:

    How is it pro-family to leave working men uninsured?

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  128. @Mefobills

    Woodrow was handled by (((Colonel House))) and was installed by English/German Jewish banking interests.

    Oh I see. Lincoln was in control of himself when he plunged the nation into war but every president since about 1900 has been in control by Jews. Fascinating stuff.

    I guess this is Unz where Western leaders would never work against the nation unless there are Jews in politics. Every single Roman and Greek war was well thought out and only existed to serve the populace. No warmongering egos or greed involved……ever.

    Woodrow was simply a dupe- the usual professor type that believes in B.S. Their type is all around in academia if you look.

    A dupe who talked congress into war and founded the league of nations?

    Your right about Rush and Co., and Conservative Inc. They suffer from Amnesia, and the things that spout out of their lips is implanted memories. They are actually Jewish memories

    You have truly gone insane trying to blame everything on the Jews. What you said makes zero sense.

    Con Inc hucksters are fully aware that they lie. That has been the plan all along. Lie about the “free market” magically fixing everything and how we need tax cuts for the rich. Just talk to one of these hucksters behind closed doors. As with liberals they will admit all kinds of things if they trust you. Both sides believe in lying to the people.

    The rank gas-lighting that you see today, might make you a little more sympathetic to Lincoln, and why he jailed journalists.

    He jailed journalists for reporting honestly about the war. Why would I be sympathetic? He never should have started the war in the first place.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  129. JimDandy says:
    @dindunuffins

    You’re changing the subject, which is your right as a member of the Unz Commentariat. It bothers me to see Proud Boys used as shorthand for something they aren’t. I’m a stickler for facts and accuracy vs. convenient narratives.

  130. JimDandy says:
    @Zarathustra

    The first time I read it, it was a version (fairly contemporary) which excluded the pedophilia chapter from the main narrative and included it as a sort of footnote at the end. Whatever idiot made the decision to publish it the way it was published when it was first published should be sentenced to a punishment from that time and place, preferably the knout.

  131. RestiveUs says:
    @John Johnson

    Where do we start? The concrete they’re pouring is only going to get harder.

  132. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    You have truly gone insane trying to blame everything on the Jews. What you said makes zero sense.

    I’m not insane, and I’m telling you straight up what happened. If you get butt-hurt about it that is your problem.

    The Civil war was about the Morrel Tariff. The mainspring of history is money. Our Jewish friends operate with finance capital and take usury, and have since practically forever. It is the family business.

    What I said makes zero sense to you, because you live in a bubble and don’t know things.

    The war was coming whether Lincoln started it or not. Do you not understand that the two economies were diverging radically. The South was indeed falling back into the finance capitalist British Colonial system, which in turn has Jewish antecedents out of Amsterdam. That is a provable fact.

    That the south was filling up with Negroes to then grow cotton, was a business plan hatched by the (((usual suspects))).

    The election of 1912 WAS a banker operation to then get the progressive era acts passed.

    During war, jailing journalists is OK… it is war time and anything goes. Jailing is a kindness rather than killing them. Why do you not know this?

    Western leaders do work against their populations, especially if: 1) There is Judeo-Christian religion teaching supremacy. 2) The money type is private bank credit, where the stock is on sold into private markets. This then makes a country NOT SOVEREIGN. 3) There is no injection of state credit into the commons or industry, so the future becomes unplanned.

    and 4) There is this idea that money and prices are all that matter, and not physical economy.

    All of these ideas are very Jewish, and act like a virus on soft headed people.

    How’s the weather in Tel-Aviv?

    • Agree: GeeBee
  133. The Reagan Revolution 7.0 Woke Edition. Haha

    Chickens be coming home to roost, its really that simple

    This just the beginning of them increasingly doing to you what they been doing to the free world for generations. Imperialism follows you back home.

    Feels like a very well planned out effort to me to push the right/conservative side of the country towards racial id pol and fascism. An equally well planned out effort to push the left side towards the woke, racial id pol, and even pedo type degeneracy in place of a real socialist revolution. Or at least give the right the perception that this is the reality. We should all be able to see where this leads.

    None of it natural or accidental. We’ve seen this before. There are names and powerful organizations behind this stuff. Almost everyone seems reluctant to call them out though.

    The white guard of capitalism against the class organs of the proletariat! Haha

  134. @Andrei Martyanov

    Demons features a character (Karmazinov) who’s a wicked parody of Turgenev. Dostoevsky apparently viewed Turgenev as one of the Europhile liberals who paved the way for the nihilists. I read Fathers and Sons in the early 80s and don’t remember it vividly, but as I recall it treats the phenomenon of nihilism from a basically secular-materialist-progressive (i.e. nihilist) perspective.

    • Agree: Vojkan
    • Thanks: chris
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  135. I’m not insane, and I’m telling you straight up what happened. If you get butt-hurt about it that is your problem.

    I think it is completely insane to suggest that Con Inc hucksters are not responsible for their own thoughts and that they have implanted Jewish memories.

    Most people would describe that as bats–t crazy.

    The war was coming whether Lincoln started it or not.

    The north could have let the south leave. Lincoln didn’t even try to negotiate a compromise. He wanted his legacy to be a war president.

    That the south was filling up with Negroes to then grow cotton, was a business plan hatched by the (((usual suspects))).

    Most slave owners were not Jewish. The early abolitionists weren’t Jewish either (they were Quakers) and they lied about their experiences with Blacks for egalitarian reasons. They were also the first to use the “magic mulatto” strategy.

    How’s the weather in Tel-Aviv?

    Here we go again. Even though I am clearly anti-liberal and anti-globalist I still must be a secret agent because I don’t line up with the theory that the Jews are to blame for everything. Real wise strategy there. People’s Front of Judea level tactics.

    During war, jailing journalists is OK… it is war time and anything goes. Jailing is a kindness rather than killing them. Why do you not know this?

    We have something called freedom of speech. Why do you not know this?

    Western leaders do work against their populations, especially if: 1) There is Judeo-Christian religion teaching supremacy. 2) The money type is private bank credit, where the stock is on sold into private markets. This then makes a country NOT SOVEREIGN. 3) There is no injection of state credit into the commons or industry, so the future becomes unplanned.

    There were plenty of wars where none of those factors existed.

    Western society did not start in year zero. Romans and Persians battled for 721 years.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Mefobills
  136. anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rocha

    Rabbi Jebus: Cut off your testicles!
    Catholic response: Protestant man bad!

    Christians avoid the nihilistic sexual deviance of Rabbi Jebus as thoroughly as Democrats avoid Joe Biden’s muh hairy legs lecture. So I’m going to rub your nose in it. If White men had followed the batshit crazy ravings of the Rabbi Jebus and actually cut off their balls, how much better would civilization had been? As good as it is now with modern day men following Rabbis exortations to emsculate themselves?

    It’s never wise to follow the emasculative rantings of a nihilistic Rabbi, now or 2000 years ago.

  137. ivan says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    LOL. That Korean kid Woody shagged was their (Woody and Mia’s) adopted daughter, numbnuts. It is pedophilia. Woody was a cradle-snatcher and a incestous father. Tsk, tsk.

  138. Many thanks for this. I didn’t realise that Dostoevsky had already written about what we are experiencing.

  139. Schuetze says:
    @John Johnson

    “How is it pro-family to leave working men uninsured?”

    Switzerland mandates health insurance for the entire population, and it is provided by a free market of competing insurance companies. People, mostly lazy nihilists like you, who cannot afford their own insurance receive subsidies for their insurance costs. But this system is sub-optimal because the government is constantly meddling in the market.

    In the US employees used to receive insurance through their employers, that would cover your strawman argument “leave working men uninsured”.

    Before that, people would pay for their own “health care costs”, and the poor would be dependent on the church or charities. Imagine a true free and open healthcare system where people paid out of pocket for “health care” with their own savings. But nihilsts like yourself can’t allow that, they want everyone to be taxed to provide “free” healthcare to people who contribute nothing. Nihilsts like yourself would force everyone to worship their chosen god, government.

    Why shouldn’t people who do not work and contribute nothing be forced to beg for “healthcare”? Why shouldn’t they be forced to acknowledge their dependency on their neighbors instead of stealing those resources from behind the barrel of the gun of the god, “government”? Why shouldn’t people have savings instead of debt?

    One of the most pernicious effects of government monopoly on health is that government politicizes and corrupts everything. Healthcare costs are so absurdly high because of government corruption. A true free market would never allow the absurdly high costs in effect all across the west.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
  140. Anon[256] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    “…So it would appear Higher Functioning Morality has been losing for over a century. When do you predict a turnaround? And how? ”

    Sometime within the next 0 to 10 years there will be a Major Global Systemic Collapse which will be MUCH LARGER than those “80 year cycles” described by the host author above. Humanity has been going down the wrong path for too many years, in blind pursuit of materialist conquest and self-centered degenerate gratification…and most people are completely Disconnected from Unseen Spiritual Connections with Nature, Humanity, and Soul (aka God).

    Without such a Large Collapse, most people would continue with dysfunctional business as usual. The ‘Whore of Babylon’ (aka ZioCorpBank\[email protected]) days are numbered. Thank God!

    • Agree: tgordon
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  141. @Observator

    Thank you for the references. But I was primarily looking for evidence that the War for Independence was “a bloody series of atrocities” rather than a just cause fought according to the prevailing norms of civilized combat. As far as I can tell (I haven’t read either book), these books address the social norms of pre- and post-revolutionary America, and the plight of defeated Loyalists, respectively. Those are both interesting and worthy subjects, but not what I was trying to find evidence about in this instance.

  142. ValMonde says:
    @ivan

    Dostoyevsky saw catholicism as one of the sources of soul corruption in the West.
    “Better an atheist than a catholic”. His words.

    • Replies: @ivan
    , @Fray Juan Crespi
  143. @JimDandy

    I don’t think you understand who the Slavophiles were in Dostoyevsky’s time.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavophilia

    Dostoyevsky was definitely not a racist or ethnocentric, but he felt western ideas should not be blindly followed by the peoples of Russia, especially the Orthodox Christians who had their own tradition.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  144. moi says:
    @John Johnson

    Of course, European Catholics and Protestants never fought over religion. And there were no “troubles” in Ireland just a few decades ago. LOL

    Hey, booze, gamble, and watch all the porn you want. Jesus loves you 🙁

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  145. Goyboy says:

    Perhaps we have more to fear from the nihilists than we do the anti-Christs?

  146. fought and won by extremely masculine people, XY and even occasionally XYY chromosome people with more high-IQ outliers and an average of 30 times as much testosterone as those other people who are born with XX chromosomes

    XYY is fairly rare, and is its own little potentially disabling “syndrome”

    XYY syndrome is a genetic condition found in males only. About 1 in 1,000 boys have it.
    Boys with XYY syndrome — also known as 47,XYY — might be taller than other boys. Other symptoms can include problems with spoken language and processing spoken words, coordination problems, weaker muscles, hand tremors, and behavioral difficulties.

    Also larger testicles, so that’s all right.

  147. Bela Hamvas had this to say about Demons (The Possessed) in his Preface to Crime and Punishment:

    In all probability, socialism did not come to pass in order to provide us with social justice, but rather to establish a new and more refined (more organized and more bureaucratic) power system of yet another small conspiracy; a system in which injustice was to become vastly greater then ever before. See Dostoevsky’s The Possessed. Socialism is a power system which, by stripping people of their personal property, makes them vulnerable. Man without property is forced to live in subjugation; and he cannot even find solid ground in his mind because this theoretically organized villany (see The Possessed) deprives him of all his counter-arguments, even in theory. Socialism has shown us only one thing: that however miserable it may be to do so, poverty and starvation are still preferable to becoming a villain; or joining the conspiracy of villains, and, on a higher level, to fleecing any innocent passer-by based on the theoretical justification of social inequality. Rather than smoothing out injustices, socialism, by challenging the concept of property, only served to exacerbate them.

    and

    Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment is not a symbolic piece. The novel relates the story of the student Raskolnikov who kills an old hag for her money and then tries to motivate his murder by saying he had a right to do so as a result of the unjust structure of society. The novel does not allude to any further meaning, and yet, it seems as if it did. After the middle of the 19th century, Dostoevsky, like other noteworthy personalities of his time, juxtaposed the idea of social injustice with the two dominant theories about how to overcome it. In the case of Russia, these two theories were slavophilism and socialism. Later on, slavophilism gave birth to Fascism, while socialism spawned communism. Slavophilism, like all the other nationalist ideas, aimed to establish social order on the basis of a nation’s historical sense of mission and the unifying potential which this provided. Dostoevsky’s own understanding of this historical mission was that Christianity should form the basis of social justice, and that the mission of the Russian nation was to lay down this foundation. For this reason, Dostoevsky was obliged to oppose the other idea, i.e. socialism; which he did oppose in his later work (see The Possessed).

    Some of you may enjoy reading the entire work, interesting but lengthy and quite humourous in parts, at

    https://web.archive.org/web/20071025022248/http://www.hamvasbela.org/en/crime.html

    • Thanks: stevennonemaker88, chris
  148. @Schuetze

    Before that, people would pay for their own “health care costs”, and the poor would be dependent on the church or charities.

    Most depended on family. For the truly indigent there was always the (dreaded) workhouse, a fear which hung over my own predecessors until well after the First World War. People went to astonishing lengths to keep sick, orphaned or dying kin at home somewhere within the extended family and out of the grip of the brutal 16th/17th-century Poor Law. This attitude continued pretty much into the 1960s, well after the establishment of Labour’s post-War welfare system.

    These relations would mostly be within a walkable distance. People didn’t move away, for fear of losing this support network. Their (post-Dissolution) churches could never keep up with the need for charity, so they continued scrabbling away in their parishes in a state of low-wage, perennially underemployed and basically useless poverty, in any bit of a job they could bluff or beg their way into.
    The very same mindset which so exasperated the new post-1746 English landlords in Highland Scotland that they began to deport the “bitter clingers”, the tribal natives, en-masse in the Clearances.

    This ancient kin-based system clashed with the requirements of Industrial Society, which wanted an “agile”, easily relocatable yet equally easily laid-off workforce. Resulting in mass privation and even famine among otherwise “respectable” workers during the periodic “busts”, and ugly stirrings of insurrection. Something had to be done.

    Eventually they borrowed the (originally Prussian, I think, like our state school system?) idea of a welfare state. Paid out of pretty much compulsory deductions and stoppages from wages. Now people had no excuse not to “get on their (metaphorical) bikes, and look for work” anywhere in the country. I still have my very first “Stamp” book, a folded card affair with literal postage-stamp style weekly receipts for “National Insurance”.

  149. @Rocha

    Anon is a Troll and a fool. he is disingenuous, and not worth your time.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  150. @Expletive Deleted

    Very interesting comment, thank you. It is the same here in Guatemala; a large percentage of people here are poor, but a very small percentage are homeless. They still have family values, and they do not turn their backs on family.

  151. @Jake

    Islam, which could not exist without both Gnostic Judaism and Gnostic Christian heresy.

    Islam: Adam himself was a messenger of God and over one hundred thousand prophets and messengers of God existed throughout the earth thereafter. Their paths to Him may have differed in the particulars, but their foundation — no god but God — remained the same. In most cases, that foundation was obscured by myriad cultural accretions having nothing to do with the original message, though it’s discernible among many peoples of the world even today (e.g. Australian Aboriginal Atnatu, Lakota Sioux Wakan Tanka, etc.).

    The distinction of Israel’s Islam: It kept an oral tradition which was transcribed to a written record that has been retained for over two millennia. Though this record was destroyed prior to the Babylonian captivity and reconstructed after some time using a Semitic language other than Hebrew, it still preserved prophecy that, given its retention in non-Gnostic records of scripture, poses a serious problem for the “Islam as Gnostic innovation” theory:

    https://archive.org/details/MuhammadInTheBible_201510/page/n7/mode/2up

    Saul of Tarsus is the individual who introduced dogma completely anathema to the monotheistic continuum, which is why Pauline doctrine went over so well in Europe, as it simply supplanted one variety of paganism with another.

  152. Anon[264] • Disclaimer says:

    The only off-ramp, as Dostoevsky never stopped screaming from the rooftops, would be a decisive return to religion.

    I’d like to agree, but the above statement really begs the question, ‘Which comes first, the asshole or the ideology?’.

    In my humble life experience, whether by nature or nurture, the asshole comes first – usually after having had inculcated some internal theology of being ‘Chosen’.

    Then, the fully formed asshole is emerges into the world, and attaches themselves to the best available ideology in their environment which will maximize their ability to inflict damage on whomever they identify as ‘The Other’.

    Give an asshole a religious creed, any religious creed, and they’ll use it as a weapon the same as any secular ideology.

    • Replies: @stevennonemaker88
  153. R2b says:
    @Sean

    Criminality.
    But murder inc?
    Tragic person and sociality.
    Far from Christian.
    I’ve known these mentalities.
    Very very discouraging.
    Go back to Christ.
    Barrett is spot on much, especially mental ground.
    Dostoyevsky would not cater to islam though.
    The Incarnation!

    • Replies: @Sean
  154. In reading Dostevsky– both “Demons’ and “The Brothers Karamazov–” one realizes that all the stuff about abolishing private property, ending marriage, destroying the family, etc. all came from the russian socialists of the 1850s/60s, who in turn got it from the European socialists, who ultimately got it from the judeo-masonic Jacobins of the first French Revolution.

    The first lodges in France were opened by expelled Scots. Just about all of America’s founders were masons, which has made me see them and this nation in a whole new light– America’s role in the 20th century was no aberration.
    In fact, we were established to be the ultimate expression of judeo-masonic poison in the world.
    We were established with the ultimate goals of helping the Jews take Palestine and destroying Europe, which we have done with our involvement in the two world wars

    Without America, there would have been an equitable peace in WW 1 and thus no ww 2 and no Balfour Agreement. I say this as someone whose paternal line has been here since 1619 abd whose ancestors were officers in the Revolution, Civil War, WW,2, and Vietnam– would not the world as a whole and most importantly Europe be much better off without America injecting Talmudic poison into the world? And that is not even mentioning Hollywood or banking or acting as world bully/collections agency for the world’s Jews….

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  155. anon[322] • Disclaimer says:

    Dostoyevsky’s characters always seemed real, but incredible, like they were unique to the 19th century, unique to Russia, or simply unique to Dostoyevsky’s imagination. Then came the New Left of the late 1960’s in America, and they were all there, spot on, already described to a “T” nearly one hundred years before.

    Take a look at Rodion Raskolnikov of “Crime and Punishment,” the above-morality part-time student and murderer and compare his psychology with the later 1920s “thrill killers” of a 15-year-old boy by elitist University of Chicago students, Leopold and Loeb!

    In “The Idiot,” among much else, we find the character Nastassija Phillipovna, who is an irredeemably ruined victim of pedophilia.

    And if you want to read about what would happen to Russia if the Jews ever got hold of it, there’s “Diary of a Writer.”

    As a friend put it, “I read Tolstoy for story-telling and Dostoyevsky for prophecy.”

    And as Nietzsche put it: Everything I know about psychology I learned from Dostoyevsky.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  156. ivan says:
    @ValMonde

    Cesaro Papism – in the end it infected the Orthodox more than the Catholics ever had. It seems to me that he protested too much living as he did in a Europe where the Church was already in full retreat from substantial political influence And is of a piece with the usual attacks on the Catholic Church by the Proddies. Oh well, one can’t have everything.

  157. @advancedatheist

    First off, The topics of philosophy and religion are almost infinitely complex. They defy simplistic categorization. If more people realized this important fact, I think we could have more fruitful discourse.

    Nihilism is not an atheist belief

    It is true that Nihilism is not the same thing as Atheism. However, it would be disingenuous to say that there is not a major overlap. Just like being a Democrat voter and being pro-abortion; they are not necessarily the same thing, but they certainly go together.

    As some have also noted, there are many Christians who are nihilistic in their own beliefs. They think that in this life nothing matters, it is all a test or exercise in order to go to heaven.

    There are also many atheists who grew up in a religious home, and learned habits and moral conduct, and continue to follow that despite rejecting their parent’s actual beliefs.

