White Biocentrism

First of all, Cosmotheism is really a form of monotheism, and it exhibits many of the same problems we see in other monotheistic religions. Chief among these is a highly abstract conception of God divorced from lived experience, and divorced from nature. According to Cosmotheism, we do not find God within nature (as we do in the paganism of our ancestors). Nature is “part of the whole,” but it is not the whole itself. Thus, the God of Cosmotheism transcends nature and the senses entirely. In this regard, Cosmotheism is actually a worse form of monotheism than Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, since it presents us with a God completely without any personal properties. Worse yet, an “incomplete” God on whom we must put the finishing touches. This is truly a “God of the philosophers” and not the stuff of religion. It is not the sort of thing that could be believed in (let alone understood) by people of all walks of life.

Further, there are more similarities between Cosmotheism and the Judeo-Christian tradition than the simple fact that both are monotheist. Pierce’s Cosmotheism speaks of a specific race charged with a special mission vis-à-vis God. What can this remind us of except God’s covenant with the Israelites, the Chosen People? In fact, certain forms of Jewish Kabbalism actually claim that it is the task of the Jewish people to “complete” God’s creation through the observance of the Law. In recent times the Israeli writer Mordekhay Nesiyahu formulated a kind of secularized version of this doctrine, which he actually termed “Cosmotheism”! (I have no idea if William Pierce knew about this, but if he did I’m sure he must have found it disturbing.)

In sum, Pierce’s theory is very much in the Judeo-Christian spirit. It is monotheist. It sees a particular people as (in effect) entering into a special covenant with God and playing a role of cosmic importance. It has a linear conception of time: it raises the history of scientific progress up into the dimension of the sacred. It even promises a kind of immortality to the members of the race who accept this mission and take part. If we find the Judeo-Christian tradition problematic, then we must find theories like Cosmotheism problematic as well.

White Man 1 wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 24, 2022 7:56 am

First of all, Cosmotheism is really a form of monotheism, and it exhibits many of the same problems we see in other monotheistic religions. Chief among these is a highly abstract conception of God divorced from lived experience, and divorced from nature. According to Cosmotheism, we do not find God within nature (as we do in the paganism of our ancestors)...

I don't know why you quoted this obscure detractor of Pierce and Cosmotheism. Not only does his piece "miss the mark," but consider that that the negative critique was written more than 10 years ago when our Alliance was flat on its back, nearly flatlined from mismanagement by Pierce's successor -- even to the extent that its Cosmotheist underpinnings had been jettisoned in favor of a Christian-friendly, broader outreach. How did that work out?

It was another two years from when that was written until I got control back from Erich Gliebe, and with Kevin Strom resurrected NA and put it back on its correct Piercean, Cosmotheist course.

I did not revisit the long critique but instead went to the comments under it to find this defense by Faustus that is useful for our purposes:


Faustus
July 26, 2012 at 7:16 pm
William Luther Pierce was a man of Western thought and inclinations. He seemed, to me at least, a remnant of high-culture, stuck in a bog of apathy and misunderstanding; even amongst his own peers. The ‘conservative’ element of his day looked at him, not up to him; this would have made them look impotent.

Then, even as now, you had your intellectuals and your activists, and only a very few were a combination of Both. Dr. Pierce was a creator, and he, unlike many of his peers, searched for much more than the mundane; this was both his appeal and gave ammunition to his detractors, as they sensed he was a ‘pie-in-sky’ sort of man.

Man, Western man, has searched in his own fashion, for these answers belonging to Life, as he perceives it. In his primitive state, that is, before the modern, western man has responded to life in different ways but, more often than not, it has been an instinctual aggression to the forces of nature which, as the case might be, caused him to fear that which would destroy him; that which threatened his survival. He did, regardless of the modern’s position that early man was ‘devoid’ of spirituality, that is to say, that ‘he understood his presence in the world’.

That Western man believed, really believed in something ‘outside’ of himself is manifest by every attempt he made to ‘record’ his presence in the ‘art’, ‘motifs’, ‘totems’ and relics which he has left, a legacy for us to partake in. Whatever the ‘belief’ was, is pure speculation on our, the children of these spirits, part. Whether this belief was seen, or performed through say, for instance, a tree, stone, river, or lake, it was and extension of what he believed. This belief was absolute. It could not be separated from him; it was all he knew. He ‘prayed’ and, if that prayer came to pass, well, it was a ‘magical’ thing; it became, in our words, mystical. He gave up his soul, willingly, to that which blessed him, and which had answered by delivering to him his ‘need’ or ‘desire’. This ‘mental’ state is the ‘healthy state’ of faith. This is belief, which denies all ‘outside’ reason. This is the ‘faith’ of a child.

