A recent conversation with the wife highlighted something I have always known but probably assumed wasn’t as prevalent even with people you are close with. Possibly because in the family I grew up in this was understood as I understand it. And our lives and some of the work my father, myself and my brother all did independently of each other also confirmed this reality:
Violence is a normal part of life on Earth. So learning about it and how and when it is required to be applied and when it is not just right, but even necessary to do so, was simply something we learned in the normal course of life, like maybe other kids learn to go to football practice or learn to ride a bicycle and understand sometimes you’re likely to fall and so on.
In polite society (which really is a nice way of saying the mollified, metrosexual, “all violence is bad” generic faggotry that has been promoted, pushed and inserted into every narrative ever since the end of WWII) the idea you may have to resort to violence is seen mostly as some barbaric act of fate and bad luck, and certainly not anything you ever could or should do in cold blood.
Some may even agree that certain people need killing, as the saying goes, but like most “civilised” meat eaters would balk at the idea of butchering their own meat from a living animal, most of these people would either not be able to go through with it, or would be (and probably remain) traumatised by the act of taking a human life, no matter how justified.
As a hypothetical, a guy who rapes children, if you had the opportunity to kill him with absolute certainty that you never suffer any legal consequences for it, how many would actually be able to pull the trigger themselves? And if you want to add another layer to it: then go on to have lunch normally 15 minutes later?
And of those people who could do that, and not be traumatised (i.e. have the lunch), the overwhelming majority would be men. Mostly men that have had experience with killing and/or combat. Maybe soldiers or hunters. And of course, a few sociopaths.
Even under justified conditions, say the defence of your loved ones, modern western society tends to view the use of violence by private citizens as a basically illegal and dangerous thing that should be the exclusive monopoly of the government.
But not too long ago in terms of historical perspective, a man caught stealing or poaching from another man’s farm, was liable to get killed for it if he was caught. And frankly, while it might be a bit extreme even if it were legal, to blast say the truffle thieves I have encountered, you can see that if the law was that I was in my right to so, that would very quickly put a stop to truffle thieving. At least after the first dead body for thieving. And I doubt it would need more than one of them to get the point across.
Now you might think that this is wrong and doesn’t work, but it is you that is wrong. Places like Singapore and Saudi Arabia, that have the death penalty, and severe penalties for theft (like cutting off one hand for the first offence) have almost none of the crimes that get punished severely. In fact even littering is a non event in Singapore, because the penalty for it is a hefty fine and a couple of weeks of humiliation in public for it.
You might not like the fact, but the fact is that human beings respond very readily to pain. Some 40 years of martial arts experience has made this fact as solid in its truth as any engineering reality. One even more reliable that gravity.
And if the West is to ever be salvaged or recover from the onslaught of uncivilised third worlders that between Christmas and New Year have killed hundreds of people around the world, from the muslim stabber in Rimini here in Italy (shot dead by the carabinieri) to the various attacks and mass murders in the USA, Berlin, and many other places, mostly ignored intentionally by the presstitutes pretending to report the news (with apologies to street whores on crack, who compared to mass media journalists are paragons of virtue), it is not going to be sone by voting or even the “powers” of “government” [the illegal, illegitimate, bought and paid for puppets of the (((Americans)))]. It will happen only and because of organised, normal men who retained the capacity to do violence when required.
The mass of culture-clashing invaders, be they “legal” or not, aided and abetted by a completely inverted and corrupted legal system, is intentionally creating conditions of lawlessness, rape, general crime, and murder that are unheard of in the original native population of the various countries.
The natural reaction at some point will be to push back, at which point those doing so will be killed/shot/jailed/vilified by the lackeys of the puppets pretending to be legitimate governments.
So in fact, the very first people that would need to be removed, even before the immigrants, would be those who intentionally created these conditions with the idea of starting precisely the kind of race riots that will eventually erupt.
The puppet-masters must be target n.1.
Only then will the puppets then be next in line to lose their positions.
And only thirdly would it become necessary to repatriate the immigrants to the fourth generation, which at that point might even be accomplished calmly and non-violently for the most part.
Those immigrants permitted to stay would have to ideally number a total of less than 2% or so of the native population, and even then have conditions they need to remain under, being immediately deported (at minimum) for breaking them (such as being convicted of any crime and so on).
Any country doing that, decoupling from the USA and its (((masters))) who also did away with all international banking cartels, reduced all taxes to no more than 10% of income total, put all government budgets and government employee salaries online for all the public to see (and possibly vote on) and issued its own, usury-free and gold and silver backed currency, would quickly become a paradise on Earth.
Which is why every single leader who tried to do that suddenly found themselves on the receiving end of the “American” war machine.
But now is the time for smaller countries beside Russia to “break free”. And if you can just do some of it, the rest will follow. They can’t put out EVERY fire this time.
Yes the game is rigged and it’s rigged against you.
Yes you are financially very limited and they are not.
But ultimately, they are weak little cowards hiding behind layers of bureaucracy, obfuscation, subterfuge, and shadows. Because they are basically human cockroaches, the light of truth burns them.
So spread the word and share this post. The Uncivilised Man is going to be required on some levels if any Western cultures are to survive.
Nationalism is the Truth
Vox Day has written one of the most important pieces of writing he has ever done here.
I absolutely suggest everyone reads it in full.
It is not just important, it is fundamental to understanding of reality on this planet and how the evil servants of Satan want to invert it.
Even so, Vox continues to make a fundamental error with regard to the one saving Grace that does exist on our fallen world: Christianity.
It is a bit of cognitive dissonance he exhibits that is hard to understand. Especially since it is directly analogous to the very concept of Nationalism he clearly understands so well and in which he refers to the relevant documents relating to the American Constitution.
If paper “Americans” are not actually Americans —and I agree they are not, even if it is somewhat arguable that there is any specific homogenous people that are American, as such, even if you allow for say such a concept as he does, I think there is a good argument to be made that Southrons are different genuine Americans from Yankee, and both are different genuine Americans from Redskins. So at minimum there are at least three different genuine Americans that can be considered such from native (birthright) principles— then there can be no argument that Protestants are in any way Christians; and this is even clearer, since the documentation regarding it is even clearer and untroubled by any genetic complexities, as it is based purely on adherence to the dogmatic principles that are all set down in writing.
Every single shade of Protestantism deviated ferociously from the only Christianity that had ever existed, complete with transubstantiation in the mass, Popes and so on, that is Catholicism.
The one exception people cling to, the so-called Eastern “Orthodox” are clearly schismatics motivated by subterfuge and political power as well as historical duplicitous turncoats that backstabbed the very Catholics that came to save them, repeatedly, even almost half a century after their schisms.
Nor do ANY of their theological claims to “orthodoxy” stand up to scrutiny based in actual Biblical fact.
Just as Novus Orco impostor clergy pretends to be Catholic, the Sarah Hoyts of America pretend to be American. And just as anyone who does not follow and believe the original dogma of the infallible magisterium of the Catholic Church, embodied in the Code of Canon Law of 1917 —which means it’s all available for perusal by anyone who cares to do so— has no claim to Christianity; no one who is not a legitimate progeny of one of the three branches of Americans mentioned above has any claim to America as their nation.
I have an opinion to explain Vox’s apparent rejection of actual Catholicism, which may or may not be correct, but as I have proposed a discussion on this before and it has been most likely politely rejected for at least a decade, I can only go on this so far, and it is thus:
Vox has an issue with any human authority over him. Which I understand and mostly agree with him on it, though I have no ego about it when that authority makes sense in order to achieve greater objectives and the “leader” is competent, or when —as is the case in the Church— that authority is derived by the “leader” (priest or bishop) adhering to divine law and doing their job with regard to imposing whatever such derived authority on me. I think Vox has an issue in both these regards I don’t have.
Secondly, I think he identifies his Christianity far more in that way that Catholicism would qualify as the internal forum than the external forum. That is, God knows our hearts fully and there is SOME scope for that internal state to give some leeway in terms of who may or may not be saved. Again, I have no real issue with this stance, but the point for me (and for logic in genera) is that the external forum, that is that aspect of your practice of religion that you exhibit publicly, absolutely matters because it helps to construct the social fabric that produces a more, or less, pious and believing society.
In short, because most people are NPCs, it is incumbent upon us to do our best to also follow the rules and apply ourselves to presenting ourselves as obedient Catholics (obedient to God first and foremost, and to his LEGITIMATE and VALID representatives on Earth that act and believe legitimately and validly).
To do so helps others see us and those who do so as the correct way to behave and encourages more Catholic behaviour, which historically has demonstrated itself to be the most beneficial overall behaviour that humanity has ever indulged in.
I make this post not as any sort of accusation to Vox, he will most likely not respond to my thoughts here anyway, but rather to make the position with respect to actual Christianity clear.
If you don’t believe paper Americans are actual Americans, you have no legitimate basis for believing anyone other than 1958 Sedevacantists (ie Catholics) are Christians, and everyone else is just a Churchian.
No related posts.
By G | 4 January 2025 | Posted in Catholicism, Christianity, Sedevacantism, Social Commentary