    There are Atheists who simply do not believe in any specific God; there are atheists who proactively state as a matter of dogma that nothing supernatural exists. These two beliefs are worlds apart, but we use the same word for both!

    I hope I have at least opened the door to the complexity of a topic such as this.

    Please see my second post for what I consider to be a decisive rebuttal to both Atheism and Nihilism.

  158. The topic of nihilism brought to mind an excerpt to an essay that I wrote. This excerpt decisively defeats nihilism:

    There exists a Universal system of value, and of morals (“knowledge of good and evil”). It is better to be alive than dead. It is better to be beautiful than ugly. It is better to be healthy than sick. It is better to be clean than dirty. It is better to be strong than weak. It is better to be truthful than dishonest. It is better to do good rather than evil. Excellence is better than mediocrity. Life is good and valuable. These truths are self evident and inherent to both conscience and to the natural order.

    I think it is worth noting that these things are true whether we agree to them or not. Even if we call something that is evil good, it is still evil. Even if we call something that is good evil, it is still good. Beauty, although subjective in a sense, is also a real thing independent of the viewer. Because we choose to call something which is ugly beautiful, does not make it so. Our own system of values should be based on the true system of values (set forth by the Creator), as our conscience should show us. However, just because we choose to think something or feel something, that does not necessarily make it so.

    Is the world subjective? in many ways. Is a hammer better than a screwdriver? It dependents whether you are working with nails or screws. Is the world objective? in many ways. The earth is a sphere, even if we think it is flat. The moon reflects light from the Sun, even if we think it has its own light source. Integrity is better than dishonesty and corruption, even if we are dishonest and corrupt. Human life (indeed life in general) is valuable, regardless of what anyone thinks. The measurement and application of many things may be subjective, but the universe is built on objective principles that are foundational and axiomatic.

    The purpose of life is not having fun or being happy. Our emotions and feelings certainly matter, but they are not the only or even primary source or judge of value and purpose. The purpose of life is the sum total of very many parts of life. Our purpose is to build and multiply; to pursue excellence and goodness in every way; to live and to love. There is value and purpose in all aspects of life. By living fully and doing what is right we bring glory to the Creator. This is the starting point from which all else flows. Logical discourse is only possible if these principles are accepted and adhered to.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  159. @anon

    True, but even beyond politics, how many of us have known a girl like Katia from “Karamazov” whose “love’ is only a form of “self-laceration” and out of pride?

    I was with a girl starting in my sophmore year of university and her ” project” was to ” put me on the right path.” Once I got into a top 5 law school, had stopped cheating on her, gotten rid of all my bad habits, she was no longer interested in me
    http://Www.google.com
    I wonder how many “Katias” there are out there? Just very attractive girls who are in love with their own pride and need to prove to themselves they can ” reform” a man and then no longer want anything to do with them once they are ‘reformed ”

  160. @Anon

    This is a surprisingly insightful comment. Martin Luther has a similar idea when he said: “For where God built a church, there the Devil would also build a chapel.” Malign purpose can use almost anything for evil.

    • Replies: @R2b
  161. @moi

    I agree with what you are saying, and I like what he says in spirit (it is very similar to what the Buddha preached), but it is still dualistic, because he is asking a person to abandon here, for there. Modern day nihilists demand people abandon there for here, which I agree is more problematic.

    Christ to me seems like a classical Jewish prophet, even though after 500 years of post-exilic new religion, the people forgot that – God spoke through him, and the term ‘son of God’ is really not particularly heretical if you agree that God created All!

  162. R2b says:
    @stevennonemaker88

    That’s not similar, and maybe notwhat anony meant.
    But falling away starts in the churxh.
    Don’t be witty, like Chris.
    It is almost over.
    Just a couple ofspasms.
    Schwabian orgasms.
    Return to Christ.
    Die kirche muß bewölkert werden!
    (Excuse mygerman)

  163. anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @stevennonemaker88

    It is better to be alive than dead, unless you concur with the following anti-natalist Jewish authors. Looks like an attack of the nihilists to me!

    Job 3:3 “Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said, There is a man child conceived.”
    Ecclesiastes 4:2-3 “I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive. But better than both is the one who has never been born, who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun.”
    Jeremiah 20:14-18 “Cursed be the day on which I was born: let not the day on which my mother bore me be blessed. Cursed be the man…because he slew me not from the womb; so that my mother might have been my grave and her womb always great. Why did I come out of the womb to see labour and sorrow?”
    Luke 23:29 “Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!”
    Matthew 26:24 “It would be better for him if he had not been born.”

    Is your grandmother a secret nihilist/anti-natalist if she likes this famous book? 🙂

  164. @The ol' gaffer

    You made a comment – over a typo involving ONE SINGLE LETTER ?

    Since you did, allow me to point out to you in turn that your phrase “in quite many places” is incorrect and invalid in English – which I presume is not your native language. In English we would say either “in quite A FEW places”, or, “in many places” – but not “in quite many places”, which is grammatically nonsense.

  165. @Anon

    Memo to [Anon]256:

    Please be sure to let me know when we start winning. I have some very old Champagne in the cupboard.

    • Replies: @Anon
  166. I found this article to certainly be thought provoking, but also convoluted and quite inaccurate in many respects. I think one major issue with this analysis (like most) is that it takes a few nuggets of truth and magnifies them in order to make an artificial case. By doing so, it leaves out other truths and oversimplifies. Take the fourth turning for example. Although in some ways human life and civilization can be seen as cyclical, in many ways it is not. Many Post Christian ideologies are false and highly destructive. The attack on the traditional family and fathers has been a huge part of the decline in the west. However, the role of the (((small hats))) in promoting all this is conspicuously absent in the article. Also, the ridiculous binary view of the “reds” vs “blues” in America actually clouds what is really going on. Both presidential candidates are owned by the banksters. Both parties are wholly owned by Jewish power. The Bolsheviks who destroyed Russia were certainly evil. However, that is not to say that the old, moneyed aristocrats in much of Europe were good. The lauded Peter The Great had his one and only son tortured to death, which was evil incarnate. I think that much of politics and history is more accurately viewed as a power struggle between various ruthless, greedy, heartless actors. The common, decent folk are usually the losers.

  167. tgordon says:
    @Bill P

    I spent a summer in Afghanistan tooling around in support of the GWOT. Best summer of my life all told. I’ve stated repeatedly that the poor bastards that the U.S. government sees fit to bomb the s**t out of in the name of Democracy are in all reality freer than the average U.S. citizen, at least that was my observation.

    The trope “They hate us because of our freedoms.” seems like a bunch of narcissistic,wishful, typically American shuck and jive to me. The enormity of this arrogance isn’t astounding, it’s understandable considering the intellectual environment that surrounds all of us.

  168. “Demons, published in 1871-1872, predicted the rise of even worse nihilisms—and future developments, including the emergence of Bolshevism and Nazism, seemed to fulfill its prophecy.”

    Nihilism is a misnomer here. Bolshevism and Nazism are not nihilisms. Far from it, they are forms of zealotry. The national socialists for instance didn’t value nothing but valued nation and race with gusto. It seems that what Dostoyevski was really railing against was atheism rather than nihilism.

  169. Kevin Barrett: “This unquenchable thirst for destruction—call it nihilism if you will—is the engine of all post-religious political ideologies, be they of the left or right. Socialism, anarchism, communism, fascism, Nazism, woke-ism: all share a barely-concealed urge to blow up the inherited social order, ostensibly to rebuild it as some sort of nebulous paradise on earth. But all those rebuilding plans are just window-dressing. It’s the destruction, only the destruction, that counts.”

    With its contempt for all things worldly, Christianity itself fits this description to a tee. It’s a belief system that denigrates everything that was considered valuable in Roman times — wealth, pride, strength, honor, reason, wisdom, truth, beauty. Though his prophecy failed, Jesus exultantly predicted the imminent destruction of the world, which according to Christian belief is the dominion of Satan: 28 Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. – Matthew 16:28

    Christianity was the original revolutionary utopian creed, the ancestor of them all. The rest are only epigones. Christianity itself is the fons et origo of Western nihilism.

  170. anon[231] • Disclaimer says:

    @Zoom-Copter

    “True, but even beyond politics, how many of us have known a girl like Katia from ‘Karamazov’ whose ‘love’ is only a form of ‘self-laceration’ and out of pride?”

    Ivan Karamazov: And know, Katerina Ivanovna, that you love only Dmitry. And you love him the way he is, insulting you. If he suddenly improved, you would instantly cease to love him! That is your anguish.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  171. Proud Boys and most of the rest of the alt right are correct about the necessity of patriarchy, but wrong about grounding it in ethnicity rather than religion.

    Mr. Barrett, calm yourself. The Proud Boys are not grounded in ethnicity. The alleged founder is a black dude with Cuban roots. And, I challenge you to name 1 group of any significance that is. Other than this discretion I like the article, as I do most of what you write. Agreed. God and family are sorely lacking in today’s world. I regret following the 1960’s god is dead mantra, and truly regret not raising my children in a religious way. I have 2 grandson’s and find it hard to express the importance of having God in one’s life when I was guilty of the same for 65 of my 72 years. Hopefully I’ll figure it out, somehow.

  172. @Anon

    Switzerland mandates health insurance for the entire population, and it is provided by a free market of competing insurance companies.

    They have a public/private mix that covers all workers in any situation. So yes they are pro-family while the libertarian position is not.

    People, mostly lazy nihilists like you, who cannot afford their own insurance receive subsidies for their insurance costs.

    Oh so now I am a poor lazy nihilist because I think all workers should be covered? Hilarious.

    Nationalists around the world think US conservatives are insane and for good reason. Telling workers “OH WELL” is just plain stupid and why the GOP keeps losing. Do you like losing?

    As for nihilism I am principled unlike tradcons and libertarians. What do traditional conservatives believe? That’s easy, current liberal beliefs + wait 10 years. Just look at how quickly they rolled over on gay marriage. Oh but muh free market is everything. Yea whatever move to Haiti then. Traditional conservatism is just race denial with an “OH WELL” economic plan for workers. Genius stuff.

    Imagine a true free and open healthcare system where people paid out of pocket for “health care” with their own savings.

    Unrealistic because some people have lifelong medical costs that can’t be supported through wages.

    One of the most pernicious effects of government monopoly on health is that government politicizes and corrupts everything.

    Which government are you talking about?

    Would you rather have heart surgery in Iceland or Baltimore?

    You guys are finished. Populism will be taking over the reigns soon. Your “Free market” Randian magic did not solve our most pressing problems and if anything just laid the path for the left by being easy competition. Just look at how Trump flubbed the pre-existing conditions question. Modern conservatism is intellectually bankrupt. Just a bunch of boomers sitting around deluding themselves on race and economics. Pathetic and soon to be over. There isn’t room for two deluded ideologies in America. We already have liberalism and that is enough. You guys can go play golf with Kevin and complain about “nihilists” while the populists try to sort out this mess.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  173. @anon

    The insight in that one paragraph is far more than the average man–even intelligent men– learn about women in their entire lives. It’s incredible given that he was said to be so autistic with women and only really “with” his widowed polish noblewoman and his stenographer.

    I think we get an idea what he thought of his polish wife’s family in “Brothers Karamazov” in the form of Grushenka’s “officer.”

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  174. JimDandy says:
    @Indifferent contrarian

    I don’t think you understand the meaning of the word “ethnicity”:

    eth·nic·i·ty
    /eTHˈnisədē/
    noun
    the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition.

  175. @moi

    Of course, European Catholics and Protestants never fought over religion. And there were no “troubles” in Ireland just a few decades ago. LOL

    The Irish mostly blew up empty cars during the troubles. Muslims have been killing each other for over 1000 years.

    Islam actually tells its followers to conquer and enslave anyone with different beliefs. Not the basis of a peaceful religion.
    http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2014/02/does-islam-allow-muslims-to-rape-female.html

    Hey, booze, gamble, and watch all the porn you want. Jesus loves you

    No masturbating unless you think it might keep you from going gay. Mohammed says so.

  176. @Zoom-Copter

    The insight in that one paragraph is far more than the average man–even intelligent men– learn about women in their entire lives.

    Well our society lies to men about female nature.

    Both Christians and liberals want to believe that only men are flawed sexually. That is really the problem.

    It just leaves men confused and women unsatisfied with the men available to them.

    Lying about race and gender for the sake of egalitarian idealism just isn’t working. It creates more problems than it solves.

  177. Schuetze says:
    @Expletive Deleted

    “People went to astonishing lengths to keep sick, orphaned or dying kin at home somewhere within the extended family and out of the grip of the brutal 16th/17th-century Poor Law. ”

    It looks like we have come full circle. Between the fake-covid panic and the deep state and corrupt doctor controlled Medical Industrial Complex, people are now going to “astonishing lengths to keep sick or dying kin at home” to avoid them being damaged or infected by deep nasal PCR test probes, fake positive PCR tests, for-profit intubations, or even forced injections of heavy metal and nano-particle laced DNA altering experimental trans-humanistic “vaccines”.

    Speaking for my immediate family, I refuse to go to a hospital, or a doctors visit, unless entirely unavoidable, until the scamdemic has blown over. My wife and I pay thousands in “Health Insurance” premiums every year, which now is only usable in case of a disaster. My lawyer died last summer of cancer, I suspect that he had stopped going to the doctor due to this covid scam.

    To make matters worse, the Medical Industrial Complex has banned and stripped pharmacies of all cheap and highly effective treatments like Hydroxycholoquine and Ivermectine. Long ago they illegalized our access anti-biotics and many other effective treatments that would allow self-sufficient and independent people to stay out of the hospitals and treat themselves.

    This is what governments have done to “Health Care” across the entire west, and it was accomplished with malice and forethought. The stripping of the ability of people to make their own health decisions and making them dependent on the government for all their health concerns is in its own way highly nihilistic. This is why I get so upset and disgusted when idiots like John Johnson start prattling on about “socialized medicine”.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  178. Schuetze says:
    @Zoom-Copter

    Hitler said that the US was the jew’s playground.

  179. Schuetze says:
    @John Johnson

    “You guys are finished. Populism will be taking over the reigns soon. Your “Free market” Randian magic did not solve our most pressing problems and if anything just laid the path for the left by being easy competition. Just look at how Trump flubbed the pre-existing conditions question. Modern conservatism is intellectually bankrupt. Just a bunch of boomers sitting around deluding themselves on race and economics. ”

    You are a Millennial Twit, a Useful Idiot, or both.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  180. @Kevin Barrett

    but as I recall it treats the phenomenon of nihilism from a basically secular-materialist-progressive (i.e. nihilist) perspective.

    Lev Tolstoy while writing War and Peace read in parallel, non-stop, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, which didn’t prevent him to write a quintessential Russian book. Secular-material is not necessarily identical to “progressive”, especially in its modern perverted sense. Europhile Turgenev, moreover, as it turned out later was a resident of Russian intelligence.

  181. Anon[256] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Bowman

    “…Please be sure to let me know when we start winning. I have some very old Champagne in the cupboard…”

    We will start WINNING as soon as ‘WE’ NO LONGER DEPEND ON ‘THEIR’ Supply Chains, Bank Loans, Sin Peddlers, Fancy Pants and Lollypops. Quit BLAMING ‘Them’ aka Politicians, MSMedia, Bank\$ters, Jews…and Break-Away from Babylon, Cooperate with other Like-Minded People, and START BUILDING A WINNING FUTURE (aka Atlas Shrugged – John Galt).

    Be PROACTIVE – Not REACTIVE – and Not in Victim Consciousness

    And I will gladly celebrate with you and a glass of your champaign after we Win…….Cheers!

  182. Anon[256] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    “…Today the left has a stranglehold on education from K-PhD. Our schools have become the biggest incubators of this degeneracy. The only way to get out of this moral rot is by parents taking their children out of school and homeschooling them in droves…”

    “…Conservatives are becoming too much like liberals, they no longer know what they want, they just know what they don’t want, which is whatever they think the other side wants…”

    We can ALSO “get out of this moral rot” by NO LONGER DEPENDING ON “THEIR” Supply Chains, Bank Loans, Education System, MSMedia Cartel, Sin Peddlers, Fancy Pants and Lollypops. Quit BLAMING “Them” aka Politicians, MSMedia, Bank\$ters, Jews…and 1) Break-Away from Babylon, 2) Cooperate with other Like-Minded People, and 3) START BUILDING A WINNING FUTURE (aka Atlas Shrugged – John Galt).

    Be PROACTIVE – Not REACTIVE – and Not in Victim Consciousness

    “…So it would appear Higher Functioning Morality has been losing for over a century. When do you predict a turnaround? And how…?

    Things will “turnaround” after the Inevitable Systemic Collapse (between 0-10 years from now) and after we NO LONGER DEPEND ON THEIR Supply Chains, Bank Loans…[as I described above.]

  183. anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @stevennonemaker88

    Sadly, you’re projecting your own disingenuity. The topic is the nihilism of sexually deviant and cannibalistic Jews. The Rabbi you worship exorts you to cut off you testicles for the Kangdom. You are too cowardly to address it. Furthermore, Cannibal/Vampire Jesus said to eat his body and drink his blood. You are also too cowardly to address that nihilistic similarity.

    Dr. Robert Morgan’s comment #172 nails the topic on the head: “Christianity itself is the fons et origo of Western nihilism.”

  184. @Mefobills

    The South was indeed falling back into the finance capitalist British Colonial system, which in turn has Jewish antecedents out of Amsterdam. That is a provable fact.

    That the south was filling up with Negroes to then grow cotton, was a business plan hatched by the (((usual suspects))).

    Explains why Henry Ford’s The International Jew published one hundred years ago emphasizes at its outset the tremendous increase in wealth the New York City synagogue(s) exhibited at the conclusion of the Civil War compared to before the war.

    Jews have been exploiting blacks since first buying them from the Arab Muslims on the West Coast of Africa and transporting them trans Atlantic in “Middle Passage”, and have not stopped to this day.

    That’s why it’s encouraging to see that Farrakhan is speaking out against the Jew Flu RNA manipulation jab:

    http://dstormer6em3i4km.onion/daily-caller-tattletales-on-louis-farrakhan-gets-his-anti-vaccine-warning-banned/

    This is also accurate

    All of these ideas are very Jewish, and act like a virus on soft headed people.

    as evidenced by the vast majority sheepishly donning the Goy Gag to Jew delight.

    Thankfully the few strong like you, Farrakhan and David Duke speak out against the Jews’ satanic evil.

    • Thanks: Mefobills
    • Replies: @Bert
  185. @Schuetze

    Agree. Except I don’t think public health medicine has to be this way, but it’s how it turned out. Those who control control everything, so they will turn the state, education, media, health … absolutely everything to shit.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  186. chris m says:

    the above article immediately brings to mind another article (by the late Justin Raimondo (2005))

    https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2005/01/21/w-and-dostoevsky/

    in which the author references George W. Bush and his inaugural address (20 jan 2005)
    just after getting elected as President for a 2nd term.

    “Midway through his inaugural address, when the president proclaimed “the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world,” I wondered if Bush or his speechwriters knew or cared how alien this ultra-revolutionary rhetoric would seem to conservatives of the old school – and soon had my answer:

    “Because we have acted in the great liberating tradition of this nation, tens of millions have achieved their freedom. And as hope kindles hope, millions more will find it. By our efforts we have lit a fire as well, a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power; it burns those who fight its progress. And one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.”

    raimondo:
    In Dostoevsky’s novel, that fire in the minds of men is not a yearning for liberty, but a nihilistic will to power that can only end in destruction. Put in George W. Bush’s mouth, those words are not a paean to freedom, but a manifesto of pure destructionism.

    (Justin Raimondo passed away on June 27, 2019)

    also see https://www.antiwar.com/justin/j111003.html
    November 10, 2003; GEORGE W. BUSH, TROTSKYITE

  187. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    > “Christianity was the original revolutionary utopian creed, the ancestor of them all.”

    An otherwise perfect post, and yet, I have a question. Isn’t any creed utopian? Isn’t the direction of life utopianist? The logic of a population is to remove other populations, even though the ultimate future is quite distant, and the path cautious.

