Dec 11, 2014

High-Tech Paganism

via Soul of the East

Soul of the East Editor's Note: In this interview with Russian journalist Konstantin Kachalin, international award-winning Serbian film director Emir Kusturica shares his thoughts on man’s spiritual trajectory, the kinship between the Serbian and Russian peoples, Western materialism, and international capital’s lifeblood – war. Kusturica, born into a Bosnian Muslim family, was baptized into Orthodoxy in 2005, thereby returning his lineage to its original faith. Translated by Mark Hackard.

Why do you always try to tell people the truth in your work, even if sometimes it’s not very pleasant?

In the beginning I was shooting films in a way that wouldn’t shame me in front of my parents, friends, and teachers. I never thought about receiving Oscars or the Cannes Palm D’Or for it. I was simply making good cinema for people. I’m sure that if I set myself the task of shooting a film that would receive every award imaginable at the very beginning of my cinematographic career, I wouldn’t amount to anything in life.

I had moral principles, and I set myself the task of telling people the truth. That’s why I’m known and watched in the world today. Human life and civilization cannot develop without powerful ideas. An apartment, car, money, the good life – these aren’t bad things. They become false when they turn into the goal of one’s entire life. Each of us should have a goal in life. But if things are transformed into life’s main meaning, its basic objective, then nothing will result from this, and so you won’t make anything of yourself.

There should be a main idea, a main goal that leads us through life, and one that leads us spiritually. We must define our task and choose our path. Only then can we receive what we desire. The idea itself will bring us to the results. A rich man can be good, yet if he conditions himself his entire life to become rich, then his life is pointless. Everything that has a spiritual idea leads to man reaching a positive goal. If we turn everything upside-down, then it will be difficult to achieve anything.

Emir Kusturica
Emir Kusturica
Modern technologies, the internet, etc. are every more attaching man to themselves. Each of us is under the control of Big Brother, even if we don’t often account for this. Are we turning into robots that will ultimately lose their spirituality and individuality?
Today the world is full of high-tech pagans. This paganism doesn’t benefit man; he is under constant technological control. His brain and all parts of his body are controlled. Everything that happens to us is accessible to new technologies, but we cannot claim that today’s man is better than in the age of the Renaissance. We cannot say that industrial-age man is better or worse then today’s high-tech man, but moderns are left without a spiritual reference point. What remains in them are not very kind intentions, and some want to dominate others and enslave people. What does God give to man? He gives him the uniqueness that is being leveled in today’s world. Man is divided not into two parts, but several.

High-tech man today is more inclined toward biological rather than spiritual life. Only material values interest him; he is a pagan of technologies. And today this pagan opposes the divine man, about whom Dostoevsky spoke. There was a very interesting study conducted by the Americans – they were choosing the best writer of all time and all peoples. Lev Tolstoy took first place, and Dostoevsky wasn’t even in their list. They’re bothered by Fyodor Mikhailovich’s deep view into the human soul. I don’t want to say anything bad about Tolstoy, but with Dostoevsky we discover man’s soul and his inexhaustible possibilities. And he converses with us today in the contemporary language each of us needs. He calls us to spirituality.

The modern high-tech pagan is happy with more; he is a consumer and doesn’t ask questions. He loses individuality and becomes part of a controlled mob. He has no soul. Today the majority of Serbs and Russians are also transforming into high-tech pagans in imitation of Western models of culture, and not the best ones. There’s also much of interest in the West, but the youth is choosing the worst – high-tech paganism. I hope that there great changes will also occur in the West, for one cannot live without spirituality.

You are often in Russia and have many friends here. What do Serbs and Russians have in common? And why did our countries experience so many human tragedies in the twentieth century? What was the point of such suffering?

The peoples of our countries suffered many tragedies. Russia is a land targeted by invaders from Napoleon to Hitler. With its vast territories and natural resources, your state has always been a prize for those who warred against it. The suffering of Russia’s peoples is an enormous historical enigma. Should the Russian people have suffered so? They have indeed experienced what no other people on the planet have. Serbia also underwent no small number of human tragedies. We lost two thirds of our labor force. If not for the First World War, there would by 40 million people in Serbia today instead of 9 million. Historical circumstances constantly draw us into these human tragedies, these wars.

Other Slavic peoples managed to adapt to historical circumstances. The Czechs, for example, were able to find a compromise with the invaders. The fascists were much more merciful to them than to the Russians and Serbs. But Yugoslavia fell into a historical trap in World War II, and Britain took advantage of that. The Serbs went out on the streets and protested against Hitler, and Churchill gave the command to all Europeans to fight against the fascists and stop Hitler from seizing Europe. We obeyed Churchill, and on March 27th, 1941, the people went into the streets. All of this was organized by British intelligence, which was carrying out Churchill’s directives. After that Hitler gave the order to bomb Yugoslavia. They always bomb us: both the Allies in 1944 and NATO in 1999.

NATO Bombing of Serbia

Today’s world is arranged to be have an interest in constant wars. Despite the fact that wars in literature are condemned and the majority of people are against war, modern war has transformed into a profitable business. This is an eternal enterprise that thinks only of how to make money off human misery. And the major hypocrisy of the modern world is that those who organize wars simultaneously finance anti-war movements.
Humanity’s fate is braided into a tight knot impossible to unravel: from war to profit, and from profit to a new war. Thus capital and enormous fortunes are created. Modern wars are waged under the slogans of democracy and humanitarianism. The war that resulted in our losing Kosovo was called Merciful Angel. And no one asks the main question – why?

In Vietnam 4.5 million people died, in Iraq today there’s already a million dead, and in Afghanistan people are dying daily; we’ll never know the real figures. This speaks to the fact that capitalism is the main military enterprise. If an angel descended from the heavens and told Bush that there would be no more wars, everyone would be jobless. Wars give the push for new technologies and make men go further. I’m against war, but it’s a component part of human history and its tragic development.

Go East: What White Rights Activists Can Learn from Asia, Part 1

via Majority Rights

The 1982 classic film Shaolin Temple was underwritten by the Peoples Republic of China but made by Hong Kong, since Chinese tradition is mainly honoured in HK or Japanese films rather than mainland travesties. It’s good for the way Buddhist monks make a play of being of peaceful spirit while beating the bejesus out of deserving warlords. The land of the rising sun is a curious amalgam of cute robots with sensual ceremonies at time-lost shrines. Stirring vistas are as integral to the folk-landscape as they ever were, partly owing to much of the land being uninhabitable.

The fact that Japanese pop-culture has mastered the art of sophisticated cuteness shouldn’t blind us to its traditional tropes. Nippon is a land of contrasts: the nerd-infested fads of teens seeking like-minded souls; and the never-changing warrior ethos. Cult-anime Evangelion is one of the most extraordinary examples: a positively baroque storyline impossible to summarise here (children of Adam are varieties of Angels, battled by mechas piloted by angst-ridden teens). The fusion of east and west continues in the music.

Another strand is gender fluidity, even taking the form of fashion . You see it a lot in action and historical films too. I suspect it’s because, historically, women were capable sword and staff fighters. The 1970s TV series The Water Margin, set in the Song Dynasty but made in Japan, is a classic example.

Now, here’s a neat link! Grace Slick writes of the easy going joints of the San Fran scene
A girl in full Renaissance drag is spinning around by herself listening to some Baroque music in her head, while several people in jeans and American Indian headbands are sitting in a circle smoking weed.
- Somebody To Love? 1990

65 Cali was a sort of fusion of old West and old Europe with East Indian yogi, Japanese art, art deco posters. Slick came from a completely conventional, right-wing 50s, a bit like Joplin, and spontaneously metamorphosed into an easy love peacenik. So far so rebellious, but her right-wing credentials are still detectable in her love of guns (Lawman) and rural pursuits. She even cites the Puritan sensibility of “Don’t you want somebody to love?” – it’s better to give than to receive. Eventually, I suppose, the hippy colonies dissolved into the family as a more logical unit, so you end up with the usual lineage and dynasty (China Wing Kantner).

The infatuation with the East is an interesting fusion, mirrored in the Western tendencies of kung fu and Japanese anime – and Samurai: The Seven Samurai is a type of Western which improves on John Ford. The big problem with the hippies is their free-loving ethos dissolves in acrimony: they like the East’s esotericism, not its discipline. If you were to inject a little discipline into the hippy mode, you would get something much more suited to a HK kung fu movie! There’s a type of freedom of bodily expression in both cases.

Hong Kong kung fu films are theatrical, their stars are skilled practitioners, but they accentuate the high flying acrobatics with the now ubiquitous wires. Nevertheless, it’s the genuine skill which is most impressive. Have a look at the super speed and grace of a champion in action:

The physical discipline of kung fu allows characters to direct emotion tellingly – in their stances, in their controlled outbursts. In Once Upon A Time In China, 19th century folk-hero Wong Fe Hung honours the tradition, even submitting to arrest according to Chinese law, and countenancing action only when directly threatened. He thereby acts as an effective symbol of the old country. His physical aspect is commanding and his moral impeccable.