This, then, is the essence of ‘all’ religion: Without faith, there can be no value. Alternatively, without value, there can be no morality, this is the purpose stated, or unstated of all of man’s religions. However, subjective reality dictates that ‘morality’ proper, as an extension of each individual or its racial components, the race-culture, are subjective by each racial experience, its history, its location/territory, and all the factors, which predispose a People to be who they are, even as we see them. So, the question is now asked, “Are there morals for some, but not for others?” If there are various degrees of morality, or at least a perception of morality, by which, precisely, is the morality, which we mark the higher-man, hence the higher-culture?

Dr. Pierce saw a correlation in science and religion; of this I am certain. He knew, instinctively, that outside of the day-to-day activities, of struggle and chaos, the balance of spirit was precious to him. Like his political endeavors, his Cosmotheism was akin to a spiritual meditative quality – all men who delve deeply into a struggle for the lives of their fellows is gifted with this type of duality.

Religion is for the Individual Consciousness, which created it.

I think Dr. Pierce understood this, explicitly.

Science, for him, gave him boundaries which, in the abstract, gave him unlimited access to the ‘limitless’ boundaries of his chosen discipline. Revilo Oliver was very similar, although castigating the ‘believers in Spooks’ he, as well as Pierce, saw the Race as its own mystical motif – that all thought and power came from a continuum of thousands of generations of ‘souls’ – these men, in particular, may have had differences of opinion, but both were very spiritual men in their own unique ways.

I like the term ‘race-culture’, which presupposes this continuum as a collective trans-migration of souls – a Celtic form of Reincarnation – but is Race specific; this is not hard to fathom, once one accepts the premise that we, all of us, are ‘particular aspects’ of our ancestors. As were our progenitors, the Seed which is left to the ‘flow of our people’ is manifested time and time again, with various and unique aspects spread to thousands, yet sympathetic to each other. Some men, for instance, have ‘traits’ and ‘proclivities’ which seem as natural as rain, without any significant training or instruction, this is the finely tuned spirituality of blood and bone which defines us all as a unique and important specie.

William Galey Simpson had a similar view based, in part, on his study of Nietzsche and Spengler. He believed that the White Peoples of the Earth should, and would, develop a ‘religion’ to take them into the future, but was quick to add that this inception could not be forced; if one forced this concept, it would be artificial in the most crass way: it would be Institutionalized.

I have become enamored with a body of works which details much of what we are discussing, and will offer these few quotes from Rise of The West: http://www.amazon.com/Rise-The-West-Fra ... f+the+west

Without the conflict of ideas, there can be no distillation. There can be no rising. In our milennia, this distillation may be summed up concerning the spiritual soul of man: “If it did not possess this greatness, then it could not become God even through grace.” This from the mouth of a truly Western thinker, [Meister] Echehart of Hocheim. This man was not the crass bastard of Africa, but of Thuringian nobility. True, this may be conceit, but let us assume that it represents the pride of personality rather than some baser instinct, for the premise is purely Western. True Western values, and that is the essence of religion, values, and is the belief that the nobility of the self-reliant soul is the highest of all values. This in no way absolves us of the ‘value’ of God; rather it reinforces the interrelationship between the seen and unseen. The tangible and the intangible.

William Pierce saw us all as a organism, living and breathing in tandem with one another, a body-politic which rose or fell with a synchronicity which could only be applied to the knowledge of physics; this could be seen in his sedate, yet revolutionary world-view, as he was both an intellect and activist – the Poet warrior, with the scale dipping towards the poet.

In those early days, white nationalism was gestating, and would not become sentient for a few more years, but Dr. Pierce had the luxury of knowing William Galey Simpson, and showed much in his cosmological outlook that, in my mind, could only have come from the delicate spirituality of WGS.

In relation to this, it is precisely ‘the spirit of Western Man’ which makes our struggle (both from a inner/outer perspective) of such pertinent and permanent value in our struggle:

“The last race to keep its form, the last living tradition,
The last leaders who have both at their back, will pass
Through onwards, Victorious.”

Oswald Spengler

The words above of Oswald Spengler are worthy of our attention. He saw clearly the step-by-step process ineluctably present in the fulfillment of culture to be the ennobling of Man – to the Higher Culture.

Truly, the ‘ennobling of man’ was, in his mind, the highest mark of a truly great people. For one to understand the seemingly metaphysical aspects of ‘survival’, and ‘ennobling’, one must know empirically, as well as spiritually, the cause and effect of the mind of Western man. One, of necessity, must be animated with his [Western man] inner most mental concepts: his concepts of Religion; his concept of Identity; his Mystical apparatus – that element which has driven him ever upwards and onwards – all must be understood in its interwoven relationship with the whole of Western man. Hence, it is that Nobility, as a mental attitude, must be groomed and well founded in a higher Culture.