    In a way, a memetic virus such as Christianity merely uses the mental capacity of the human brain to trick men into taking an implausible and counter-productive worldview – and yet this very imaginative capacity is what enables such efficient policies as the Holocaust, an industrial genocide.

    As Chechar says, it is human proclivity to stories that is the crux. Culture is the greatest tool. As with material technology, some will crack their own head with it, others will use it wisely.

  188. Schuetze says:
    @Commentator Mike

    “I don’t think public health medicine has to be this way”

    In a high trust society one could have “public health medicine”, but why risk it? Why turn every thing over to a monopoly, even if at the time it has good intentions? If anything the predicament that we are in with Covid should make it perfectly clear that a single point of control makes it far easier for corrupt people, and their sycophants like John Johnson, to take over.

    In a high trust society every one can trust everyone else to not become a parasite. In a low trust society, full of nihilists like John Johnson, everyone is in it for everything they can get. In a high trust society, honor and respect come through hard work and good deeds. In a low trust society, full of nihilists like John Johnson, respect is proportional to the amount of lies told and the amount of bling owned.

    Both my parents were assisted by the family in their suicide when they left this earth. Both were afraid of becoming a burden to their children, my father because of stage 4 cancer and my mother because of alzheimers. I personally do not want vaccines or masks, if I catch “covid” and die, so be it.

    The problem with todays low trust society, full of nihilists like John Johnson, is that everyone wants to live forever at the cost of everyone else. People die. People without family and without support who cannot support themselves while clinging to life, have no reason to expect the government to extract taxes at the point of a gun from everyone else in order to keep them alive. There is no shame in dying, and not everyone gets to live to 100 in good health. Having the wherewithall to be able to pay for first class health care when one is older is one of the most important motivations for working hard while younger. Take away that motivation and you end up with a low trust society, full of nihilists like John Johnson, where everyone is in it for everything they can get from everyone else by demanding “free health care”.

  189. @Schuetze

    I’m all for variety. I used to live in countries where you could get absolutely any medicines over the counter without a prescription, imported or cheap generic versions, and self medicate without the need to ever see a doctor. But even there they started introducing prescription regulations copying the West.

    The worst about the low trust society is that you can’t trust the authorities. I don’t even trust the expensive first class health care – they’re out to make money and are out to fleece patients with unnecessary treatments and procedures. On the other hand the free government care may try to save on the treatment of patients. Myself, I trust in natural healthy lifestyles as much as possible but sometimes one does require doctors and their medicines.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  190. @Commentator Mike

    Well, here is one for you– I’m quite healthy and in my late 20s. Last month, my girlfriend’s small fucker of a dog bit my elbow. Within a week, i was puking constantly and could not leave bed.

    Given all the covid shit going on, I still refused to go to hospital, got oral antibiotics, refused to go. Then 2 weeks ago saw my father, who was a medic in Vietnam War and said to me: ” you can see the bone at the bottom of that infection. You’re gonna either die of sepsis or lose your arm ”

    So I go into hospital bc between that and pain just being too much… x-rays show it’s osteomyelitis and a “septic elbow ” Dr. at first hospital is very decent white guy, starts iv antibiotics and puts me on diludad, so at least the agony stops. Then he tells me they have to move me to a hospital with a burn unit (since infection so deep and ate up so much flesh) and with a ‘ better surgery dept.”

    The surgeon is an obese Haitian woman. Christ. I call my older brother and tell him that if sepsis gets into blood, please get them to pull plug rather than amputate anything or keep me on a respirator.

    They do another MRI. Of course, she fucked up surgery and piece of bone still exposed and is apparently on nerve. But rhe best oart? The attending in this new hospital is a vicious Indian woman who told me I “don’t need diludad” and switches me to one percocet every 8 hours.

    So laying here in agony, awaiting another fucking surgery , with no pain meds and an elbow that…you cannot imagine. Demand to see the pain doctor and she is…another vicious Indian female, who adds to my 1 percocet…Tylenol, while suggesting I “might be a drug addict (!!!). This is American Healthcare in 2021. And even with decent insurance, christ help me when I get the bill.

    Moral of this tale? I keep thinking of Kipling: ” if you’re wounded and lying on Afghanistan’s plain/And the women come out to cut up what remains/ just roll to your rifle, and blow out your brains/ And go to your God like a soldier.” I wish I had gone for my shotgun over this.

    Fucking insanity. Ever slammed your hand in a car door or home door? Inagine that, but your entire elbow while it’s also on fire…and the Indian offering you 1 percocet and insinuating you are a drug addict when you ask for something stronger.

    A special thanks to the very Jewish Sackler family and to all the H1B1 visa advocates for bringing doctors here who seem to have gotten a brain parasite drinking shit water from the Ganges and won’t give me even moderately strong opuods with an infection in arm bone and sepsis in elbow.

    Healthcare in America in current year. On a positive note, many of the nurses are surprisingly White, attractive females– many denied med school admission– who are all too happy to curse Indians in and out of hell with me at night with no one else around when I am in agony…

  191. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    There certainly are some (alleged) Christians who are nihilistic in their views. Granted, you can find some stand alone Bible verses that might appear to even support that concept. That is not the same thing as Christianity being Nihilistic. Properly understood, Christianity is the opposite of Nihilism.

    It’s a belief system that denigrates everything that was considered valuable in Roman times — wealth, pride, strength, honor, reason, wisdom, truth, beauty.

    Psalm 96:
    6 Splendor and majesty are before him;
    strength and beauty are in his sanctuary.
    Proverbs 8:
    10 Take my instruction instead of silver,
    and knowledge rather than choice gold,
    11 for wisdom is better than jewels,
    and all that you may desire cannot compare with her.
    Joshua 22:
    8 he said to them, “Go back to your tents with much wealth and with very much livestock, with silver, gold, bronze, and iron, and with much clothing. Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brothers.”
    2 Corinthians 7:
    4 I am acting with great boldness toward you; I have great pride in you; I am filled with comfort. In all our affliction, I am overflowing with joy.
    Psalm 8:
    5 Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings[b]
    and crowned him with glory and honor.
    John 8:
    32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
    Leviticus 19:
    17 “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him.

    You are wrong about every single thing you mentioned. Christianity does not denigrate ANY of these things. Rather, each one of these things must be properly understood in context to the rest of the world. Pride can be bad if it takes the form of Arrogance; Unjustly getting wealth is evil; external beauty can be used for bad, etc.

    Genesis 1:
    31 And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

    God’s creation is good, and all the attributes you mentioned are also good, taken in the proper context. This is the position of both the Bible and Christianity. Anything else is heresy from within or slander from without.

    • Replies: @C.T.
  192. @Zoom-Copter

    Healthcare in the US is quickly becoming a nightmare. Hugely expensive too.

    We have been quite pleased with the healthcare we get here in Guatemala.

    In 2019 We paid around \$1,800 (without insurance) for a C-section for my wife which included a couple days in the hospital. Great quality care, and less than a 10th of the price in a first world country.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  193. Schuetze says:
    @Zoom-Copter

    Thanks for the story Zoom-Copter. I feel for you.

    A few years back I had the misfortune of getting a kidney stone while travelling through Spain. I had no idea what was going on, so we checked into the emergency room at a local “free socialized medicine” hospital. I spent 7 hours in the waiting room going through agonizing spasms with no idea what was going on before I finally got to see a doctor. They constantly refused to give me a pain killer until I had been X-rayed, but they were to busy and I was not in a life threatening situation. Every couple of minutes as the pain hit, I would wish that I was dead. Finally I got x-rayed and they gave some mild pain killer. It was more the relief of knowing that it was only a kidney stone that made the constant pain until recovery tolerable.

    I concur completely about the refusal by “medical professionals” to provide oxycontin/morphine/codein to patients in pain. Who made them god? I don’t care if there are addicts like George Floyd who might die of heroin instead of fenatyl, it is my body and my right.

    I also would bet that if a drive up pharmacy was allowed to provide intravenous anti-biotics on demand that you could have taken care of yourself from the very beginning and saved the “medical professionals” much effort and cost. But no, only pregnant teenage bimbos are allowed the right of “my body my choice”.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
    , @Zoom-Copter
  194. Sean says:
    @R2b

    https://www.psychcongress.com/multimedia/dr-charles-raison-link-between-inflammation-and-response-psychotherapy
    But in the context of risk of infection or in the context of being infected, if your inflammation goes up and that causes you to step away from other people, that can be very protective in terms of surviving an infection or not getting infected in the first place. I just can’t tell you how relevant this is in the age of COVID where we’re struggling with this dynamic between the sort of evolved human need for social connection and this evolved human fear of contagion and infection.

    So in the context of many aspects of the modern world, if your inflammation’s up, that’s not very helpful. Your inflammation’s up from being obese or being stressed out, and that makes you feel disconnected from other people, that’s clearly not helpful. But again, across evolutionary time, the increased inflammation causing these sorts of withdrawal behaviors, it really was probably quite adaptive.

    Maybe the person whose immune system is activated is that way because he has got something communicable and might give other members of his group that infectious disease. If so, making him behave in not just a withdrawn but a strange eccentric and rather menacing manner could be a group selection solution to preventing epidemics. Barrett’s ideas are so egregious that I wonder if he is somehow inflamed and something like a biologic adaptation for being on the fringe of society is what propelling him down the paths less taken.

    Regarding morality, but is it a choice to be bad? I have heard it said that the most important nine months of life are before one is born. It also seems from Wrangham’s work that the tribe was the original Murder Incorporated, killing off the violent males and by a form of self domestication, genetically pacifying the human race. I am a timid person but I have read a lot about crime and there are biologic correlates such as slow heartbeat and extroversion In general crime does not pay long term and those drawn to gangs will be killed or die in prison and know it. Yet they cannot stop themselves behaving in a delinquent manner. There are also people who are kind and forgiving through and through irrespective of the consequences, and it seems more and more there is a genetic basis to various ways of being ranging from safety first to deliberately risky.

    Daniel Dennett in the NYT reviewing Why Are We in the West So Weird? by Joseph Heinrich:-

    According to Joseph Henrich, some unknown early church fathers about a thousand years later promulgated the edict: Don’t marry your cousin! Why they did this is also unclear, but if Henrich is right — and he develops a fascinating case brimming with evidence — this prohibition changed the face of the world, by eventually creating societies and people that were WEIRD: Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic.

    Inclusive fitness Islam or Christian prohibitions against consanguinity, the latter is clearly superior for technological progress, but is it sustainable? It is begining to seem like the highest values destroy themselves. The older I get the more fatalistic I am and the less I believe “The fault is not in our stars, But in ourselves”. Whether you want to phrase it as “Grace” and “God’s Plan For Me” or the determinism of physics, there is not a lot of room for attributing a free choice as the agent in individual action for good or ill. No one is to blame what they are; how can they be responsible for what they do. Maybe it is just an ancient feeling that this wrongdoer ought to be lynched, thereby taken out the gene pool.

  195. @Zoom-Copter

    I commiserate with your predicament. These Indian doctors get around and I’ve had very bad experiences with them and some other Third World docs. Some of them probably have fake degrees but even the real ones don’t seem very competent. I was once chased by a pack of wild dogs on a beach in a country with warnings about rabies posted all over the place and one manged to bite me but luckily I was wearing jeans and all I got was a tiny bruised spot on my leg as the teeth did not penetrate the fabric and some saliva on my jeans and skin. I generally try to avoid doctors and hospitals but when there is a serious problem it is best to seek medical help as soon as possible to avoid complications.

  196. Wielgus says:
    @Zoom-Copter

    So you don’t like Indians?

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  197. @Schuetze

    Mate I just can’t figure it out. White Dr. had me on diludad first 9 or 10 days, all was OK. So first the Indian tells me that I “seem tired all day, the diludad is too much.” Then I tell her I’m tired bc I haven’t slept a single night.
    Her next excuse is ” well if you get addicted to this you can’t have it at home!’ Yeah honey, I get that, but I’m constantly told I will be here at least 2 more weeks. In a sane world, she’d be back in…Mumbai picking trash out of a heap to sell, not deciding on my meds.

    And they REALLY do not like that I was a double major in uni, one of them with a concentration in psychopharmacology, so I began giving them lectures on how opiod receptors work in the brain and agonists/antagonists (once i realized i was being fucked anyway).

    I was accepted for a joint JD/MD program but dropped MD part after first semester when my ex-gf said she was not going to be poor during a residency and “doctors don’t make real money anymore anyway ” (which is true i guess, abd unless you plan to be a president/director of a hospital it is kind of a waste.

    Have to say though, am amazed by change in nurses since last time I spent any time in a hospital while my grandmother was dying. Yes some outliers but most are cute, White, in good shape, nice, and very much red-pilled.

    Given what my GF’s fucking miserable dog caused (along with no visitors being allowed here), I’m hoping to get the number of the Germanic girl from Argentina before I leave.

    Although cute nurses also a curse in that you have to wait for an ugly/fat/black one to come on shift to ask for a laxative since you don’t want a cute girl associating you with taking a dump.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  198. @Wielgus

    Untrue. I’m very fond of chicken Tika Masala. If the Indians woukd stick to that, nan bread, and basmati rice, we’d have no problems

  199. @stevennonemaker88

    Well, save a place for me in Guatemala as I may soon be joining you and other expats there to dodge the heeb hospital bill collector. Even with insurance, money spent in here will end up being more than 10 trips to Zurich in a 5 star hotel and 10 trips to Tokyo.

  200. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Zoom-Copter

    > “Last month, my girlfriend’s small fucker of a dog bit my elbow.”

    The moral of the story – dogs are disgusting creatures, Moslems are right.

    “my ex-gf” > as you’re a chad, I feel no pity for you. The incels are a new proletariat, and the revolution of the future ought to be savage.

    “was a medic in Vietnam War” > imperialist vermin.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  201. stevennonemaker88: “[stevennonemaker88’s position] is the position of both the Bible and Christianity.”

    Oh really? Who appointed you spokesman for Christianity? Christianity has been torn by conflicts about what constitutes “real” Christianity for two thousand years. There are nearly as many interpretations of Christianity as there are Christians. But it’s quite obvious, in any honest reading of the NT, that Christianity rejects this world and its values and instead places its hopes in an imaginary next, a utopia, the so-called kingdom of God. To establish this, we have only to consult the words of the crucified rabbi himself.

    Against wealth:

    Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
    – Matthew 19:24

    [MORE]

    Looking at his disciples, he said:
    “Blessed are you who are poor,
    for yours is the kingdom of God.”
    – Luke 6:20

    Against pride:

    Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
    – Matthew 5:5

    Against reason and even the possibility of wisdom:

    Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
    – Matthew 18:3

    Against strength:

    But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
    – Matthew 5:39

    Rejection of reason in favor of faith:

    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
    – John 14:6

    Rejection of the world and its values generally as the dominion of Satan:

    5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

    8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’
    -Luke 4:5-8

    The antinomy that Kevin Barrett sets up between religion and nihilism is entirely false, and the Jesus of the Bible (probably a fictional character, btw) was a nihilist himself. That’s one reason why these various creeds are often described as religions. They stink of religion because they share this common ancestry.

    • Replies: @stevennonemaker88
  202. @Schuetze

    Not only pregnant teen bimbos, but in states like NJ a doctor can lose license for trying to convince a 9 year old boy who Jewish propaganda has convinced he “might be a girl” not to have his buzzer chopped off.

    I wonder if I told them “hey, I want to get my buzzer chopped, I’m a girl” and then stopped them at last minute after they injected the painkillers and propranolol.

    How long must those mother fuckers need morphine for due to their own insanity? And yet an infection in bone and sepsis in elbow that could yet kill me and Tylenol? Fuck these people. If I knew where to cop dope I genuinely would

  203. @Adûnâi

    Gee, you sure have me angry! I’ve never come across a pathetic hard-on desperate for attention before. How dare you say such things?

  204. Adûnâi: “Isn’t any creed utopian? Isn’t the direction of life utopianist?”

    I don’t think so. The ancient Greeks and Romans didn’t think that the future would tend to be better than the past, and in fact thought of the past as better than the present. Their “Golden Age” was the past. They didn’t have a cult of Progress, and also didn’t expect heaven to arrive after they were dead. The latter appears to have been an innovation of Christianity. Catullus gave the common, pre-Christian view of death in one of his poems:

    Soles occidere et redire possunt
    Nobis cum semel occidit brevis lux, nox est una perpetua dormienda

    [Suns may set and rise again,
    but with us once the brief light goes out, night is a perpetual sleep.]

    Adûnâi: “Culture is the greatest tool. As with material technology, some will crack their own head with it, others will use it wisely. ”

    Since culture is the set of all tools, I don’t think it’s a tool itself, in the same way that the set of all oranges is not itself an orange. Culture emerges, but isn’t selected in advance. As I’ve explained, the problem with technology is its unforeseen side effects, one of which would appear to be human extinction.

  205. C.T. says: • Website
    @stevennonemaker88

    Those verses you cite are from the OT. The NT is all about the inversion of Aryan values. (The Old Testament is for Jews and the New Testament is for us gentiles.)

    See my blog and pay special attention to what Richard Carrier says about how the gospel writers inverted the story of Romulus: a total transvaluation of Aryan values! Or even better, read the texts linked in my site’s sticky post.

    Whatever you want to call it, thinking you can aid in saving the white race while, at the same time, bending the knee to Jewish deities (Yahweh and Yeshua) is some kind of combination of insane, dishonest, cowardly, naive, or very stupid. To bottom line it, it won’t and can’t work.

  206. @Schuetze

    You are a Millennial Twit, a Useful Idiot, or both.

    No real response as usual. As with liberalism your ideology is mostly smoke and mirrors.

    Go craft golden idols of Rand and Moses and then go to Unz to complain about Jewish influence.

    Just another angry tradcon that doesn’t want to admit he was conned by the 1%. Con Inc hucksters would pimp your wife and then demand additional tax cuts for their time. You would probably give it to them.

  207. @Schuetze

    Having the wherewithall to be able to pay for first class health care when one is older is one of the most important motivations for working hard while younger. Take away that motivation and you end up with a low trust society, full of nihilists like John Johnson, where everyone is in it for everything they can get from everyone else by demanding “free health care”.

    You are cracking up. Nowhere have I said that health care is free. Stop trying to reach for canned conservative arguments.

    I said it is a pro-family position to make sure all workers are covered. It is a pro-nihilist position to favor the 1% and then slowly adopt whatever liberals come up with (see conservative positions compared to 10 years ago).

    Iceland has higher levels of trust than the US and they insure all their workers.

    But please go back to rationalizing why we need billionaire liberals but we can’t insure all workers.

    Like I said your time is ending. Only populism can defeat liberalism. You guys were given decades to apply your childish “free market n tax cuts” theories that did nothing to stop the left. We now have trannies in the Navy and the Democrats will be legalizing 8 million voters. Way to go. Conservatives have done a great job of talking while the left keeps winning.

    If there were any justice in this world all conservatives would be sent to “free market” Somalia which according to Rush and Rand should have surpassed the US in all areas by now.

  208. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    You are actually an ignoramus who wrongly attributes reality, so you get butt-hurt when somebody accurately portrays events.

    There were plenty of wars where none of those factors existed.

    Western society did not start in year zero. Romans and Persians battled for 721 years.

    No kidding Sherlock? Do you know that there was usury underlying those wars? You don’t have to be a Jew to operate the usury mechanism, and in many cases in history it was not malicious intent, it was simple ignorance.

    In the case of the Jew it is provable malicious intent, especially through their own utterances. You ignore this data and spin fairy tales.

    In the case of Babylon, Persia and Greece it was triangular debts owed in gold, mostly at 33 1/3 percent interest. It was this experience with the first creation of money that caused later Babylonians (Hammurabi) to codified laws against usury and established floor prices for commodities.

    NOT SO WITH THE JEWS. They continued their operations against humanity always, and with few exceptions. It has gotten so bad, that Jewish usury operations are now codified in Talmud.

    Babylon made loans to Persia at 33 1/3%. It takes about three years to double in repayment. After paying back the original loan, Persia found there was no money left in local circulation and she still owed Babylon’s bankers the interest on the loan.

    Commerce in Persia comes to a halt, except for barter. There is no gold for taxes. King Cyrus needs gold to pay his retainers. Persia goes to war against her creditor and conquers Babylon in 536 BC.

    Next up … Greece conquers Persia. As Persia spent her conquest gold, there was a flash of economic activity. New cities are built, new temples, industries are financed. The flood of wealth sends Persian merchants to Greece.

    The Greeks want Persian wares, so they borrowed with the promise of returning the loans plus interest.

    In 412 B.C. Sparta borrowed 5,000 Talents from Persia to build warships. Seven years later in 405 B.C. , Lysander of Sparta used those ships to destroy the whole Athenian fleet, which was attacked while they were drawn up on the beach.

    “Thou shalt not lend upon usury to they brother.” Deu. 23:19

    “Owe no man anything but to love one another.” Rom 13:8

    “The borrower is the servant to the lender.” Prov. 22:7

    Modern man (at least some of us) know there is a red-thread through history that explains events, but you don’t know that red thread, and hence are confused about the nature of reality.

    This is why you get butt-hurt when somebody RIGHTLY brings up Jewish actions, as being malicious toward consensual civilizations.

    If you don’t want to be accused of a being Jew, then rid yourself of the false notions rattling around in your noggin.

    Virtually all of the wars were bad actors maneuvering for sordid gain, maneuvering well in advance of the war. Jews, especially the top jews, are bad actors. Rank and file Jews are often victims. Witness the hysteria in Israel about Covid, where rank and file Jews are forced or gas-lit into taking the jab.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  209. @C.T.

    Those verses you cite are from the OT. The NT is all about the inversion of Aryan values. (The Old Testament is for Jews and the New Testament is for us gentiles.)

    That’s amusing since every single church in this country teaches from the Old Testament.

    Hey teens don’t have sex cuz Old Testament.

    The ban on shrimp? Nah we can ignore that. It’s the Old Testament.

    But by all means start visiting churches and tell them you have a new Aryan Theory (use those words) that allows them to drop the Old Testament. Film their reaction please.

    • Replies: @C.T.
    , @Adûnâi
  210. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    Most slave owners were not Jewish. The early abolitionists weren’t Jewish either (they were Quakers) and they lied about their experiences with Blacks for egalitarian reasons. They were also the first to use the “magic mulatto” strategy.

    I can do this all day. You really are not aware. As an unaware person, you are part of clown world.

    No kidding they weren’t Jewish. The idea was to import negroes and use them as tractors to make the land produce. Negroes were presented to land owners at a price, and the land owners bought them. the land owners did not hatch the slave plan, it was mostly Jews – who in turn had a long history of slavery operations, long predating the Atlantic slave trade. Why don’t you know this?

    Commentator Jake here at UNZ makes the case that Protestantism is a Jewish construct. In my comment history I have laid out exactly how and when Protestantism was funded by Jewish stock market capital out of Amsterdam. You don’t know this because you were not taught, and hence are in a state of ignorance.

    You are regurgitating what you think you know in the same way as are Con-Inc. Most westerners are in a state of profound ignorance because they have been lied to since birth.

    • Agree: GeeBee, Schuetze
  211. Ron Unz says:

    Babylon made loans to Persia at 33 1/3%. It takes about three years to double in repayment. After paying back the original loan, Persia found there was no money left in local circulation and she still owed Babylon’s bankers the interest on the loan.

    Commerce in Persia comes to a halt, except for barter. There is no gold for taxes. King Cyrus needs gold to pay his retainers. Persia goes to war against her creditor and conquers Babylon in 536 BC.

    Next up … Greece conquers Persia. As Persia spent her conquest gold, there was a flash of economic activity. New cities are built, new temples, industries are financed. The flood of wealth sends Persian merchants to Greece.

    The Greeks want Persian wares, so they borrowed with the promise of returning the loans plus interest.

    Do you have a source on that? Back in my younger years, I had a strong interest in Classical history, and certainly don’t remember reading that in Herodotus or anywhere else.

    Under Alkibiades advice, the Persians certainly provided large financial subsidies to the Spartans, assisting them in their war against the Athenians. But offhand, I don’t recall the details of the loans that you describe. What’s the source on that.

  212. C.T. says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    I’m not a Marcionite (drop the OT, etc.), only an apostate. As Robert Morgan has said in another thread: ‘White nationalists have failed because trying to stir up anti-Semitism in a culture shaped by almost two thousand years of Christian delusion and a white race imbued with the conviction that a Jew is God is a fool’s errand’.

    By ‘apostate’ I don’t mean dropping Christianity and subscribing ‘neochristianity’ (secular liberalism), but full apostasy from our parents’ religion.

    https://chechar.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/red-giant/

  213. @Mefobills

    No kidding Sherlock? Do you know that there was usury underlying those wars?

    So you are saying that the 721 year Roman and Persian conflict was caused by Jewish bankers?

    The Romans weren’t even interacting with Jews when that conflict started.

    What about the sacking of Carthage? Jews again? How far do you take this insanity? Peloponnesian Wars? Were Spartans actually motivated by the spirits of Jewish bankers? It’s not possible for a Western society to go to war without a Jewish motivation?

    “Thou shalt not lend upon usury to they brother.” Deu. 23:19

    So you are complaining about the Jews and then quoting them? You do realize that Deuteronomy was written by Jews, right?

    I have no problem if you are against usury and in fact I am against letting Wall St dictate consumer interest rates. But I think it is totally insane to try and blame all Western wars on Jews. Man has been warring since he picked up a club. Just look at how many wars the Chinese and Japanese have been in and without a single Jew involved.

  214. Hey Unz readers,

    Fellow Unz tradcon here. Let’s meet up at the iHop later and talk about the problem of Jewish influence.

    We’ll spend some time studying the Old Testament and then we’ll talk about my favorite libertarian economist Schwarmy Liberwitz. He has a fascinating new economic theory on how it’s good for the economy to rape the poor.

    I really think we can win the next election. If anyone asks our position on healthcare just call people socialists and bring up abortion. Will definitely work this time.

    – Classic Unz Tradcon

  215. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    So you are saying that the 721 year Roman and Persian conflict was caused by Jewish bankers?

    I never said that, it is you trying to erect a strawman, so you can knock it down. You have a jewish sprit; one of deception.

    The Grecian empire would install a model Greek city into each conquered country. Each city contained a temple. Each temple was also an interest bank which made loans. Gradually the gold in the form of interest payments returned from the people to the Greek temples scattered all over empire, and depression set in.

    Greek traders established cities in the southern and northern parts of Italy. Greek traders traded with Rome on credit, lending 10 coins on the condition that 11 be returned. Rome had a difficult time paying their ballooning loans to the Greeks. Rome turned on Greece, conquered her and confiscated her wealth which was concentrated in the Greek temples, and municipal and private banks.

    What I am saying is that all of these civilizations were malfunctioning because they did not understand money, but they came to understand it at some point in their history. Rome never did figure it out, which is why it failed. The Jew was not responsible for Rome, but there is no way that the Jew was good for Rome, as his insights are anti-logos.

    I am saying that the jew operates the usury mechanism, and whenever there are bad actors about, you can count on the jew being present. Sorry if it is butt-hurting.

    The sacking of Carthage was also not Jewish as we know it, but Carthaginians were a Semitic people, and they did operate a piracy system, where they interdicted ships at sea. They also had a slave system where they used African labor to sustain their oligarchy.

    So you are complaining about the Jews and then quoting them? You do realize that Deuteronomy was written by Jews, right?

    Sophomoric drivel. The Jews were always at war with themselves. The creditor class represented by Hillel did a takeover at the time of Jesus. The idea was that there would be a permanent class of creditors to extract from Jewish debtors. The Jubilee, which was encoded in the bible was being overturned by the Pharisee class. The transmission path for Jubilee injunction was from Babylon (Hammurabi) into Isaiah.

    https://michael-hudson.com/2017/12/he-died-for-our-debt-not-our-sins/

    They said ‘we’ve got to get rid of this guy and rewrite Judaism and make it about sex instead of a class war’, which is really what the whole Old Testament is about,” Professor Hudson said.

    That was that was where Christianity got perverted. Christianity turned so anti-Jesus, it was the equivalent of the American Tea Party, applauding wealth and even greed, Ayn-Rand style.”

    To distill it down for you, the Pharisee class wrote the Talmud. This then put bad operating software into the minds of Jews everywhere, making them malfunction. The bible got perverted in stages, and of course, with Jew involvement.

    The history of man is his attempt to erect himself out of the muck. Our Jewish friends, at least in modern history, are not elevating man, but instead promulgate constructs that are damaging. Unz readers are constantly cataloging these activities, which somehow fly over your head.

    Going back thousands of years, practically to the beginning of recorded history, the Haibaru donkey caravaneers were taking usury on the movement of metal money from east to west. It is the family business.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @John Johnson
  216. @John Johnson

    You do realize that Deuteronomy was written by Jews, right?

    Deuteronomy was written by a monotheist tribe of Phoenicians that went extinct in the first century A.D. and has absolutely no relation whatsoever in any way to the modern Ashkenazim.

  217. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    > “That’s amusing since every single church in this country teaches from the Old Testament.”

    Does it? Back when America was founded as model Israel on a hill by Calvinists, they had the strength to exterminate the Indians as the Hebrews had once done to the Palestinians. But now, America is built on the virtue of universal love of all races and creeds, free speech bullshit, miscegenation nonsense. A nation that shies away from genocide so much that it bred 10 million Iraqis under its occupation is hardly inspired by the bloodthirsty Jewish fairy tales.

    > “But by all means start visiting churches and tell them you have a new Aryan Theory (use those words) that allows them to drop the Old Testament.”

    I wonder how you got the idea that Chechar likes the New Testament more. He literally calls it “the inversion of Aryan values”. A genocidal racist such as himself, he hates all parts of the Jewish Bible, but he will not condemn the Jews for genociding their enemies, as Christcucks do.

  218. @John Johnson

    Although I mostly agree with your comment, and signalled so, I would like to add some notes which shed more light into the situation regarding this webzine.

    (1) I have noticed, from how he addresses libertarians, and from his opinions on economic and other public policy matters, that Ron Unz is not a libertarian. Apparently, judging from some very old articles which are available for reading at this site, he has never been one.

    (2) Libertarians are very vocal in the commentariat of this site, but judging from the low popularity score of the only two libertarian writers on this site (Ron Paul and Ilana Mercer, who by the way diverge a lot on some topics), I’d say the hardcore types are not the majority of readers.

    (3) Some writers pander to libertarians in specific topics (e.g. the pandemic response). They have no discernible uniform ideology. Mike Whitney and Israel Shamir are two examples, but there are probably more of them.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  219. Schuetze says:
    @Zoom-Copter

    When my father was in the hospital in California with metasticized cancer all through his body, the onocologist kept trying to convince him to stay in the hospital and get radiation therapy. Probably 70% of the nurses were black, and they all seemed to have an attitude.

    My father wanted none of the hospital’s, or the doctor’s, help. All he wanted to do was get back to his log cabin with his horses and colts and die in peace. Eventually we basically had to break him out of the hospital and prop him up on pillows by the window so he could look a the colts dancing in the meadow.

    Fortunately he had a “good” doctor who had given him a perscription for a ton (a few bottles) of oxycodone (IIRC) . This is what we ground up to make a soup he ate to see him off to valhalla.

    That was in the early 2000’s. Since then I doubt anyone can get that kind of large perscription from any doctor even a boutique one. My brothers in California both have boutique doctors. They both get all they antibiotics they can wish for, likely oxycontin, percocet and anything else. This is all health insurance is good for, it is the flat fee you pay for access to pharmaceuticals. But any morphine based painkillers are verbotten. Luckily I have a small stash from my father. Expired, but in an pain-emergency I will risk it.

    In any case I wish the best of luck and a speedy an painless recovery.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  220. @C.T.

    Those verses you cite are from the OT. The NT is all about the inversion of Aryan values. (The Old Testament is for Jews and the New Testament is for us gentiles.)

    Some of those I quoted were from the New Testament, some from the old. The Old Testament is absolutely relevant and Critical to Christianity. Generally speaking, Scripture must be taken as a whole, and informed by conscience, common sense, and history to have meaning.

    I think you should read Mr. Unz’s article on oddities of the Jewish religion to understand that modern Jews actually do not use the Old testament very much. Most of their religion is based on Talmud.

    • Replies: @C.T.
  221. GeeBee says:
    @Mefobills

    Well said as usual. I feel that poor old John Johnson is like many of us were not so long ago, which is to say before we had that epiphanic moment when we slapped our foreheads and cried out loud: “My God! So this is what it’s really all about!” There comes a point, in other words, where careful and relevant research always leads to that moment.

    As you say, it’s about a financial, or perhaps an economic stratagem, whereby cunning people interpolate themselves between production and consumption, using a system of rake-off that permanently puts their ‘clients’ in hock to them. Essentially, they are being financially raped.

    That Jews are especially known for this is no surprise, once one understands their early history (which you hint at in your mention of the ‘Haibaru’ – which is of course the original term for Hebrews). In this regard, I would recommend anyone interested to read Anthony Ludovici’s work Jews and the Jews in England (written under the pseudonym ‘Cobbett’ in 1938). He deals with every aspect of the long history of the Jews, and rationalises how it came about that they gravitated to this parasitic modus operandi. He is quite even-handed and fair to them, all in all, and in my opinion is actually a touch too indulgent when it comes to the authenticity of their scriptures and claimed history. It can be read online here:

    https://www.anthonymludovici.com/jews_pre.htm

    • Thanks: Mefobills
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  222. C.T. says: • Website
    @stevennonemaker88

    You still don’t get it. I’m the most radical anti-Christian of the whole racialist sites. Just visit my blog.

    • Replies: @stevennonemaker88
  223. @ValMonde

    Dostoyevsky saw catholicism as one of the sources of soul corruption in the West.
    “Better an atheist than a catholic”. His words.

    Dostoyevsky lived his life like a catholic but he didn’t know it.

    His interaction with catholics involved polish people. He did not like polish people. He was one bad word away from a death sentence in a cold gulag. If he had said anything positive about catholics he would have been shot in his sleep by a jew agent sent by the State. That is Russian history.

    No offense to Russians but their spirituality compass is, off.

    Deep souls maybe, but their spirituality compass is off.

  224. In many of his novels he rails against the Catholic Church. His knowledge of the Catholic Church, however, came largely from the French socialists who had such a profound influence on him in his youth.

    Dostoevsky viewed the Catholic Church as an institution that had abandoned its spiritual beliefs in a quest to give mankind earthly happiness. He has the Catholic Grand Inquisitor state to Christ in The Brothers Karamazov, “You promised them heavenly bread, but, I repeat again, can it compare with earthly bread in the eyes of the weak, eternally depraved, and eternally ignoble human race?”

    Dostoevsky related his sense of how the Catholic social preoccupation worked. “The Catholic priest searches out some miserable worker’s family and gains their confidence. He feeds them all, gives them clothes, provides heating, looks after the sick, buys medicine, becomes the friend of the family and converts them to Catholicism.” This sense of the socially obsessed Catholic Church which places earthly comfort before redemptive suffering and peace on earth before peace of soul must make any post-Vatican II Catholic uncomfortable in its precision. The only error when applied to the Novus Ordo Church is that the priest would no longer attempt to convert the family. The sentimental socialism of the nineteenth-century French intellectuals whom Dostoevsky came to despise found a happy home in the post-conciliar Church.

    With his insistence on suffering and salvation, the supernatural and sacrifice, Dostoevsky echoes many of the teachings of the Catholic Church. With his prophetic vision of a possessed Russia unleashing her demons into the world, he echoes the prophecies of Fatima, and not only those prophecies that already come to fruition. The above quoted words from the deathbed of Stepan Trofimovich Verkhovensky in Demons conclude with the following remarks:

    But the sick man will be healed and “sit at the feet of Jesus”…and everyone will look in amazement…. Dear, vous comprenez apres, but it excites me very much now…. Vous comprenez apres…. Nous comprendrons ensemble.

    Russia will be healed; Russia will sit at the feet of Our Savior and the whole world will be amazed. “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph, Russia will be converted and a period of peace will be granted to mankind.” The Brothers Karamazov , Dostoevsky has the wise elder Father Zossima on the brink of the grave say, “This star [the image of Christ] will shine forth from the East.” The same promise has been given us by Our Lady and we who suffer here in the maelstrom of the modern atheistic, materialistic world still await that glorious moment.

    • Thanks: chris
  225. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    There certainly are many different interpretations and sects of Christianity.  This is the case with most systems of belief.  As I originally stated, the topics of Philosophy and Religion are almost infinitely complex.  There is also much error in most churches and intentional subversion of Christianity. (the scofield bible, etc) There are many Nihilistic “Christians” that are full of lies and foolishness. such is human nature.

    Oh really? Who appointed you spokesman for Christianity? Christianity has been torn by conflicts about what constitutes “real” Christianity for two thousand years. There are nearly as many interpretations of Christianity as there are Christians. But it’s quite obvious, in any honest reading of the NT, that Christianity rejects this world and its values and instead places its hopes in an imaginary next, a utopia, the so-called kingdom of God. To establish this, we have only to consult the words of the crucified rabbi himself.

    Christianity is not based only on the NT. Christianity considers the Old Testament as part of scripture. The bible states that God made the world, and his creation was very good. Certainly Christians look forward to a new heavens and a new earth. Mankind in general is corrupt. Christians aught to reject arrogance, greed, perversion, cruelty, dishonesty, laziness, etc. Christians aught to embrace honesty, hard work, excellence in everything they do, integrity, humility, justice, etc.

    Wealth: I don’t think that there is practically anyone on this website who would not agree with the fact that Greed and the quest for extreme wealth is highly destructive and one of the primary causes behind the collapse of the west.  That does not mean ALL wealth is bad.  Having enough material things is good and necessary, but it is not the primary goal of our existence or life.  This is common sense, and backed up by scripture.  
    1 Timothy 6:9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.

    Pride: Pride can certainly be bad. In the sense of arrogance, ego, hypocritical, self righteous mentality. Not in the sense of self respect, integrity, attention to detail, etc. As I already quoted above, Paul stated he was proud of his pupils.

    Against reason and even the possibility of wisdom:

    Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
    – Matthew 18:3

    the Bible is strongly in favor of Wisdom, as I have previously explained. What you quoted is NOT IN ANY WAY against reason or wisdom. Like most parables, the meaning can be layered and complex. Most of Christ’s teachings do not stand alone; they are dependent on other teachings and context. The primary meaning of the verse you quoted is the importance of humility.

    Acts 6:3 Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty.

    Against strength:

    But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
    – Matthew 5:39

    This is not a prohibition of self defense or of strength. Self defense is a duty and a right. Strength is a valuable and important attribute. God himself is called the Almighty. Much of scripture is highly figurative and poetic. Christ also said:

    Matthew 18:8 And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away.

    how does your foot cause you to sin? does it have a separate brain? how exactly does someone tear out their own eye or cut off their own limbs? it is not even physically possible in most cases. Obviously, he is speaking in a figurative, poetic fashion.

    Rejection of reason in favor of faith:

    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
    – John 14:6

    This has nothing to do with rejecting reason.

    Rejection of the world and its values generally as the dominion of Satan:

    5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

    8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’
    -Luke 4:5-8

    This teaching is highly poetic, and not to be taken in simplistic, dogmatic terms. Satan masquerades as God, but he is NOT God. His words are lies, and his offers are hollow. Hence the historic term “devil’s bargain”. This verse does not in any way support your point. Jesus is God, and already has all authority and splendor, over HIS OWN creation. The world is corrupted, and full of lies and sin. But it is still God’s world.

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,[a] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

    You argument hinges entirely on misinterpreting certain Bible verses to make them say ridiculous, self contradictory things. IF you interpret all of Scripture literally and dogmatically, you end up with a collage of bizarre, perverted contradictions. This is why to make sense out of the Bible and to find the God Given wisdom within it, you must interpret it in context and in harmony with the rest of the bible, with conscience, common sense, and historical perspective. To illustrate this point, I leave you with the below quote. It is not a contradiction.

    Proverbs 26:
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly,
    lest you be like him yourself.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
    lest he be wise in his own eyes.

  226. chris says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    The analogy you make in this article, brilliant, Kevin!

    The Devils was one of the very Dostoevsky writings which I hadn’t read. So I ordered it after reading your article and being impatient I’ve started to listen to it until the book comes. Not only is the novel true genius in itself, but the similarity to the situation in the US today are really remarkable. ….. I mean the analogy works only up to a point of course, Dostoevsky’s characters for the most part seem to be far better read than your average antifa enthusiast. The most striking aspect for me so far in the novel is the indulgences of the “intellectuals” for the whims of the youth, which seems capable, like it actually did in Russia, to unleash a deluge which will wash them all away, as you’ve pointed out in your article.

    Thanks a lot.

  227. @Mefobills

    The sacking of Carthage was also not Jewish as we know it, but Carthaginians were a Semitic people, and they did operate a piracy system

    They were not Semitic and their destruction had nothing to do with piracy. Phoenician colonists founded Carthage and we know that through DNA testing.

    The Carthaginians were trying to play fair but the Romans wanted to wipe them out and not let them rise again to fight another punic war.

    Had nothing to do with Jews or banking or usury. It was about a stronger nation wanting to finish off a competitor while they were weak.

    So you are complaining about the Jews and then quoting them? You do realize that Deuteronomy was written by Jews, right?

    Sophomoric drivel.

    To distill it down for you, the Pharisee class wrote the Talmud.

    You are calling me sophomoric while being condescending and yet you get the book wrong. Deuteronomy is part of the Torah, not the Talmud.

    Jews wrote Deuteronomy. Sorry if that disrupts some weird proto-Aryan fantasy take on the Bible.

    Atlas Shrugged – Written by a Jew
    Deuteronomy – Written by Jews
    Catcher and the Rye (one of my favorites)- Written by a Jew

    Most Biblical texts and libertarian essays were written by Jews. I’m so sorry, I’ll send a card.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  228. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    The Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, etc all strongly believed in the afterlife and took it very seriously. Trying to paint them as toga wearing atheists is ridiculous.

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
    • Replies: @anon
  229. @C.T.

    …What does this have to do with my comment?

  230. @GeeBee

    I feel that poor old John Johnson is like many of us were not so long ago, which is to say before we had that epiphanic moment when we slapped our foreheads and cried out loud: “My God! So this is what it’s really all about!” There comes a point, in other words, where careful and relevant research always leads to that moment.

    I’m younger than most of you and in fact went deeper into politics after catching numerous boomer professors trying to pass lies as truth.

    I take reality for what it is. I am fully aware that international finance executives are disproportionately Jewish and that Jews in Europe were once moneylenders as it was forbidden for Christians. That moneylending undoubtedly created a powerbase that certainly exists today.

    But the difference is that I do not extrapolate from that reality an irrational conspiracy theory where Jews have been behind all Western wars and left-wing movements.

    The French Revolution was certainly not Jewish and created the foundation of secular egalitarianism. Members of the French upper class were executed in the name of equality and we still have revolutionaries that think they can fix all the inequalities of the world. Liberals and left-wingers still refuse to believe a natural hierarchy exists and their extreme elements would send us to re-education camps if they could.

    I don’t blame the Jews for our problems because I have met too many Whites that want to believe equality exists where it simply doesn’t. It’s not even an intellectual process for them. On an emotional level they want equality and don’t really care about how valid an argument is. The idea that races can have differing group abilities like dog and horse breeds is absolutely terrifying to them. They would much rather put us on trains and shut down the internet than face that reality.

    But by all means go back to blaming Jews while quoting Bible versus written by Jews on a website owned by a Jew. So sorry to break up the party.

  231. @Brás Cubas

    Libertarians are very vocal in the commentariat of this site, but judging from the low popularity score of the only two libertarian writers on this site (Ron Paul and Ilana Mercer, who by the way diverge a lot on some topics), I’d say the hardcore types are not the majority of readers.

    On paper this is may be true but modern conservatism is heavily influenced by libertarian theory.

    ConInc has been promoting libertarian economic theory for decades. They want zero intervention when it comes to health care and they also promote charter schools as a solution to public schools.

    But as I have mentioned many times this outlook is based on race denial. Charter schools were already tried in Black areas. They would never discuss this on Fox News or other Con Inc outlets as it goes against the orthodoxy. They can’t talk about race and they also can’t admit that sometimes the government is in fact useful. They already drank too much libertarian poison and have no where to go. I don’t say this because I want to kick them in the teeth. I say this because I really don’t want to live in a one party country but that is where we are headed if conservatives do not move to populism.

    Modern conservatism is basically stuck in a loop. You can see this in numerous threads on Unz including this one. Conservatives still talk about charter schools and market allocated health care. I was called a poor nihilist in this thread for taking the position that all workers should be covered.

    This is libertarian thinking at work. They have a hard time with complex issues where cutting back government regulation hasn’t worked as a solution. You can’t even discuss these issues without getting called names. It’s very similar to liberal solutions regarding race. If you point out what hasn’t worked they call you a racist and try to depict your motivation as suspect.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  232. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    > “The ancient Greeks and Romans didn’t think that the future would tend to be better than the past, and in fact thought of the past as better than the present. Their “Golden Age” was the past.”

    Then what did people strive for if not for better times? Are you implying Roman statesmen did not take pride in expanding their civilisation to the bounds of the Oikumene? That their learned men did not take note of the steady scientific progress from Archimedes and Hipparchus through Ptolemy and Galen? Religion-wise, they might not have been Hegelians, but Stoicism did posit the world to be knowable and rational, thus not one sorrowful fall as seen among the Galileans.

    > “They didn’t have a cult of Progress, and also didn’t expect heaven to arrive after they were dead.”

    How is the idea of progress related to the notion of the after-life? I’m surprised you’re not making that old argument that the Romans allegedly worshipped Nature so much, they must have considered technology blasphemous. Either way, as Richard Carrier puts it in his book The Scientist in the Early Roman Empire (2017),

    …it often appears that Roman scientists brought their fields to the most advanced levels ever achieved until the dawn of the Scientific Revolution, which took up where the Romans left off.

  233. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    > “They were not Semitic and their destruction had nothing to do with piracy. Phoenician colonists founded Carthage and we know that through DNA testing.”

    You are seemingly disparaging pseudo-history, but then deny the Carthaginians were Semitic? Their language was a close relative of Hebrew.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_language

    > “The Carthaginians were trying to play fair but the Romans wanted to wipe them out and not let them rise again to fight another punic war.”

    In what way did three titanic wars spanning a century with millions of casualties constitute “playing fair”? Carthage attempted to conquer Syracuse and invaded Hispania, do you honestly believe the fate of Rome would have differed from that of Carthage in the case of a Jewish victory?

  234. You are seemingly disparaging pseudo-history, but then deny the Carthaginians were Semitic? Their language was a close relative of Hebrew.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_language

    Yes their language was Semitic in origin but the Phoenicians were not Semitic.
    https://phys.org/news/2016-05-ancient-dna-phoenician-carthage-european.html

    In all fairness it is probably still taught that they were Semitic. There has been a desire on the part of liberals to make them Arab and even Black.

    In what way did three titanic wars spanning a century with millions of casualties constitute “playing fair”? Carthage attempted to conquer Syracuse and invaded Hispania, do you honestly believe the fate of Rome would have differed from that of Carthage in the case of a Jewish victory?

    The were playing fair by meeting all the demands of Rome from the peace treaty of the second Punic war.

    Carthage was not at all a threat to Rome at the time. In fact they wanted protection from Rome against King Masinissa.

    The Romans asked the Carthaginians to hand over their weapons and then they proceeded to slaughter them.

    All irrelevant to the main point which is that none of this had anything to do with the Jews or usury.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  235. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    But the difference is that I do not extrapolate from that reality an irrational conspiracy theory where Jews have been behind all Western wars and left-wing movements.

    I don’t do that, but at the same time I’m not willfully looking away from Jewish inputs.

    If you talk about the French Revolution and leave the Jacobins out of account, then don’t expect others to take you seriously. So, here is a case where you willfully look the other way, and then you proclaim people like me to unbalanced and irrational.

    At best you have a sophomoric view of the world, and you don’t like people who know more than you calling you out.

    Jacob Frank proclaimed himself to be reincarnated from the Jewish Messiah Sabbatai Zevi. Zevi in turn turbocharged the Kol-Niedre, so that pre-crime was sanctioned. Pull on that thread to update your understanding of the French revolution.

    It is you who are unbalanced and “stiff necked.” Gee-Bee gave you some reading materials and homework, I expect you to pull-head-out-o-rectum, and educate yourself.

    His reading material for you is decidedly not what your boomer clown-world professors would have prescribed.

    I get it that you are rejecting clown world. But, you are drawing improper conclusions, and leading many of the two digit IQ Unz readers astray.

    • Thanks: stevennonemaker88
  236. @John Johnson

    You are probably correct in most things you wrote, and possibly in all of them.

    Although I live in Brazil, I think that, with minor changes, the situation is the same.

  237. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    All irrelevant to the main point which is that none of this had anything to do with the Jews or usury.

    You are a knuckle-head.

    I was explaining how those wars were not related to Jewish usury. You challenged me on that point, and it seems you are constantly trying to squirm out and shift when confronted.

    You seem to think I am unbalanced an unable to see things, that I am irrational.

    Your hand waving about Carthage aside, I consider Rome to have been monetarily astute in the beginning under King Numa, and then later they made many mistakes, ultimately leading to the dark ages – which in turn was the greatest depression.

    Gold had been consecrated to the vaults, and land had been enclosed into Latifundia.

  238. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    But by all means go back to blaming Jews while quoting Bible versus written by Jews on a website owned by a Jew. So sorry to break up the party.

    There you go again making false attributions.

    Ron is a free thinker, and the fact that he is a jew doesn’t automatically make him the enemy of humanity.

    There are many fine and upstanding Jews. The top Jews, call out dissenting Jew as being “self haters.” It is a form of control.

    Ron is the spiritual cousin of Baruch Spinoza (1632-77). Spinoza was a member of Amsterdam’s Jewish community and one of the great philosophers of the day. He was also a former student of Rabbi Ben Manessah.

    The political nature of the Jewish publishing houses, then refused to publish Spinoza. Spinoza was especially critical of the Jewish attempts of subterfuge to undermine Dutch and English society. At the time Manessah was printing Bibles at what would today cost in the millions of dollars.

    Ask yourself why Jews would publish Bibles.

    Spinoza clearly rejected the teachings of Judaism, and even so, he was offered 1000 Florin’s a year if he would conform to Jewish rules and behaviors, and announce so in public.

    Spinoza was cursed and then expelled from the community in 1656 and then suddenly died at the age of 35. Suicided perhaps?

    Spinoza noted that the Jews of Amsterdam were using the printing press to push a narrative, and also that they were rigging the stock market, and further that they had maneuvered to own 25 percent of Dutch East India Company.

    Here is Ron Unz on Hitler:
    https://russia-insider.com/en/history/hitler-saved-europe-ron-unz-how-western-allies-almost-went-war-against-ussr/ri27017

    By the way, Charles Bausman, the publisher of Russia Insider has made a conscious decision to NOT IGNORE THE JEW, otherwise he cannot understand history or reality.

    If you grow a pair, you can be brave like Spinoza or Unz.

  239. stevennonemaker88: “The Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, etc all strongly believed in the afterlife and took it very seriously. ”

    Wrt to Greeks and Romans, you simply don’t know what you’re talking about. Read what Catullus wrote again. Does “perpetual sleep” sound like an afterlife? His was the informed view. Greek atomism didn’t allow for the existence of anything but atoms and the void. Epicurus’ and Democritus’ materialism left no room for such superstitious nonsense as an afterlife. Epicurus was very influential and against the very idea. He wrote:

    “Death is nothing to us. When we exist, death is not; and when death exists, we are not. All sensation and consciousness ends with death and therefore in death there is neither pleasure nor pain. The fear of death arises from the belief that in death, there is awareness.”

    Pythagoreans believed in reincarnation, but that isn’t an afterlife in the Christian sense. Socrates ponders the question in Phaedo and seems to come down on the side of reincarnation, but also expresses uncertainty. Marcus Aurelius accepts something similar to the Epicurean view. In Bk VII he writes:

    “32. OF DEATH : Either dispersion if atoms ; or, if a single Whole, either extinction or a change of
    state.”

    The closest thing to the Christian idea of heaven in the ancient world was the mythic isles of Elysium. But that was usually thought to be only the abode of heroes like Hercules or Aeneas.

  240. Adûnâi: “How is the idea of progress related to the notion of the after-life?”

    It’s indirectly related to the Christian idea of heaven, which in their mythology is taken for granted as a desirable destination for everyone, to arrive at which is the purpose of life. The myth of Progress also borrows quite a bit from the Christian idea of history ending with the triumphant return of Jesus to rule for a thousand years over his subjects on Earth, as foretold in the Bible. Everything that happens is supposed to be building to that “wonderful” conclusion, i.e., we can expect things get better and better until they’re finally perfect. The secular interpretation is the same thing, only Jesus-less, and paradise arrives as the result of technological development. The thousand-year Reich, the eventual withering away of the state in Marxism, the role played by the singularity in transhumanism — all are echoes of this originally Christian belief.

    Adûnâi: “I’m surprised you’re not making that old argument that the Romans allegedly worshipped Nature so much, they must have considered technology blasphemous. Either way, as Richard Carrier puts it in his book The Scientist in the Early Roman Empire (2017)”

    I haven’t read Carrier’s book, so I can’t criticize it, except to say that it’s hard for me to understand how there were any “scientists” at all before the discovery of the scientific method. If you read what passes for science back then, you find very little that resembles what we know today by that name. Aristotle, for example, who is frequently cited as some sort of early scientist, says that women have fewer teeth than men. Apparently it never occurred to him to actually look and count them. Much of the written material consists of “so-and-so says this” and “so-and-so” says that, but there’s very little that I’ve ever seen in the way of hands-on investigation or experimentation.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  241. stevennonemaker88: “… the Bible is strongly in favor of Wisdom, as I have previously explained. What you quoted is NOT IN ANY WAY against reason or wisdom.”

    Your 1100 word screed is too error-filled and ridiculous to dissect in detail, but it would be interesting to hear you explain (in less than another 1100 words, I hope) how becoming like an ignorant, irrational child is supposed to help you get to heaven, if reason and wisdom are valuable to Christians. Also, observe that in the Bible, Jesus reasons with no one. He doesn’t engage in a search for truth. He doesn’t argue or persuade. He simply proclaims himself the truth, take it or leave it. Christianity stresses the primacy of faith over reason. Reason and wisdom are devalued to the extent that the stupidest person ever to walk the face of the earth, perhaps even stupider than stevennonemaker88 (if that’s imaginable), will attain to heaven in place of a wise man with no faith in Jesus. Christianity succeeded to the extent that it did only because its entry requirement of faith was much easier for people to meet than wisdom, which was rare back then, and even in shorter supply today. It was a clever marketing gimmick, certainly, but not one that demonstrated any respect for rationality.

    • Replies: @stevennonemaker88
  242. @Schuetze

    Sorry about your father’s ordeal but glad at least he didn’t have to go in pain. This was early 00s you said? I also recall nurses from around that time as being beings either white pigs or blacks, but I swear a good 70% of them here where I am in nyc area are solid 8s these days.. A number of poles/balts, and many of the natives are in early 20s and cute.
    Was trying to convince my favorite one– in early 20s– not to go to Miami for next 5 days but to try to see if she could change it for somewhere like siesta key or longboat key on gulf coast. Miami is all concrete, Cubans, and coke. I’m damn near in love with this girl– hates Indians, negroes, Mexicans, but never got into JQ with her.

    My personal dr. Is an old guinea with protection (from local PD anyway) as his family is known to be mobbed up and have been since 40s. I wish I could mention some of the figures I see in his office regularly without doxxing.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  243. GeeBee says:
    @John Johnson

    Thanks for your reply, and I very much suspect that there is far more that unites you with the likes of Mefobills and myself than which divides us. I was very much like you ten years ago (I am in my sixties by the way), when I was reading online ‘Right-wing’ content at sites like Takimag and Breitbart, among others. I found myself astonished at the level of blame being hurled at the Jews by writers at Takimag, whereas this sort of thing was actually an ‘offence’ that usually led to a permanent ban at Breitbart.

    I began, slowly but surely, to understand what you already concede – ‘that international finance executives are disproportionately Jewish and that Jews in Europe were once moneylenders as it was forbidden for Christians. That moneylending undoubtedly created a powerbase that certainly exists today’. It’s a start. But there is a great deal beyond what lies on the surface of this empirical analysis. As Mefobills has demonstrated, many of your cherished ‘examples’ of ills that have beset the West being Judenfrei are, on deeper analysis, not merely cheered on by these people, but in many cases planned and executed by them.

    In the ancient world, for example, the Jews in Alexandria at the height of the Roman Empire, were causing immense problems to the Roman imperium, as Emperor Claudius’ Letter to the Jews at Alexandria, of A.D. 41 made clear. In it, he wrote:

    “I command the Jews not to agitate for anything beyond that which they have hitherto enjoyed, and not from henceforth, as if they lived in two cities, to send two embassies — a thing which never occurred before now – nor to intrude themselves into games and elections, but to profit by what they possess and to enjoy in a city not their own an abundance of all good things, and not to introduce or invite Jews who make voyages to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt, thus compelling me to conceive the worst suspicions; otherwise I will by all means take vengeance upon them, as fomenting a general plague upon the whole world.”

    This proclamation from Claudius was in response to riots between Greeks and Jews in Alexandria, and is illustrative of a profound lack of mystery regarding so-called ‘anti-Semitism’ down the ages. For Claudius, peace in the city would be restored only if the Jews ceased certain negative behaviours: agitating for special privileges (“to agitate for anything beyond that which they have hitherto enjoyed”); attempting to circumvent established political practices (“to send two embassies — a thing which never occurred before now”); attempting to enter and disrupt the cultural life of the Alexandrians (“to intrude themselves into games and elections”); attempting to manipulate the demographics of the city (“to introduce or invite Jews who make voyages to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt”); and exploiting their diaspora status to cause problems internationally (“fomenting a general plague upon the whole world”). These basic premises of Jewish financial and political acquisitiveness, cultural intrusion, disregard for political norms, propensity to demographic warfare, and exploitation of being essentially rootless, have been the mainstay of all conflict involving Jews both before and ever since Claudius, with extraordinarily little variation in themes, and it is of little surprise to add that the Jewish community of Alexandria was finally ‘extinguished’ by Trajan’s army during the ‘Kitos War’ of 115-117 CE.

    What of more recent examples which you cite? The hidden role of Jews in fomenting the French Revolution has been pointed out by Mefobills. Yet this was merely a step along the way. A far earlier – and in many ways more profoundly influential – revolution was ‘The Grand Rebellion’ in England, of 1642, which culminated in the execution of King Charles I. A hideous and despicable act, yet one in which a powerful king, ruling over a country from which Jews had been banished since Edward I sent them packing in 1290, was replaced by Oliver Cromwell as ‘The Lord Protector of England’. One of his first acts was to readmit Jews into the land. A coincidence? Perhaps, but there is evidence that the Grand Rebellion was funded from Amsterdam. Certainly, it was just one of many subsequent examples of powerful monarchies being replaced by parliamentary governments (achieved at the point of the sword in this instance: Cromwell seizing power in what was to all intents and purposes a military coup).

    [MORE]

    We must, however, look still further back, to the sixteenth-century and the Reformation, in order to find the source of these cataclysmic wars and revolutions. For it was Protestantism that animated these events that are all too often broken down into component parts, which although fundamentally linked are dealt with by historians almost as if they were stand-alone events. As the ‘noble Jew’ Oscar Levy observed over a hundred years ago: ‘There is a direct line from Savonarola to Luther, and from Luther to Robespierre, and from Robespierre to Lenin”.

