Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 1st, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default Cambria (Christian Jew-Apologist): Thoughts about Liberals and Hush Crime

[from Cambria Will Not Yield]

Pietas

The liberals are not overly concerned about the proliferation of pornography. Virtually everything is permitted in the porno-zones of our major cities, and virtually everything is permitted in our movies and in our television shows. There is however one significant exception. The real life torture murders and rapes of white people by black barbarians are not talked about or shown by the liberals. And of course we know why the black atrocities against white people are never reported or shown. The mad-dog liberals are committed to a new religion in which the Negro savage is the centerpiece. If the most obviously unequal of God’s creatures can be made to appear equal, then the liberals’ dream of one coffee-colored race and one Godless faith can be realized. So we are constantly barraged with false images of blacks on stage and screen, in which they are depicted as kinder, nobler versions of white people. And upper and middle-class whites, who have very little contact with blacks other than with upper and middle-class ones who know how to work the system, by and large believe that the world should be one big, happy, racially blended family. But it is a different story in the white lower classes. They can’t escape to gated communities and expensive high-rise apartments. They know what the presence of blacks in a community means. It means bestial torture, murder, rape, and robbery. The white liberals should forsake their liberal pomp and expose themselves to “to feel what wretches feel,” but in order to do that the liberals would have to care about the plight of white people. And of course, they don’t care.

This lack of concern for one’s own kind was not always the mark of the European. In fact, the mark of a Christian European was his intense concern for his own. The relief of Lucknow was not one isolated incident; such concern for one’s own was the rule, not the exception in Christian Europe. And the key word is ‘Christian.’ When the European was Christian, he cared about his people.

I think the event that indicated Christian Europe was no more took place in the 1960’s when Pope John XXIII stated he had “no feeling of hatred, only loving charity and forgiveness” for the Congolese barbarians who tortured, mutilated, and killed nineteen missionary priests, and then raped, tortured, and killed the missionary nuns. If a people stand by and let such a thing happen to their own kind, can they be called Christian? Can they even be called human? No, they can’t. They must be called what they have become: soulless robots who have banished the Man of Sorrows and replaced Him with the sterile ratiocinations of their own minds. Pope John didn’t see actual white people being tortured and murdered, he saw in the white victims mere abstractions whose deaths gave him a chance for a P.R. coup: “I can appear saintly if I forgive their enemies.” And he didn’t see, in his mind’s eye, hideous beasts straight from hell, when he thought about the Congolese natives who murdered the whites. He saw adoring noble savages who would fall down and worship him because of his great beneficence.

Pope John represented the new breed of bloodless, and therefore, soulless (because the soul of man resides in the blood) liberal whites who see life as an abstraction. The black is an abstract good, and the white is an abstract bad, so nothing that the black does to the white can be termed evil, because the white is evil and deserves to be punished. Voting for Obama or honoring Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday is not sufficient punishment for white people. Only the daily sacrifice of whites to blacks will satisfy the bloodlust of the barbarians and the utopian dreams of the liberals.

Pope John was a prototype of the new, anti-white Christian. His hardhearted, callous unconcern for the suffering of his own kind, and his abstract love for the black race became the faithless credo of the white man. Why does a man adopt such a cruel, heartless faith? A man adopts a new faith when he has lost his old faith. In the Christian faith, and in no other faith, each individual soul has eternal significance. This is a very hard thing to believe when we look at the material world. Nature and nature’s laws seem, as regards individual human beings, to be inhumane and unforgiving. But the Christian used to believe that man was something more than nature, because his God was something more than nature. The two faiths are coordinate. When one believes that his God is a distinct God above and separate from nature, then he believes that human beings created in that God’s image are above and separate from nature. It was only after Christ, by His resurrection from the dead, asserted that God’s love was stronger than nature’s inexorable laws, that man started to see nature as something that could be studied and used in the service of man.

Modern science was made possible because Christ rose from the dead. But European man forgot who gave him sovereignty over nature. He placed Christ in a subordinate position to science. The end result of that betrayal has been the return of a gnawing fear in the heart of the white man. While passionately trying to scientize every aspect of his life, a small voice inside of him keeps telling him that he is once again naked before his greatest enemy. He thought science was leading him to paradise, not to the valley of the shadow of death.

The pagan has the usual pagan opiates of wine, women, and battle. But what does the white man have to sustain him in the face of death? Science has proven a false messiah, and he has only a dim memory of the reason why he once looked at life so fearlessly. So he takes refuge in his own mind. If he can abstract himself from existence, he can avoid the pain of existence.

The liberals will always have a maniacal hatred for the non-utopian, non-abstracted white man, because the existence of such men threatens the abstracted pleasure dome of the liberals. When a white man comes too close to the pleasure dome, the liberals sic their colored dogs on him. And for the moment, it seems that the dogs are keeping the white man at bay. But that is only because the remnant whites are irresolute. They are still mesmerized by the forces of modernity. When they step back into the role they were born to, the role of the Christ-bearers, all the seemingly insurmountable obstacles will be mere shadows on the wall that disappear in the light of day.