HK films are malevolent and theatrical, or comedic and ludicrous to the nth degree, but they do not fall into the western trap of portentious pedantry (the likes of Nolan’s Interstellar yawnathon). They have a moral human spirit and physical dimension which breaths life into turgid historical drama. In a semi-similar fashion, Bollywood accentuates traditional Indian aspects, imparting a story through human spirit and gaiety. Both these traditions fulfil a physical and moral dimension sorely lacking in the West. Batman tries his best, though I have to admit to a fondness for the old Adam West TV campness.

This form of physical infused with moral storytelling is a sign of a harmonious order. HK and India have all this at the time of writing – HK is teetering on the abyss as we speak. By “harmonious” I don’t mean lack of conflict, quite the opposite. In fact, in Swordsman 2 sexual conflict is a big part of the story.

Swordsman 2 with Jet Li and Brigitte Lin features a clan of uplanders who cohabit as a brotherhood, and there is some typically crude body-centric language (the same applies to the Chinese story on which Water Margin is based). Prowess with the sword is a badge of status; you want strong women, you got ‘em. Villain Lin becomes a eunuch and gains supernatural powers. Ambiguous sexuality in my view is quite an old Western tradition too. The thing about the Ouji (prince) craze is it is inspired by a time when men dressed more effeminately (men in tights, red Indian headdresses).

The sexualisation of women in our culture by contrast is overwhelmingly negative, something like the male-oriented fixation of Stepford Wives; the female body as a techno-centric dead-end. The Eastern way is a much more physical, body-centred romance, so that the woman, as in Michelle Yeoh’s films, is a balletic specimen of grace and power. Women in the middle-ages and Renaissance art were deployed to great effect as physical specimens, obviously.

The East is therefore less male-oriented and less enslaved to male techno-fetishism. Now, I should discount mainland China, since the “real” China is elsewhere. The idea of recognizing contrasts in sexes, not in a highly sexualised sense, but as a physical reality which has historical antecedents, and is thereby a form of escape from male enslavement. Techno-centric slavery of social-media is the best case-in-point. It’s literally run by “servers”, the clients are “slaved” to eachother in an arbitrary fashion. The entire culture of social-media is a form of male-oriented techno-slavery! Ask Jennifer Lawrence.

I suggest this points the way to a physical reality which is somewhat akin to the you see in Brueghel. There is a camaraderie between men and women which is not overly sexualised but has a crudity and coarseness. Actually, that type of thing is not so far removed from the old West, so we’re back with the hippies!

Is the Pope a hippy? I noticed him using the language of pop-culture to proclaim that Europe’s era of philosophy and “great ideas” has been replaced by the “bureaucratic technicalities” of European Union institutions. In a blistering broadside, he intones:
“The true strength of our democracies – understood as expressions of the political will of the people – must not be allowed to collapse under the pressure of multinational interests which are not universal, which weaken them and turn them into uniform systems of economic power at the service of unseen empires.”
This will come as a shock, but a revival of Christendom could be a novel way forward. There is no ethos in the Western world when we cannot support HK for fear of Chinese reprisals (on our wallets).

Every White Cop in America Must Now Ask Themselves "Do I want to become Darren Wilson" When They Challenge Black Criminals

via Stuff Black People Don't Like

Darren Wilson
Buried in what would seem an innocuous story is an important point reinforcing the reality of police as guardians of the state. [Police Chief: Branding Officers as Racist is ‘Going to Cause Rift at Some Point’, CBS St. Louis, 12-4-14]:
St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar is concerned “a rift” could be created if police officers are automatically branded as racist by critics. 
Speaking to Fox News on Wednesday following a grand jury’s decision not to indict a New York City officer in Eric Garner’s death, Belmar said the mantra that police are bad is counterproductive. 
“I think it is because it’s going to cause a rift at some point that may be very, very difficult for us to come back to. We are the 24-7 face of government here in law enforcement. We’re looking to solve problems. We’re looking to make sure that people understand we can’t arrest our way out of a problem,” Belmar said.
"The 24/7 face of government."

An important, but correct point. 
Until recently, Officer Darren Wilson was one of these representatives of the government in Ferguson. In late August, a total of nine (yes, nine) Washington Post reporters were assigned the story of trying to uncover some dirt on Wilson to establish a background anecdote magically proving he had some reason racial reason to shoot Michael Brown... granting the Department of Justice the ability to charge Wilson with violating Brown's civil rights
Those nine reporters uncovered nothing in Wilson's past, save him being a solid police officer. 
But nothing in Wilson's past matters now, save what transpired on August 9, 2014, for this incident will forever cloud his future courtesy of a racial lynch mob exhibiting a ferocity for revenge even  Javert would find overwhelming. 
Those revolutionary members of the 'Justice for Michael Brown' movement consider all police officers as complicit in his death [guilty-by-association] and Darren Wilson is just the extremely white-face representing the state's monopoly on violence.
And in the words of one press release released by a group of black lawyers attempting to revoke his police officer license, a face that looks like "a demon."[African-American lawyers group seeks to have Darren Wilson's police officer license revoked, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 12-10-14]:
The National Bar Association, led by an attorney for Michael Brown’s family, says it filed a “lawsuit” with the Missouri Department of Public Safety demanding the revocation of Darren Wilson’s police officer license. 
The department acknowledged receiving a document but said it is being treated as a complaint because the agency is not a venue for a suit. Spokesman Mike O’Connell said he could not reveal specifics from the document. 
Wilson, a white Ferguson police officer, fatally shot Brown, an unarmed black teen, on Aug. 9, triggering nationwide protests. Wilson resigned from the force Nov. 29, five days after a St. Louis County grand jury decided not to indict him in Brown’s death. 
Neil Bruntrager, an attorney for Wilson, said that his being a police officer “is off the table forever” but that, “Keeping his license in good standing is a matter of pride.” Bruntrager added, “He didn’t resign under any criminal charges and he didn’t do anything wrong.” 
The association, which says it represents African-American lawyers and judges, is headed by Benjamin Crump, who represents Brown’s family. 
It press release said it filed the document “on the grounds that he committed a criminal act ...” 
The release says Wilson’s comment in a TV interview that Brown had “looked like a demon” led the association to “challenge his suitability to ever wear a badge and carry a gun ever again.”
Every white police officer in America is only a "one or two minute encounter with an unstable black male" away from sharing the fate of Darren Wilson, truly illustrating the utter instability of Black-Run America (BRA). 
And what is his fate? New York Times reporters Julie Bosman and Campbell Robertson, though aware of the death threats to Wilson's life, published the street he lives on (sharing the house with his new, pregnant bride). 
Though being a police officer was "the job of his life," Wilson now enjoys the type of life of eternally-hounded George Zimmerman:
Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson is married, expecting a baby and contemplating his future now that a grand jury has decided not to indict him in the shooting death of unarmed black youth Michael Brown. 
Since the shooting, Wilson has been in hiding. He described a solitary life with a small circle of people, much like the life described by George Zimmerman after he was acquitted of killing unarmed black teen Trayvon Martin in Florida. 
"You have to take precautions, where you sit in a restaurant and where you drive," he said. "You have to make sure no one is following you." 
If he goes out, he said, he has to be on guard for who is looking at him or looking too long. 
Wilson said his conscience is clear. He said he would do everything the same if faced with Brown again. 
"I did my job that day," he said.
Darren Wilson did do his job on August 9, 2014; but because he did his job, he's now out of a job. With angry, racial-influenced mobs burning down buildings and beating people with hammers all in the name of exacting justice for the individual Darren Wilson briefly encountered in his final moments as an active-duty officer for the Ferguson Police Department. 
The truly scary thought for every white police officer in America is when they pull up on a group of black males, with one or two matching the description of a recent robbery/assault/murder suspect and if their training will take over or will the legacy of Darren Wilson sneak into their mind?
Will this white police officer just keep on driving, allowing a potential black suspect to freely go on his/her way in committing another (perhaps more lethal) crime? Or will this white police officer approach the potential black male suspect and "in one or two fateful minutes" become the next officer having death threats Tweeted his way and New York Times reporters publishing his address?
The "rift" St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar warned about goes far, far deeper than most people dare imagine. 
And because of the intensity of black criminality, coupled with unaccountable nature society holds black parents with maintaining some semblance of discipline over their children, the odds are extremely high another white police officer shoots innocent black youth incident will occur soon in either the city of St. Louis or metropolitan St. Louis.

The Seething Anti-White Hostility behind the ROLLING STONE Scandal

via The Occidental Observer

You would need a heart of stone not to laugh at the humiliating predicament of Rolling Stone magazine. The hipster bible’s lurid account of a gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house has spectacularly blown up in its face and the magazine has been forced to issue an excruciating apology to its readers.

The story, by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, seems to have been written without the most basic journalistic checks and safeguards. There was no police investigation or third-party witnesses. The “suspects” were never approached for their side of the story, and now there are openly voiced doubts as to whether any rape took place at all.

Bloggers such as Steve Sailer and Richard Bradley ruthlessly pulled the original story apart. The affair has become a perfect case study of leftist journalism modus operandi in that where the facts clash with the narrative, it is the facts that have to give way.

It is also an instructive in media ruthlessness; for the magazine has chosen to shift responsibility for the debacle on the hapless woman herself with the words that, because of “discrepancies” in the story, its “trust” in her “was misplaced” — a cynical way to treat an obviously vulnerable young person who, whatever happened to her, is clearly still in distress.

But there is another dimension which has only so far been mentioned by Jewish convert blogger Luke Ford — that is the undertow of seething Jewish ethnic resentment that permeates the entire affair.

This can be heard in the initial squawks of indignation from Rubin Erdely’s stoutest defenders — Jewish female journalists.  Jezebel’s Anna Merlan initially dismissed Richard Bradley as an idiot and seemed to think gang rape was too foul for ethics. “Uurgh, it’s about ethics in gang rape journalism as well now?” She grudgingly back-pedalled later.

New York Magazine ‘s Kat Stoeffel was similarly indignant that anyone would question the veracity of the affair.

The New York Times was initially supportive of the Rolling Stone story via its reporter Jennifer Steinhauer and happy to take it all at face value. To validate Rubin Erdely’s due diligence, the Times went to two Journalism professors, Helen Benedict and Marc Cooper — both Jewish — who seem to have seen nothing wrong in Rubin Erdely’s reliance of the entire story on the word of one person.

Only Slate’s Hanna Rosen added a note of caution, on a podcast, and that long after the story began to unravel.

But most of all this anti-White animus can be seen clearly in the previous writings of Sabrina Rubin Erdely herself, who has been described as “militantly Jewish” by

Much of her Rubin Erdley’s previous writing has been dedicated to the cult of victimhood. Her worldview seems to encompass the usual bizarre left-wing cosmology in which women and minorities are constantly beset by White hatefulness in the shape of racist cops, Nazi drunks, predatory priests and many other sources of White oppression.

One of the most controversial of her previous stories was from 2011 about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. On this occasion, a defender of the Catholic Church hit back with a blistering reply. In this rebuttal the author Bill Donohue shows that, although hindered by the restrictions on frankness on these matters, he knows exactly  what is going on.

He begins:
The sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church provides grist for the mill to those who harbor an animus against it, so a certain amount of cheap shots are to be expected. But what was printed in the September 15 edition of Rolling Stone was not the typical below-the-belt attack: it represents a new low in yellow journalism.
The author of “The Catholic Church’s Secret Sex-Crime Files,” Sabrina Rubin Erdely… knows how to smear, and knows how to exploit stereotypes. As we will see, she is also dishonest.
Ms Rubin Erdely, he says, is a bigot who has brought journalism to a new low. He accuses her of dishonest reporting. He takes apart her selective and biased use of facts.  He points out that “As with any form of prejudice, there are staples that are commonly employed by bigoted writers. Anti-Catholics, for instance, like to play on the stereotype that the Catholic Church operates in secret, as a top-down organization, run by Rome. True to form, not including the title of Erdely’s piece, the term “secret” appears 16 times in her article.” He accuses her of trying to rope the pope into an international conspiracy.

He is surely quite reasonable when he makes this point. For suggestions of secretiveness and cabal-like conspiracizing  and institutional cover-ups by a priesthood, are totally beyond the pale when applied to certain other religions.

Charitably, he writes, “Erdely’s description of the priesthood is not a reflection of her Jewishness—Jews have written excellent works on the Catholic Church—it is a reflection of her stupidity.”

Despite this, Mr Donohue lands a few swipes at Jewish behaviour in analogous circumstances. He mentions how New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg lied to the public about the real reason for the discreet removal of his deputy (it was for beating his wife). He points out that many in the Orthodox Jewish community prefer to deal with such issues internally.

Indeed, the principle of mesira dictates that Jews are not to inform on other Jews, including in matters relating to sexual abuse which has been rife in Orthodox Jewish communities.  It’s noteworthy that sexual abuse within Jewish communities has been more or less off limits to the mainstream media and certainly not a topic that Ms. Rubin Erdely would cover. For example, almost two years ago Taki pointed out that the practice of mesira includes the New York Times:
Speaking of little boys, leave it to The New York Times to find a front-page story unfit to print because it wasn’t anti-Catholic: The Brooklyn DA recently arrested an astounding 85 Jewish Orthodox men on charges of child sex abuse. Back in 1985 a Hasidic “therapist” was indicted for abusing five boys, but police suspected he abused more than a hundred. Avrohom Mondrowitz fled to Israel, where he remains to this day a free man. Those nice guys who shoot rock-throwing Palestinian children refuse to extradite him. Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes now has to tread carefully. Fifty rabbis have signed a public announcement in Yiddish denouncing the Hasidic family who went to the cops. They asked—now get this—for any believer to kill the family that informed “on fellow Jews.” So what will happen to the 85 perverts? All I know is the Times has not published a word, whereas when the Catholic Church sex scandal broke, it led the news in the front page for months. There is something very evil when rabbis who hate the non-Jewish world can dictate to an abused child’s parents whether or not to talk to the mostly non-Jewish fuzz. If some parent were to go and firebomb the Times, we might see it appear on the back pages.
Toward the end of Donahue’s exculpatory essay, he makes a very serious insinuation indeed as to some of the motives at play. Readers of The Culture of Critique can be under no illusion as to the scenario he is outlining — organised Jewish anti-White malice gleefully smearing the Church out of pure racial hatred. Here we move from journalism to a Lynne Abraham, the District Attorney for Philadelphia, but the sentiments are the same.
Finally there is the matter of the District Attorney who started the grand jury investigations in the first place, Lynne Abraham. Erdely mentions her role, but only in the most positive terms. Here is what the reader was not told.
Abraham launched her investigations into wrongdoing in the Philadelphia Archdiocese ten years ago. From the very beginning, she knew full well that she would come up empty: the matters she probed fell outside the statute of limitations. So why press the issue? Her goal was to indict in the court of public opinion, allowing uncontested grand jury testimonies to affect the reputation of the Catholic Church. Everything she did was fodder for a new round of hearings and condemnations.
What is not generally known is that it was absolutely unethical for Abraham to focus her exclusive attention on the Catholic Church, acting as if no other secular or religious organization had any track record of concealing the sexual abuse of minors. Why was it unethical?  Because that was not her charge. On March 31, 2011, I sent a letter in the overnight mail to Abraham, the text of which appears below:
“In the Grand Jury report of September 26, 2001 (First Judicial District, Criminal Trial Division), it says that the Grand Jury was charged ‘to investigate the sexual abuse of minors by individuals associated with religious organizations and denominations.’ You were the District Attorney at that time.
“Could you identify which ‘religious organizations and denominations’ you pursued, other than the Roman Catholic Church? It is important to the process that we ascertain accurate information.”
Abraham never replied. Is there any wonder why?
There has been wrongdoing—too much wrongdoing—by members of the Catholic clergy. Reporting on it is not a problem; selectively reporting on it is. Worse still are malicious distortions of the kind found in Erdely’s diatribe.
Rolling Stone should stick to what it does best, reporting on music and the entertainment business, and leave issues like religion to those who are better suited to address it. Serious journalism is the work of serious journalists. It should be clear by now that Sabrina Rubin Erdely is not among them.” (“Rolling Stone gets ugly: Vile hit on Philly archdiocese“)
Journalism and prosecutorial discretion as ethnic warfare that cannot tell its name.
Despite their lack of ethics and their ethnic biases, journalists like Erdely have a powerful influence because they have access to the mainstream media. Let’s hope that Ms. Rubin Erdely’s career cannot be salvaged. But don’t bet on it.

DNA Evidence Exonerates Foolish White 'Liberal' Who Confessed to Killing Eight Women so the Blacks that Did it 'wouldn't be punished'

via Diversity Chronicle

After spending nearly 35 years behind bars in a federal prison, recently analyzed DNA evidence has exonerated confessed serial murderer and rapist Edward Thompson. The evidence proves conclusively that the crimes for which he took responsibility were, in fact, committed by African-Americans. Thompson, a white male, who is 58 now, was serving eight consecutive life sentences. One for each victim. In a trial that lasted several months, prosecutors showed the jury pictures of brutally beaten, raped, tortured, and murdered young women. For years Thompson was regarded as one of America’s most heinous serial killers, and his story was profiled extensively by the media.

Many Americans were puzzled as to why a young white American, who was by all accounts a great student, from a wealthy and upper class family, would go into urban neighbourhoods and brutally rape and murder young white women. His family and friends expressed disbelief, yet in court, he confessed guilt and even orated at length as to how much he enjoyed planning and carrying out his horrific crimes. It was all, we know now, a carefully contrived act.

Upon his release, reporters asked Thompson, “Why did you accept guilt for such heinous and gruesome crimes when you were innocent? Why did you keep silent for so many years, and remain in prison?” Thompson answered “I knew that most likely these crimes were going to be traced to urban youths of color. I didn’t want African-American boys, who grew up facing the sting of poverty and bigotry everyday of their lives, to go to jail for raping and killing a series of privileged and affluent white women. The truth is we are all guilty. I grew up a privileged white male! Had I been born poor and black in the inner city, I would have committed those crimes!”

Facing heckling from the radical right wing, and shouts of “You are insane.” Thompson continued, “All of us, rich and affluent white males hoard all of the wealth and commodities to ourselves. We refuse to give minorities a chance! We are all guilty. I was more responsible for those gruesome crimes than the actual perpetrators! I was not going to sit back and stand by while our crimes, as white males, were pinned on African American urban youth. They may have technically raped, tortured, and murdered these women, but we all should bear the guilt and responsibility! I’m guilty and they aren’t! Every day I cut myself with razors to remind myself of my guilt and I whip myself with a belt. I scourge my evil privileged skin! I’m an evil white male, and I don’t deserve to live or to be free!

When asked about his experiences in prison, Thompson stated that “I offered my body willingly to anyone of color who wished to use it for their pleasure! I knew it would be very lonely for male homosexual prisoners of color. I knew that many of them would be sexually frustrated. So, although I am straight myself, I willingly offered my body to them as an outlet for them to vent their sexual frustrations, as often as they needed one. I even worked out to look my best.” While in prison, Thompson contracted several STDs and received treatment repeatedly for a prolapsed rectum.

Some extremists on the radical right, are claiming that Thompson was and remains, mentally ill. They claim that prosecutors should have discovered his agenda, and sought the real culprits. Many progressives have praised Thompson, and hailed him as a hero, for nobly standing up and taking responsibility for his own white privilege.
According to Dr. Isaac Feldheimberg, a criminal psychologist, “Edward Thompson is a truly great and heroic man. He was accused of horrifically raping, torturing and murdering several young women. He took the blame because otherwise innocent youth of colour would be punished. Yes, I say innocent. Technically they might have done the deeds, but only technically. White racism, white oppression, and white discrimination drove them to do it! We need more Edward Thompsons. I’m sick and tired of phoney white liberals who talk about helping youth of color but don’t have a single black friend, and haven’t made any personal sacrifices! Thompson should get a gold medal!” In fact, Edward Thompson has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and is considered a serious contender.

When pressed as to his plans for the future, Thompson noted that “Several beautiful young ladies have offered to sleep with me, because I took responsibility for my privilege and saved those young African Americans from lengthy prison terms. I have received offers of marriage from countless women. However, I have turned down all such offers. Because of the unequal balance of power in our society, I have foresworn such things. I will not have sex with a woman until full equality for women is achieved everywhere! Until then, no man deserves it!

Despite offers from several wealthy fans and supporters to put him up in their own homes or buy him a luxurious home of his own, or a stay in a first class hotel room, Thompson refuses to leave the small tin shanty he has occupied in an alley in urban Detroit since his release from prison. “As long as even a single young boy or girl of color lives on the streets in America, I refuse to live in a house or a room of my own! I do not deserve better than they do. Offers of shelter from whites disgust me!” Thompson noted, as he removed the marijuana joint from his mouth, and handed it to a homeless person of color. He then offered the gentleman a sip from some collected rainwater.

Thompson has already been stabbed four times with a crack pipe, and has been repeatedly beaten and robbed. When asked the race of the perpetrators by police, Thompson rightly refuses to answer, or sometimes smiles widely and says, ”alright fascist pigs, it was a group of blonde white guys, in suits, carrying brief cases. They are rich white and privileged! Go get ‘em all! Shoot ‘em!”

Several wealthy progressives, including Warren Buffet, have offered Thompson a job, or start up money for his own non-profit organization. Thompson refuses all such offers, noting that, “I’d rather die than become another suit and tie wearing sell-out. I will stay here living on the streets, and helping urban youth and poor of color wherever I can, however I can.” Thompson notes that so far he has helped several homeless to patch up their cardboard boxes, and he has liberated watches and jewellery for them, from several local shops, or created distractions so that they could liberate items from stores.

Principled progressives are rightly distrustful of Thompson and scornful of him. While claiming to be a progressive, he merely assumed that youth of color committed the murders and rapes for which he took responsibility. An assumption Thompson made, without a single shred of evidence! In this case it was true, but it very well could not have been as well. Edward Thompson is just another privileged white male. In this writer’s opinion, he deserves no special praise or commendation for his actions. He did some good, but even that is erased by his racist assumption that youth of colour were guilty. Edward Thompson’s ugly racism should rightly disgust all Americans. He’s no hero.

Racial Bias Is Only a White Problem . . . Really?

via Theden

Two recent articles in the Washington Post and Mother Jones, both by Chris Mooney, are trotting out the peculiar Brahmin narrative of recent years in which it’s a given assumption that only Whites are capable of being racially biased or racist. In the WaPo article, titled “Across America, whites are biased and they don’t even know it,” In both pieces, Mooney bases his assertions largely on results generated by the Implicit Association Test (IAT), a computerized test in which people are asked to respond to paired sets of images and words with different races and different words each time. For instance, “bias” is revealed when someone consistently responds positively to the pairings that have images of white people and positive words associated with it, and operates in reverse when given an image of a black face and a negative word.

Mooney engages in some disingenuous framing regarding the issue, noticeably by only discussing what IAT results show for Whites:
Most white Americans demonstrate bias against blacks, even if they’re not aware of or able to control it. It’s a surprisingly little-discussed factor in the anguishing debates over race and law enforcement that followed the shootings of unarmed black men by white police officers. Such implicit biases — which, if they were to influence split-second law enforcement decisions, could have life or death consequences — are measured by psychological tests, most prominently the computerized Implicit Association Test, which has been taken by over two million people online at the website Project Implicit.
Even with the warning that the results under discussion in this article are drawn from a sample that is “younger, more educated, more politically liberal, and more female than the U.S. population as a whole,” Mooney feels safe to assert that “white people in every U.S. state are biased.” Of course, as is always the case when Brahmin experiments regarding race, racial bias or racism don’t *quite* fit their narrative, they have to add ” that there are reasons to think that Americans as a whole may be more biased than the map suggests,” and they add this qualifier because of the already noted makeup of the group that’s taken the test up to this point.

Mooney finishes off with a typical and boring histrionic flourish regarding this so-called bias apparently only present in Whites:
Overall, looking at a map like this one tells us something pretty crucial to our understanding of racial bias: It is everywhere, from north to south, from Maine to California. It is present among liberals and conservatives, men and women, young and old.
We have a huge amount of work to do.
Now, funnily enough, Mooney’s own narrative takes a hit in his piece over at MoJo. Titled “The Science of Why Cops Shoot Young Black Men,” Mooney basically makes the same case as the WaPo article: The IAT results show that, man, White people sure are biased! But, and it’s quite odd that he doesn’t seem to think this is fitting to address, a graphic in that piece shows that racial bias, or ethnocentrism, as it’s known elsewhere, is built into all groups. Here’s the graphic:


Really, what we want to focus on with this infographic is the lower half. Note that under the listing “Ethnicity”, the grouping Hispanic or Latino shows a positive bias towards Whites, as does the “Not Hispanic or Latino” grouping. For anyone who knows even a little bit about Black and Hispanic relations in this country, you know that both groups *really* don’t like each other. But somehow, that bit of information is largely skipped over by Mooney.

And then there’s the “Race” category, in which we see all races listed, except one, show a positive bias towards Whites. Yet again, Mooney completely ignores that groups as varied as Native Americans and East Asians have an implicit positive bias towards Whites, and that the only group that shows a positive bias towards Blacks, are well, Blacks. Instead, he continues with his sophomoric finger wagging at Whites, but that’s to be expected at this point.

What would be really interesting is if the test wasn’t a binary choice between Blacks and Whites. If it was opened up to pairing off all races, one imagines that the results would once again prove that ethnocentrism is something central to humanity, and that it’s not a sign of “bias” or “racism”, but rather a holdover from our evolutionary biology still operating today.

In short, Mooney is running around with data that strengthens the case for the idea of ethnocentrism. It’s been shown that Mooney’s “bias” is rather something operating at a very deep level in all humans, at least partially because the hormone oxytocin and likely other biological factors. Try as they might, our elite Brahmins still just can’t program us away from preferring our own. But because this Brahmin narrative is under assault from both science and increasingly, people’s everyday experiences, Mooney and his elite peers are trying their hardest to keep their sinking boat afloat, largely by shouting more loudly that any problems regarding race in the U.S. are solely caused by Whites, and ignoring any contrary data, even data that appears in their own work.