    The Reformation had not merely caused the most traumatic period in European history, leading to the appalling ‘wars of religion’ which led to endless conflict and huge loss of life, especially in France and Germany, but the ensuing Puritanism acted as the midwife to the triumph of mercantilism, and opened up the door to the exploitation of the masses, which culminated in the social horrors of the Industrial Revolution, of which more anon.

    Did Jews have a significant role in either the Reformation or the terrible revolutions and religious conflicts that were its legacy? Yes, they did. Mefobills has already cited Amsterdam Jews as financing and publicising many of the key factors in this regard, and there is no doubt that Jews had a vested interest in fomenting these disputes, with the aim of undermining the traditional fabric of Europe. The entry of Jews into Western, increasingly urban society certainly changed the very nature of those societies, and it was in their interests to help these changes to occur. They wanted a system wherein they might operate untroubled by powerful kings, who might at any moment come to realise their parasitic and deleterious nature and, like Trajan and many another, exterminate or expel them. They needed, in short, a scheme to replace powerful kings with a more ductile system of governance, which they might infiltrate and eventually capture, and to instigate a social and economic climate in which they could not merely thrive, but conquer. In short, they aimed to install the merchant (largely their own sort) on the ruins of throne and altar.

    In this regard, the effect of the Reformation was without doubt to their advantage. It would, over the course of three centuries, first mortally wound and finally deal the death blow to the age-old system of Traditionalism, and in its place usher in the social and political concept that we know as Modernism. The former is a system, usually of absolute monarchy, wherein the king protects the people from war, famine and abuse. It espouses the ancient cardinal virtues of duty, honour, goodness, beauty, truth and self-sacrifice. The latter is all about the primacy of money and materialism, where a man’s worth is measured not against his record of fulfilling those cardinal virtues, but by the balance he can boast of at the bank.

    Traditionalist societies were properly functioning, coherent entities, where stability, harmony and certainty meant that they fulfilled most of the criteria demanded by classic ‘socialism’. In fact, Marx himself admitted that these societies formed a species of socialism, which he called ‘feudal socialism’ and which he never the less anathematised, regarding such systems as ‘reactionary’ (which is to say not conducive to world communism). What few realise, brainwashed and propagandised as they are, is that in these societies the lack of ‘freedom’ – or perhaps we should use the sacred term ‘Liberty’ – was conducive not to repression and misery, but to comfort and security. Until the advent of Modernism, workers very often were more or less a part of their feudal master’s property, and the dictates of sound husbandry therefore applied to them: they must be nurtured and cared for in order to maintain the master’s assets in good order. As Oscar Levy very succinctly put it:

    Disraeli pointed out long ago that Christianity is nothing but “Judaism for the people”. The Ideal of Democracy contained in this appeal of the Jews to the people was their successful battle cry, their most wonderful propaganda work, their Deus vult! that finally forced the world to follow them. With it they have inspired—or, if you will, infected—Lollards and Hussites, Protestants and Puritans, Socialists and Bolshevists alike. Now Democracy, as we all know, declares—or pretends to proclaim— everybody free and equal: it was therefore bound to destroy the bond, feudal or patriarchal, between lord and serf, master and servant, and it replaced it, had to replace it, by another bond (a bond it had to invent for the occasion) that of wages and salaries. Democracy, as we all know, abolished slavery—that natural slavery in which the master took an interest in his slaves, because they were part and parcel of his most valuable property; but it re-introduced it in the form of Wage Tyranny, by means of which the ” freed ” serf could be freely exploited and even squashed out like a lemon without any harm being done to the Master’s interests. Thus ended this glorious liberty principle of the Reformation and the Revolution: the finest theory that has ever been invented for the most miserable of all practices, that have ever defiled this world. No doubt the Jews are responsible for this, as they are responsible for everything, because they are the spiritual fathers of Democracy and therefore of plutocracy.’

    Having first reared its ugly head in mid-seventeenth century England, this same phenomenon of Modernism would convulse first France, in 1789, and then spread like wildfire over 19th century Europe. These revolutions have shaped the modern world, and although ostensibly in the name of “the people,” they can be discerned as attempts to bring about the empowerment of the merchant and the primacy of money. As Spengler noted:

    The economic tendency became uppermost in the stealthy form of revolution typical of the century, which is called democracy and demonstrates itself periodically, in revolts by ballot or barricaded on the part of the masses. In England, the Free Trade doctrine of the Manchester School was applied by the trades unions to the form of goods called ‘labour,’ and eventually received theoretical formulation in the Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels. And so was completed the dethronement of politics by economics, of the State by the counting-house.

    These events form part of the ‘historical dialectic’ that Marx saw as steps in the march towards international communism. Marx’s philosophy, in effect, sought to hijack these unstoppable forces that were replacing the traditional world with Modernism.

    As for the Jews’ role in all of this, there is a plethora of evidence, little of which is to be found in the texts studied at what today pass for schools and universities. Or as Mefobills put it to you, ‘they are decidedly not what boomer clown-world professors would prescribe’. Certainly, they are unlikely to recommend the likes of Anthony Ludovici (who, as a matter of fact, studied under Oscar Levy as a young man). In his Jews and the Jews in England (which I recommended to you in another post), Ludovici wrote that:

    As an Oriental, as a descendant of a race inured in the desert to an existence which, though precarious, was certainly neither industrious nor laborious, and, ever since his abandonment of the nomad’s life, attracted to and becoming more and more occupied in trade and general trafficking, the Jew, not only in his own community, but also as an influence outside his community, was bound to promote and cultivate precisely that kind of culture — which, for the lack of a better name, we may call “black-coated” — in which clean, easy and quick paths to wealth, or at least to self-support, are preferred to strenuous, slow and clothes-soiling paths, in which a love of the work as such, apart from the profit it brings, may be a motive for choosing and clinging to it.

    Owing to his age-long connexion with civilization, urban life and trade, the Jew was bound to promote and develop the culture which is built upon a vast expansion of urban rather than of rural habits and occupations. For men invariably tend to choose and foster the conditions in which their peculiar mastery is best displayed. A swordsman does not choose pistols for a duel.

    Finally, by his congenital proclivity to traffic with the products of other men’s labour rather than to be a producer himself, the Jew was bound to favour all those activities which we now know as speculating, forward buying, forestalling, regrating, and the promotion of every variety of agency and middleman function until, in the whole of the labour and products of the nation he influenced, there was nothing that remained immune from the “rake-off” of the purchaser with the capital to anticipate a demand.

    Nor is the knowledge which made the establishment of this fact possible a thing of yesterday. It was accessible to Cromwell, to the legislators of the Restoration, and to all those who, in both Houses, were entrusted by the nation to examine the question of the Jews in England after 1830. And yet it was completely ignored, and everybody acted as if our present-day culture, which has undoubtedly been developed largely under Jewish influence, were the consummation most desirable for England. The asperities of the Manchester School and its régime were but a practical application of the accepted principle of converting — even the flesh and blood of infants if necessary — into profit.

    He went on to make an absolutely crucial observation, which insofar as it applies accurately to the role of Jews in England, also forms the evidence upon the veracity of which stands or falls our thesis regarding Jewish influence in the world today:

    The relation between Capitalism, Liberalism and Judaism has been sufficiently demonstrated by Werner Sombart. What Sombart fails to point out, however, is the incredible blindness of all those, whether in Germany, France or England, who failed to foresee the only culmination which could result from the radical substitution of the free-lance, independent and, as it were, Bedouin conception of property for the Western, socialized and functional conception. And what no one who took part in the fateful debates of 1834 saw, was that the choice of ways and means, the framing of a national policy, could not, in the conditions that then prevailed, and cannot even now, be divorced from the type of man who chooses and who frames, and therefore that the intervention of the Jew in the control of the national destiny must mean the abandonment of all hope of preserving the nation’s identity.

    The fact, moreover, that in England after the resettlement [in the time of Cromwell’s Protectorate, i.e. the 1650s] the Jew was in the position of a stranger aspiring to power in a society already organized to a great extent upon the aristocratic and hereditary principle, meant that his one form of power — Money — found itself opposed, or at least limited, by other kinds of power which, besides having no necessary basis in money alone, were inaccessible to money as such. These other kinds of power were Gentile aristocratic lineage, Gentile aristocratic privilege, hereditary honours and functions, all of which could not be bought, had no market price, and belonged to a political system and a constitution which would need to be transformed and if necessary wrecked, if these forms of power were to be released to merely affluent candidates for their possession.

    Thus, if in such a society the Jew was to persist in his ambition to acquire power that had no insuperable limitations, it meant that, willy-nilly, he must give the weight of his support in influence and money to all those tendencies in the land which were aiming at destroying these peculiar and unpurchasable forms of power, and at dismantling the political framework into which they fitted.
    Whether the political incompetence of the occupants of these seats of power, or their stupidity or their gross neglect of their duties played into the hands of those elements in the nation which were anxious to displace them is a question which need not be gone into here.

    But what is important is the fact that, no matter how virtuous or efficient they might have been, and no matter how exemplary might have seemed their administration and their leadership in the eyes of the masses, the Jew could not logically have acted otherwise than he did; for he was by the very nature of his position committed to siding with their political critics and opponents. Fundamentally, there is no reason — no fact in the past history of the Jews — which would justify us in assuming that, had the privileged rulers of this country satisfied all the demands of the nation, the Jews, as inveterate strangers, knowing only their own ethnic and spiritual solidarity, would have allowed the efficient performance of their functions by the privileged classes to weigh against the more pressing desideratum of opening up all avenues to power for themselves.

    There is a second part to this overarching idea, but I have written enough already. Very briefly, it is the role of Protestant Christianity itself in disarming the European and American population and making them susceptible to the ‘Jewish infection’. Commenters on this very thread, especially Dr Robert Morgan, are past masters of what we call the clash between ‘mono-causalism’ (Jews are to blame for everything) and ‘bi-causalism’ (Protestant axiology is like AIDS – it allows infections to take hold).

    • Agree: Mefobills
  244. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    I already thoroughly and politely explained this to you. Matthew 18:3 is not about wisdom, or reason, or wearing diapers, or sucking on a pacifier to be like a child. It is about humility, as explained by the VERY NEXT VERSE: “Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” I also thoroughly and politely explained to you that scripture is not meant to be interpreted dogmatically, literally, and without common sense.

    I’ve been polite so far, but you might want to reconsider insulting other’s intelligence when you haven’t even figured out how to hit the “Reply” button. Even your “anon” friend has figured THAT out….”Doctor”.

  245. @GeeBee

    Very good comment! I actually agree with many of the things John Johnson says, and also with what mefobills, Schuetze, and other’s post.I would simplify it to say that: There is a group of wealthy jews who have historically been destructive parasites in their host culture. Today, They are exceedingly wealthy, powerful and global; and form the core of the New World Order. HOWEVER; that does not mean that the jew is the root of all evil, or that the world would be a peaceful utopia without them. Historically, whites have been guilty of a huge amount of evil (like all races) and have by and large gone along with and even promoted the globalist, jewish agenda. It is wrong for whites to have a “shit-don’t-stink” mentality about themselves, just as it is wrong for people to pretend that wealthy jews are victims and not the core of the NWO.

    • Thanks: GeeBee
  246. @John Johnson

    I think that you and Mefobills actually are mostly in agreement. He is not saying the Jews are solely responsible for EVERYTHING like some posters do. What he is saying is that their influence runs deeper than you are giving them credit for, and I think he is correct.

  247. Thanks for your reply, and I very much suspect that there is far more that unites you with the likes of Mefobills and myself than which divides us. I was very much like you ten years ago (I am in my sixties by the way), when I was reading online ‘Right-wing’ content at sites like Takimag and Breitbart, among others. I found myself astonished at the level of blame being hurled at the Jews by writers at Takimag, whereas this sort of thing was actually an ‘offence’ that usually led to a permanent ban at Breitbart.

    I am nothing like you and there is no reason to patronize me.

    Your friends here view themselves as educated and yet they clearly lack any sense of European history pre common era. Feel free to re-read this thread if you doubt that. Half the posters here don’t even want to acknowledge that the Old Testament is Jewish in origin.

    I have no problem with criticism of the Jews as a group. There is no confusion on my part. In fact I don’t think WW2 can be understood without analyzing Jewish influence in Europe before the Nazis. The public schools teach an intellectually dishonest version where Hitler creates resentment of the Jews from ether.

    But there is also intellectual dishonesty at Unz regarding Jews and Western history.

    You can write a 10k word essay but you cannot cover what is an illogical position whereby Jews are always to blame for Western society’s wars and yet Western society had wars well before the Romans conquered Judea.

    This dishonest take on history ends up absolving Anglo tyrants and warmongers. Napoleon’s bloodlust in the name of equality and democracy now falls on a small group of Jewish financers. His bloody invasion of Spain or his Russian failure can now be blamed on Jews. How convenient.

    The main problem here is that you are forced to take the position that Anglo leaders were only responsible for themselves before Jewish influence. If Hannibal leaves a trail of bodies from the Alps to Italy then it was by his own volition as a war general gambling his nation’s fate. Napoleon’s merciless warring against his European neighbors? Oh that was the French revolution and caused by Jews. Wilson’s unneeded entry into WW1? Jews again. Even Lincoln’s war is blamed on the Jews which was before the waves of Jewish immigration. Again you must take the position that only Western leaders of antiquity can be greedy or start wars for glory. Everyone since year zero was merely victims of Jewish conspiracy.

    This is actually very similar to blaming Whites for everything that is wrong with Africa. In the public schools it is taught that Whites ruined Africa through colonialism. Well was Africa a utopia before then? That isn’t discussed. Even though colonialism is over we still see Whites blamed for every single mistake that Black leaders make. If someone like Mugabe ruins his country we see Western media reverting to blaming colonialism even though he was a dictator that killed Whites. Blacks are absolved of responsibility by blaming Whites. As with blaming Jews for every war you end up taking irrational positions whereby White colonial spirits or a global White conspiracy must somehow be to blame even if you can’t explain cause and effect.

    Perhaps you can convince yourself that it all still makes sense. It may all work out in your mind but to the outsider this is all madness. It’s absurd to argue that all wars after year zero were Jewish in origin while ancient Rome and Greece just happened to have similar wars with parallel motivations and without any Jews involved. As with blaming Whites for Africa you have to ignore a long period where your blame group had no involvement. That leads to irrational arguments as seen in this thread.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  248. stevennonemaker88: “I’ve been polite so far …”

    Only if you call refusing to engage with what is being argued polite. Furthermore, it’s apparent neither you nor Jesus spent much time around children if you think they are humble. Squalling, completely egocentric, and obnoxious is more like it; and also, lacking wisdom and the ability to think logically. If that’s your ideal, you are indeed a good Christian. LOL.

    • Replies: @stevennonemaker88
  249. @GeeBee

    I Just HAD to post a second reply to your lengthily and astute comment. About the topic of Traditionalism, “Throne and Alter” vs liberalism, modernity:

    This is an extremely interesting topic which I am still wrestling with myself. On one hand, As a Christian I see the benefits of Alter and Throne. Theism, and virtue, are infinitely superior to atheism and hedonism. Historically, there were kings like Alfred the Great of Wessex; he protected his people from the Heathen army, and then made a gracious peace after winning victory. There were also kings like Peter the great, who had his only son tortured to death after swearing an oath to pardon him. In short, the historic system of Christendom was certainly not all bad, but if we are honest with ourselves, their was a huge amount of bottomless cruelty, greed, and evil propagated by the THRONE AND ALTER THEMSELVES. I live in Guatemala, and the exploitation, torture, and genocide of the allegedly heathen Maya by the allegedly Christian whites is enough to bring a man to tears. It continues right up to the present day. Where do we draw the line between God-ordained hierarchy and godless exploitation… or are we oversimplifying a topic which needs to be looked at from other angles?

    (I realize that the world is not binary and highly complicated. nevertheless, these two systems are often presented as antagonists, and I think this is an interesting topic and i would like to hear what some of our seasoned commentators think about it)

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  250. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    You are wrong once again, as I have three kids. Children back in Ancient times certainly knew how to respect their elders. I would not characterize kids as Squalling, completely egocentric, and obnoxious, unless they have not been disciplined.

    Learn to hit the reply button, doc.

  251. GeeBee says:
    @stevennonemaker88

    I shall reply quite briefly, as I must attend to preparing our supper as my wife has pulled a muscle in her groin and I have insisted she sits down and takes it easy. Your point concerning theory and practice being oft separated, in terms of Traditionalism, is well exemplified by something that I have posted before on this site more than once. It is an extract from a speech made in the House of Commons by Britain’s only Jewish Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (albeit one he made some years before he achieved high office). It was made in support of retaining the Corn Laws, in the debate about their repeal in 1842. Disraeli knew that only the corn laws stood between the last vestiges of Traditionalism in England and the final triumph of Modernism, and thus the commercial interest. He said:

    When [in 1066] the Conqueror carved out parts of the land, and introduced the feudal system, he said to the recipient, “You shall have that estate, but you shall do something for it: you shall feed the poor; you shall endow the Church; you shall defend the land in case of war; and you shall execute justice and maintain truth to the poor for nothing. It is all very well to talk of the barbarities of the feudal system, and to tell us that in those days when it flourished a great variety of gross and grotesque circumstances and great miseries occurred but these were not the result of the feudal system; they were the result of the barbarism of the age. They existed not from the feudal system, but in spite of the feudal system. The principle of the feudal system, the principle which was practically operated upon, was the noblest principle, the grandest, the most magnificent and benevolent that was ever conceived by sage, or ever practised by patriot.”

    Anthony Ludovici (I seem to be quoting him rather a lot of late, but he’s more than worth it) made this same point in his work A Defence of Aristocracy (second edition, 1933), in which he accused the British aristocracy of often abrogating their paternalistic role, in the face of this same plague of commercialism and mercantilism that was luring them away from their feudal duties. In this same regard, I was much struck by the words of a grand old lady, Olive Cook, when I read, many years ago, her treatise on the English Country House, when she remarked on this same phenomenon, writing:

    There is no lack of evidence for the practical application of this new philosophy. It was with an eye to material benefits that many landowners became promoters of the emigration movement. They did not themselves become colonists; their object was to create a permanent market beyond the Atlantic for English goods in exchange for the products of the New World. The institution of the money-market, after an Act of Parliament had legalised the lending of money at interest, was but one sign of the times. The notion of using money to beget money appealed to merchants and shopkeepers; but it also encouraged a new and eventually disastrous tendency in landowners – to live from investments instead of from the judicious management of their estates. Men who looked upon property as a source of profit and not, as they had hitherto done, as a means of maintaining a given state of society, embraced every opportunity of increasing their land, buying up needy squires, a process analogous to the absorption of small businesses by large, which has contributed to the malaise of the modern industrial world. The dukes of Bedford added manor to manor, acre to acre until they were so ‘spacious in the possession of dirt’ that most of Bedfordshire seemed to be theirs.

    In essence, all of this impacts on what I wrote in my previous (and admittedly lengthy) comment. As soon as the merchant has more money than the king, the merchant will be the de facto ruler and the people will begin to suffer. The fault lies with the unbridled triumph of mercantilism.

    Traditionalism (i.e. governance mostly by kings) enshrined the essential connectivity and mutual responsibility between the throne and the poorest serf. Under this system, privilege (and thus power) entailed responsibility. The French phrase noblesse oblige is often used to describe it. It is, in essence, aristocratic paternalism, whereby the highest discharged a duty to protect and care for the lowest. Thus, always providing that this system worked well (and of course it didn’t always do so) what emerged were functioning, coherent, Hobbesian ‘organic societies’ with harmony in all their parts (as Oswald Spengler memorably put it). Under Modernism – which is the primacy of money and thus materialism – what we see are societies that resemble a body afflicted with cancer, where cells begin to attack one another until it dies.

    In other words, the age-old links cementing the throne within the ambit of societal cohesion is broken. Today’s ruling oligarchs have zero sense of responsibility towards the ‘proles’. On the contrary, they exploit them at every turn and couldn’t care less when they are overtaken by debt, depression and despair. Indeed theirs is a peculiar type of tyranny that actually seeks these outcomes among the ordinary people, wedded as the oligarchy is to peddling the notion that people must be persuaded to buy junk they don’t need using money they don’t have. I repeat: a man’s worth today is measured by his tawdry little status symbols. Note my last sentence but one: the words ‘peddling’, ‘junk’ and ‘money they don’t have’. These are the essence of Modernism. They encapsulate the triumph of mercantilism and thus materialism. These three avenues of exploitation of the masses by oligarchs constitute rich and fertile ground for the Zuckerbergs, the Gates, the Bezos, the Singers, the Adelsons and the Dorseys.