Nietzsche and Shaw both looked to the future in order to find a superhuman hero. Was there ever such a failure of vision? The superhuman heroes were all in the past, European men and women who consecrated their lives to The Hero. But the obvious miracle of European civilization is cited, by the liberals, as an example of the evil of the white man. Even professed friends of the European, such as Pat Buchanan, routinely condemn the European for racism in the past and express their hope that the colored races will be kinder to the whites than the whites were to them. Yes, the blacks are a kind race of people; we can look forward to the time, under their regime, when murder, rape, and mayhem are the norm, and civilized behavior is considered an aberration. Actually, we don’t have to look to the future to see such a dystopia: in Africa and our American cities, the savage new world is here.

When a European ceases to care about his own and transfers his allegiance and sympathy to the savages of color, then that man has ceased to be a European. He has become a man without a soul, a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. The white counter-attack against the liberals and the coloreds must come from pietas, from love of one’s own. The man imbued with such a love will not be doctrinally non-violent in the face of barbarism. Nor will he place his faith in the democratic process or modern science. He will live and breathe the same rarified air of Tell and Wallace. And then he will have the strength and the faith to move mountains. A sword is just a weapon to the barbarian; he wields it in order to commit the usual atrocities. But to the Christian European the sword is a cross to be wielded in defense of His reign of charity.

The end of the liberals’ reign has already begun. There are cracks in the pleasure dome. Europeans with hearts that still burn within them have turned away from the new Babylon. They seek the old Europe, His Europe. And when they find it, they will unsheathe their swords and use them in defense of their people and their God. That’s the way it happens in all the fairy tales: at the last trump, the hero steps in and defeats the forces of evil. And we, as Christians, believe in The Fairy Tale. Christ is risen, and His Europe will triumph.

http://cambriawillnotyield.blogspot.com/
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

It was only after Christ, by His resurrection from the dead, asserted that God’s love was stronger than nature’s inexorable laws, that man started to see nature as something that could be studied and used in the service of man.

There is literally no human achievement the christian bigot will not claim for Christianity. I fully expect one day to read that humans didn't breathe until Christianity appeared.

The claim doesn't even make logical sense. The logical thing to do, if you believe that there is a power beyond nature, a power capable of rendering nature's laws inoperable, or superseding them, is to figure a way to appeal to, appease, or enlist such a power. Why the heck would you bother figuring out difficult laws if you have a holy shortcut?
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #3
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

What causes man to seek to understand and control things has nothing to do with God, but is simply a matter of noticing that there's a relation between doing (A) and getting result (B). Grasping necessary connection makes you speculate. What else can I effect? What else can I control? How else can I manipulate the world to enhance my environment?

None of this has anything to do with religion.
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Christ-bearers, what rot. That corpse might have scared someobody 2,000 years ago, Toby, it moves no one today. White resurgence will manifest in some new SS-style form - white men fanatically dedicated to their race and the kind of world worth living in, a world only whites can create and sustain.
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #5
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

The fool who wrote the above is oblivious to the fact that the hyperconcern with the 'individual soul' is exactly what led to liberalism and the lie that blacks are people who must be saved. Liberalism comes from Christianity, and Christianity is of the jew. All of these are anathema to whites, and all of them are "bad for Whites."
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #6
cillian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
It was only after Christ, by His resurrection from the dead, asserted that God’s love was stronger than nature’s inexorable laws, that man started to see nature as something that could be studied and used in the service of man.

There is literally no human achievement the christian bigot will not claim for Christianity. I fully expect one day to read that humans didn't breathe until Christianity appeared.

The claim doesn't even make logical sense. The logical thing to do, if you believe that there is a power beyond nature, a power capable of rendering nature's laws inoperable, or superseding them, is to figure a way to appeal to, appease, or enlist such a power. Why the heck would you bother figuring out difficult laws if you have a holy shortcut?
Because the christians found an easier way, simply kill anyone that doesn't agree, destroy all history and rewrite it in a dead language that only a select few are allowed to learn, and give all credit to christ or some fictional saint.
 
Old July 1st, 2009 #7
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Default

"Modern science was made possible because Christ rose from the dead"

Science is the opposite of religion. Here again, the conservative desire to have reason and religion.

They "think" reason + mysticism = reason.

In fact, reason + mysticism = mysticism

Just like they want censorship (1972 porno decision) and first amendment. Just like they want socialism and free enterprise.
They don't give a flying fuck about these contradictions, probably because their comfort zones are still intact.
 
Old July 2nd, 2009 #8
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Default

For a religion, the appeal to consequences is itself a sign of weakness, but even in those terms the piece goes nowhere. The white Christian elite of the US is anti-white. The white secular elite of Western Europe is anti-white.

