It is currently Sat Aug 18, 2018 7:35 pm


Tomorrow's Religion

Fundamental ideas
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Cosmotheist

  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:41 pm

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostMon May 18, 2015 10:01 am

PUBLISHED BY ROSEMARY PENNINGTON, ON MAY 17TH, 2015
http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/05/creating-a-new-society/

Image

by Dr. William L. Pierce

A WONDERFUL THING about the philosophy which governs our movement is that it is very simple — it is completely summed up in our Affirmation — and yet it is all-inclusive. It tells us everything we need to know. Everything is derived from it.

It tells, for example, what kind of society we want to build in place of the present one. That is, it gives us the basic principles which must govern the building of a new society. Since our principles are fundamentally different from those governing any society now on this earth, then our society will also be fundamentally different from those which exist today.

Today societies are categorized in various ways. A common way is according to which members of the society have the power. Thus, we have monarchical society, ruled by a single person, who usually inherits his power. And we have plutocracy, or a society ruled by the wealthiest members. And we have technocracy, or a society ruled by the technicians who keep the wheels of industry and commerce going. And gerontocracy, a society ruled by its elders. And democracy — or monocracy — society ruled, supposedly, by everyone. And, finally, anarchical society, in which, supposedly, no one has power, no one rules.

Another common way of categorizing today’s societies is according to the type of economic system which prevails. Thus, we have communistic societies and capitalistic societies, as just two examples.

But note one thing about all these different types of society. None are defined with respect to any purpose. They are defined according to which members control them, defined according to the mechanics of their operation, but none have any purpose — other than the common purpose of all societies, of course — namely, the static, day-to-day purpose of providing a framework within which its members function, presumably with more efficiency and greater security than they could function without a society.

Of course, the societies with which we are familiar may set goals for themselves: building an irrigation project, for example, or conquering a neighbor, or eliminating smallpox, or increasing the average wage. But these goals do not determine, in any fundamental way, the structure of the society. They do not provide a purpose which determines the essential nature of the society. A monarchical society or a democratic society which sets out to build a system of dams and canals or to take some land away form the members of another society remains monarchical or democratic, as the case may be.

But we want to build a society, and we must build a society from the beginning, according to principles determined by our Purpose — in other words, a purpose-oriented society. And this is where we part company with all conservatives and with most right-wingers. They are concerned with making slight modification to our present society — getting rid of Henry Kissinger, outlawing busing, dismantling the Federal Reserve System — or, at most, with reestablishing the society we had 30 or 40 or 50 years ago, by putting the Blacks back in their places, either in their part of town or back in Africa, and by interpreting the U.S. Constitution once again the way it used to be interpreted.

Now, there is no doubt that such changes would yield a society more agreeable to everyone in this room than the present society, but it would still be a society with no purpose beyond the basic purpose of all societies, which I just mentioned. It might be a safer society, a freer society, a stronger society, a more prosperous society, but we are aiming for something far beyond that.

The conservative, the right-winger, wants a society, basically, which suits his needs and desires. We are aiming for a society which suits the Purpose of the Creator. And that’s a big difference.

There is, however, one aspect of the society we want which is shared with the society most conservatives and right-wingers want, and that is naturalness. Everyone feels this Jewish-cosmopolitan chaos, this multiracial bedlam which passes for a society today is alien, is wrong, is unnatural. If we are to survive much longer we must have a society which is more in accord with our inner nature, a society which suits our race soul, the sort of society we might have expected to evolve naturally among an all-White population, without alien or discordant influences.

A natural society is, among other things, racially homogeneous. It is the social aspect, the social dimension, of a natural environment. It reflects all their characteristics and peculiarities. It is uniquely theirs. It provides for them a lifestyle, it embodies a mode of behavior, which is perfectly attuned to their innermost souls.

A natural society is a society which feels right, which fits. There are millions and millions of our people today, certainly not just right-wingers, who instinctively feel that this mass-production, nine-to-five, rush hour to rush hour, neon and asphalt and Negro lifestyle which has been forced on nearly everyone today some how just doesn’t fit.

We want a natural society not just because our souls will be more at ease in such a society, but because, living and working in a society to which we are more closely attuned, we can be more effective. Each of us individually, and our race collectively, can make more progress, in each generation, along the Path ordained for us by the Creator.