    Anyhow, I must cook – Adieu!

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  252. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Zoom-Copter

    > “I’m damn near in love with this girl– hates Indians, negroes, Mexicans, but never got into JQ with her.”

    I may sound cringe and be unwelcome, but nobody will say this otherwise – picking your girlfriend according to your interests is cuckoldry. That’s not what a man would do. The fact that a chad like yourself lowers himself to such is a testament to the wretched state of this dreadful race.

    Our ancestors had marriages arranged for them. Our ancestors considered women meat. Even moderns have in essence molded their women to their fancy – the dominant liberal fetishists have created an independent woman… You want a trad wife, unable to see that you should not be seeking a woman, but creating a woman – by seizing power.

    This freedom of expression meme is incredibly queer.

  253. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    I am nothing like you and there is no reason to patronize me.

    Yes, you meet the definition of sophomoric:

    Definition of sophomoric
    1: conceited and overconfident of knowledge but poorly informed and immature
    a sophomoric argument
    2: lacking in maturity, taste, or judgment
    sophomoric humor

    soph•o•mor•ic sŏf″ə-môr′ĭk, -mŏr′-►
    adj. Of or characteristic of a sophomore.
    adj. Exhibiting great immaturity and lack of judgment.
    Of or pertaining to a sophomore or a sophomore class.

    • Agree: GeeBee
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  254. anon[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @stevennonemaker88


    Photo: Non Fui, Fui, Non Sum, Non Curo, found on many ancient Romans funeral monuments, translated as: “I was not; I was; I am not; I care not.”

    And no, they weren’t atheists. Theism does not mean belief in an afterlife. You sound completely void of of any understanding about history or theology. Fact is, you’re projecting your own atheism; the Romans considered you Christians to be athiests, because you rejected the old gods and goddesses.

    “…the persecutors of the Christians coined a new word to describe those who denied the very existence of the old gods and goddesses—the Christians were condemned as ‘atheists.’

    Christian atheism excited rumor….”

    Jonathan Kirsch (2004) God Against The Gods: The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism. Viking. p. 109.

  255. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    > “Everything that happens is supposed to be building to that “wonderful” conclusion…”

    Are you not confusing the secularised version for the original? Traditional Christians believe the world to be irreversibly corrupted by Satan and thus it can never be made good – outside of recreating it in the End Times. It is quite common for Christianity to expect the state to worsen, not improve. See Tolkien’s philosophy – utter pessimism, with a childlike eucatastrophic ass-pull at the end. Where was this “progress” in the millennium of church supremacy? It started after the Renaissance.

    > “…all are echoes of this originally Christian belief.”

    Inventions happen. We should not hold our praise when praise is due. It might be true that Galileanism uncovered a new weapon in the control of man’s psychology. If it was the zealotry of this Jewish creed that allowed for the Holocaust to happen, so the merrier! It is clear that the Mongoloids remained stagnant, our only comparison.

    > “I haven’t read Carrier’s book…”

    It’s an amazing read, and available on libgen. I highly recommend. Chapter 3.10:

    In the 2nd century A.D. a professional dream interpreter named Artemidorus of Daldis sought to make a science of his art. As documented in his lengthy treatise Interpretation of Dreams, he researched the science of ‘dream interpretation’ by consulting not only every book on the subject he could find, but the “much-despised” street diviners as well, thus showing no aversion to interacting with craftsmen in his pursuit of knowledge (see chapter 4.6), nor any isolation from philosophers or competing schools of thought.1115 He continually added to this ‘science’ with his own research, conducting countless interviews of live subjects in order to build a database, and then test hypothesized correspondences between the content of dreams and a dreamer’s subsequent fortunes. And from this he sought to develop an empirically-based system of divination, which he believed should be increasingly freed of superstitious nonsense, and could be improved over time with ever more research.

    [MORE]

    Artemidorus imagined himself both building on and improving the work of his predecessors, and all of this he regarded as valuable because such an understanding of dreams was useful to present and future generations. His approach was almost modern and surprisingly empirical, and I think reflects the scientific zeitgeist of the time. The fact that he was chasing a phantom is not relevant to the point. Even modern scientists have done that, and still do on occasion. It is far more important to observe that even a diviner thought cautious, extensive, and organized empirical research was necessary to his field and would lead to worthwhile improvement in its accuracy and usefulness over time. Artemidorus obviously held this attitude because it was increasingly respectable, and even expected. He thus reflects everything we have argued in this chapter: ancient scientists, and many others among the educated elite, believed there had been and would continue to be progress in scientific knowledge, and that this was a valuable, useful, and desirable thing. And they believed the way to accomplish this was through more, and more accurate, empirical research, and the testing of theoretical models against observed evidence.

  256. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @GeeBee

    > “…the words ‘peddling’, ‘junk’ and ‘money they don’t have’. These are the essence of Modernism. They encapsulate the triumph of mercantilism and thus materialism.”

    If the money is as fake as the belief in the equality of races and sexes, then what is materialist about such a system? It is pure idealism, Christian wishful thinking. It is no materialism if the ideology of the society lies in the denigration of matter and the worship of an idealist lie, of an immaterial god of préstige and of universal love.

    It might seem like philosophical niggling, but I believe materialism to be blood & soil by definition, for anything else is idealist suicide. A society must first exist – as a racial collective. If economy or human rights are put above survival, a demise is at hand.

  257. Adûnâi: “Are you not confusing the secularised version for the original? … It is quite common for Christianity to expect the state to worsen, not improve. ”

    You’re missing the point, which is that from the Christian perspective, anything that happens hastens Jesus return and rule on Earth, and therefore is a good thing. It isn’t in that case necessarily tied to material improvements in the human condition. Their gaze is fixed only on the end of history, when Jesus’ return to reign will result in heaven on Earth for a thousand years, so you might say that they were the original “worse is better” people.

    Adûnâi: “… he researched the science of ‘dream interpretation’ … ”

    There is no science of dream interpretation.

  258. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    Mr. Morgan.
    You do know it seems a bit pretentious and just outright…well..,uslessness when you add;;”Dr ” before your name on a site like this? After my name shall I add “M.A.,] J.D.?

    I did some work in Malta for about 7 months dealing with admiralty law, and there all lawyers put the title of Dr. before their name.

    I, for example. have an M.A. in Marine Biology before I decided to go an (almost) totally different direction and get my JD in the law of the sea, i.e. Admiralty. Which is a hell of a lot more complicated that most could imagine.

    Anyway friend, My point is that you might want to skip the honorific before your name on here since LOTS of us on here have advanced degrees but would feel silly mentioning it.

    HERE, one is genuinely judged by the content of his post and what new info or arguments, what he he brings to the table. A shitty post by a PhD is still…just a shitty post.

    A vety good post by a dude who is otherwise maybe down on his luck and sleeping rough but brings something new to the table in terms of looking at something from a new angle is worth a lot more than a stale doctorate trying to coast off his honorific.

    My point? DROP THE “DR” ASSUMING IT WILL GIVE YOU UNEARNEDED RESPECT. & GRAVITAS! AND WILL MAKE YOUNGER PEOPLE AFRAID TO VERBALLY CONFRONT YOU HERE. IF YOUR DOCTORATE IS WORTH THE PAPER IT IS PRINTED ON, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE SHORT WORK OF ANYONE WITH THE HUBRIS TO DIRECTLY CHALLENGE YOU ON SOMETHING RELATED TO YOUR Speciality– so why the need to advertise yourself as “-doctor!?”

    Join the rest of us gladiators in intellectual blood-sport “winner takesball” with no title or reputation to fall back on.

    • Agree: stevennonemaker88
  259. Zoom-Copter1: “… After my name shall I add “M.A.,] J.D.?… I, for example. have an M.A. in Marine Biology before I decided to go an (almost) totally different direction and get my JD in the law of the sea, i.e. Admiralty. …”

    LOL at this dumbass who thinks I am using my real name!

    Hey newb, what do you call 10,000 dead lawyers at the bottom of the sea?

    A good start.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  260. >newb
    Look at this dumb fuck who doesn’t realize that each time I change locations and am using phone or i-pad, I get messages that “your username is on record but does not match email on record.” Thus forcing a change in username. I’d hazard a decent guess i have been here longer than you– however, since I don’t rely on a good reputation gleaned from my username,I’m happy to start as a “newb” here whenever since my posts still hold up as they are liked/enjoyed (rarely disliked) based on content, nothing else.

    Your “excuse” still makes no sense and you are still just as pretentious an asshole. Notice you didn’t put “Robert Morgan! Binman” as username and your defensiveness and attempt at an ad hominem that has nothing to do with my point proves my initial assessment correct– you are in way over your head with people far more intelligent/learned than you are and thus your use of the title of “Dr” in username is your pathetic attempt to make up for that.
    Not only are you not very clever based on your posts I’ve read– which could be forgiven, as stupidity is no crime- you are also flat-out boring, which is a “hanging offense” in my book. You take care now, “Dr.”

    p.s.– the mark of an intelligent man? To be able to say to another man when he has a reasonable point: “You know, if I’m giving off that impression, maybe you are correct then! Thanks.” The mark of an undereducated moron is defensiveness and ad hominem insults. You fall into latter category.

  261. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    Oh, i neglected to acknowledge the lawyer joke! How original, never heard that one before. And you didn’t even go for the classic Shakespeare line: “First thing we do is we kill all the lawyers.” And I’m neither an ambulance chaser nor shyster of any sort. Unless you personally own a massive, multi-billion dollar,focean-going freight company, neither you nor any other regular person has reason to curse me.

    Upon further reflection, given that this is a site where (many times) the majority of articles ARE written by academic doctors, how in the hell is one to assume giving yourself a fake title of “Dr ” is sarcasm? You can’t reason with a moron who is convinced he is correct.

  262. Zoom-Copter1: “… I don’t rely on a good reputation gleaned from my username …”

    LOL. This idiot thinks I have (or even want) a good reputation around here. So true that lawyers aren’t the sharpest knives in the box.

    Zoom-Copter1: “How original, never heard that one before.”

    I thought something on your level would appeal to you.

    Zoom-Copter1: “You can’t reason with a moron who is convinced he is correct. ”

    Indeed.

    Sounds like you’ve had an expensive “education”, but I think you’ve been defrauded. Put it to use and sue for your money back!

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  263. @Mefobills

    Yes, you meet the definition of sophomoric:

    Definition of sophomoric
    1: conceited and overconfident of knowledge but poorly informed and immature
    a sophomoric argument

    Says the guy that tried giving me a history lesson on how Deuteronomy is from the Talmud when it is from the Torah. Talk about overconfident of knowledge and poorly informed.

    Mr. expert on the Jews doesn’t get his Jewish Holy books right but wants to label me sophomoric and lecture me on how the Old Testament isn’t Jewish.

    You and half the posters at Unz need a basic course entitled : Bible basics 101: Yes the Jews wrote most of it.

    Now stay away from that shrimp. Or does New Covenent have you covered? You guys can debate it. That is what is amusing about modern conservative Christian arrogance. They are so confident in their knowledge of Jewish Holy books that they argue with each other almost immediately over anything as seen here.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  264. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    You’re missing the point, which is that from the Christian perspective, anything that happens hastens Jesus return and rule on Earth, and therefore is a good thing.

    This is probably the worst aspect of evangelical Christianity.

    There is an apocalyptic sect that actually wants the US to become Sodom to fulfill a prophecy.

    They cheer on the destruction of the US because it brings them closer to the apocalypse.

    Evangelical Christianity really needs to go. It’s the worst. They brainwash their children into believing the world is out to get them and that the country will be turning into some den of decadence and faggotry as part of God’s plan. So why bother trying to change it?

  265. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    Expensive education? Nope. Atctime I applied i was guaranteed admission to the joint NYU MD/JD grad program so long as SAT over 1500- high school GPA over..3.8 or whatever, and you had to maintain a 3.5gpa to keep scholarship and guaranteed admission to both schools. I DID get accepted to Havard- Brown- Princeton- UVa- Williams- Amherst ( waitlisted at Yale but New Haven is about as charming as Detroit so no great loss– but why get into that obscene debt when I hadca sure thing at 2 of the top LS and MS in the country for free? One or BOTH and no debt?

    I still can’t get over what a fucking moron you are- but then youn”cannot fix stupid.” Oh well. I did try to explain why you came off as a hard-on by granting yourself and honorific (“ironic” or not) but alas- stupidity and obstinacy? NEVER gonna fix that. Take care

  266. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    > “…anything that happens hastens Jesus return and rule on Earth…”

    That is indeed what I missed. But was it a common idea in the Middle Ages, when traditional Christianity was omnipotent? “Everything the god does is good because it’s the god” is more of a Hanbali Muslim idea. Whereas Catholics are famous for trying to structure society under feudalism and help the poor with their charity. They do not seem like welcoming the power of Satan in the world.

    > “There is no science of dream interpretation.”

    Please, read a few sections from The Scientist in the Early Roman Empire. Your remark is nonsensical. I didn’t even consider the next paragraph important, that’s why I hid it under the “MORE” tag. But if you insist…

    The fact that he was chasing a phantom is not relevant to the point. Even modern scientists have done that, and still do on occasion. It is far more important to observe that even a diviner thought cautious, extensive, and organized empirical research was necessary to his field and would lead to worthwhile improvement in its accuracy and usefulness over time.

  267. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    Mr. expert on the Jews doesn’t get his Jewish Holy books right but wants to label me sophomoric and lecture me on how the Old Testament isn’t Jewish.

    The Jewish holy book is the Talmud. The Talmud was written AFTER the Temple fell. The TALMUD antecedents are Kabala and relate closely to Hillel and the Pharisee class.

    The New testament supersedes the old testament, using the doctrine of Supersession.

    You have no idea what I am talking about, as you are sophomoric, and confident in your incomplete and false worldview.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  268. Adûnâi: “But was it a common idea in the Middle Ages, when traditional Christianity was omnipotent?”

    I don’t know. But after Rome fell, few read the Bible, as few could even read. So deep was the Christian rejection of reason and intellect that St. Ambrose, Augustine’s teacher, was considered a genius because he could read without moving his lips!

    Adûnâi: “Please, read a few sections from The Scientist in the Early Roman Empire. Your remark is nonsensical. I didn’t even consider the next paragraph important, that’s why I hid it under the “MORE” tag. ”

    Oh, that was you? I thought it was a moderator, since I’ve mentioned before that I don’t read past MORE buttons. Those won’t work without javascript, and I don’t use that.

    The art of not reading is a very important one. It consists in not taking an interest in whatever may be engaging the attention of the general public at any particular time. When some political or ecclesiastical pamphlet, or novel, or poem is making a great commotion, you should remember that he who writes for fools always finds a large public. A precondition for reading good books is not reading bad ones: for life is short.
    – Schopenhauer, Parerga et Paralipomena

    Based on your quote, it seems to me like Carrier is anachronistically projecting his ideas about science into ancient times. This dream interpreter of his engaged in inquiries that resembled modern science without actually understanding why he was doing it, which defeats the purpose. In the larger picture, the greatest proof of this lack of a scientific worldview is the lack of technological progress generally back then. For example, Hero of Alexandria invented a steam powered “aeolipile”, but it was never used for anything.

    https://www.britannica.com/technology/aeolipile

    If there had existed a scientific worldview in ancient times, then surely it would have been.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
  269. Zoom-Copter: “I DID get accepted to Havard- Brown- Princeton- UVa- Williams- Amherst ( waitlisted at Yale … ”

    Very impressive! And it makes sense, too. I’ve been picturing you as a guy wearing a propeller beanie, hence your nick, “zoom-copter”. You need the propeller to cool that massive brain of yours.

    Zoom-Copter: “I still can’t get over what a fucking moron you are …”

    LOL. Welcome to my fan club, propeller boy.

    • Replies: @Zoom-Copter
  270. @Mefobills

    The Jewish holy book is the Talmud. The Talmud was written AFTER the Temple fell. The TALMUD antecedents are Kabala and relate closely to Hillel and the Pharisee class.

    Yea nice try. You ascribed Deuteronomy to the wrong book while being arrogant and condescending.
    Here is a basic reader for you:
    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/deuteronomy/

    The New testament supersedes the old testament, using the doctrine of Supersession.

    That is the argument used when Christians don’t want to follow something in the old testament.

    They will however teach from Genesis and tell children that the creation account and flood are historical events because the old testament is the word of God.

    If you question those events using the new covenant argument then you will be berated.

    The will also use the old testament to criticize homosexuality but then ignore the shrimp rules.

    None of this adds up. Seems like a game of pick and choose.

    You have no idea what I am talking about, as you are sophomoric, and confident in your incomplete and false worldview.

    My worldview here is based on what should be an obvious conclusion which is that conservatism has completely failed to stop the left. I don’t see the point in letting people like you set the direction of the GOP or anything in politics for that matter. Conservative boomers have completely fumbled the football and it’s hilarious that they try to blame “nihilists” as if tax cuts ‘n abortion was ever a solid political strategy.

    The jugular of the left is race, not economics. Libertarian and “free market” economics embraced by conservatives are built on just as much horse manure as liberalism. That is my worldview here and I am certainly confident in it.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @Mefobills
  271. GeeBee says:
    @John Johnson

    The jugular of the left is race, not economics. Libertarian and “free market” economics embraced by conservatives are built on just as much horse manure as liberalism. That is my worldview here and I am certainly confident in it.

    At the risk of patronising you once again, I feel that neither Mefobills nor myself would cavil at your statement regarding Libertarian economic policies. I would, however, caution you that when you observe that ‘The jugular of the left is race, not economics’, you would be on firmer ground if you differentiated between those among the rank and file of ‘the people’ who profess to be ‘of the Left’, and those who actually pull the puppet strings. For sure, the average Leftie thinks he, she (or it) is devoted to protecting their pets imported from the Dark Continent. The reality, of course, is that the puppet masters merely use what Revilo P Oliver memorably described as ‘biological refuse’ to fulfil the old ‘divide-and-rule’ ploy. They divert attention away from the results of their extractive and exploitative system of rake-off from the productive sector, which sees what Michael Hudson calls ‘suck-up’ (as opposed to the classic ‘trickle down) from labour to capital, and disguise it beneath an entirely bogus appeal to the altruism of these idealistic Lefties in the form of channelling their energies into defeating the straw men of ‘inequality’, ‘racism’ and ‘White privilege’.

    Or in other words, the real matrix of power that today finds it convenient to espouse the traditional leftist constituency, is every bit as wedded, and indeed more so, to ‘economics’ than are so-called ‘Conservatives’. Always follow the money. And always note whom the main recipients of the money are.

  272. Mefobills says:
    @John Johnson

    Libertarian and “free market” economics embraced by conservatives are built on just as much horse manure as liberalism.

    And somehow you think that I am conservative or liberal?

    Even if I quote the Bible, you somehow impute that I am a bible thumper? There are nuggets of wisdom to be found everywhere if you look, and if you but think and are willing.

    I am accusing you of not being a deep thinker…sophomoric. I wouldn’t be wasting so much time on you if I didn’t see something. You could be a deep thinker in future. At least you are trying and involved, which is more than most people. I’m giving you a kick in the butt, and so is GeeBee; you are getting more attention than most. If you remain intransigent and dogmatic in your current views, then you will not be able to advance.

    Hudson has noticed that most of the Bible has to be rewritten, as the words used to describe concepts don’t relate to what is actually taught.

    If you were not “stuck”, you would have noticed that the quotes I gave you were related to debt and credit, but instead you went off on a tangent trying to find some sort of wedge issue.