The subtle tissues of his spirit enveloped the ‘essence’ of what were his spirituality, his evolution of mental constraints, and his outlook on his surroundings. Primitive man was close to nature, as are all primitives, and was closer to a stricter understanding of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ as it seemed to him: what nurtured him was good; what denied or hurt him was bad. Simple, yet not ‘simple minded’. Through the passing eons, these ‘feelings’ and ‘experiences’ were molded by his evolving system of technics, his very own creations that passed eventually into the regimen of Religion. This, then, was the Institutionalization of his very consciousness. (ROTW)

Did William Pierce offer us a solution? I don’t think even he knew the width and breadth of his cosmology. It is worthy of speculation however, and in the minds of these ‘searchers for truth’ will come a time and a place, in which we all can sense this change; when this change happens, I hope that those of us who have benefit of this historical glance at Pierce andothers, will aid us in formulating our own world-view and, perhaps, this will congeal:

What or Who, then, should the West follow. Should we follow Hammurabi, Moses, Jesus, or the Philosophers? Should the traditions of our northern Folk, the Eddas, be followed? Should the spirituality of the West be confined to any one Institution? Can we, in any event, reshape the technics of the past? What imperative should we, as a People, follow? Should our value be ‘of this world’? On the other hand, should we transcend the earthly and nestle, childlike, in the realms of ‘heaven’ and the ‘world to come’? After all, as has been said, ‘where a man’s heart is, there also, is his vision, his value, his importance’. This, then, the spirit of Western man. This spirit, the power behind all great cultures, has also seen its greatest Religions.

Good and Evil are symptomatic of every Religion, of every Culture. Hence, the question: What is good for our People? What is evil for our People? For some individuals, the search is for something outside ‘christianity’ – that substance, which embodied the original teachings of that first evangel, Jesus, and not simply the de facto relationship of the modern religious technic of the ‘church’ is their prime motive – still they search. If we seek a foundation by which to reaffirm our spiritual direction, our spirituality, what, then, do we replace it with? Can we, you and I, overcome ourselves? Can we, you and I, create our own ‘good’ and ‘evil’? This, of course, would be the great doing as Nietzsche put it. Do you believe, are you able to envision this actualization? This is the question: Are you willing to try? Let us, then, resist the evil, and embrace the good. Thus, to our rising.

In his own way, Pierce was a Creator; how could he not be?

In the beginning of the article, Mr. Carver prefaced the beginning with the assertion that Dr. Pierce and NA were White Nationalists – I would agree by degrees – and would also assert that in this early beginning, not only was Pierce among a few that saw a ‘future’ in which all of us would congeal and unify under a socio-political banner – what name or orthodoxy was not known early on, but ‘white nationalism’ was already invoking its own evolution and synthesizing its own eschatology. Dr. Pierce was a part of this, just as we all are.

In another quote from: http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-The-T ... 469&sr=1-1 Dr. Pierce, in fact, is mentioned in the Dedication:

White Nationalism has its own narrative, the multi-verse of scriptural anecdotes, and belief systems, which range from Catholicism, Christian Identity, Episcopalian, Southern Baptist, Asatru, Odinism, Wotanism, Aryan Mysticism, Dualism, Vedic thought, Transmigration, Natural Philosophy, the doctrine of Metempsychosis30 , Cosmotheism and Theosophy just to name a few.

And white nationalists have been called small-minded and myopic!

The White Nationalist reeks of ‘religious’ ideas, but this does not necessarily disclose the nature of science or of spirituality in regards to Nationalism.
____________________________
30 A term disclosed by Professor Revilo P. Oliver, when discussing the value of an Aryan Religion or, more precisely, the need for a strictly White-aryan religion; he remarked that: Schopenhauer drew inspiration for much of his philosophy from the fifty Upanisads that he read in the Latin translation by Anquetil Duperron (Strassburg, 2 vols., 1801-1802), of which he said (Parerga, II, 185), “It has been the most elevating reading which (with the exception of the original text) there can possibly be in the world. It has been the solace of my life, and will be of my death.” [See Note, (Liberty Bell, December 1986)] FLS

I have always like the concept of distillation.

It seems to me, that in the distillation of our Western ethos, even in certain ‘christian’ ethics, there is, fundamentally, a passion and spiritual disposition to our Struggle – and being a White Nationalist is about preparation, struggle, sacrifice; of Art and War. You cannot have one (Art), without a sense of ‘spirituality’, and one cannot have War without a sense of passion – in fact, both elements are about Love of something – and most of us see this as centering on our Race, our flesh and bone. This seems to me, to envelope all that Dr. Pierce has to say, as well as so many of our other thinkers here, in America.

Truly, we have men in this country who are known by their Deeds, and it is only right and proper that we pay our respects and acknowledge their ‘deeds’, in both the spiritual and physical realm.

The infighting and egoism of others pales in comparison to those ‘true-believers’ like William Luther Pierce