Quote:
Pope John didn’t see actual white people being tortured and murdered, he saw in the white victims mere abstractions whose deaths gave him a chance for a P.R. coup: “I can appear saintly if I forgive their enemies.”
If the pope had to worry about how he appeared to an external PR machine, then how powerful could he have been?

Quote:
When the European was Christian, he cared about his people.
But he cared about another people even more, the people who now control the PR machine.
 
Old July 2nd, 2009 #9
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
The fool who wrote the above is oblivious to the fact that the hyperconcern with the 'individual soul' is exactly what led to liberalism ."
Except the belief in the individual soul was a pre-Christian Aryan belief as well. The Hindu Aryans believed in the transmigration of the individual soul, the Greeks believed that individual souls went across the Styx to Hades, the Germans and Norsemen believed that if you died in battle you would go to the corpse-hall of Odin and feast until the final battle, or else if not you would be crammed into the house of Hel where the Nid-hog would eat your soul.

Aryan Zoroastrians believed in it too.

It was the Hebrews who did not believe in an afterlife, until around the time of when they came into contact with the Zoroastrians, Persians, who believed in it, and then their concept of "Sheol" began to appear in their writings.

So a belief in an individual soul is not some Christian invention. Nor is it necessarily the reason for liberalism. Liberalism did a lot to divorce men and their "Souls" from their organic human communities though. Rousseau, John Locke, and the notion of the individual as the legitimate atom of society, rather than the folk or ethnic group or "nation," or for that matter some collective religious authority or tradition, but not those things but the "individual,"-- that was a specifically Enlightenment idea and these men were part of a secularizing movement in Europe not a religious one.
 
Old July 2nd, 2009 #10
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
Science is the opposite of religion. Here again, the conservative desire to have reason and religion.
Not so. Science is based on certain metaphysical premises. In the west they are essentially the same premises as Christianity. The existence of a physical world which is governed by unseen but knowable natural laws. That's it in a nutshell where Western metaphysics is concerned. Aristotle was the father, anyways, and his heir Aquinas.

You might want to read Thomas Kuhn's "the structure of scientific revolutions" if you want a good book about how metaphysical ideas can undergo big changes from time to time, remaining essentially the same for centuries and then changing rapidly.

Spengler wrote about the similarities between the metaphysical premises of the Classical world view and the Western or Faustian one, in Decline of the West.

The Jews have an essentially different world view and metaphysics than Christians or followers of materialistic science. That is the Jew as the oomphalos, or, the navel of the universe. The Jews conceived of themselves as God's covenant people, and hence, after they rejected the universalitistic notion of Christianity that other peoples or nations could encounter God directly through Christ, then after that the Jews rejected God in a fashion and that left the only part of the equation, Jews, as the navel of the universe, or the Jew tribe as Godhead itself. That is like relativism, the cultural relativism of the Frankfrut school, or the relativism of the plaigiarist Jew Einstein.

Christianity and science have a shared universalistic metaphysics that says each person is just right here where they are, affected by the laws of nature in the same way as every other person is. Today's liberal misunderstanding of that, whether it is liberal-atheist or Christian-conservative, but today's misunderstanding of that is to discount a person's race, history, ethnicity aas part of a person's natural identity which is subject to the laws of nature. Thats the mistake.



Quote:
They "think" reason + mysticism = reason.
In fact, reason + mysticism = mysticism
Sorry, that's a dictum from the Jewess Ayn Rand. I reject her and this false notion. Aquinas and many of the best centuries of our race transpired under the notion that reason and faith can be reconciled.

Faith is not some feeling in your belly about the supernatural or miracles. Faith is a feeling of trust. Trust experienced in the context of a human religious community. If you are in a bogus religious community you wont feel it. If it's working for you then you will. That's what I have found from talking to people. Faith has very little to do with whether or not you believe in the Tooth Fairy. That's the caricature of faith that Jews have innoculated us with through the mass media our entire lives. That Christians are essentially just credulous children who believe in Santa Claus. Well, thats just Jewish bullshit. Sure, a lot of Christians are, but if that population is also encountered in other religions then the difference is nullified and not attributable to the religion itself but the character defects of the credulous individual instead.
 
Old July 2nd, 2009 #11
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

is this who the thread is refering to? I hadnt seen this before but I'll take a look, thanks.

http://cambriawillnotyield.blogspot....1_archive.html
 
Old July 2nd, 2009 #12
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Default

"Not so. Science is based on certain metaphysical premises. In the west they are essentially the same premises as Christianity."

That's what Galileo said.

"The existence of a physical world which is governed by unseen but knowable natural laws."

Where do these laws come from?
 
Reply

Tags
hush crime, liberals

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:06 AM.
Page generated in 0.29877 seconds.