    His latest book, and “forgive them their debts” is a wake-up call to Christians, where they are worshiping false doctrine.

    https://michael-hudson.com/2017/12/he-died-for-our-debt-not-our-sins/

    If you don’t follow debt/credit relations of mankind, then you are lost when trying to understand history.

    https://michael-hudson.com/2017/12/he-died-for-our-debt-not-our-sins/

    ___________________
    The Christianity we know today is not the Christianity of Jesus,” says Professor Hudson.

    Indeed the Judaism that we know today is not the Judaism of Jesus either.

    The economist told Renegade Inc the Lord’s Prayer, ‘forgive us our sins even as we forgive all who are indebted to us’, refers specifically to debt.

    “Most religious leaders say that Christianity is all about sin, not debt,” he says. “But actually, the word for sin and debt is the same in almost every language.

  273. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    The “expert on the Jews” doesn’t know that “zoom-copter” was the product the Israeli spies before 9/11 (“art students”) used to sell in malls around NJ and NYC and the kike– in thick Hebrew accent– would throw the dumb thing to make it go in a circle and draw a crowd around around him just like his push-cart peddling ancestors in Russian Empire selling amulets of “the blood of a Christian child” complete with rabbinical certificate.

    Ok, now I get the irony in you giving yourself title of “Doctor,” you really are an asshole. And you act like beating the kikes at their own game and claiming a spot at an elite uni is a source of shame? Sorry we can’t all go to community college and then transfer credits to Liberty University to act as Jerry Falwell’s pool boy as you did…

  274. @Kevin Barrett

    [Nazism] it borrowed nihilism’s immorality (“if you can’t beat ’em join ’em”) and embraced its materialist messianic-millenarian idolatry, transposed into a different key. So at the end of the day it was just another flavor of post-religious nihilism.

    Large claims demand large proofs, Dr. Barrett.

    What evidence do you offer to support the above claim?

  275. Zoom-Copter: “The “expert on the Jews” …”

    ?

    I’ve made no such claim.

    Zoom-Copter: “Ok, now I get the irony …”

    Only now? LOL. Your little propeller must be spinning furiously.

  276. @Dr. Robert Morgan

    The steamy spinny thing Hero devised was used to power some fairground-tier toys. What stopped the ancients from making big, useful stuff from this knowledge was the relative cost.

    They didn’t use much coal, even on the east end Hadrian’s Wall where it more or less lies about on the surface and on the shore. Compared to the expense of 200 gallons of gruel, a big whip, and 50 slaves to dig, pull or lift some materials, mining that stuff to power (imaginary) machinery wasn’t cost effective. Also it stunk like Hades, unlike wood.

    Part of the reason for this inability was that they couldn’t manage coal boiler fires due to their truly pathetic ironworking technology, inferior to almost any (Gaulish, German or Persian) barbarian’s.
    Like trying to handle fusion without a tokamak.
    Bronze (which they were actually very good at) boilers wouldn’t last a week, probably melt before you’d even got a brew on, and would bankrupt you.

    The inability to pour and cast, or even use (water-hammers) to pound out wrought iron sheet for the putative engines. And that iron-mastery depended, in the end, on huge amounts of roasted coal (coke), as the English found out after they had hacked down and charcoaled most of the trees on their reef for making bronze cannons and plate armour or whatever.

  277. Expletive Deleted: “Part of the reason for this inability was that they couldn’t manage coal boiler fires due to their truly pathetic ironworking technology, inferior to almost any (Gaulish, German or Persian) barbarian’s.”

    http://dtrinkle.matse.illinois.edu/MatSE584/articles/steel_greece_rome/steel_in_ancient_greece_an.html

    See especially the last section, “Limitations of Steel Development and Applications”.

    They had centuries to work such problems out, but didn’t. So again, I think it was more to do with their view of the world than a purely technical issue it appears nobody even tried to solve.

  278. Bert says:
    @Farrakhan.DDuke.AliceWalker.AllAgree

    Jews have been exploiting blacks since first buying them from the Arab Muslims on the West Coast of Africa and transporting them trans Atlantic in “Middle Passage”, and have not stopped to this day.

    Jewish involvement in African slavery goes back further than sugar plantations in Pernambuco, Brazil. Before that they were involved in the same activities in the Cape Verde islands prior to 1492 and in Iraq during the Middle Ages. They also invented the use of gang-labor, i.e., driving the slaves at a relentless pace, in sugar cane cultivation.

    Hebrew and Portuguese inscriptions on the tombstones in the small Jewish cemeteries throughout the islands indicate that the majority came from the Moroccan cities of Tangier, Tetouan, Rabat, and Mogador (now Essaouira), bearing distinctive Sephardic names such as Anahory, Auday, Benoliel, Benrós, Benathar, Benchimol, Brigham, Cohen, Levy, Maman, Pinto, Seruya and Wahnon. These families landed primarily on the islands of Santo Antao, Sao Vicente, Boa Vista and Sao Tiago where they engaged in international commerce, shipping, administration and other trades. The Jews prospered in Cape Verde and were often considered pillars of the local economy.

    Sugar cultivation made 9th-century Iraq into a slave society.

    The great discovery in Brazil in the second half of the 16th century was the gang labour system, which was so cost-effective that it made Brazilian sugar cheaper in Europe than the sugar produced in the islands off Africa. A plantation using gang labour could produce, on average, 39 percent more output from comparable inputs than could free farms or farms employing non-gang slave labour. The secret of success was that slaves could be driven, whereas free labour could not; this led to the creation of very profitable gangs of slaves supervised by white overseers and Black drivers. Tobacco and coffee cultivation also used gang labour, but cultivation of these crops was less physically demanding than that of sugar and cotton and led to much lower mortality rates than did sugar and rice.

    The Jews in the Sugar Industry of Colonial Brazil
    Arnold Wiznitzer
    Jewish Social Studies
    Vol. 18, No. 3 (Jul., 1956), pp. 189-198https://www.jstor.org/stable/4465456?seq=1

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  279. Corvinus says:
    @Bert

    “They also invented the use of gang-labor, i.e., driving the slaves at a relentless pace, in sugar cane cultivation.”

    Your source does NOT state specifically it was a Jew or Jews who invented it. You are making an inference here. Try again.

    As far as America is concerned…

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1995/09/slavery-and-the-jews/376462/

    “Martin, in one of his endorsements, made a startling assertion concerning slave ownership by Jews: “Using the research of Jewish historians, the book suggests that based on the 1830 census, Jews actually had a higher per capita slave ownership than for the white population as a whole.” The Secret Relationship does in fact approach making that suggestion, and since the claim would appear to be a pivotal one, it is worth examining.

    In order to assess such a claim, one must resort to details. Martin’s purported actuality is wrong on its face if applied to the “white population” of the United States “as a whole,” because in 1830 only a handful of white northerners still owned slaves. Jews were concentrated in the North, and they constituted a very small minority there. Even if the statement is taken as applying only to the states in the American South that had not adopted gradual emancipation laws, it remains badly flawed. A careful and honest footnote in The Secret Relationship reveals that “Jewish scholars” had concluded that Jews in the South lived mostly in towns and cities. Neither this book nor Martin’s explains the significance of this fact.

    In actuality, slave ownership was much more common in southern urban areas than in the southern countryside. The relatively high proportion of Jewish slaveholding was a function of the concentration of Jews in cities and towns, not of their descent or religion. It is also the case that urban slaveholders of whatever background owned fewer slaves on average than rural slaveholders, including those on large plantations. Thus the proportion of slaveholders has never been an accurate measure of the social or economic importance of slaveholding, unless it is assessed on a broadly regional or state-by-state basis. In this instance, as in so many others, the statistical data do not stand up and cry out their own true significance.”

    Now, from 1709-1807, there are 934 recorded voyages in which Rhode Island merchants were responsible for procuring 106,000 slaves. Now, Jews arrived in Newport as early as 1658. On the eve of the Revolution, they were estimated to be around thirty families. According to historical records used (e.g. naval office shipping lists, censuses, tax records) that identified merchants and planters as Jewish, there were 347 slave ships sent to Africa by Rhode Island slave traders from 1761-1774, with 21 being funded by Aaron Lopez, a Portuguese Jew. That means 326 voyages were underwritten by non-Jews during this time frame. Of course, Jews played a role in the peddling of human flesh. The extent in this particular case is nominal compared to other ethnic groups.

    Moreover, according to Bertram W. Korn’s research (Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South, 1789-1865), census records and slave purchasing documents show that southern Jews:

    “who owned slaves were concentrated in cities, not in the plantation districts containing ninety percent of the enslaved population. For example, there were only four Jews – less than one-tenth of one percent – among the 11,000 Southerners who in 1830 owned fifty or more slaves….Another statistical indication of Jewish ownership of slaves, probably more accurate in terms of proportions than the census returns, are references to slaves in Jewish wills. Over the years, Professor Jacob R. Marcus has assembled at the American Jewish Archives, one hundred and twenty-nine wills of identifiable Southern Jews who died during the period of interest. Of these, 33 refer to the ownership and disposition of slaves. [That would mean 96 did NOT own slaves] This would mean, if it is a reliable index, that perhaps one-fourth of Southern Jewish adults were slave owners. [That would mean three-fourths Southern Jewish adults were NOT slave owners]. It is instructive that this matches the federal figures for the 1860 census, namely, that three-fourths of the white population of the South were not slave owners. Equally important, however, is the fact that only one-seventh of Southern Negroes were domiciled in towns and cities.”

    According to David Brion Davis, Professor of History Emeritus at Yale University, he writes:

    “To keep matters in perspective, we should note that in the American South, in 1830, there were only 120 Jews among the 45,000 slaveholders owning twenty or more slaves and only twenty Jews among the 12,000 slaveholders owning fifty or more slaves. Even if each member of this Jewish slaveholding elite had owned 714 slaves—a ridiculously high figure in the American South—the total number would only equal the 100,000 slaves owned by black and colored planters in St. Domingue in 1789, on the eve of the Haitian Revolution…Of course, some Jews were involved in the slave trade. Every European Western nation was. There were also some regions in which the slave trade was more accessible to Jews—Rhode Island, Newport, Holland, to name a few striking examples. The Dutch Jews weren’t persecuted, so there were quite a few who were involved.”

    • Replies: @Bert
  280. Bert says:
    @Corvinus

    My comments were directed at showing Jews as major participants in African slavery for growing sugar prior to the discovery of the New World, i.e., on the Cape Verde Islands. Among all types of slave labor, sugar plantations had the highest mortality. When the Portuguese colony of Pernambuco was established in northeastern Brazil, Jews from Cabo Verde set up sugar plantations there. The material below continues the story to the Caribbean sugar islands.

    Although the sugar trade in the Americas was initially dominated by the Portuguese Empire,[6] the Dutch–Portuguese War would cause a shift which would have knock-on effects for the further growth of the sugar trade in the Caribbean and particularly the production of rum (made from sugar cane juice).[7] In 1630, the Dutch seized Recife near Pernambuco in what is today Brazil (the Dutch called this New Holland after they took over) and this territory included some sugar plantations worked by African slaves who had been brought to the territory earlier. Some of the slave plantation owners were Cristão-Novo, i.e. “New Christian” Sephardic Jews who had been forced to convert to the Catholic Church.[7] As the Portuguese Inquisition was in operation and the Dutch Calvinists were generally more tolerant of Jews, they were happy to side with them over the Catholic Portuguese and remained in the area operating their substantial sugar-orientated slave plantations, now under Dutch sovereignty.[7] They even founded the first public synagogue in the Americas there in 1636; the Kahal Zur Israel Synagogue.

    Further north in the Caribbean, the Protestant Kingdom of England was beginning to challenge the interest of the Catholic powers in the region such as the Spanish Empire and the Kingdom of France, taking control of a number of islands, including Jamaica and Barbados.[7] One of these men, Colonel James Drax who had interests in Barbados, visited Dutch Brazil in 1640 and purchased a triple-roller sugar mill and a set of copper cauldrons (used for turning sugar cane into molasses, i.e. sugar cane juice used in rum production).[7] This technology, although originating in Sicily had spread to the New World and had been improved on by the Sephardim and the Dutch.[7] After 1654, the Portuguese had taken the territory back and pushed the Dutch out of Brazil. Many of the Sephardic Jewish sugar plantation owners fled to English-controlled Barbados, supported by Francis Willoughby and set up the Nidhe Israel Synagogue.[8] In competition with English merchants and due to accusations of favouring the Dutch in the sugar trade (who continued to control Curaçao), Jews were originally not allowed to own more than two slaves in Barbados, but aided the sugar plantations in other ways, bringing their expert knowledge of technologies in cultivating rum from the sugar cane and working as merchants, supplying them with African slaves to work the plantations,[9] helping to make Barbados the sugar capital of the Caribbean and the rum capital of the world.[7][10] By 1706, the laws against Jews owning sugar plantations in Barbados has been dropped.[7]

    Your diversion toward trying to show that Jews in the U.S. were no worse than whites in regard to slave holding and dealing illustrates how cucked you are by (((them))).

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  281. Corvinus says:
    @Bert

    “Your diversion toward trying to show that Jews in the U.S. were no worse than whites in regard to slave holding and dealing illustrates how cucked you are by (((them))).”

    It would be other than surprising for Jews (or any other displaced group) who ended up in a place (Cape Verde) searching for economic opportunities. But Jews were no different than other Europeans in their desire for mammon by way of peddling human flesh. There is no “moral continuum” here–slavery is immoral and unjust. Whites, Jews, blacks, Asians, indigenous groups–the individuals who practiced it engaged in atrocities on equal footing.

    Furthermore, there is no diversion. It’s called offering the proper historical context. I noticed that you did not challenge the facts as offered by the historians. That was a wise move on your part. And, the word “cucked” is outdated and literally means nothing to me. Try harder next time to think of a more intellectual stimulating comeback, or “dig” as they used to call it.

  282. Strange coincidence. I reading this book now. Half way through Chapter 5. Russians write long books. What’s with having a thousand cast, it’s bewildering.

    Piotr is a product of bad parents. His dad is a pathetic pussy hat wearing boomer. His mother, a masculine control freak bully. Piotr as rapist, seems motivated like Raskalnikov (Crime & Punishment). I cringe at every French quotation: insecurity.

    Glad to know Russia has embraced the problem and are building Orthodox cathedrals through the land. To fend off the second wave of Bolshevism coming from the USA.

  283. @Corvinus

    Unpacking the deception of this sentence could fill volumes:

    But Jews were no different than other Europeans in their desire for mammon by way of peddling human flesh.

    The first sign of untruth is the unrelenting disgust Jews have for this concept:

    …Jews were no different than other Europeans…

    The second sign is how that phrase rings akin to “My fellow white people” the twitter blue checks by the thousands have been caught using since Trump’s election/Charlottesville to vilify Euro descended as “racist”, and the countless twitter account bans of whites who retweeted the mfwp tweets along side other tweets from the same individual claiming Jewishness.

    By 1492, which proceeds the Reformation because the Jews had not reached Amsterdam yet to begin printing counterfeit “Bibles” yet, the Catholic Church had banned slavery and the culture had compliantly accepted the ban as evidenced by the prime reason for suspicion of Columbus’ Jewishness was his bring of New World natives back to Spain as slaves.

    The goyim here at UR are wise to Jew deception.

    “Shut it down! The goyim know.”

  284. Unum says:

    Start a counter-historical society/movement.

    Prepend it with the slogan “challenging everything you think you know.” and “no stone unturned”, and “asking hard/uncomfortable questions because truth demands it and history is preserved by it.”

    That hedges you against accusations of “racism” and “nazism/antisemitism” because
    it grounds your cause strictly in discussion of the factual.

    Anyone that then challenges you appears to challenge you, not on reasonable grounds, but because they object to fact-finding itself.

    In otherwords, however controversial, anyone that challenges you, legitimizes you.

    This “neutrality” is therefore the answerto nihilism.

    Nihilism pushes against everything to define itself. Ideologically it has no “center”, which is why it falls apart when not *directly* pushed against by *ideological* force. The force of reason isn’t *active and aggressive*, yes it *asserts* but it doesn’t *impose*. The “facts are as the facts are”, and the truth follows from the conclusions and counter-conclusions. Only the clever manipulation of *argumentation* dictates the course otherwise.

    In this way neutrality with assertion–the rebirth of reasoned debate, acts to pull nihilism, as like fenrir on a chain, away from its stated end goal, back to its roots in western liberal reasoning.

    [MORE]

    In otherwords you can distract liberalism with a hamster wheel. It’s when we refuse to engage in the hamster wheel, that Dostoevsky’s Demons metastasize, like the sphinx who eats anyone who refuses to engage with its word-games.

    Liberalism is a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, and on its forehead is the mark of a beast. And the name of the mark profanes True Reason by proclaiming itself above and “more equal” to reason.
    It puts words above the spirit of a thing.

    As others said its a dead letter philosophy, not that its believers *don’t read*, only that what they read isn’t spiritually and mentally nourishing.

    It’s pharisee-ism as others wrote. I believe it was Nietchze who wrote that there were two kinds of man: the Economic Man and the Spiritual Man.

    When the Economic Man becomes spiritual, the outward appeal is to “fairness”, but the goal is always self-enrichment. And so they build kingdoms *of* ruin, and empires of corpses, extracting a small measure of utopia and paradise by creating hell on earth.

    Where when the Spiritual Man becomes economic, the appeal has no outward appearance, but rather appears in the very nature of the thing, where the inward nature is manifest for all to see, the fruit of the works. And so they build kingdoms *on* ruins, creating paradise on earth, by paying small measures of hell, to create heaven on earth.

    No one ever really enjoyed a hard days labor, least of all honest work.

    But go to any well built and functional society, where marriages are stable, children are happy, and people are prosperous and free: The restrains we put on each other, in good will, for righteous ends, and the work we do out of love, to feed our families, and grow out communities, becomes the backbone of civilization, which has in the grand scope, greatly reduced human suffering over thousands of years, and so, brought us closer to heaven, than any work of destruction, nihilism, or utopianist ends-justify-means.

    Both of these groups, the Economic Man, and the Spiritual Man, appear to me as a sort of process that emerges in their pursuit of their inherent natures, and thus both should impose dysgenic or eugenic ends.

    We need only look then at the *outcomes*, the fruit of societies, both primarily economic, and spiritual, to determine wherein lays heaven, and wherein lays hell.

    Recognizing this, we can then say, the greatest treasure we must protect, and assert the *right* to protect, is *history unaltered*, *unadulterated*, and *uncensored*. Without which we cannot lay claim to The Truth.

    This is why Orwell wrote “he who controls the present controls the past, he who controls the past *controls the future*.”

    And in that light, it is therefore all the *more* revolutionary to repeat that sacred maxim, excluding all the russian’s bombs, the american’s guns, and the french’s guillotines: that the most *truly* revolutionary act is to speak the truth.

    Because to speak the truth, is treason, in the empire of lies.

    Others will argue that lies travel around the world before the truth can put on its pants. But that is plainly nihilism. For if it were true, and I cannot repeat this enough–I cannot emphasize it enough, we would absolutely still to this day be ruled even now by tinpot dictators with spears, while living in huts and caves. No, on a long enough timeline, the arc of human history has *always* been upwards to the stars, through great difficulty and calamity. For wherever the excess gyre of human folly has lead men into new, darker ages, we have, like the orthodox church, been reborn, a newer and brighter age.

    In that regard, Christ didn’t die for our “sins.”

    He died for The Truth.

    The ultimate Truth:

    We were never, as a species, beyond redemption.

    Redemption was *always* the plan.

    Whether you believe in The Christ proper, or the idea of fallen man in general.

    To suggest otherwise, is to suggest that The Divine, whatever, or whoever it may be, is changeable.

    Only fools think they can question or change God, whatever or whoever your God may be. Call it nature. Call it “sky daddy”, doesn’t matter.

    Man change. God doesn’t. Maybe the name, the image, the face.

    But as old as man is, as civilization is young, for all our 100,000 years of history, going back to the earliest oral stories, *murder*, *rape*, *theft*, *arson*, *abandonment of ones family*, have all been crimes, if not legally, than morally.

    And the societies that punished them thrived. And the societies that allowed them, stumbled and perished.

    If this be not Divine Will, that such should be true for so long, unchanging–if this is not God-among-us, then I know of no better God or description thereof.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin Barrett Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV