The Morality Problem

Morality

(From the WIN website, dated 16th July 2013):

It is an accepted historic truism that civilisations, much like the majority of animal life, are born, bear fruit, become barren, and eventually die. But was it also not implicitly true to the medieval “scientist” that man had no hope of taking to the skies or in observing objects either too minute or distance due to the physical limitation of the human eye?

We philosophize for reasons beyond the arbitrary pondering of our inner and outer realities. Thought – the conscious probing of both the theoretical and the practical – not only attempts to fulfil a mechanical requirement in Man, it is the very expression of Man and isolates him from the greater animal kingdom. Other living beasts, especially birds and mammals, are of course capable of problem-solving, yet in Man the synaptic response to obstacles, invasive events, abstract reasoning, and conceptualisation, is wholly unique.

When we refer to Man it is more correct, and often far more honest, to exclude those abundant sub-groups that have achieved, in the global and historical sense at least, comparatively very little. And, being Europeans, we must be acutely concerned with and emphasize the accomplishments of Europeans and those of European descent across the planet; for it is the European who has shaped our world and our cognitive pathways for millennia.

What then shapes the thought processes of the European branch of the human subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens? What makes us; what drives us; what defines us as remarkable? Why do we in particular produce, survive, and expand when few other groups are capable and, conversely, why do we now rush headlong towards our own global extinction?

Just as the electron and the neutron orbit the lonely proton at the atomic level, so do the planetary bodies in our sublime and singular solar system revolve around our star, the Sun. The reflected semblance of the microcosm (the atom) and the macrocosm (the solar system) can be witnessed in Man both in terms of his societal functions and, more broadly, his civilisations.

If Man acts selflessly for a larger organism, of which he himself is a part, the organism begins to function symbiotically, for the mutual advantage of every component. In contrast, if Man operates in a selfish manner the organism – if it is unwilling or unable to reject such a destructive component (or cell) – will gradually accede to the rapidly multiplying cancer cells and is certain, at length, to perish.

As our society becomes cancerous, the effects on the greater organism (the civilisation) are equally as dramatic. Although it is generally accepted that civilisations reflect the moral and spiritual essence of the citizenry, only a close and impartial study of history – and the wisdom of a handful of frequently sorrowful, and simultaneously scorned seers – can determine when, during the vivacity of a civilisation, the integral cells begin to mutate, to become selfish, and when atomisation comes to be terminal.

When the proton, that is man, is no longer accompanied by his electron (an unquestioning faith) and his neutron (exclusive racialism) then he will at first develop a spiritual sickness before ripening as a destructive cancer cell. Whether this nihilism is active or inert makes little longterm difference if a societal structure is being manipulated and influenced by forces to which the individual component is completely ignorant.

An actively destructive cell, for example, manifestly supports the dismantling of the traditional Whole and will, in its place, welcome the erection of something alien. Whereas the inert cell chooses merely to do nothing, thus permitting the breakdown to ensue and continue unabated; opting instead for the passive myopia of slavery: the cancer cell and the slave cell being siphoned inextricably towards the struggling heart of civilisation.

The White race is caught in a brutal death grip with itself. Even supposedly “enlightened” folk have shown themselves impotent in their ability to peel back their rigid fingers and sweating palms. They instead accuse others of the self-imposed strangulation and take comfort in the fact that they have little control over extraneous agencies. These ideological monists, although not ultimately as harmful as the aforementioned selfish cells, are incredibly obstructive nonetheless.

We are frequently exposed to the ubiquitous cry of “Jew!’’ from racial separatists who, insofar as they cannot derail their attention from The Great Global Conspiracy Theory, ignore the vast hordes of genetically similar bipeds who provide the authors of the overthrow of the West with both aid and comfort; tacit support due to apathy, inaction, and complacency, and a lack of moral and spiritual vitality.

We are therefore compelled to ask of ourselves the following: which appeared first, the cancerous civilisation (and the infection that caused it to be) or the cancerous man, without whom the architects of our genetic destruction may never have been able to produce their ruthless blueprints. Against the vehement tirades of the monists we must examine both our external enemies in unison with our internal frailties for if we do not and by some inordinate fortune we survive the policies of the coming New World Order, then we will be deferring a proper, timely, and exhaustive explanation of our condition to future generations and that is at best irresponsible and, at worst, perilously reckless.

To announce that we have conquered the true enemy – should fate grimace as described above – and that our people are now free to stride onward towards a glorious but as yet undefined destiny, is to knowingly administer a medicine formulated to alleviate some of the immediate symptoms but that is in itself completely insufficient to impart a definitive and decisive cure.

In either case, whether our decline is due to the inalienable flaws we have identified within our own racial group or solely as a result of the machinations of another, we are duty bound to answer another critical query: whether contracted in isolation or dispensed via the impositions of a cartel whose thinly-veiled purpose is the demolition of our culture, civilisation, and the adulteration of our unique racial characteristic, why have a majority of our people developed a reoccurring psychological pox?

Because the answer to the above is at once unpopular and inconvenient, the monists – who have become immune to every constructive criticism – parrot “Jew!” This is, however, an insufficient explanation of our present calamitous situation. In order to create a significant (majority in fact) quantity of cancer and slave cells one must, at the very least, accept the reasoning that something must have been amiss with the individual components or else such unnatural notions, as the thorough rejection of ancient, mimetic traditions and subconscious impulses relating to concepts as obtuse and ingrained as honour, justice, morality, community, etc., must be relegated to the convoluted verbiage of the mentally raceless environmentalists who minimise – if not completely reject – the undeniably powerful influence heredity exerts on human feats and endeavours, or lack thereof.

To express a belief in heredity (the “nature over nurture” principle in modern socio-anthropological parlance) and yet heap upon a relatively recent environmental factor (e.g., a competing tribal collective) the woes of a civilisation or, in fact, a race, that has collapsed time and again throughout history into writhing, disconnected miasmas of cancer and slave cells, is to contradict the fundamental cornerstone of evolution and, consequently, of the natural inequality that exists between all human beings and especially among Man´s diverse and empirically measurable ethnic and racial differences.

If this aforementioned paradox holds then the British sent to Australia as convicts (i.e., cheap labourers) and later as colonisers, for instance, might not have been competent in building a nation from literally nothing because the environmental variables should have proven too malign or may well have diverted them down a path of subsistence-level existence – as is the case with the indigenous humanoids – or towards a short-lived, pseudo-hippy community, because the work of nation building was just too difficult and unpleasant and, therefore, served no immediate purpose.

Similarly, if circumstance favours the modern European and he survives the imposed genetic replacement scheme, then what unknown and capricious factors could possibly alter a more conclusive fate in another, future epoch? The White race would not have changed and its essential substance will remain; its tendency towards civilisation is perhaps as strong as its inability to override or modify the Aryan Morality, which is a curious instinct that has allowed a rival clan to survey and champion the commercial production of presumably innate cancer and slave cells to the detriment of the West and her eminent legacy.

The White race will act in accordance with a predetermined pattern in most scenarios because that is the reality of heredity, of genetic inheritance; it is what affords us with hope for the future (because we understand our past) and why we can speculate on what our propitious progeny may produce and accomplish. But to under-represent or avoid entirely potentially negative traits is certainly fatal. In the past expansion, colonisation, and empire resulted in slavery, excess, and universalism, followed, inevitably, by genetic degradation. Today, however, universalism is imposed upon a fragmented mass of individuals, but the conclusion will be approximately comparable to the aforementioned.

Whether the effort is focussed on rudimental survival or on more superfluous ventures, the gradual or swift alteration of external stimuli from harsh to favourable does little to asphyxiate the creative genius of the Europeans race. The Faustian urge, which is synonymous with the old Occident, is clearly evident even today. The basic premise is this: resolve the “Jewish Problem” and we are still confronted with an antediluvian Morality Problem.

It is fallacy to speculate that only brief but intensive environmental forces are the perquisites for progress. However, such occurrences frequently serve as catalysts for both mental and physical innovation. Pressure that would no doubt crush competing races spurn us on, but now a duress that has toppled one mighty culture after another is gnawing away at our own equivocal roots. We have forgotten – or perhaps have lost – the twin aegises of religiosity and racial tribalism and we have exposed our flanks – a ridiculously emotive sentimentality – to our assailants.

And supporting the monists are the Anti-Zionists, a patriotic band of genuine racial separatists who have worked – or spoken-out, as is most often the case – to the diametric interests of the West. The facile equation Anti-Zionists do not appear able to balance is adroitly expressed in the following: Jews (J) – Israel (Z) = the new Diaspora (D) or J-Z=D. The JZD principle is so astonishingly obvious that it begs the question of whether or not Anti-Zionists are in fact and deed, acting on behalf of the Race. Furthermore, do Anti-Zionists represent the agreeable alternative to Zionism; as monopoly capitalism once mirrored international communism like a slowly contorting image reflecting in a rippling pool?

Just as the monists sometimes grant Jesus Christ with powers of the Ubermensch so Anti-Zionists adamantly maintain that Israel, or any Zionist, no matter the geography, is at the heart of our sprawling ills and it (they) must be extirpated in order to restore equilibrium to the Occident. But supposing that Israel suddenly and unceremoniously fell, where exactly would the six million or so dispossessed Jews relocate? Madagascar? Siberia? Birobidzahn? No, they would flock to their summerhouses and historic strongholds throughout Europe and the United States – this will become fact should Zion be overrun.

What therefore is the purpose of Anti-Zionism other than to bring about a new and less discursive Diaspora? The inhumane treatment of the Palestinians and Israel´s numerous neighbours are matters that should not concern the racially conscious European unless of course vital trade is negatively affected. The omnipresent Aryan Morality must not be given license to impinge upon common sense or common tribal interests.

There is no doubt that Zionism has been a monumentally expensive luxury for gentiles not to enjoy and few could effectively argue that the pernicious influence of the continent-spanning ‘Israel lobby’ has caressed and corrupted a great many individuals, institutions, organisation, and governments across Europe and especially North America, but the consequences of the dismantling of a Jewish state would immerse us, and not the Arabs, in the steaming kosher chicken soup right up to our earlobes.

It is difficult to discern exactly what the cumulative effort of the Anti-Zionists is actually supposed to produce. If the aim of the game is to remove comprehensively that singular state from the Near East then the patriots have not examined the subject with an objective enough lens or have miscalculated the correct level of magnification.

By all means, the Anti-Zionists should be free to position a spotlight on the parasitical relationship that has been concocted between Israel and the White world; the White racialist perspective should not oppose Anti-Zionists in this regard, but careful consideration should be given to the consequences of a world without a dedicated Jewish homeland. Our sights must always be set on a stone tablet, engraved upon which is the enduring legend: “We must act in the best interests of the Race”.

A sudden or inconspicuous influx of Israeli Jews into our own homelands would further undermine our precarious national positions. Our stance should be, therefore, to encourage as much migration to the state of Israel in parallel with a policy of opposing and promulgating the insidious ascendancy of all special interest fraternities, lobbies, and groups that operate in our midst, undermining our national wellbeing and our very existence. The fate of Israel, and all who dwell within her, and those nation states unfortunate enough to border her or be trapped within her gravity, are none of our concern.

The monists recognise a solitary devil while the Anti-Zionists refine this narrow vista. Both lack a realistic appraisal of our situation and neither camp can offer a solution to the most pressing question of our age: without the Jew, how will the white race evolve in times to come? Or, in slightly different terminology: what compels us and why do our civilisations inevitably decline? Have we finally understood the crucial lesson or are we fated to repeat the same tiresome mistakes ad mortem?

Cancer cells populate our legal, political, industrial, academic, cultural, and economic hubs. The controlled mass media is the playground of our vestigial enemies in which they promote every destructive vice imaginable and ferment anti-White propaganda in synchronisation with our own cancerous cells. The remnant of the body – our civilisation – has been permanently crippled by a glut of slave cells that continue to absorb the poison and ensure the next generation is complicit in their acceptance of gene suicide.

Should the still-living entity become a corpse, only those replete with both a functioning electron and neuron will resist and will endure – as we have always done – to facilitate the construction of something better. If the truth of our peculiar constitution is not documented and accounted for then, and in some distant era, we will begin to retrograde, not because of the powerful and malevolent will of clandestine conspirators, but because it is in our nature to do so.

If the coming evolutionary bottleneck is so severe that only those members of our tribe deficient in the Aryan Morality will exist, then our destiny will be secured. But should this not be the case then a programme of persistent social reconstruction is desperately required; an adjustment in our collective viewpoint that will see the sentimentalists and traditionalists shunned and the inadvertent projection of our morality into other living organisms, and especially competing races, outmoded.

We cannot continue as we are. We have not only conceived everything of universal worth in the artificial sense, but we have likewise given birth to the damaging dogmas of democracy, egalitarianism, liberalism, et al. This wound must be uncovered and disinfected. We must take responsibility for our own failings and finally desist from apportioning nearly total blame to others.

Until we can fully comprehend what has happened in recent centuries and devise a feasible and pragmatic solution to end the repetitious cycle, then we have no future, Jews or no Jews. Unless we engender a new man, one who possesses a clarity of thought and vision unrivalled in human history, there will be no new social order and no new tribe. But we have shown this perception and because of it there is still hope. We are the beginning, a new cycle refreshed and revitalised; the first new leaf emerging from the frost of a long winter.

Long Live the New Tribe!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s