11 Facts about the Eric Garner Case Big Media Won’t Tell You

via American Freedom Party

Sources in the mainstream media expressed outrage after a grand jury declined to indict a New York City policeman in the death of Eric Garner, but there are 11 significant facts that many of them have chosen to overlook:
  1. There is no doubt that Garner was resisting an arrest for illegally selling untaxed cigarettes. Former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik put it succinctly: “You cannot resist arrest. If Eric Garner did not resist arrest, the outcome of this case would have been very different,” he told Newsmax. “He wouldn’t be dead today. Regardless of what the arrest was for, the officers don’t have the ability to say, ‘Well, this is a minor arrest, so we’re just going to ignore you.'”
  2. The video of the July 17 incident clearly shows Garner, an African-American, swatting away the arms of a white officer seeking to take him into custody, telling him: “Don’t touch me!”
  3. Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny.
  4. At the time of his death, Garner was out on bail after being charged with illegally selling cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false impersonation.
  5. The chokehold that Patrolman Daniel Pantaleo put on Garner was reported to have contributed to his death. But Garner, who was 6-foot-3 and weighed 350 pounds, suffered from a number of health problems, including heart disease, severe asthma, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea. Pantaleo’s attorney and police union officials argued that Garner’s poor health was the main cause of his death.
  6. Garner did not die at the scene of the confrontation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance taking him to the hospital and was pronounced dead about an hour later.
  7. Much has been made of the fact that the use of chokeholds by police is prohibited in New York City. But officers reportedly still use them. Between 2009 and mid-2014, the Civilian Complaint Review Board received 1,128 chokehold allegations. (Patrick Lynch, president of the New York City Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, said: “It was clear that the officer’s intention was to do nothing more than take Mr. Garner into custody as instructed, and that he used the takedown technique that he learned in the academy when Mr. Garner refused.”)
  8. The grand jury began hearing the case on Sept. 29 and did not reach a decision until Wednesday, so there is much testimony that was presented that has not been made public.
  9. The 23-member grand jury included nine non-white jurors.
  10. In order to find Officer Pantaleo criminally negligent, the grand jury would have had to determine that he knew there was a “substantial risk” that Garner would have died due to the takedown.
  11. Less than a month after Garner’s death, Ramsey Orta, who shot the much-viewed videotape of the encounter, was indicted on weapons charges. Police alleged that Orta had slipped a .25-caliber handgun into a teenage accomplice’s waistband outside a New York hotel.

Idiot of the Month: Anti-White 'Liberal' Knocked-Out with Hammer While Demonstrating His 'Solidarity with Blacks'

via Alternative Right

There has been a lot of competition for the much-coveted Alternative Right Idiot of the Month Award recently, with special efforts being made by white, liberal, anti-police-brutality protesters, keen to show solidarity with the "Black Community" but somehow getting roughed up in the process.

The most laughable example to emerge so far is that of an elderly bearded man in Berkeley California, who was keen to demonstrate that not only was he a sensitive White man who felt the pain of his Black brothers, but also a keen cyclist!

Wearing a cycling helmet and a home-made protest T-shirt with the slogan "Cops: Stop Killing Black Men," he certainly stood out among the be-hooded "youths" that he had foolishly chosen to ally himself with. Things took a nasty turn when he tried to assert his "white privilege" in order to stop them looting a Radio Shack to instead focus on the much more important business of his moral posturing. One hammer blow to the head later, the bearded, Black-loving, bicycle-riding burk from Berkeley was one idiot award richer, but alas none the wiser.


via Radix Journal

Christopher Nolan has established himself as the “new Spielberg.” From our perspective, this passing of the mantle is a tremendous improvement.

We shouldn’t discount Steven Spielberg’s craft and the depth of his better films; however, Nolan’s aesthetic—expressed in imagery, setting, and especially acting and writing—demonstrates an unmistakable sense of hierarchy, reserve, decorum, and magnanimity; this was doubtlessly gained from his more class-conscious English background.

No better is this demonstrated than with the character of Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine) in The Dark Knight Trilogy. Alfred is, as we know, a faithful manservant. Nevertheless, he is a deeply respected, wiser elder.1 Alfred’s acceptance of hierarchy and his tireless service is ennobling, rather than degrading.

Americans might call the trappings and ambience of Nolan’s films—along with his dizzying, Escherian plots—pretentious. And they are, in a way that makes his predecessor, Spielberg, vulgar in comparison. Nolan’s influence on American cinema, like that of countryman Alfred Hitchcock, has been thoroughly civilizing.

Moreover, Nolan’s films deal with themes that are not only profound in their own right but are of central importance to us, even if he doesn’t always reach the conclusions we might want him to. The credence and power he affords these perspectives (which he must nevertheless obligingly demonize) speaks to Nolan’s magnanimity . . . and maybe even a suppressed longing to be something closer to us. The least we can say is that he is quite willing to entertain heretical thoughts . . . sometimes very heretical thoughts.

The most obvious example of this is in the tension he builds between the ostensibly neoconish Batman and The League of Shadows in his Dark Knight Trilogy. The League of Shadows seeks to overthrow a society it deems corrupt, embodied by crime-ridden Gotham City. At first blush, The League might seem to be on the left end of Jean-Pierre Faye’s “political horseshoe,” something like a a comic-book version of Occupy Wall Street.

Yet the League of Shadows is driven by an esoteric motive, one the Occupy movement most definitely does not share. The degeneracy and sickness of western societies—not their economic inequality—is one of The League of Shadows primary hatreds; Occupy, so far as anyone can discern, was dedicated to a more equitable redistribution of degeneracy.

Perhaps fundamentalist Islam is The League of Shadow’s closest analog. In fact, Ra’s al Ghul (played by Liam Nesson in the film) is envisioned in the comics as a scimitar-wielding demon-prophet first arising in the Arabian desert 600 years ago; in other words, he’s a Mohammedan figure. Hence, in The Dark Knight Rises, we see Islam, cloaked disingenuously in the rabble-rousing egalitarianism of Bane, rising to overthrow the West.

The wealthy Bruce Wayne is, for his part, depicted faithfully by Nolan as a man of colonial-stock aristocrat.2 And this too, naturally, is wont to appeal to us. Wayne, even if ultimately an oligarch governing and defending a degenerate society, is depicted in ethnicity, bearing, and style as a vestige of a higher, older Anglo-Saxon culture.

We are even more drawn to Wayne when we learn about his deeper political sympathies. In The Dark Knight, he doesn’t bat an eye as District Attorney candidate Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), understanding the need to crack down on crime in Gotham, articulates the idea that, in some moments, it is necessary for a dictator to assume power. “When their enemies were at the gates,” Dent says in defense of both Batman and strong political leadership, “the Romans would suspend democracy and appoint one man to protect the city. It wasn't considered an honor, it was considered a public service.”

Far from disagreeing, Wayne appears moved and enthusiastically throws his support behind Dent. Even if Dent is Gotham City’s “Giuliani”-a tough figure who seeks to quell an inherently unstable multicultural city—we can enjoy his striking political incorrectness, and also the ultimate direction this sentiment points.

Most importantly of all, Nolan seems to be acknowledging the concept of the Kyklos, the traditional cyclical notion of history. Indeed, it is explicitly referenced in Batman Begins by Ra’s al Ghul. Batman is the hero, but as a sort of Buckleyian, rear-guardist sense—“standing athwart history, yelling stop.” Simply the notion of civilizational decline—put forth in a period of civilizational decline, when all mainstream institutions assert fanatically that we continue on an upward course of “progress”—is, in itself, subversive. This is not changed by the fact that it comes from the mouth of a comic-book villain.

And then there is the “gothic” setting of “Gotham” itself, which is understood in the comics to have essentially been a Gothic Cathedral writ large. Here, Batman functions as one of its gargoyles, intimidating and punishing sinners. This alone makes Batman ripe for traditionalist treatments, especially for a positioning of the West versus Islam. The “noir” look and tone of most all Batman films—along with what is called “Goth” in popular culture—ultimately arises from the horror fiction produced in the Age of Enlightenment, characterized by an unease with a more masculine and barbaric Medieval past. The bawdier venality and degeneracy of Gotham in Batman’s universe should also be understood, in this context, as pointing very likely to the feelings of Batman’s creators vis-à-vis the Catholic Church and Christianity generally.

The Persistence of Memory

In Nolan’s early film Memento (2000), co-written with his brother Jonathan, an important metaphor appears. Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce) suffers from the condition of anterograde amnesia, short-term memory loss or the inability to create new memories. Leonard is thus caught in an endless, repeated limbo, constantly trying to recollect his past and identity. His only “memories” are random jottings, tattoos, and Polaroids. In this state, he becomes a puppet of Teddy Gammell (Joe Pantoliano) and seeks retribution upon an imagined enemy, one who may not have actually harmed him.

In the end, Memento is a film about the danger of loosing one’s memory and thereby being reduced to a passive and degenerate state, incapable of a sense of purpose or even self-motivation and therefore only activated by motivations given to one externally. In some odd and almost certainly incidental way, which the then younger and less wise Nolan brothers perhaps chanced upon by good instinct, it is a deeply traditionalist message. Ancient Europeans believed that the written word destroys the oral tradition, and thus the cultural and ethnic memory served by it; we can only assume this to be true tenfold with the case or television and movies.

In 2014, one is reminded of mainstream European-Americans (and especially Christian-Zionists), hopelessly severed from the stabilizing traditions of their European roots and addicted to the memory-destroying media, which simultaneously hops them up with animus against persons or peoples they have no natural cause to hate. At one point Leonard says: “If we can't make memories, we can't heal.” In John Boorman’s 1981 traditionalist’s epic, Excalibur, Merlin (Nicol Williamson) says it better: “It is the doom of men that they forget.” Memento also shows the danger of presuming to exploit such a culture-less and yet enflamed creature. For Leonard will eventually turn on his manipulator, Teddy.

In Memento there is repeated reference to Gideon’s Bible, which Leonard reads “religiously.” When it is shown, the lens focuses on the passage: “an eye for an eye.” Hence, religion (or even the written record of a history, mystical or otherwise) does not serve as a symbol of memory but rather, at best, something fragmentary, invariably taken out of context.

It’s possible also that Nolan is making a commentary on the vengeful First Testament versus the merciful Second, which presumably Leonard will never have time to read. Or perhaps Nolan is positing the Bible as a symbol of forgetfulness rather than memory.3

Regardless, Nolan takes a much less cynical view of religion in later works. Indeed, Christianity, at least as it operates as a metaphor, plays a major role in Interstellar.

What Dreams Are Made of

Inception (2010) is about dreams . . . and dreams within dreams. Here, Nolan develops another another important leitmotif that will define his oeuvre, that of the “Dream-Makers.” In the world of Inception, Dominick Cobb (Leonardo di Caprio) and his confederates literally enter the subconscious of willing and unwilling subjects. Their fictional profession seems to be an allegory for filmmakers, artists, and philosophers, as well as advertisers and propagandists. These are the ones who implant ideas into the subconscious of others, or even the shared collective subconscious. There is also the wonderful notion that the deeper, more profound and impactful the idea, the more risk an artist or thinker takes in its “inception,” and the cleverer and more masterful he must be—risking even being mired endlessly in the dream itself. Indeed, the film contains the useful understanding that this “inception” must ultimately be made to resonate emotionally with its subject. Perhaps Radix’s readership thinks especially of the New Right and its travails in a similar manner?

In Inception, it is curious to see that it is the objective of the Dream-Makers (Cobb’s team is “extractors”) to inspire the dissolution of a Western energy conglomerate for the benefit of an Asian competitor, a company headed by Saito (played by Ken Watanabe). In a way, Cobb and his team—a band of thieves and criminals, though charming ones—seem to be acting in the stead of The League of Shadows: they are working toward the dissolution of a Western Civilizational (even if only economically). So we see . . . cryptically, implicitly . . . that devious part of Nolan’s again, that part that takes the side of the The League of Shadows.

There might be an even more obscure message embedded in the film. The object of Cobb’s “inception,” and in whose mind the lion’s share of the film takes places, is Robert Fischer, the son of energy tycoon Maurice Fisher and heir of the monopolistic energy conglomerate Fischer Morrow. The name Fischer is frequently, though not exclusively, Ashkenazi, and the most famous real-life Robert Fischer is, of course, the chess champion Bobby Fischer, a Jew, through his mother’s side, who became anti-Semitic in his later years. Is this reference to Judaism, and to the real-life Bobby Fischer, deliberate?

There is another character, Ariadne (Ellen Page), who is the “Dream Architect”; she is responsible for fashioning the dreamscape in order to deceive Fischer. She carries as her “totem,” perhaps meaningfully, a chess piece; quite a symbolic choice with respect to Robert/Bobby Fischer. Second, there is an angle-dependent, yet striking resemblance between Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy) and the younger Bobby Fischer (a quick Google image search reveals this).

The intention here, assuming the reference is deliberate, may simply be to indicate the great challenge that Cobb’s team faces vis-à-vis a mind as formidable as “Bobby” Fischer’s, which has been trained to prevent “inception.” Certainly such an explanation would serve as a credible alibi. Then again, information on Bobby Fischer is a mouse click away, and Nolan, who doubtlessly seems intent on “incepting” deeper messages, strikes one, at this point in his career, as more careful, thorough, and deliberate in his choices, and aspiring to understand all dimensions and implications of them.

Indeed, the message maybe deeper. To wit, in the manner that Robert Fischer went his own way in Inception, dissolving his father’s company, so certainly did the real life Bobby Fischer, rejecting and thereby dissolving his own heritage. It is interesting here to see essentially a caricature of Adorno’s “Authoritarian Personality” type, a critique Kevin MacDonald suggests was designed primarily to demoralize Gentiles, applied to Robert Fischer’s father, Maurice, who, to the extent Robert is intended as a Jew, is likewise intended.4

In real terms, Maurice, however he is depicted, is simply desirous of the continued power and success of his lineage, an idea especially prominent in the company name Fischer Morrow. Yet he is conjured here as loveless and cold, capable only of uttering to his son on his deathbed a single word: “disappointed.” And this loveless relationship is seen as a chink in Robert’s emotional armor by the team of “inceptors,” as perhaps Frankfurt School thinkers likewise saw a similar perceived loveless-ness between father and son as a vulnerability in the minds of Europeans.

If it was Nolan’s intention to deliberately reference Bobby Fischer, and specifically his rejection of Judaism, or simply to hold up the “Fischers” as Jewish types, it seems possible that he is likewise cryptically signaling for the dissolution of monopolistic Jewish economic and cultural power (which at this point is almost synonymous with Western economic and cultural power). Here, one is reminded of Lord of the Rings and Tolkien’s chastisement of Gollum and many others who find it impossible to resist the ring of (wealth and) power.

If all this were so, it would also lend credence to the notion of a comparably subtle and long-honed anti-Semitism among Europeans in general and Englishmen in particular, at least vis-a-vis the relatively less sophisticated Americans. It also reveals an ability, scarcely seen in Americans, to engage in ethnic competition sub rosa. It would also indicate that Christopher and Jonathan Nolan have, like the artful team of “inceptors,” gone quite deep, even under the nose of a Jewish producers and studio heads, to “incept” a likewise deeply subliminal idea.

And yet despite these two important examples, Interstellar is doubtlessly Nolan’s greatest and most mature work to date, and therefore most worthy of our analysis.

A Crypto-Christian Epic

It is, of course, a mistake to view Interstellar as a racialist or “right-wing” film. Yes, Nolan is, quite admirably, calling for a return to nobler virtues embodied in the great explorers of the Age of Discovery and the American Astronauts of a more recent period. Though beyond this explicit message lies a crypto-Christian allegory.

Here, it seems, Nolan is implicitly endorsing Christianity as the faith of the West, intrinsically bound to it, as its bedrock even, and as a necessary or inevitable part of cultural, civilizational, and even scientific renewal, much as Spengler fastened Christianity to The West through his coinage of “Faustian.” And Nolan optimistically seems to be signaling for a Faustian Indian Summer, if not the appearance of a new Faustian Age all together. Here are the clues.

Quite explicitly, there is a Christian theme of death and renewal (or resurrection), of which even the characters in the film are cognizant. They have named their missions, which are intended to save all mankind, Lazarus missions. Nolan also slyly follows James Cameron in The Terminator; both give their protagonist the initials of Jesus Christ—John Conner and James Cooper, respectively.

And there is also doubtlessly a reference to Christ’s (and Dionysus’, Balder’s or Adonis’) pre-resurrection descent into the underworld or hell, seen especially in Copper’s disappearance into the black hole. In this myth, it is understood that Christ’s resurrection and apotheosis (as is the case with his pagan equivalents) is only possible by his suffering and gaining of wisdom in hell. Likewise, this is the case with Cooper.

Additionally, Cooper becomes a sort of Holy Father in Heaven (or Space), contrasted with Murphy, an Earth Mother or Mary, both daughter and, as it will be revealed, mother and liberator of Christ (Cooper). To wit, Murphy is virginally “impregnated” by the Spirit, Message, and Word of God, as the Catholic Nun is, and thereby becomes the mother of the world as well as the mother of Cooper, The Savior, who is also reborn by her efforts.

There is also something unmistakably “Rapture”-like and “world-denying” in mankind’s abandonment of earth and ascent into the heavens. Lastly, we see the Adam and Eve myth conjured, with marooned Amelia Brand (Anne Hathaway) awaiting James Cooper, to repopulate a new planet, though with the help of innumerable pre-fertilized embryos.

Perhaps you are tempted to retort, “to hell with symbolism!” After all, the Christian symbolism is derived in large part from Pagan symbolism, which was used to convert Pagans to Christianity. Hence, why can’t Nolan’s symbolism be interpreted as Pagan and Nietzschean and Cooper, as a sort of a White Pagan savior? And additionally, who is to say Nolan is not merely using Christian symbolism as a metaphor? Might he be endorsing a scientific revival—one that would doubtlessly be post-Christian?

The reason for this ultimately lay outside of symbolism and is found in Nolan’s treatment of race in the film. This is made unequivocal when Brand, with a modern piety that is presumed to have survived a period of great dearth, happily reveals the fertilized eggs that have been cultivated to populate the new extraterrestrial worlds have been made deliberately diverse in genetic makeup. We understand the intended specific meaning of this in today’s context and know that this refers to more than brunettes and blondes. Alas, Space travel will not be the White flight “racists” have dreamt it be.

How does this make Nolan’s film a Christian film? Cooper’s goal is far from an ethnic or particularistic one, rather it is a Catholic one, and by Catholic, we also mean universal and globalist. To wit, Cooper will save all of humanity. And thus Cooper, like the Christ for whom he was named, is ultimately a “caretaker” to the world, despite his memorable words to the contrary. This contrasts sharply with Darren Aronofsky’s tribal Noah, where only Noah and his family, understood as proto-Jews, survive a worldwide cataclysm, whilst the Orcish non-Jews are subsumed. Importantly, the earth is retained and Noah’s descendants inherit it.

Collapse, as depicted in Interstellar, is a presumed to be a “man-made” environmental disaster, and not a man-made corruption of the spirit and moral sensibility. In other words, the causes are more Jared Diamond than Edward Gibbon. Donald (John Lithgow), Copper’s father-in-law, drops the primary hint: “But we made a lot of mistakes. Six billion people. Just try to imagine that. Every last one of them trying to have it all.” Add to that the footage from Ken Burn’s documentary The Dust Bowl, a film greatly admired by Nolan, which instructs us that the Dust Bowl was “man-made.”

In other words, environmentalism becomes adopted as part and parcel of a larger crypto-Christian outlook in the same manner Darren Aronofsky folded environmentalism into Judaism in Noah. Yet in Noah, the sinless Noah is absolved of the sin of environmental destruction, whereas in Interstellar, humans are held responsible and, through Cooper, take responsibility. In any case, Nolan’s environmental collapse, as Spielberg’s in A.I. and Aronofsky’s in Noah, smells slightly of an eschatology obsessed with disasters, and the notion that man alone causes them.

Certainly, we—of all people—should be environmentalists and should be aware of the risks humanity poses to the natural world. After all, we understand, appreciate, and need nature on a spiritual level. Yet we should also recognize the use of environmentalism by our political adversaries as a distraction, much in the manner of abortion or gay marriage.
Indeed, environmentalism is used by the political Left much in the way their mystic forebears unconsciously used prophecies of eschatological disasters—a collective, non-human boogeyman everyone is obliged to fixate on so that attention is distracted away from them and their more secretive agendas. And when the rubber hits the road, and third-world immigration is correctly identified as a “sustainability” problem, we find where their true motives and loyalties lie.

Indeed, to ignore race, and America’s fuzzy-headed notion of it, is to ignore the central problem that is leading us to the sort of societal collapse envisioned in Interstellar. We are turning the West into a new third world and destroying our planet because we are, with an overgenerous squandering of our great Faustian advancements, saving, advancing, fueling, transporting, feeding, and thereby expanding dysgenic third worlds, at the expense of our own and, as depicted in Interstellar, at the expense of the natural world. It is, of course, unsustainable. And the seed of this wrongheadedness lives in our most prestigious minds, among whom Nolan may now count himself.

We might prefer that Nolan had abstained from directing scenes like that in The Dark Knight, when golden-hearted African convicts teach lessons in Kantian morality to craven and hypocritical White people. But maybe—who knows?—Nolan’s fuzziness on race is a conscious idea inception to help hurry on the collapse, so that renewal may follow? This is, of course, wildly unlikely. Rather Nolan’s sentimental scenes seems sincere; at worst—or best?—they are the standard, cynical, politically correct gestures of obedience one expects of any Hollywood director.

Nolan is—much like Vladimir Putin (for now), Nicholas Wade, and the best people “above ground”—a mixed bag . . . though, nevertheless, a positive development. Perhaps developing events, as well as praise and constructive criticism, will help him become something greater than he is.

Curmudgeons, for whom nothing and no one is ever good enough, will attract scant friends. Hence, we are obliged to see the good in people, to see their potential, and not simply dwell on their inadequacies or compromises. And if we cannot sway the Nolans, Putins, and Wades of the world, there will be more artists, scientists, and statesmen who will go even further, who will build on the laudable aspects of these men’s works and incept even riskier and deeper ideas into the collective dream. We, who live in the deepest part of the subconscious, here in the “id,” the most honest part of the Web, are obliged to make certain of this. And we must do some inception of our own.


  1. One sees similar relationships depicted among Tolkien’s Hobbits, particularly between Samwise and “Master” Baggins, if perhaps captured less well by Peter Jackson, who errs on the side of histrionics.
  2. In the comics, Jewish creators Bill Finger and Bob Kane took special pains to Anglicize and Americanize Bruce Wayne, deriving his surname from “Mad” Anthony Wayne. His ancestral backstory eventually indicates that he was descended of a brother of the revolutionary officer. Anthony Wayne’s father was descended of Protestant Anglo-Irish family.
  3. More trivially, it may also be a reference to the Beatle’s Song “Rocky Raccoon,” which likewise features a vengeful protagonist, contemplating Gideon’s Bible in a hotel room before a planed murder on someone who has stolen his wife.
  4. The point is not being made that the personal life of Robert Fischer in Inception in any way mirrors the real personal life of Bobby Fischer, who was neither the heir of an energy conglomerate nor the son of a domineering father. Indeed, the identity of Bobby Fischer’s absentee father is, in fact, obscure. Indeed, it is possible that this abandonment and rejection, rather than an “authoritarian” father figure, more than anything else relates to Fischer’s rejection of his Judaism. But here we enter into the realm of idle wondering and fruitless pop psychology and we are obliged to be less presumptuous than the Frankfort School.

The War Between the Aryan First and Second Castes

via Aryan Myth and Metahistory

The War Between the Aryan First and Second Castes Aryan peoples has been discussed before on these blogs. In the Germanic world this was represented by the war between the Aesir and the Vanir which resulted in their amalgamation and the formation of modern Germanic man. However what is little spoken of is the ancient war between the first and second castes in Aryan societies. I have discussed before on this blog and on my Celto-Germanic Culture, Myth and History blog about a tension between the first caste of priests and the second caste of nobles/kings and warriors. It is these two castes rather than the third caste of producers and farmers which are genuinely originally Aryan.

We need to remind ourselves that the Aryans were a warlike and dominant elite who formed the upper echelons of the societies which they conquered and dominated. The further away these societies were from the Ur-Heimat of the Aryans the more likely it was that only the first two castes were predominately Nordic. This is because it is the first and second castes who would have been involved directly in the conquest and subjugation of foreign peoples. Back in their Ur-Heimat there was less distinction between the three castes as they all stemmed from the same genetic root. Indeed it is only outside and away from this original homeland do we see an entrenched historical caste system. In the conquered lands the people they enslaved became the third caste who did all the hard manual work for them. They had no need to bring their own farmers and producers with them. This is why one can see today racial differences between the various European societies. The caste system unfortunately has not survived in Europe. Only in India can we find a broken remnant of it. What we have today in Europe is instead a degenerate class system which is based on money and nothing else. Even the Upper Class which in England and Europe is the nobility (different from the American concept of an Upper Class which is purely monetary based) has become debased due to its prostitution to lower, baser and alien elements in order to maintain their lives of privilege, their own money having long dwindled away.

The reason why we see a very strong caste system in India is because of the vast racial differences between the invading Nordic Aryans and the conquered negroid and Dravidian peoples. It has survived today because of this stark racial contrast. In Europe the differences were not so great so it did not last as long. The caste system was imposed upon the conquered lands to preserve the racial difference between Aryan and non-Aryan. Money has and is breaking down these barriers: the lust for material wealth and worldly power is particularly epitomised in the USA which has become a racial cesspit. These American 'western' anti-values are poisoning Europe also. This is why a racial awakening is needed but this can only occur after a folkish spiritual awakening as Europe turns back to its old Gods, who have never gone away but are waiting for us to come back to them. We therefore do not convert to heathenism: we return to it!

The purpose of this article is to explore further one aspect of the historical tension between the first and second caste. The Germanic caste system has its mythological basis in the Rigsthula of the Elder Edda.
"Once walked, 'tis said, the green ways along, mighty and ancient, a god most glorious; strong and vigorous, striding, Rig. 
Ever on he went in the middle of the way, till he came to a house with door unclosed. He entered straight; there was fire on the floor and a hoary couple sitting by the hearth, Great-grandfather and mother in ancient guise. 
Well knew Rig how to give them counsel, he sat him down in the middle of the floor, with the home-folk twain upon either side. 
Great-grandmother fetched a coarse-baked loaf, all heavy and thick and crammed with husk: she bore it forth in the middle of the dish, with broth in a bowl, and laid the board. 
Thence Rig uprose, prepared to rest; -- well he knew how to give them counsel -- he laid him down in the middle of the bed and the home-folk twain upon either side. Thus he tarried three nights together, then on he strode in the middle of the road while thrice three moons were gliding by. 
Great-grandmother bore a swarthy boy; with water they sprinkled him, called him Thrall. Forthwith he grew and well he throve, Bur tough were his hands with wrinkled skin, with knuckles knotty and fingers thick; his face was ugly, his back was humpy, his heels were long. Straightway 'gan he to prove his strength, with bast a-binding loads a-making, he bore home faggots the livelong day. 
There came to the dwellings a wandering maid, with wayworn feet, and sunburned arms, with down-bent nose,- the Bond-maid named. 
She sat her down in the middle of the floor; beside her sat the son of the house: they chatted and whispered, their bed preparing -- Thrall and Bond-maid -- the long day through. 
Joyous lived they and reared their children. Thus they called them: Brawler, Cowherd, Boor and Horsefly, Lewd and Lustful, Stout and Stumpy, Sluggard, Swarthy, Lout and Leggy. They fashioned fences, they dunged the meadows, swine they herded, goats they tended and turf they dug. 
Daughters were there, -- Loggy and Cloggy, Lumpy-leggy, and Eagle-nose, Whiner, Bondwoman, Oaken-peggy, Tatter-coat and the Crane-shanked maid. Thence ate come the generations of thralls.The Birth of Churl
Ever on went Rig the straight roads along till he came to a dwelling with door unclosed; he entered straight; there was fire in the floor; Grandfather and Grandmother owned the house. 
The home-folk sat there hard a-working; by them stood on the floor a box; hewed the husband wood for a warp-beam; trim his beard and the locks o'er his brow, but mean and scanty the shirt he wore. 
The wife sat by him plying her distaff, swaying her arms to weave the cloth, with snood on her head and smock on her breast, studs on her shoulders, and scarf on her neck. 
Well knew Rig how to give them counsel; he sat him down in the middle of the floor, and the home-folk twain upon either side. 
Grandmother set forth plenteous dishes; cooked was the calf, of dainties best. Thence Rig uprose prepared to rest. -- Well he knew how to give them counsel -- he laid him down in the middle of the bed and the home-folk twain upon either side. 
Thus he tarried three nights together, then on he strode in the middle of the road while thrice three moons were gliding by. 
A child had Grandmother, Churl they called him, and sprinkled with water and swathed in linen, rosy and ruddy, with sparkling eyes. He grew and throve, and forthwith 'gan he to break in oxen, to shape the harrow, to build him houses and barns to raise him, to fashion carts and follow the plough.
Then home they drove with a key-hung maiden in goat-skin kirtle, named Daughter-in-Law. They wed her to Churl in her bridal linen: the twain jade ready, their wealth a-sharing, kept house together, and joyous lived. 
Children reared they thus they called them: Youth and Hero, Thane, Smith, Yeoman, Broad-limb, Peasant, Sheaf-beard, Neighbour, Farmer, Speaker and Stubbly-beard. 
By other names were the daughters called: Dame, Bride, Lady, Gay, and Gaudy, Maid, Wife, Woman, Bashful, Slender. Thence are come the kindreds of churls.The Birth of Earl 
Still on went Rig the straight roads along till he came to a hall whose gates looked south. Pushed was the door to, a ring in the post set: he forthwith entered the rush-strewn room. Each other eyeing, the home-folk sat there -- Father and Mother, -- twirling their fingers. There was the husband, string a-twining, shafting arrows and shaping bows: and there was the wife o'er her fair arms wondering, smoothing her linen, stretching her sleeves. A high-peaked coif and a breast-brooch wore she, trailing robes and a blue-tinged sark. Her brow was brighter, her breast was fairer, her throat was whiter than driven snow. 
Well knew Rig how to give them counsel; he sat him down in the middle of the floor, and the home-folk twain upon either side. 
Then took Mother a figured cloth, white, of linen, and covered the board; thereafter took she a fine-baked loaf, white of wheat and covered the cloth: next she brought forth plenteous dishes, set with silver, and spread the board with brown-fried bacon and roasted birds. There was wine in a vessel and rich-wrought goblets; they drank and revelled while day went by. 
Well knew Rig how to give them counsel; he rose ere long and prepared his couch: he laid him down in the middle of the bed, and the home-folk twain upon either side. 
Thus he tarried three nights together; then on he strode in the middle of the road while thrice three moons were gliding by. 
Then a boy had Mother; she swathed him in silk, and with water sprinkled him; called him Earl. Light were his locks, and fair his cheeks, flashing his eyes like a serpent's shone. 
Grew Earl forthwith in the halls and 'gan to swing the shield, to fit the string, to bend the bow, to shaft the arrow, to hurl the dart, to shake the spear, to ride the horse, to loose the hounds, to draw the sword, and to swim the stream. 
Forth from the thicket came Rig a-striding, Rig a-striding, and taught him runes, his own name gave him, -- as son he claimed him, and bade him hold the ancestral fields, -- the ancestral fields -- and the ancient home.
Then on rode Earl through the murky wood, through the rimy fells till he reached a hall. His shaft he shook, his shield he brandished, his steed he galloped, his sword he drew; war he wakened, the field he reddened, the doomed he slew, and won him lands -- till alone he ruled over eighteen halls. Gold he scattered and gave to all men treasures and trinkets and slender-ribbed horses; wealth he strewed and sundered rings. 
Along dewy roads his messengers drive till the hall they reached where Ruler dwelt. A daughter owned he, dainty fingered, fair and skilful, Erna called. 
They wooed her and brought her home a-driving; to Earl they wed her in veil fine-woven: husband and wife lived happy together, their children waxed and life enjoyed.The Birth of King 
Heir was the eldest, Bairn the second, Babe, Successor, Inheritor, Boy, Descendent, Offspring, Son, Youth, Kinsman; Kon the kingly was youngest born. 
Forthwith grew up the sons of Earl; games they learned, and sports and swimming, taming horses, round shields bending, war shafts smoothing, ash spears shaking; but King the youngest alone knew runes, runes eternal and runes of life. Yet more he knew, -- how to shelter men, to blunt the sword-edge and calm the sea: he learnt bird language, to quench the fire flame, heal all sorrows and soothe the heart; strength and might of eight he owned. 
Then he strove in runes with Rig, the Earl, crafty wiles he used and won, so gained his heritage, held the right thus Rig to be called and runes to know.
Young King rode once through thicket and wood, shooting arrows and slaying birds, till spake a crow, perched lone on a bough: "Why wilt thou thus kill birds, young King? 'Twould fit thee rather to ride on horses, to draw the sword and to slay the foe. 
"Dan and Damp have dwellings goodlier, homesteads fairer than ye do hold; and well they know the keel to ride, the sword to prove and wounds to strike."
Amongst the Germanic peoples by the time that the Rigsthula had been composed there no longer was a separate priestly caste. Instead the functions of the priest were amalgamated with the warrior caste and the king was viewed in essence as the incarnation of divinity and to a lesser extent so were the nobles. However this is a distortion of the original Aryan caste system and is not to be found amongst other non-Germanic Aryan societies. No doubt this was due to the conclusion of a conflict between these two castes for supremacy. In essence the struggle never really went away. We find in the Middle Ages ongoing conflict between the king and the church and between emperor and pope. In fact by xtian times the clerics probably had greater power than the nobles.

The Aryan caste system is reflected in the tripartite functions of the Gods. We still see in the Germanic mythology the survival of the priest, warrior and farmer caste system of the Aryans. The Rigsthula is out of step with the cosmogony. The Rigsthula knows a noble/warrior, farmer and thrall tripartite division, the latter caste being non-Nordic whilst the cosmogony sticks to the original priest, noble/warrior and farmer system. The thrall was essentially the non-Aryan and non-Germanic slave of the conquered territories. The Rigsthula is thus a distortion and a reflection of later Germanic society. In the Germanic cosmogony we still have the Gods of the three functions of sovereignity, war and production represented at the temple of Old Uppsala asWodan, Thor and Fricco according to Adam of Bremen, writing in the late 11th century CE.

I originally intended that this article should be about the significance of the serpent in Aryan mythology but it would seem that this time (like many times before) the Gods had other ideas! However what I have to say about the serpent cult has a direct connection with this article and should be read in conjunction with it.