Now, a truly natural society is something which is only formed slowly. Its institutions develop and grow over the course of generations. Only thus can it truly mold itself to the soul of a race. It is not something which is transformed over night by an edict of the government, as the alien forces in our present society have repeatedly transformed it in recent years.

And yet we are not talking about a static society but a dynamic one, a truly progressive society. But by progress we mean the advancement of our race along the One True Path, the Path toward Godhood. We do not mean new styles in clothing or automobiles every year, or a revolution in sexual practices every other year.

Although true progress is inherently slow, there are many thing which can and must be done very quickly in laying the groundwork for that progress. One of those things, which we can accomplish in the first few months of our new society, for example, will be a drastic revision of the crime situation. I believe we can safely guarantee that in the first year we will reduce street crime to perhaps one percent of its present level and reduce all crime by perhaps 95 percent, that is. To about a twentieth of its present level.

Those who think that is an exaggeration are still thinking only in terms of what is possible in the degenerate society of today. There are many today who would sincerely like to reduce crime to such a low level, but they are not willing to do what is necessary to accomplish that goal — even if the ruler of this society would let them. They have the wrong priorities.

But we are willing to do what is necessary, because we have a goal, a Purpose, which determines our priorities for us. And among our priorities the health of the society ranks considerably ahead of the supposed personal rights of its thieves and rapists and drug dealers.

Of course, simply by excluding from our society those who are not members of our racial community, we will eliminate the great bulk of the criminal element. But, more than that, the simple act of removing these alien elements reduce their own inclination to anti-social behavior. For the root of anti-social behavior is alienation, the feeling of not being a part, of not belonging to society, and alienation naturally and inevitably is the accompaniment of racial mixing.

Now, please note that we are not promising the elimination of all crime, but only the majority of it. Husbands will still beat their wives occasionally. One man will occasionally kill another in a quarrel over a woman or over money or something else. People will still be exposed to temptations and provocations of various sorts every day, and some will inevitably yield. Perhaps, in fact, some types of behavior which we now consider criminal should no longer be considered so in a new society but instead should be recognized as natural and inevitable and be accommodated in some way. For we do not expect our new society to change human nature — or at least not very quickly. That is something we will attempt only over the course of many generations, only over centuries and millennia.

But simply by establishing a healthy social environment for our people and by introducing a few fairly simple and obvious reforms into our police and criminal justice systems we can keep criminal activity down to a level where it will not be the socially destructive factor it is today. And that will not require, by any stretch of the imagination, a Big Brother style police state.

A society which is really determined to keep itself healthy, to eliminate certain sickness form its midst, a society which is not controlled or influenced by those who have a vested interest in maintaining those sicknesses, can use many means which are as effective, or more effective, than direct coercion — although we must not ever be too squeamish to use coercion when that is called for.

The prevalence of anti-social behavior, whether engaging in muggings on the street, or flaunting homosexuality, or even corrupting oneself though drug abuse, is determined to a very large extent not by the laws passed by legislatures but by the attitudes inherent in a society. Why is homosexuality, for example, so much more prevalent, so much more obvious and public today in American than it was 100 years ago? It is largely because of the attitude expressed by our controlled mass media and by our educational system that there’s nothing wrong with it. If one changes the attitude expressed by the media and by the schools from one of toleration or even encouragement of this sickness, to one of the strongest disapproval, one may not change the basic nature of the homosexual who was born with some genetic defect which gives him his unfortunate tendency. But one will at least drive him back into the closet and one will prevent many persons of weak or disturbed character for acquiring the tendency.

And the same is true of other social illnesses. One can effectively suppress them by rounding up and shooting enough people, or one can eliminate them by establishing a healthy social climate. Some illnesses call for the first cure and some for the second — but in the long run a society can be and remain truly healthy and truly progressive only if the tendency toward health and progress is naturally rooted in the great bulk of the members of the society instead of being artificially imposed from above.

Nevertheless, we are talking about a society which is willing and able to guide its members, to impose constraints, to set both positive and negative examples. And this implies the exercise of power, real and effective power, even if not in the form of direct police power. For we are certainly not talking about an anarchic society or a libertarian society, in which everyone does his own thing.

Today, even in our present society, far more social control is exercised by the mass media and by the schools than by the Congress and the President and the courts, with all their legislative and police and judicial powers. In our new society should we simply leave these powers, the power of the media and the schools, up for grabs, to fall under the influence of whatever private groups can win control of them?

Hardly! They are the very determinants of the type of society we shall have. They do more than anything else to set its goals and shape its institutions, and we must be sure that these goals and institutions are in accord with our Purpose, with the Creator’s Purpose. So this means that society as a whole must assume certain powers which are now either chaotically uncontrolled or are in the hands of the enemies of our people.

How shall these powers be administered and exercised? That is a question we want to answer very carefully, after the greatest deliberation. But we can make some tentative suggestions now. We can say quite definitely, for example, that we are not interested in the conservative goal of restoring the Constitution of 200 years ago.

We are not interested in minor variations on that theme either, which might allow, for example, some deviant person of great wealth or strong personality who favored reintroducing Blacks or Jews into our society to control, say, ten percent of the Federal legislature if he could convince ten percent of the public to vote for his party. We are, in fact, not even greatly impressed by the democratic axiom of “one man, one vote.” That was supposed to insure against tyranny, but it has not quite lived up to expectations.

Let us remember that our Purpose, and therefore the Purpose of our new society, must not be to provide the best possible climate for free enterprise but to put us, as a race, once again on the Path toward Godhood. Because of this, it is likely that the privilege of choosing our society’s leaders will be somewhat more carefully bestowed than at present, when it is merely necessary to have attained 18 years of age.

It seems clear to me that our Purpose tells us that we must envisage a society in which the electorate consists only of those members of society who are wholly dedicated to that Purpose. Those who have the responsibility for choosing our society’s administrators and decision-makers must be persons who have proved, in deed as well as word, their dedication.

We might envisage the attainment of electoral status as a crowning honor bestowed on our most worthy citizens, an honor not only entailing great respect from the community but also a great responsibility for the welfare and progress of the community. Being given the privilege of voting might be made a ceremonial occasion, a sacramental occasion, the most important occasion of a citizen’s life, an occasion not unlike joining a Holy Order, in which the initiate takes a binding oath to fulfill his responsibility and to put his duties and obligations as an embodiment of the Creator and an agent of the Creator ahead of all else, throughout the remainder of his life.

This will be a status potentially open to all but actually achieved by relatively few, the best and ablest of our race. And it will be their responsibility to exercise the ultimate power, to control the destiny of the society. Those few experts who actually make the day-to-day decisions will be answerable to their electorate.

Now, there are many other aspects to the society we want besides the determination of voting qualifications. In most cases we must be very careful about being too specific, because the actual working out of the specific details is something which will require a great deal of thought and planning. Whatever we say now is only of a tentative nature.

But we can be sure of some general things. We are sure that we do not want a society in which our Truth, our understanding of reality and of our Purpose, is but one idea in a competing chaos of ideas, a society divided against itself into a hundred conflicting sects. We want a society which is not only racially homogenous but also spiritually homogenous, a society which is a single, indivisible community inspired by a single, great Truth, working for a single Purpose.

And we can be sure of some other things. We want a society based on blood instead of on gold, a society in which racial quality, in which Life itself, is the basic value, instead of money, as in today’s society.

It will be a society in which the importance of the family will not be so much as an economic unit but as a biological unit, a creative unit; a society in which healthy, racially sound children will be the greatest treasure which can be produced — a treasure far more significant that today’s Gross National Product.

It will be a society which will judge its progress by the degree to which each new generation surpasses in racial quality the previous generation. The great task of our new society will be the upward breeding of the race. And this task will be shared by every institution of the society. We must have an educational system, for example, which not only prepares the child to lead an economically productive existence, but which instills in him a lifelong consciousness of his racial identity and his racial mission, a consciousness of the fact that he exists not only in the present, but that he is a link in the chain of generations which stretches from the distant past into an unlimited future, and that he has a responsibility to every other link, past and future, in that unending chain.

We want a society without artificial barriers based on social class or on personal wealth or family connections, but one in which status is determined by the quality of the individual and, even more so, by the extent to which that quality, those talents and abilities and character, are used in the service of our Purpose.

The ordinary workman who strives always to do the best job he possibly can, whether he operates a lathe in a factory or a tractor on a farm, the workman who puts his soul into his work because he understands that he is working not just for himself but for his racial community and for the Purpose it serves — such a person will be entitled to the highest honor and respect in our society.

We want a society, finally, which in all its institutions and its policies,
in its schools and its athletic programs,
in its taxing policy and its welfare policy and its foreign policy,
in its environmental programs and its military defense program,
reflects the one overwhelming fact that it is a society not of man alone,
but of man as a part of God,
as an embodiment of the Divine Spirit.

It must in its every aspect reflect the beauty and dignity of a higher mankind,
and as man ascends the Creator’s Path toward self-completion and total self-realization,
our society must itself ascend that Path with him.


* * *


Source: National Alliance BULLETIN, August 1976
Offline

Jjack

  • Posts: 117
  • Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 3:06 pm

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostSat May 30, 2015 9:19 am

Les religions prolifèrent parce que la puissante sottise, impératrice du monde, ne mourra point par le hasard.

Les cultes sont détestables parce qu’ils annulent le génie humain. Les religions discordantes conçoivent une doctrine idiote, perpétuellement régentée par des tyrans mentaux et suivie avec zèle par des séquestrés ignares.

Et voilà, les croyents parcourent la terre avec la tête comblée des aphorismes qu'ils devraient désapprendre.

http://www.gate.net/~joachim
Offline
User avatar

David Pringle

  • Posts: 105
  • Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 11:45 am
  • Location: National Alliance WV Campus (White Zion)

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostThu Jun 15, 2017 11:14 am

This is a great piece Kevin. I enjoyed re-reading it last night.

I didn't notice it last time I read it but this time I caught an error in the text. You've left out _the_ in front of path.

"— that is the path of Cosmotheism, and that is path the Life Force must inevitably take if life is to extend beyond the paltry lifespan of our birth planet."
Offline

Jim Mathias

  • Posts: 482
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostFri Jun 16, 2017 2:28 am

David Pringle wrote:This is a great piece Kevin. I enjoyed re-reading it last night.

I didn't notice it last time I read it but this time I caught an error in the text. You've left out _the_ in front of path.

"— that is the path of Cosmotheism, and that is path the Life Force must inevitably take if life is to extend beyond the paltry lifespan of our birth planet."
I'm glad you bumped this thread up, David. I gained a few things reading it as well as the follow up posts by Cosmotheist.

A side benefit for me personally: The story of Dr. Pierce's interview with the reporters who thought to find out that Cosmotheism was just another hokey tax dodge was amusing in that these usually cynical types came in with preconceived notions and ran into the genuine article instead.
Offline
User avatar

David Pringle

  • Posts: 105
  • Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 11:45 am
  • Location: National Alliance WV Campus (White Zion)

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostFri Jun 16, 2017 10:50 am

Jim Mathias wrote:
David Pringle wrote:This is a great piece Kevin. I enjoyed re-reading it last night.

I didn't notice it last time I read it but this time I caught an error in the text. You've left out _the_ in front of path.

"— that is the path of Cosmotheism, and that is path the Life Force must inevitably take if life is to extend beyond the paltry lifespan of our birth planet."
I'm glad you bumped this thread up, David. I gained a few things reading it as well as the follow up posts by Cosmotheist.

A side benefit for me personally: The story of Dr. Pierce's interview with the reporters who thought to find out that Cosmotheism was just another hokey tax dodge was amusing in that these usually cynical types came in with preconceived notions and ran into the genuine article instead.


And that happens regularly. Cosmotheism is based on observable, repeatable FACTS, not speculation. The reporter from the county here probably believes that an extraterrestrial from either another dimension or world not only made Earth in seven days but was able to somehow gather all the animals of the world on a boat. How did the American Bison or the duck-billed Platypus find their way to the Ark?

Since we don't believe in talking animals or magic or alien deities who ride sunbeams from the Pleiades system to explain golden tablets we must not believe in anything.
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1765
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostFri Jun 16, 2017 2:25 pm

David Pringle wrote: How did the American Bison or the duck-billed Platypus find their way to the Ark?


GPS? :lol:

Image
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1765
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostMon Feb 05, 2018 4:25 pm

"Country Boy" Fred Streed is one of the smartest straight-talkers I've ever worked with, and one of the very highest-valued Alliance members to have lived and worked on the National Alliance's WV campus. He and I and others in the Alliance understood Dr. Pierce's religion of tomorrow -- Cosmotheism -- if others have not yet grasped it. I was just reminded of a comment he wrote after Carolyn Yeager's brilliant decision five years ago to invite me and her sanctimonious Identity Christian friend Bill Finck on to her Internet radio show together to "debate" religion. I did not realize at the time that Carolyn was such a fan of Finck's CI beliefs that Whites are the true Israelites, as were many of her show's followers. :lol:

No. 42 - Fred Streed - January 25, 2013:
Pastor Bill Finck made a big deal about how much of the moral values and spirituality in xtianity are contained in much of classical literature. I would have to wonder, this being the case, just what xtianity brings to the table that has any value for our struggle for White survival. This is without even going into the teachings of xtianity that AREN’T contained in the general currents of Classical, or any other European Pagan thought (which is one of the things that worry me about bible “morality”.

I think Reverend Will’s biological racism requires much less mental gymnastics than any of the xtian arguments I have heard so far, and so I will go with that. Occam’s razor and all that! But hey, I’m just a simple old country boy. I really don’t care to waste my time distorting history in order to prove we are “the true xtians”, disregarding science and common sense to “disprove” evolution, or worrying about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

---

Call your next case!
:D

Will Williams wrote:The National Alliance doesn't make its monthly internal members' BULLETIN available online in pdf form, but our March 2015 issue featured a commentary that is worth sharing here with non-members. I comment then introduce Fred Streed:
---

Chairman Williams Comments on Cosmotheism


“In 1978 a group of members who were especially interested in the religious or spiritual aspects of the National Alliance’s work organized the Cosmotheist Community Church.” That sentence from page 17 of the 1993 edition of William Pierce’s National Alliance Membership Handbook was removed in the 2005 edition — along with several other crucial passages, including pages 46-51, which described Christianity as an opposed ideology.

Additionally, entire paragraphs were removed from the section on general principles of National Alliance ideology and were replaced by a watered-down section on religion (p. 24), which stated, “Our membership consists of a variety of beliefs. A member may be very religious or very non-religious.”

Why did Erich Gliebe and Shaun Walker decide to remove those sections?

Gliebe and Walker made a mess of the Alliance Handbook because they wanted a “bigger tent”; they wanted to make the Alliance “Christian-friendly” in hopes — vain hopes, as it turned out — that more Christians would join us because they’d no longer be offended by the fundamentally Cosmotheist underpinnings of Alliance ideology. Cosmotheism is the philosophy that undergirds all of the Alliance’s ideals and undertakings -- and it is absolutely incompatible with a Semitic religion that worships the Jews’ tribal god.

One of William Pierce’s closest friends and long-term associates, Mr. Fred Streed, was in charge of the infrastructure and physical plant at the National Office for 11 years — not to mention that he was appointed by Dr. Pierce to be president of the National Alliance Board of Directors. Mr. Streed’s understanding of Alliance ideology is unquestioned, and he has steadfastly maintained that the Alliance should never compromise its Cosmotheist roots. Recently, Mr. Streed engaged in a very valuable dialogue on Cosmotheism with a number of critics and questioners, which we’re proud to share with you this month.

Fred Streed: A Cosmotheist Dialogue

Q: Why doesn’t the Alliance stick with Christianity and try to reform it?

A: Superstition passed off as religion is not a real option. If it were reformed to the point where it did not violate the laws of Nature, or resort to spiritual terrorism, it would no longer be Christianity anyway. Christianity needs to be realistically scrutinized, not reformed.

Q: My interest in Cosmotheism, such as it is, is in understanding why Dr. Pierce believed it to be necessary.

A: It is necessary because it is reality. It is necessary because Whites have a strong need for purpose in life. That need gets subverted by superstitious claptrap like Christianity. Cosmotheism is an understanding that our lives are lived in this physical world, not some otherworldly, pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die foolishness. Our one purpose is to advance life.

Q: Cosmotheism is okay, but the name is ridiculous — Scientology-level ridiculous — but there’s a lot of good stuff there.

A: Dr. Pierce didn’t invent the name; it was already in use. Call it Pantheism or Panentheism if it bothers you that much. Or invent a new name. It will still be Cosmotheism by the accepted definition. Dr. Pierce also didn’t invent most of the concepts embodied in it. It’s more a discovery of what is true than an invention of anything. Some seem Hell-bent on the idea that Cosmotheism is some kind of cult religion. It’s not. Some evidently understand neither what it is nor its purpose. Others, I suspect, deliberately pretend it is a cult of made-up hokum like Scientology or Mormonism because they have an agenda of their own — and that agenda isn’t the preservation and advancement of the White race.

Cosmotheism defined, according to Webster’s New International Dictionary, 2d edition; 1934: “[cosmo-+-theism.] Ascription of divinity to the cosmos; identification of God with the world. Compare: PANTHEISM”

Q: Strictly speaking, Cosmotheism isn’t a religion, in much the same way as Buddhism — or ancestor-worship — devoid of folk beliefs and the like, isn’t a religion.

A: I would disagree with you there. I would say Cosmotheism is a true religion — and Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are not religions, but superstition operating under the cover of religion. I don’t know how many times I have had some Christian tell me to “look up on a starry night and then try to deny there is a God.” Truth is, I do experience a religious feeling of awe when I look at the Milky Way and reflect on the vastness of the Universe, the beauty, the grand scope of it all. But that doesn’t make me think there has to be some transcendent Hebraic spook behind it all. There is an irony in a Christian tapping into a bit of genuine religion to justify his Bible- based nonsense.

Cosmotheism is simply a religious world-view based on a scientific understanding of Nature, at least to the extent we do understand reality. Scientific advances that alter our understanding of reality also help us achieve the one Purpose of life, which is to advance to higher states of consciousness and understanding. That is what Cosmotheism is. Contrast that with the dogma of the Christian churches, which resists changes in our understanding.

Q: If you really want to find religious elements in the National Alliance, just look at the way Dr. Pierce is treated nowadays. He was probably the most significant person in American racial nationalist thought, and was a great leader (let’s face it, making intelligent and willful White folks pull together is about the hardest thing that a man can do), but where is the evolution of thought, and of the movement, that he started? It seems to have stopped when he died.

A: Nothing has stopped. His ideas are standing the test of time rather nicely. He is still widely read and quoted; his ideas still inspire.

Q: Where does the Jew fit into this Cosmotheist world view?


A: Life, at least life on this planet, as we all know, advances by becoming better adapted to its environment — it evolves new forms to take advantage of new or changed environments. Less adapted, less fit, life forms cannot compete, and are displaced and die out. Much environmental change has been random, a throw of the dice if you will, yet has served well to challenge and advance life to ever-higher states. The asteroid or comet that struck the Earth 65 million years ago and wiped out most of the then-existing species, including most or all of the dinosaurs, was one of those random events.

That event opened up ecological niches that had once been occupied by dinosaurs and other now-extinct animals. The small furry creatures who were the ancestors of all of today’s mammals — including us — were able to diversify and exploit those niches, something they could not do while they served as dinosaur food. There have been several of these “extinction events” in the half billion years or so since complex multicellular life began; the one that wiped out the dinosaurs being the most recent.

The point of all that is that advance- ment in the complexity and fitness of life came about as a result of competition and the overcoming of adversity. That is where the Jew comes into the picture. The Jew is destruction incarnate. He is parasitism and degeneracy and chaos, toxic to all life. He is self-selected for this role. His purpose is to winnow the chaff from the grain, metaphori- cally speaking. The Jew brings rot and decadence. His personality is toxic. This shows in the Jews’ preference for scatological humor, their championing of the sick, the weak, the base. But nowhere is it more clear than in their attacks on human sexuality, that most sacred of all our drives. The Jew poisons our reproductive urge with his promotion of homosexual sex, abortion, interracial sex, feminism, “gay” marriage, and endless further combinations of filth and degeneracy. He counters our art with anti-art, he counters our high culture with trash cinema and boob-tube debauchery, he counters our sacred genome with the promotion of mixing with Congoids and Mestizos.

At some level the Jew knows exactly what he is, subconsciously or consciously. That is why he is so extremely sensitive to any resistance to his destructiveness. It also explains his fascination with the “Holocaust” that didn’t happen. He is obsessed with the idea that some day he will be called to account for his depredations. He knows that truth cannot be covered up indefinitely and that justice cannot be evaded forever.

The Jew, of course, springs from the same Creator/universe as we do. His purpose is to weed out the weak and degenerate among us. That doesn’t mean he is not evil: If we understand evil to be anything that hinders the One Purpose, which is ever higher levels of consciousness, then he is indeed evil. He is an integral part of a duality that is actually different manifestations of the One, which is the all. The Jew exists for us to defeat. If we do not defeat him, we will die — and, in fact, will have proved ourselves unworthy of life. To fail at that task will consign our race to the grave forever, and probably will mean the extinction of life on this planet.
---
Offline
User avatar

C.E. Whiteoak

  • Posts: 221
  • Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 7:45 pm

Re: Tomorrow's Religion

PostTue Feb 06, 2018 1:08 pm

I wish I had been advanced enough to grasp this point of view fifty years ago. :(
Previous

Return to Religion and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest